| |||
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Awopbopaloobopalopbamboom. I can be emailed at caterina at caterina dot net
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Where I will be: Mar. 22-27, San Francisco
|
{ Saturday, November 30, 2002 }
From Julian Barnes' introduction to Alphonse Daudet in the Land of Pain: He was 'a true man of letters' in the Turgenev sense. He always had been. When he was sixteen, his brother Henri had died, at which moment their father gave vent to a great howl of 'He's dead! He's dead!' Daudet was aware, he wrote later, of his own bifurcated response to the scene: 'My first Me was in tears, but my second Me was thinking, "What a terrific cry! It would be really good in the theatre!"' From that point on he was 'homo duplex, homo duplex' 'I've often thought about this dreadful duality. This terrible second Me is always there, sitting n a chair watching, while the first Me stands up, performs actions, lives, suffers, struggles away. This second Me that's I've never been able to get drunk, or make cry, or put to sleep. And how much he sees into things! And how he mocks!'
LINK | 8:57 PM | At the nursing home where I worked when I was fifteen there was one woman who looked too young to be there. She looked as if she were, say, 67. She couldn't get out of her bed, something wrong with her muscles, and I had to spoon feed her. "You're too young to be here," I said. "Honey, I'm 90 years old," she said. I almost dropped her Salisbury Steak. I insisted she tell me her beauty secrets. "Every day you have to put lotion on your skin." "That's it?" "That's it." "What kind?" "Doesn't matter," she said. "During the war I put Crisco on my face every day."
Mao, a fascinating card game described by Tom on A Rule Against Rules. I'd never heard of it before: boy number six: remember that game we played for a while in which you couldn't tell anyone the rules, you just had to learn them by getting frustrated and losing a whole lot?
Mao is just another card game, modeled after Communist China under Chairman Mao, of course. It's somewhat similar to Uno, except that has a bunch of other random rules, and you play it with any old deck of cards. What makes it unique is that you're not allowed, under any circumstances, to say the name of the game, or any of the rules. You get penalties from people who actually know the rules whenever you do something wrong, and you're told what the penalty is for (failure to say 'thank you,' failure to win, failure draw a card, etc) but you're never told what you did to get these penalties, making you paranoid about everything you're doing. LINK | 10:05 AM | Dos Pesos, sly devil, gets me to postpone his neutering appointment tomorrow morning by throwing up all day today!
The other day as I was driving my car I thought to myself, "If I could have any painting in the world, what painting would it be?" and I thought, "Of course! The Mona Lisa!" Because it is the cynosure of the painted world. Because everyone knows it. Because it is the most reproduced painting in the solar system. Walter Benjamin was wrong about the work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction. Reproduction, and a thing's subsequent propagation into general consciousness, makes the original more valuable, rather than less. Not only monetarily, but also culturally. With the printed word, while there is some value to the original manuscript, the "cultural value" increases as it is more widely disseminated. Today I read a poem I really loved, Gravity and Levity by Bin Ramke, which is printed in issue #35 of Conjunctions, and as I was reading it, I became a little depressed at how few people actually were going to read it. I mean, you haven't read it, have you? Didn't think so. And I thought that there is something qualitatively different about reading, say, Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening. You know that people have read it before you -- not just people, the public -- and that people will read it after you. Or even something like Thirteen Ways of Looking at a Blackbird. In reading those poems you were part of a poem-reading society, a people, a nation! whereas reading Gravity and Levity today felt wee, insignificant, solitary and vaguely masturbatory. You know, arch. Self-indulgent. I wanted everyone else to have read it. I wanted to belong to one of those cultures that awaits the next, say, Seamus Heaney collection. (Apparently in Ireland, the police let Heaney off for speeding because they recognize him!) I love poems, I adore poems but they seem to have become the dessert and not the bread of life, and that makes me glum. Do you read poems? Do you buy poetry books? I buy about a dozen books of poems a year, I'd say. I read all the ones in the New Yorker, and like about a fourth.I want to take a short survey here: How often do you read poems? and Have you bought any poetry books this year?
Somebody sprayed -- sprayed!!-- motor oil all over my car, and about five other cars that were parked in the alley near my house. It had to be deliberate! It was only on the front end of five cars. Of course, rubbing it off with a towel only smeared it into a Vaseline-like transparency; driving around, the world looked like a dim memory. I drove slowly to the nearest gas station and used their squeegee for a really long time until I could see, then drove it through the car wash. Car washes haven't lost their charm! I still love driving through car washes. I hadn't done it in years -- the San Francisco car washes require you to exit your vehicle. No fun at all.
My fluctuating intelligence is at a low ebb right now, and though I seem to be carrying off a reasonable facsimile of the chit-chat required for daily call-and-response interactions with salespeople, desk clerks and telephone solicitors, I'm barely able to experience my own sentience. My knuckles have been drooping floorward, my hairline has been creeping down to my eyebrows, and I've been noticing comfy perches up in branches. Ontogeny recapitulating phylogeny in reverse. Next stop, tadpole.
and attention can no longer change the outcome of the gaze,
the ear too is finally sated, starlings starting up ladderings of chatter from AFTERWARDS, by Jorie Graham LINK | 4:45 PM | A papyrus of the poems of Posidippus were found wrapped with a mummy. The article describes how the discovery sheds new light on an historical aspect of Greek literature: The papyrus not only adds fivefold to the known corpus of epigrams by Posidippus, they said, but it illuminates a critical transitional period in Greek writing.
Most earlier literature was meant for performance. Bards recited their poems before audiences. Actors seldom worked from scripts but were told by the dramatist what to say and do in plays. And epigrams, short and often witty, were confined mainly to verses. In its original meaning, an epigram was anything written on an object, usually an inscription on stone. But the newfound scroll was designed for wider reading, specialists in Greek writing said, and that is new. It also shows that by the time of Posidippus, epigrammatists had literary aspirations. LINK | 9:43 AM | I'm having a really hard time not opening my nephew's Christmas present. I think I have to get my own pontiki. And a pootiki too.
Last night we all sat around Rachel's kitchen table eating chili and lasagne and drinking wine and tea and doing two of my favorite things: talking and laughing. We discussed Toni's novel, which is so far really promising and Rachel's poems. I hadn't read Rachel's until the meeting, and read through them all when I got home. I'm really excited for when her new book comes out, and you should be too since the poems we read last night are going to be in it and they were excellent. We have to wait for it until the spring though (her MS is due in March). Until then, you can read her last book of poetry Giving My Body to Science. PS: Looking up that book, Amazon just appended a list entitled "Customers who wear clothes also shop for" followed by a short list:
and customers who don't wear clothes shop for...? It's unusual for large companies to be aware of the distinction between the shopping needs of nudists and non-nudists.
Subject line from today's email: INCREASE YOUR PENIS SIZE BY 1/4 INCH IN ONE WEEK!
Truth in advertising? Or are they targeting men with modest expectations?
Cuentas claras, amistades largas my friend Jim used to say whenever he insisted on paying me back for something I'd forgotten about. Clear accounts, long friendships. How true. This afternoon we had the unpleasant task of confronting this guy in our art collective who could not account for $2,500 missing dollars from the group's bank account, which was in his name.
Deer Esther: Thanck yu n Klaus 4 feeding me all that chiken! I haf only kible heer n can yu beleve!! Cat n Stew didnt bring me bak n e presints -- it was lik they didnt evn car. I m tiping this leter all by myself. Next week I m going to get fixt! I dont know what fixt is but I am eksited. Win evir I think aboot that beegle, I get mad! But win ever I think aboot yu n Klaus I get hapi. Lov Dos. LINK | 7:24 AM | Where the Rubber Meets the Road. While I was in Amsterdam, my eczema, responding to the dry heat, dust and wool, broke out all over my face and neck and arms. It is hideous, and it is miserable. I remember reading a survey of AIDS patients rating their various ailments in terms of the suffering it caused them, and their skin ailments were consistently rated the worst, above digestive disorders, dementia and even blindness. "If I could just stop this itching, I'd gladly go blind!" one fellow said. This didn't surprise me. Nabokov, suffering from Psoriasis, wrote to his wife Véra in 1936 that his psoriasis drove him to the edge of suicide. Your skin is also what you rub up against the world with, the place where the rubber meets the road. I was trying not to feel leprous. I did anyway. It's gone now. May the Ointment Gods be praised!
From Testaments Betrayed by Milan Kundera: An old revolutionary utopia, whether fascist or communist: life without secrets, where public life and private life are one and the same. The surrealist dream André Breton loved: the glass house, a house without curtains where manlives in full view of the world. Ah, the beauty of transparency! The only successful realization of this dream: a society totally monitored by the police.
The Department of Homeland Security may make this world possible. Jan Prochazka, an important figure of the Prague Spring, came under heavy surveillance after the Russian invasion of 1968. At the time, he saw a good deal of another great opposition figure, Professor Vaclav Cerny, with whom he liked to drink and talk. All their conversations were secretly recorded, and I suspect the two friends knew it and didn't give a damn. But one day in 1970 or 1971, with the intent to discredit Prochazka, the police began to broadcast these conversations as a radio serial. For the police it was an audacious, unprecedented act. And, surprisingly, it nearly suceeded; instantly Prochazka was discredited: because in private, a person says all sorts of things, slurs friends, uses coarse language, acts silly, tells dirty jokes, repeats himself, makes a companion laugh by shocking him with outrageous talk, floats heretical ideas he'd never admit in public, and so forth. Of course, we all act like Prochazka, in private we bad-mouth our friends and use coarse language; that we act different in private than in public is everyone's most conspicuous experience, it is the very ground of the life of the individual; curiously, this obvious fact remains unconscious, unacknowledged, forever obscured by lyrical dreams of the transparent glass house, it is rarely understood to be the value one must defend beyond all others. Thus only gradually did people realize (though their rage was all the greater) that the real scandal was not Prochazka's daring talk but the rape of his life; they realized (as if by electric shock) that private and public are two essentially different worlds and that respect for that difference is the indispensible condition, the sine qua non, for a man to live free.
LINK | 5:59 AM | We've arrived and are staying in little hotel on Leliegracht which is well-located, but too expensive. We ran into Kris last night at dinner, such a nice surprise! and Dos Pesos has already sent us a couple of postcards telling us about how much fun he is having without us.
We're off to Amsterdam, where we will be seeing our favorite Amsterdam resident Rogerio, and Kris and Fred and hopefully Paul and Jouke. And, of course, attending Doors.
Today Derek alerts me to the existence of the Fombum who sits atop a flower atop scaly pillars atop a mashed-potato lake and permits genuflecting on a lower branch:
"They say that Fombum has always existed and that he will have no end. He was created for himself alone. His being fills the earth and sky and he occupies everything physical to show his immensity in the infinity of his essence. They assure us that he doesn't work hard to govern his creatures. Without difficulty he contains them in his own being. They say that he had no quality or color which can be seen by people. Finally, this Fombum has a thousand rare perfections and is the source of every good thing." -- Jesuit missionary Ludwig Froes, 1565.
LINK | 4:49 PM | Tonight Stewart and I stopped by Pulp Fiction on Main Street on the way back from Klaus and Esther's (who are taking care of Dos Pesos while we're in Amsterdam, lucky dog!) and I found Woodstock Handmade Housesto add to my collection of books on vernacular architecture. Looking around the web for more vernacular architecture and I found:
LINK | 12:14 AM | NY Times Book Review trend: praise for writers that eschew pop cultural references (Also, should "pop-cultural" be hyphenated while "pop culture" is not? Not sure how that works.) The Little Friend "... the book takes place sometime in the 1970's, though Tartt is blessedly sparing with gratuitous period details and pop-cultural references..."
You Shall Know Our Velocity "This, along with Huey Lewis on a car radio and Val Kilmer on a ''Top Gun'' poster, is one of the mercifully few pop culture signifiers to show up.
I've noticed this elsewhere. Everyone seems to hate it these days. And here is David Foster Wallace in an interview talking about realist authors uneasily sort of not making pop culture references: Updike doesn't seem to me to
write all that effectively about this stuff. When his characters
go out to eat fast food they go to Burger Bliss instead of Burger
King, as if in fiction you can't use the regular product name. It
just seems to be a mentality that is more old-fashioned, and a lot
of -- it's ironic -- the hard-core realists, the ones who
specialize in, you know, domestic psychodrama and the terrain of
the interior heart, seem to lean really far away from references
to pop culture -- I think because they're afraid that stuff is
freighted with social agenda and theory and they want to stay away
from that. The idea of writing realistic fiction where people
aren't spending 6 hours a day watching TV seems absurd to me,
because that's what people do.
LINK | 6:33 PM | And now, an offshoot of Game Neverending fanzine Ludus Perpetuus arrives, Paper Lane.
Dream House by Gregory Crewdson. I've always like Crewdson's superreal supersaturated suburbia photographs.
From Brenda Shaughnessy's Interior with Sudden Joy, (which has one of my favorite Dorothea Tanning paintings on the cover, also named "Interior with Sudden Joy") Reading her poems is like finding a lost piece of myself. Here is this poem: POSTFEMINISM
There are two kinds of people, soldiers and women,
Now that is too kind. It's technical: virgins and wolves.
one orders a shirley temple. Shirley Temple's pimp
piece of work but she don't come cheap. Myself, I'm
in my mother's body. That's sneaky, that's more
gray room. I am voracious alone. Blank and loose,
in a handmade basket case. Which of us weaves
seduction: your war-on-thugs, my body stockings.
even if you leave them before morning. Pigs
there are two kinds of people. Hot with mixed
LINK | 1:04 PM | If you're coming here for the poems, you can skip this Of course I'm aware that posting your political opinions to your weblog -- especially a weblog with a comments feature -- is liable to net you a lot of grief. But that's OK. It doesn't bother me when the things I post get other people incensed. I've come to be pretty thick-skinned where the Caterina.net comments fields are concerned. It would be easier to just keep quiet, I guess, or have no comments at all. But that would be so much less engaging, and I've learned so much from so many of your posts, I have changed and amended my opinions -- it's great. I love the comments. Other people's opinions are as valid as mine -- I make no claim to having any more idea of what "the truth" is than anyone else. I have opinions. I get pissed. I rant. I am not always the best of all possible Caterinas. But since this is Caterina.net, not Carl.net or Joe.net or Lisa.net; this is where you get my viewpoint. Preaching to the choir is a futile exercise, so disagreement is generally good. There always will be a few people who are disrespectful, rude, hostile or just plain assholes in the comments. I don't bother responding to those. (I also don't always respond if I think I have nothing to add (or am too busy)). So I really really appreciate it when people like Brian, in the comment field below, has the guts to say they totally disagree with what I'm saying, but then add, "Please don't let my pithy reply deter you from responding. I'd really like somebody to help me change my mind on these issues if I am misunderstanding the situation." That is really great. Here is what I think about the "War on Terrorism":
We have reached the point that the idea of liberty, an idea relatively recent and new, is already in the process of fading from our consciences and our standards of morality, the point that neoliberal globalization is in the process of assuming its opposite: that of a global police state, of a terror of security. Deregulation has ended in maximum security, in a level of restriction and constraint equivalent to that found in fundamentalist societies.
--Jean Baudrillard, "L'Esprit du Terrorisme," Harper's Magazine, February 2002 I am afraid of any justification for national militarization. I am even against people with guns anywhere in public. Even the police. (Think Britain.)(Call me a peacenik, I don't care.) When I was walking around Lebanon and Syria in 1999, there were soldiers with machine guns all over the place. Freaked me right out. (We got lost in the Hezbollah part of Beirut, and that freaked me right out too, but that's another story.) When I was in the St. Louis airport in February this year there were soldiers with machine guns all over the place. First time I'd ever seen a machine gun in the United States. Boded ill for us. Very ill. To fully protect ourselves from terrorism would turn the U.S. into a prison state. The "War on Terrorism" is justifying outrageous defense spending. The 2003 proposed Defense budget is $379 billion, which would roughly match the combined spending of the 15 next biggest miliary powers, as a defense analyst noted in the Senate. How does Bush justify this spending? How does he convince the American people that we need a big arms buildup? By spreading fear. I am against fear-mongering. These random alerts from the FBI especially rile me. Terrorists can strike at any time, in any place. That is the nature of terrorism. This is news? I really did agree with those parts of Bowling for Columbine where Michael Moore pinned responsibility for our current Culture of Fear on the media. It's possible that I'm not scared because I don't have a TV and am so not subjected to the daily reminders that I should be scared coming from the "war-mobilizing and patrioteering mechanism" as Richard Falk calls it in The Nation. I read the news online, in the newspapers and in magazines. The threat of terrorism seems possible, but remote. I may blow up next week, but I don't plan on living in fear. I am against war-mongering. Initially I was against the actions taken in Afghanistan against Al Qaeda and the Taliban regime by the U.S. Government, fearing for the civilian Afghans, but the Taliban was vanquished soon enough to seem that the Bush Administration had taken the appropriate action. Yay team. But since then -- and this what I am mostly against -- is the Bush Administration extending their definition of what constitutes "terrorism" to include any nation possessing weapons of mass destruction that might fall into terrorist hands, i.e. Iraq. Are we defending ourselves against a direct military threat from Iraq? No. This is war-mongering. Iraq is probably harboring weapons of mass destruction, but does that give the U.S. the right to deploy against Iraq weapons of mass destruction? The logic behind this boggles the mind. And doesn't it seem like Bush is trying to settle his father's scores? All the same people are making the decisions. I am incensed that the "War on Terrorism" is diverting attention from domestic issues. Health care, education, social security, the environment, human rights, corporate corruption, rampant consumerism, the 3000 ads the average person sees before s/he gets to work in the morning -- the list of the issues that are being ignored goes on and on. This galls me. I'd even be happy to talk about tax cuts! Let's cut taxes! Erm... I am against unilateralism From the outset, the Bush Administration deliberately repudiated several important multilateral and multinational treaties, including Kyoto (global warming), the ABM treaty (against militarizing outer space) and the Biological Weapons treaty (prohibiting the development of such weapons) in a general all-out Fuck You to the rest of the world, absolving themselves of any responsibility to other nations. Their selective adherence to The Geneva Convention (for human rights) in the case of the Taliban and Al Qaeda detainees in Guantanamo Bay was another flaunting of global concern or cooperation. I think this is deplorable. What was that thing Bush said about his willingness to bomb China within a few months of taking office? Egads. Diplomatic nightmare! Proceeding to declare war on Iraq against the decree of the UN Security Council will be another boot in the face of the world, demonstrating that the U.S. has no respect for human solidarity and has a willingness -- an intention -- to subjugate all nations. I will swear again here. Fucking Oath. Brian: I am not against airport screenings. Like Stewart says, "If the choice is between gittin' blowed up by terrerists or having to take your shoes off before boarding the plane, we will all, of course, remove our shoes." I actually don't mind them paying for extra chemical detection equipment and better scanners, shelling our more tax dollars for better trained security personnel. But people are constantly complaining that their tweezers are being confiscated. This is a joke. Have you ever noticed how many metal pieces are in the airplane tray table? Have you ever seen someone garotte someone with a belt in a movie? Why have all those dull butter knives been replaced with plastic knives? You should see what I can do with your throat using the fork. I could use my jewelry to off you if I wanted. The fact is: You can't stop someone who is willing to die and take everyone with them. Plain and simple. But all this searching causes humilation. The feeling of invasion. The constant presumption of threat. How much of this is necessary? I think there is more likelihood since Sept. 11th that passengers will jump up and stop hijackers. People are saying, "Things are so uncertain now." That is absurd. If September 11th proved anything, it proved that things were uncertain before. The Homeland Security Bill: Here is where shit gets really scary. Orrin Hatch has proposed an amendment to this bill that states that a warrant is no longer required to access electronic communication, i.e. email. If that doesn't scare you, you have forgotten what liberty is. Time to read 1984 again. OK, I could say a lot more about everything, but I need to sleep a little. I think this is my longest post ever, and I didn't even get through half of my opinions. I will read all the comments you have, and will likely learn things, but I probably won't respond to them. Sorry! I can only talk so much, and this was itself a response to a comment from yesterday's post. I want to read some poems now...
I was raised by two very serious Republicans, we're talking Goldwater, Nixon, and Reagan Republicans, and they're still serious Republicans. I even registered as a Republican for a year when I became eligible to vote at 18. I am not, however, a Republican. And I am not happy about yesterday's election results, and what a presidentially controlled Congress is now capable of doing. I am horrified by what Bush is doing to the environment, I am appalled at the entire sabre-rattling Iraq escapade, I am repelled by the "War on Terrorism", the periodic -- and extremely vague -- FBI warnings of "increased threat", his undermining of women's rights, his stance on guns, the ENRON catastrophe which was conveniently buried under war rhetoric -- there are dozens of things the Bush administration has done that appal me. Ugh.
"The world is neither significant nor absurd. It is quite simply. That, in any case, is the most remarkable thing about it."
--Alain Robbe-Grillet LINK | 9:43 PM | And another thing of beauty we should all look at together. More celestial atlases are available on this site. (via calamondin)
Ludus Perpetuus, a Game Neverending fanzine has just launched! GNE players, add your player description, contribute articles, and read an exclusive interview with Inspoetica, the perpetual #1 player.
Say, over the river and through the woods. It turns out that there is a reason children are perpetually yearning for the flour-dusted, mythical figure called grandma or granny or oma or abuelita. As a number of participants at the conference demonstrated, the presence or absence of a grandmother often spelled the difference in traditional subsistence cultures between life or death for the grandchildren. In fact, having a grandmother around sometimes improved a child's prospects to a far greater extent than did the presence of a father.
LINK | 1:00 AM | Asa nisi masa.
Let us all look at this beautiful thing together.
I had completely forgotten I'd started a novel for National Novel Writing Month last year. I just found it today, and really like it in all its unedited stream-of-consciousness oddness. It has that fresh untweaked feeling. I think I'll keep writing more of it: Nonetheless she admired the American way of always working, always trying, always striving. Working was also the Chinese way. The rituals of work were rituals of purification, means of making oneself cleaner for the final face-to-face with God. The office park was the sweat lodge of the soul. If you never stopped working you could not die, or wander off the true path into darkness. It was a way of escaping death and the devil all at once, and making some money on the side. Heaven would be winged executives, the swiftest commutes, the smell of dryerase markers, the New York Stock Exchange.
There was no satisfaction in being a yuppie since the term yuppie had been invented. Her spell check didn’t even tag it as a wrong, a nonexistent word. With the invention of that one word it became too easy to put her down. Replacing panty hose was another stupid yuppie chore. She had to buy new panty hose every week. They could put a man on the moon, but they couldn’t make panty hose that didn’t run? It didn’t add up. All these little things added up to make May unhappy. She hated the word Filofax. And cellular. She needed to get away from all such words. She never wanted to touch base again. But there was no where else to go except back into the weirdness. The bookish weirdness of her youth. Hers was hard won normalcy. She wanted to keep it, along with the modernist furniture. But she had changed her mind; the New York Stock exchange wasn’t heaven after all. And she was weird. LINK | 3:16 AM | We just got back from seeing Bowling for Columbine and I was surprised by the Canadian gun statistics. I didn't agree with Michael Moore's conclusion which seemed to be that the media in the United States is responsible for inculcating Americans with fear, and this fear is driving them to buy guns and kill each other. This is not to say that the media doesn't do that -- I think it does -- it just seems that gun control seems to be the major difference between Canada and the United States. That and a better social support system. Stewart also said that Michael Moore can be really sensationalistic, and while that is probably true, it's also the reason why his movie is being shown coast to coast (and all over Canada) while hundreds of far more earnest, deserving and intellectually sound anti-gun documentaries are languishing in the vaults, unseen by the millions. Here is some interesting info I just read about Canadian gun control.
Dog bride.
Fascinated by the Elegant Gothic Lolita business found on Morbid Outlook magazine (what a great name!), I've been surfing all over the place, especially Luscious Dilettante -- look at this Goth cutie -- and learning terms like "Execugoth" -- Execugoth! The world is indeed a wonderful place. Luscious D. also has an excellent links page. What I've learned so far: The Elegant Gothic Lolita look was given its icon in the form of Mana, who is a man, and is in the band Malice Mizer, prounounced Marisu Mizeru. There is a magazine for this, the Gothic and Lolita Bible, and some of them have been scanned in here. I'm sure the craze is probably over by now, since trends in Japan change with wind direction. They also stopped closing the main square in Tokyo from traffic and turning it into a pedestrian walkway on Sundays-- some people attribute the whole fashion explosion to this Sunday stroll. Now I really want -- need! -- a black parasol with a ruffled edge -- here's one with beaded trim in velvet. And of course your best friend will want to get in on the action.
|