Friday, July 29, 2011

August, Riding the Wave

 On Hapuna Beach
Riding the wave that's riding the wave-- lyrics I heard a few nights ago at a near empty cafe off Amsterdam Street. The image conjures so many waves-- past, present and future; waves  personal, in the lives of my friends, and in the country and world, at large. As the tidal wave of the world economy threatens to wipe us all out financially, all of us but those on the oil tankers or basking upon the vast yachts of the bankers, I think instead of all the healing waves that have washed over me and those I love. When I was a child, I delighted in building sand castles and watching the rising tide fill the moat, wash away the walls, inundate the castle. With the ever approaching financial limits of retirement, I see my present sand castle slipping away into the salty water, imagine all the comforts of my years of contented bourgeois life becoming austerity, or at least parsimony. And when actual retirement arrives, I plan to live as close as possible to the sea.

In my view, nothing can take the place of a walk on the beach. For decades I have lived in Atlanta, having to drive at least 250 miles to the ocean. Each year I have lived here I have driven or flown to oceans and seas all over the world. How do I love thee? Let me count the seas, from the Aegean to the Pacific coast of Hawaii, from Glacier Bay in Alaska, to Bergen's coast of Norway, to the Straights of Magellan, to the Straight of Georgia in Canada to the beaches of San Juan, Puerto Vallarta, and Manzanillo, and those long golden sand strands of shore in Australia. Whether the wild beaches of Big Sur or along the Oregon coast, or the tame Gulf of Mexico powder beaches of Santa Rosa Island, there is a sublimity to being beside the ocean, an "ataraxia," that transcends the tensions and anxieties of life in the crowded suburbs of society. 


Jack

Pacific Ocean, Hawaii
Photos from my visits to Hawaii


Sunday, July 17, 2011

Malick's Tree of Life


Two paths intertwine in this film, the way of Grace and the way of Nature. Either way, love is the only way to achieve happiness. Such is the explicit message of Terrence Malick's film, "The Tree of Life." All else impacts us visually, soaking our psyches with visual metaphor and reaching the depths of our emotional selves with memory, gesture, and whispers from a dream-like world. The film has the sweep of Koyaanisqatsi, the struggle for the sacred in Nature vs. the destructive forces of development, money, and the quest for power. The visual beauty of Kubrick is also here along with similar metaphors of birth, death, and the archetypes of human existence in an indifferent world. At times I even sensed David Lynch's nightmarish details, especially in the extended point of view of Jack in pre-adolescence. 

There is a glimpse of the Zone of Totality, as we see the total eclipse of the sun in a series of celestial images that give the film its mysticism. At the gathering on the shore, the characters apparently forgive one another for all their transgressions. As with Kubrick, though, there is no final meaning or happy ending, and we leave the theater with as much a sense of meaninglessness as Sisyphus came to accept. The cosmos and all human existence within in, connected or not,  may have great beauty, and perhaps like Keats, Malick presents the case that this beauty and the love within it are the only truth there is.

The San Francisco Chronicle gives a thorough review of the film, noting the two ways I mentioned above and offering excellent insight into the film's merits:

Jessica Chastain and Brad Pitt, top, are the parents of three boys in "Tree of Life."

The Tree of Life

WILD APPLAUSE Drama. Starring Brad Pitt, Sean Penn and Jessica Chastain. Directed by Terrence Malick. (PG-13. 138 minutes. At Bay Area theaters.)
If someone gave you, as a gift, a bag of diamonds and rocks, you would not see it as "a mixed bag." You would see it as a bag of diamonds with some rocks that can be easily pushed aside, and you would be happy to be rich. In the same way, Terrence Malick's "The Tree of Life" is at times trying and perplexing, but it also contains some of the most psychologically insightful and ecstatic filmmaking imaginable.
Malick shows you the world that you know, but he shows it in such a fever that you see it, not differently, but completely. It's a vision so alive to the mystery in everything that the simple depiction of a man walking into an office building feels like a feast of limitless possibility and geometric variety. To see "The Tree of Life" is to wish you could go through life seeing things in this way. There would be no fear of death because each moment would be so full as to contain lifetimes.
From the first moments, Malick presents his film as a contrast between two ways of understanding human existence. There is the way of nature, which sees only struggle and looks for reasons to be unhappy, and there is the way of grace, which is in touch with love and the broad movements of the universe. The way of nature is embodied by Brad Pitt as a hard-charging husband and father - it's a lovely performance from Pitt, whose control-freak facade never completely hides the vulnerability motivating it. Jessica Chastain, as his wife, embodies the way of grace. They live with their three children in a Texas suburb in the 1950s and are seen through the memory of their eldest son, Jack (Sean Penn), looking back from the present.
As in "The New World," voice-over narration, to the accompaniment of subjective shots of trees and sky, gives us the characters' inner thoughts. These produce a unique effect. It's as if we're seeing a dream of the past and hearing mental vibrations that, either randomly or because of their particular strength, happened to survive time. The feeling is one of privilege, to be picking up on precious currents of consciousness, seemingly lost to the world.
At its most basic, "The Tree of Life" vividly replicates, in cinematic terms, the way we remember. There are general memories, moods and sensations, and then there are incidents and bits of conversation that are recalled with absolute present-tense lucidity. And so the incidents of voice-over are interspersed with straightforward scenes showing this 1950s family. Malick is trying to give us life as it is consciously experienced, the unceasing inner monologue and its interplay with the outside environment, the thoughts of the past mixing with the suspended and yet always available present.
The ambition behind such an attempt is enormous, and Malick's success is complete. But he doesn't stop there. In "The Tree of Life" he doesn't only want to show what life and consciousness feel like. He wants to capture the nature of life - what life is. To this end, he films waterfalls and mountains, gives us long minutes of churning, multi-colored ooze floating in space, and even includes a brief dinosaur interlude. He is trying to give us the mind of God. No, more than that. He is trying to film God.
When he stays within the multiple minds of his various characters, Malick is working here at the level of genius. His handheld camera hovers with a sense of impending revelation. The beauty is beyond description. But when he ventures into explorations of the universe and its origins, the work becomes general and less interesting, liked warmed-over Kubrick.
Still, there is little doubt that "The Tree of Life" will stand as the cinematic achievement of the year.
E-mail Mick LaSalle at mlasalle@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page E - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/02/DDU91JNN0T.DTL#ixzz1SPBXkBv0



Jack

Friday, July 15, 2011

The Blazing Summer of 2011



Will, Jay Brannan, Jack
Club One, Savannah


We celebrated the Summer Solstice with visits to Savannah. First Dar and I drove down for visits with John and with Dad and Kathy, the latter at Johnny Harris. We stayed at the familiar Bed and Breakfast Inn, having breakfasts of shrimp and grits and, second morning, strawberry pancakes. John and I walked the beach with its air of burning cyprus all the way from the Okeefenokee Swamp.


The second jaunt to Savannah came after Dar, Will and I heard Jay Brannan's sold out concert at Eddie's Attic in Decatur. When the show was over, Dar departed, but Will and I stayed long enough for Will to take over the piano and sing such songs as Gnarls Barkley's  "Crazy" accompanied by opening act singer Tristan Clopet. The night was too good to end, so we drove to Savannah, stopping at the Waffle House at 2AM where Will performed some Cee Lo Green covers for the ecstatic staff, one of whom recorded his singing. 
After the meal, we drove on to Savannah, stopping at my brother's house. John then drove us to Tybee in his Cadillac to watch the spectacle of a sliver of crescent moon rising over the ocean, followed by sunrise as we stood on the windy beach, letting the cool waves wash our feet. 
 Sunrise over Savannah Beach

Will, John and I wound up downtown atop the Bohemian Hotel as a tropical storm blew in, walls of rain and lightning dramatizing the Savannah River, the bridge, the cobblestone streets below. Will performed again in the lobby, singing "Crazy" on a wandering musician's guitar, and pleasantly startling the guests running in from the rain. The friendly concierge or whatever he was, having heard us talk about Jay at Club One that evening, arranged to take us to our car by shuttle. He saved the day, we got in a decent nap, and arrived on time, which was too early, for the Encore performance of Jay Brannan in Savannah. Jay and I talked a good while and he mentioned his fans from the Atlanta show onstage. It was a great performance, though Jay seemed a bit depressed and tired. This was his last show of the tour. (see the vid. below from the show)

Starr's Porch, Lookout Mountain

A week later I followed up the trips to Savannah with a week on Lookout Mountain. It was restful and relaxing and cool there, as I house sat for Starr who was in Michigan. She returned late on Friday and we attended a dazzling pool party Saturday, culminating in an intimate swim with Starr, Donna, Katie, Brook, and me which Will happily joined as midnight approached. He serenaded us all poolside after the swim. On Sunday after a leisurely breakfast cooked by Starr and Donna, Will and I hiked to the Waterfall at Cloudland Canyon, concluding my summer trips thus far.
 Here are the two main collections of photos from our trips:

 

Wednesday, June 01, 2011

Music, New Orleans, and the Creative Process

Treme continues to be a revelation about New Orleans, not simply about the spirit of the place, how it rose Phoenix-like out of the waste of Katrina, and all the other dismal disasters it has encountered, yet also about how music is created, about the struggle to make it as an artist and a musician. This article  from Salon (click) reveals how even the food of New Orleans is connected to its creativity and exemplifies its qualities. The series literally makes me want to live in New Orleans again.


Musicians and cooks talk shop on "Treme"

HBO's drama is about post-Katrina life in New Orleans -- but it also brilliantly captures the creative process 

http://www.salon.com/entertainment/tv/feature/2011/05/31/treme_season_two_episode/index.html

Friday, May 27, 2011

Wilde Love

Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas (
Oscar Wilde and Lord Alfred Douglas ("Bosie") in 1893 (William Andrews Clark Memorial Library) 

David Hare's The Judas Kiss provided much food for thought, and like the food Oscar Wilde eats in the British hotel room, it is a bit cold and fishy.  The acting at the Actor's Express last night was powerful and moving, yet it could not overcome the sense that the story isn't believable. Was Bosie a boring snob who used and abused his older friend? No doubt. Yet the story has to show us why or how Wilde came to love the man so much. After all, both Bosie and Wilde had sex with many beautiful boys. What was it about Bosie that seized Oscar's heart and held it? This play doesn't even give us a clue. I don't buy it.

The Judas Kiss turns the Love that dare not speak its name  into an unspeakable obsession. Not only does Bosie betray Wilde, so too does his first male lover, Robbie Ross, who is alternately jealous, guilty, and in cahoots with Oscar's wife Constance. Perhaps the play isn't homophobic, but despite its love of Oscar Wilde, himself, it portrays Oscar's affections as misguided and destructive. 

It  was not Bosie and not Robbie who caused Oscar Wilde's imprisonment and ruin. Wilde clearly loved both of these men. Neither relationship was the cause of his arrest or conviction. Bosie's homophobic father's insults, Wilde's suit, and Queensberry's counter charges brought the trial. Neil McKenna's 2005 biography, The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde, reveals all the interconnected political and social intrigue.  Still, few realize that were Oscar Wilde tried in Atlanta, Georgia today, he would be sentenced to far more years in prison. Having any kind of sex at all with boys under eighteen, as many who testified at his trial were, would lead to up to ten years in prison. Clearly, it was the testimony of these underage rent boys that, after two trials, produced the desired conviction.


What strikes me as oddest of all is that this predicament is not so different from what happens among the so-called straights. Men marry, their wives grow old, often uninterested in sex (at least with them) , and the men go out looking for much younger women. No doubt liberated women have a similar experience. On the purely physical level, the quest often descends into materialistic prostitution and/or dangerous liaisons. The road to sordid decadence is busy with drivers of all persuasions.

All of which brings me back to love. If Wilde was anything, he was wildly romantic. Ultimately, we shall never know why he loved Alfred Lord Douglas so passionately. Love is intimate and private. I dare say no two genuine relationships of love are the same. The very word, love, has become inadequate to describe the  passion existing between those who deeply care for one another. Our world's pressure to conform, to follow the accepted, deluded  path of monogamous marriage, children, work, and religion (or to pretend to do so) has become even more of a straightjacket than the Victorians wore. 

The existentialist Gabriel Marcel points out the vital difference between being and having. Do you want to have a partner or spouse, or to be a partner or spouse. Our passion for others should be about merging our being with theirs, not about possessing them and controlling them. Once again, Simone De Beauvoir wrote about  and exemplified  this passion. I think Oscar Wilde did as well.

Jack 5/26/11


Here is an excerpt from De Profundis, Wilde's letter to Bosie, written at the end of Wilde's prison term:

When first I was put into prison some people advised me to try and forget who I was. It was ruinous advice. It is only by realising what I am that I have found comfort of any kind. Now I am advised by others to try on my release to forget that I have ever been in a prison at all. I know that would be equally fatal. It would mean that I would always be haunted by an intolerable sense of disgrace, and that those things that are meant for me as much as for anybody else – the beauty of the sun and moon, the pageant of the seasons, the music of daybreak and the silence of great nights, the rain falling through the leaves, or the dew creeping over the grass and making it silver – would all be tainted for me, and lose their healing power, and their power of communicating joy. To regret one's own experiences is to arrest one's own development. To deny one's own experiences is to put a lie into the lips of one's own life. It is no less than a denial of the soul.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscar_Wilde

Wednesday, May 18, 2011

Ageism: the New Racism




Simone De Beauvoir


Simone De Beauvoir wrote in Coming of Age about the prejudice against the elderly in Western society. In the decades since, the maltreatment of the aging, especially in the United States, has worsened. The worship of and obsession with youth and the assumption that the old are repulsive, deranged, and damaged are the perpetual themes of the mass media. Only the bravest of artists and most radical  of counter-culture voices decry the "secret shame" of the bigotry against the old. Often that bigotry is subtle and sophisticated.

Take, for instance,  Maureen Dowd in the New York Times. Under cover of attacking the privileged rich, she calls the 62-year-old suspect in the Strauss-Kahn case "a crazed, rutting, wrinkly old satyr charging naked"  into the room. Whether or not this man is a rapist, her statement indicts all old men as repulsive. Yes, there are certainly old rapists. There are young rapists. If you want a portrait of young women child molesters and rapists, read John Irving's Until I find You. The generalization that one member of a class of people is evil, therefore the whole class is bad, is at the heart of most bigotry. Dowd, of all people, should realize this.

Today I read an essay in the Paris Review about Andrew Lytle ** written by a man who took care of him when "Mister Lytle" was 92 and the author 20. It is a tribute to both men. Despite the fascinating twist on sexuality in the story, I loved the author's precise, vivid description of  Lytle after which he writes,  

"I found him exotic; it’s probably accurate to say that I found him beautiful."

At 63 I am just beginning to be aware of the prejudice against me as an old man. I'm used to decades of experiencing prejudice from those who know I am gay.  This second bigotry is far more insidious, and potentially far more isolating. All I can think to do by way of combat is to post articles like the one above on Lytle and a few portraits of other old human beings I think are beautiful:

louise-bourgeois-2.jpg
Louise Bourgeous and art piece

Bertrand Russell


 Bertrand Russell
With pipe









See also:

‘Frankenfolks’ And The Rise Of Ageism 

Agewise: Fighting The New Ageism In America by Margaret Morganroth Gullette

Chicago (IL): University of Chicago Press, 2011




Jack Miller

(White Male, Age 63. Beautiful)


** Lytle was famous at Sewanee, where I got my undergraduate degree in Philosophy. I knew Allen Tate, of the essay, who was there when I was. We introduced Mr. Tate to our new, blacklight, hippie coffeehouse in 1968.









Wednesday, May 04, 2011

Hallelujah!

Having heard this song many times since hearing Leonard Cohen, himself, sing it in concert, having recorded Will singing it, and talking about it and about the moving Jeff Buckley version of the song, this article Dar forwarded to me yesterday is a revelation.


(The version I love with "Dark" replacing "Dove")

Hallelujah!

One haunting ballad has been the soundtrack to many lives recently. But why? Bryan Appleyard on Leonard Cohen’s uber-song


Songs are everywhere. We buy them and play them, of course, but we are also subjected to them in pubs, cafes, lifts and shops. You see people in cars singing along to the radio, and on trains they nod and rock to their MP3 players. Unthinkingly, we stroll along humming the latest pop pap. A visiting alien might reasonably conclude that we are sustained by songs rather than air, food or water. Songs are thus the dominant expressive form of our time. Yet most of them barely exist in our consciousness at all. Mass-produced drivel, they drift around the charts for a week or two, insinuate themselves into some particularly indiscriminating part of our brain for a while, and then are gone. Some have an afterlife as instant mood music for television shows, films or advertisements. But, by and large, songs are the supremely disposable art form of our time.
The exceptions are obvious. A few songs or performances are good enough to last, and some are just bad but evocative, and are therefore continuously recycled. Abba’s songs aren’t as good as everybody says they are, but they work in a way that makes them eminently usable. Equally, almost any rubbish that struck it big in the late 1960s can now be used to sell stuff to the moist-eyed middle-aged, who have discovered, to their infinite sorrow, that they were not, in the event, born to be wild.
All of which brings me to the story of one particular song that seems, through some mysterious alchemy, to have done everything a modern song can do. Leonard Cohen’s Hallelujah has been papped, drivelled, exploited and massacred. It has also produced some very great performances, and it is, in truth, a very great song. In a fundamental sense, at least partly intended by Cohen, it is a song about the contemporary condition of song.
Even if you think you haven’t heard it, I can guarantee you have. It has been covered by, among many others, Allison Crowe, kd lang, Damien Rice, Bono, Sheryl Crow and Kathryn Williams. Bob Dylan has sung it live, a performance that has, apparently, been bootlegged. It has been used in films and on television. Rufus Wainwright sang it on the soundtrack of Shrek, Jeff Buckley’s version was used on The West Wing and The OC, John Cale sang it on Scrubs, and so on. Cale’s is the best version I have heard — pure, cold and scarcely inflected at all, it sends shivers down the spine.
Other songs may have been covered more — in Cohen’s oeuvre, Suzanne, with 124 versions, and Bird on the Wire, with 78, come out ahead of, at the last count, Hallelujah’s 44. And other songs may have made it onto more soundtracks. But there is something unique about Hallelujah, something that tells us a great deal about who we now are.
Cohen recorded it on his 1985 album Various Positions. It seemed destined, at that point, to remain in the same memory vault as most of his work. Fans would love it, aficionados would acknowledge it as a fine piece of songwriting, but otherwise it would just be an addition to the repertoire of great Cohen songs, a large though highly specialised musical sector.
Then, in 1994, Jeff Buckley released a version on his album Grace. This sold millions worldwide, and Grace’s status was finally and fully elevated to “legendary” when Buckley drowned in the Mississippi in 1997. He was the son of Tim Buckley, an extraordinary singer-songwriter who had also died young in mysterious circumstances. A wild and fatal romanticism seemed to hang over the family, over Grace and over the song that everybody found themselves singing from that album, Hallelujah. It was, unquestionably, Buckley’s version rather than Cohen’s that was to make the song universally recognisable.
This is fair enough. Buckley, like his father, had a phenomenal vocal range, and Cohen, famously, has not. Many of Cohen’s best songs — Alexandra Leaving, Famous Blue Raincoat — are exactly suited to his low groan. But Hallelujah is not. It needs to be sung, and Buckley really sang it, whispering and screaming his way through its bitter verses. His interpretation is a little lush for me, but it was better than Cohen’s, and it was exactly that lush- ness that projected it onto all those soundtracks and caught the attention of all those other singers.
What then became really odd about the song was the utterly contradictory way in which it was used and understood. This was, in part, due to the fact that Cohen seems to have written at least two versions. The first ended on a relatively upbeat note:
“And even though it all went wrong, I’ll stand before the Lord of Song With nothing on my tongue but hallelujah!” It was this ending, curiously, that Dylan especially liked, as he told Cohen over coffee after a concert in Paris. Cohen sang him the last verse, saying it was “a rather joyous song”. (Incidentally, during the same conversation, Cohen told Dylan that Hallelujah had taken a year to write. This startled Dylan. He pointed out that his average writing time was about 15 minutes.) Anyway, for once, Dylan’s taste had led him astray, because the bleaker ending in the Buckley version is much better, in the sense that it is more consistent. There is no redemptive Lord of Song, the only lesson of love is “how to shoot at someone who outdrew you” and the only hallelujah is “cold and broken”.
Encouraged by this apparently official duality, subsequent covers tinkered here and there with the words to the point where the song became protean, a set of possibilities rather than a fixed text. But only two possibilities predominated: either this was a wistful, ultimately feelgood song or it was an icy, bitter commentary on the futility of human relations.
It is easy to justify the first reading. There are the repeated hallelujahs of the soothingly hymn-like chorus, and there is a gently rocking tunefulness about the whole thing. This, if you didn’t listen too closely, was what made it such perfect material for that supremely vacuous show The OC. Young, rich people — especially in California — often feel the need to look soulful and deep on camera, and the sound of doomed, youthful Buckley sighing Hallelujah as they all pondered the state of their relationships must have seemed about right.
But, of course, Cohen doesn’t write songs like that. What he most commonly does is pour highly concentrated acid into very sweet and lyrical containers. Never in his entire career has he done this as well as he did in the second version of Hallelujah. The song begins with a statement about the pointlessness of art. Addressing a woman, Cohen writes of a secret chord discovered by King David. But he knows the woman doesn’t really care for music. Nevertheless, he describes the lost music, as if to Bathsheba, the woman whose beauty overthrew David:
“Well, it goes like this, the fourth, the fifth The minor fall and the major lift The baffled king composing hallelujah.”
The art is futile, because the woman doesn’t care. Instead, she humiliates and destroys the man, though, even as she does so, “from your lips she drew the hallelujah”. Man needs woman more than he needs art. The ejaculated hallelujah — a cry of praise to the Lord — is drawn forth not by David’s secret chord, but by his subjugation to Bathsheba. The remainder of the song brilliantly weaves this theme through a cinematic description of a failed affair, combined with strange but delicate images of a military parade, a “holy dove” and a western shoot-out. The fourth verse comes close to a genuinely optimistic eroticism.
“But remember when I moved in you And the holy dove was moving too And every breath we drew was hallelujah.”
But the lover concludes that there is nothing more to love than a “cold and broken hallelujah”. Sexual love is, sadly, what we need, but is it what we want? It is hard to imagine a more bitterly subversive and countercultural question.
The aesthetic trick at the heart of this is the undermining of the word hallelujah. It means praise to the Lord, but it is, basically, just a musical sound, like lalala or yeah, yeah, yeah. Describing the chord structure in those three lines in the first verse makes the words, sort of literally, into the music. Similarly, the chorus, which consists simply of the repetition of the word, is pure song, in which the words and music are inseparable. And it is a pure pop song or contemporary hymn — a catchy, uplifting tune and a comforting word. It has almost a sing-along quality. The words become the happy tune, the tune gets into your head and, once there, reveals itself as a serpent. For what you will actually be singing along to is arid sex, destroyed imagination, misogyny and emotional violence.
All of these have to be gone through to get to the “hallelujah”: a romantic affirmation, certainly, but only of the pain of our predicament. After that conversation with Dylan, Cohen compared himself to Flaubert, meaning only that he was a slow writer. But he was more right than he knew. Like Flaubert, he sees the erotic as a kind of poison, deadening the artist and dragging him back to earth; and, like Flaubert, he delights in describing this awful insight.
So, the Hallelujah that adorns the flaccid sexual crises in The OC and adds soul to the babbling shenanigans of The West Wing is a brilliant fake. It sounds like a pop song, but it isn’t. Like the Velvet Underground’s Heroin, Bob Dylan’s Leopard-Skin Pill- Box Hat, John Phillips’s Let It Bleed, Genevieve or even Frank Sinatra’s I Get Along Without You Very Well, it is a tuneful but ironic mask worn to conceal bitter, atonal failure.
Of course, this is such an effective aesthetic trick precisely because of the way songs have seeped into our lives. Instrumental versions of Heroin or Let It Bleed, Genevieve — the first advocating the nihilism of addiction, the second about a man who cares nothing for his girlfriend miscarrying in the basement — would go perfectly well in a lift or clothes shop, just as Hallelujah can slot into almost any television show you can imagine.
These works use familiarity, even banality, as a weapon. They remind us that, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, there is a real world beyond the pap, that perhaps we should try listening rather than just hearing, that words like hallelujah just need a brief touch of genius to be brought back to life, and that Leonard Cohen, who was 70 last year, needs to be with us for a good few years yet. Check out the Cale version: erotic failure never felt so good.

Sunday Times
http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/music/article409551.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1



http://youtu.be/Pid0nCrsQxM (Jeff Buckley Version)




The John Cale version:  http://youtu.be/vEOZLQ3d1FI



 Jack

Monday, April 25, 2011

Treme Returns and so does New Orleans

Good review of Treme. It was great seeing John Boutte on the show-- Heard him and talked with him at length last summer at dba.

Jack

As we return to the post-Katrina New Orleans of "Treme" for the start of season two (Sunday night at 10 on HBO), things are in many ways much better for the musicians, chefs and other locals we met in the drama's first season.

Itinerant trombonist Antoine Batiste (Wendell Pierce) decides the time is right to form and front his own band, while his ex-wife LaDonna (Khandi Alexander) coincidentally decides to expand her bar's business by adding live music. Trouble-making DJ Davis McAlary (Steve Zahn) tries to start a record label to promote his love of the city's bounce music, while his violinist friend Annie (Lucia Micarelli) finally starts establishing herself in the local music scene. Mardi Gras Indian chief Albert Lambreaux (Clarke Peters) gets to work patching up the home that was destroyed in the storm, while his trumpet-playing son Delmond (Rob Brown) sets out to reinvent his sound and, in the process, reconnect with his New Orleans roots.

Most of these characters have moved past mere survival now. Their lives have found some level of post-Katrina equilibrium, and now they're all looking to build something. It's an attitude exemplified by one of this season's two new characters, Nelson Hidalgo (Jon Seda), a carpetbagger from Texas looking to get rich by helping to reconstruct the devastated city.

But even as many of the people of "Treme" are doing much better than when last we saw them, the city itself - only 14 months removed from the storm - is in more dire straits than ever. At this point in time, people have returned to New Orleans, but so has crime, at a rate and volume that's far more than the city's police force - represented by the show's other new regular character, Lt. Terry Colson (David Morse) - can handle. Half the city is on anti-depressants, and there's a sense the other half probably would be if they had a minute to pause and recognize how they're really feeling.

That mix of ambition and indecision, of construction and devastation, provides the backdrop for a second season that's unlikely to change the series' reputation as The Wonderful Show Where Very Little Happens, but only because change to the show seems to only come as incrementally as it does to the city.

"Treme" was co-created (with Eric Overmyer) by David Simon, whose last HBO series was the densely-plotted great American novel for television "The Wire." So the new show's focus on atmosphere over story, on small character beats over big developments, has been a tough transition for some viewers, even the ones ready to follow Simon and fellow "Wire" alums Pierce and Peters anywhere thanks to their work on The Best Show Ever.

I understand the reluctance to embrace the laid-back aesthetic of "Treme," even though I don't share it. But I will say this: in season two, the strengths of "Treme" remain strengths, while some of the show's weaknesses have been much improved.

First, the stuff that worked before and continues to do so: The atmosphere, sense of place and absolute love of that place are all second to none on television. As a love letter to the city of New Orleans, to its culture and food and (especially) its music, "Treme" was, is and will likely continue to be fantastic. And the performances remain among the best you'll find. Alexander and newly-minted Oscar winner Melissa Leo continue to shine as a pair of strong women still grieving over the loss of, respectively, a brother and a husband. Pierce is still a superhuman reservoir of charm, Kim Dickens (as Janette Desautel, a chef who has fled to New York after the post-storm failure of her restaurant) still so touching and vulnerable (and this year has material largely written by celebrity chef/foodie Anthony Bourdain), and Morse (who appeared briefly last season) such a natural fit as a wise but weary veteran cop with no idea how to keep his district together, nevermind the city.

And, hell, the music alone (with the actors, other than professional violinist Micarelli, largely faking it while working alongside real-life fixtures of the New Orleans music scene) is often worth the time investment. Regardless of the style - traditional jazz, bounce, funk, classical and everything in between - the musical numbers are done with so much joy that it doesn't matter if they're only sometimes informative of character or plot.

As for the areas that were more problematic a year ago, the new season definitely feels like it has more forward momentum. It takes a while to get there - I've seen 5 episodes, and had a conversation with a friend who had only seen 3 and felt like the pace was just as ambling as before - but after a while there's a much clearer sense that there are stories being told here beyond "character X tries to pay the bills and hold onto their sanity," and that many of the stories tie together in a way they didn't before.

The simple fact that Batiste - the closest the ensemble show has to a lead character - has a storyline at all this year, as opposed to what was essentially an ongoing situation last season, is a huge step forward in that area. Characters seemingly cross paths more frequently than before, and even as Delmond and Janette spend much of the early episodes off in New York, an effort is made to keep them tied to life in New Orleans.

And some of the new character combinations feel more promising than what was there before. Last season, Annie was dating Sonny (Michiel Huisman), a bitter junkie resentful of her greater talent and determined to hold her down at his level. Being paired instead with Zahn's goofball Davis brings out more of Micarelli's inherent sunniness. And once Sonny is no longer a weight at the ankle of Annie and has only to deal with the limitations of his talent in a city with no shortage of better musicians, he becomes a much more interesting and, dare I say it, sympathetic figure.

There are still frayed edges that haven't quite been dealt with. Where the Baltimore of "The Wire" was filled entirely with fictional characters and events - even if many of them were heavily-drawn from real ones - "Treme" has an at times awkward mix of the fictional and the real. Lt. Colson, for instance, spends a lot of time discussing real-life New Orleans PD scandals that are in his recent past but took place 5 or 6 years ago for us, and those scenes never quite feel connected to the lives of the show's characters.

Leo's crusading lawyer Toni Burnette again has to play private detective to find out what happened to a young man who died in the storm's aftermath, but where last year that quest had a personal stake for the audience because the man in question was LaDonna's brother, here it's the son of a new character we meet briefly and don't see again. (Leo gets much better material in showing how Toni and daughter Sofia, well-played by India Ennenga, are coping with the aftermath of her husband's suicide.)

And while the show takes a fairly nuanced approach to Nelson Hidalgo - he could easily come across as a caricatured opportunist, but instead is written and played as a guy who wants to make a buck but also seems to genuinely fall in love with his adopted new city - Seda is still largely off in his own show for most of the 5 episodes I've seen. He represents the theme of building, but I'm hopeful he gets more integrated with the other regulars before the season's out.

Still, the great vastly outweighs the problematic from where I sit, and the small detail work remains wonderful. The first 5 episodes are packed with great moments, not only for the main characters, but for the people of the city as a whole. Antoine winds up with a music teaching job to help pay the bills, and during one class, the kids are thrown into an utter, understandable panic when a rainstorm gets a little too intense. A later episode features a funeral for a local jazz man attended by what seems like every player in the city; as the man's coffin is being loaded onto the horse-drawn hearse, we see a beautiful tableau of every musician holding his or her instrument aloft as a show of respect.

Even with slight tweaks and an upward narrative trajectory, "Treme" is never going to be a mass-appeal hit - is unlikely, in fact, to even become a fiercely-cherished cult item like "The Wire" was. But I don't think Simon, Overmyer or anyone else involved has any illusions of broad success with this project. Like so many of the characters on the show, if they wanted to hit it big, they'd be doing something else; they do this out of a deep, unbreakable love for this city and its traditions.

Or, as an incredulous Delmond says when an interviewer asks him how his new album is selling, "'Selling'? It's jazz, man."


Alan Sepinwall

http://www.hitfix.com/blogs/whats-alan-watching/posts/review-hbos-treme-returns-for-season-2








 

Friday, April 15, 2011

Leonardo's Birthday

http://www.muckypig.com/thepen/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/St.-John-the-Baptist-1513-16..jpg

MONA LISA X390


Mona Lisa model was a male say Italian researchers
 
ROME — Italian researchers who specialise in resolving art mysteries said Wednesday they have discovered the disputed identity of the model for Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa -- and claimed he was a man.
Silvano Vinceti, chairman of the Italian national committee for cultural heritage, said the Florence-born Renaissance artist's male apprentice and possible lover Salai was the main inspiration for the picture.
However his claim was immediately disputed by experts at the Louvre in Paris, where the painting is on display.
Salai, real name Gian Giacomo Caprotti, an effeminate young artist who worked with da Vinci for 25 years, is thought to have served as a model and muse for several of his paintings. The pair had an "ambiguous" relationship and were probably lovers, Vinceti said.
Comparisons between the facial characteristics of figures from several of da Vinci's works -- such as "St. John the Baptist" and the "Angel Incarnate" -- reveal striking similarities with the Mona Lisa's nose and mouth, he said.
"There are remarkable similarities," Vinceti told reporters.
What is more, Vinceti said da Vinci had left clues to the model's identity in tiny letters L and S which he and his team found painted into the eyes of the Mona Lisa.
"Close examination of a high-quality digital copy of the portrait had revealed an L for Leonardo and an S for Salai," he said.
But Vinceti's claims have been disputed by the Louvre museum.
The museum said it had carried out "every possible laboratory test possible" on the picture in 2004 and then again in 2009, and insisted that "no inscriptions, letters or numbers, were discovered during the tests."
"The ageing of the painting on wood has caused a great number of cracks to appear in the paint, which have caused a number of shapes to appear that have often been subject to over-interpretation," the Louvre told AFP.
The museum also said Vinceti's had made his claims without having had access to the painting itself.
The Italian aficionado, whose team gained notoriety with their claims surrounding the death of Caravaggio last year, said he felt sorry for the embarrassment the museum must feel on having missed the clues all these years.
"I can understand their incredulity and amazement -- after all this must be the most studied picture on earth," he told AFP, but added "they're really blind."
"They have to be serious and accept that they didn't see what was right in front of their eyes," he said.
In order to clear up any lingering doubt over his theory -- worthy of Dan Brown's 2003 bestseller the "Da Vinci Code" -- Vinceti said he would be willing to take his team to France and collaborate on further tests with the Louvre.
"We're ready to go to Paris and extract a tiny bit of paint from the numbers and see whether they match the rest of the painting, to see if they were done at the same time or are marks that have appeared over time," he said.
Whether the prestigious art museum will take Vinceti up on his offer is yet to be seen.

Saturday, April 09, 2011

Thoughts upon the last bloom of the orchid falling


 

"Sex is the root of which intuition is the foliage and beauty is the flower." D.H. Lawrence



When did I first grow aware of this truth central to the philosophy of love expressed so well in so many works by my literary mentor, D. H. Lawrence? Perhaps it was at the age of eighteen, when sex with my high school girlfriend meant no more to me than masturbation, but the reticence and budding friendship of her brother meant so much more. It took me such a long time to unravel the mystery of it, often starting with beauty, the woman I met in college, and going backwards by intuition to the sexual union, finally so taking me out of myself and my ego, that I shook like a branch of leaves in the winds of  a changing season. By the age of twenty-one I was convinced that love without sex was impossible, except the love of family, which usually is begun in sex, defined by sex. To this day I still believe this. I have friends with whom I have not had sex, of course, and friendship is a kind of love, true enough. Yet love which takes one out of the individual ego, transcends the self, leads us to behold the beauty of the other, making it part of our own person, is grounded in sexual intimacy. Otherwise, the holding back, the suppression of the sexual impulse, ultimately destroys the love.

My thought brings easy agreement when it refers to the love of the opposite sex, and when the age difference is slight. Many agree today that monogamy, enforced, as if a  given to relationships, is the opposite of love, counter-intuitive, anything but beautiful when it turns to possessiveness and jealousy. The real question for me at an age past sixty, is whether love such as I have known in the past is still possible. 

Last night I saw the film Dangerous Method. The film is brilliant, exploring the ideas and innovative insights of four people: Freud, Jung, and very importantly, Sabina Spielrein and Otto Gross. We all know about Freud and Jung. What Spielrein added for me was the analysis of the collision of egos in love, how that collision overcomes the selfishness and the isolation of the self, becomes simultaneously destructive and creative. She and Freud understood the embrace of Eros and Thanatos in a new way. There is death in every orgasm. 

Then there is Otto Gross. I have read about him all day. In the film he advocates freeing oneself from inhibitions, letting go of what Freud or his followers called the super-ego. Analysis in his view must be revolutionary, not leading the patient to conform and become a good, productive citizen of society, but rather freeing the patient to explore creative, challenging feelings, especially sexual feelings. He became an anarchist, wanting to overcome the restraints, limitations, and narrow views of Victorian society. His attack on monogamy and his insight that bisexuality is a given in the healthy psyche, made him an outcast. So too did his view that a man must accept and understand his own homosexuality before he can be a complete lover of women. He died in poverty in Berlin in 1920. 

One of the articles I read today discussed the "taboo of tenderness." We are fed the rule that men must be strong, must be anchors to women, supporting them, nourishing them, in order to be proper lovers. Lawrence bought into some such view. He believed there was a balance in the heterosexual relationship, a charging of the blood in intercourse. I entertained the idea myself. When I was with the three women with whom I had prolonged sexual intercourse, I was always the strong one, the anchor. It was a role that left me decidedly at sea. I sought an equal, someone like myself, wanting strength and independence, not someone whose happiness depended on me. 

Despite having the best sex in my life with women, finding the most sexual satisfaction in heterosexual sex, I experienced the most profound love in sexual tenderness with other men, often with men predominantly heterosexual themselves. The actual sex we had was not mindless, which even fucking gay men usually turned out to be. It was the very exploration of our selves, our motives, the collision of egos Sabina Spielrein experienced that moved me, that took me from sex to intuition to beauty and back again.

Only I have no answers, even after all this love and experience. In the two most loving and caring sexual exchanges with so-called straight men, they both told me that the experience of sex with me was beautiful, most recently with a man far younger than myself, taboos broken open like an egg. Giving, tender. Beautiful. And yet, then and now, there was no mutual urge to continue to experience that tenderness of touch. 

My love for an older man when I was twenty-one was without question the most important creative development of my own psyche. I learned that nothing is more vital than understanding, of sharing one's deepest ideas and experiences with another person of like mind. We later taught the same philosophy course. We talked of literature and philosophy as if they were the most important things in our lives. We even loved the same person for a while, one of the two men I mentioned above. Ours was a collision of egos that became Aristotelian friendship, mostly Platonic, I suppose, but rooted in sex that we experienced, full of intuitive foliage, flowering into a thing of beauty. We were lovers for twenty years, until he was murdered.

Eros becomes Thanatos.

Wednesday, April 06, 2011

On the Eve of our brief April Break

The video below (posted April 4) is one I made a couple of weeks ago with Will. We've become good friends and I greatly admire his musical talent.
Tomorrow after a two hour stint at my school I shall have the remainder of Thursday and Friday off. I had thought of going to Savannah, but decided instead to relax here, with warm evenings on the porch. There are financial items, including my taxes, that I need to do. I also look forward to continuing to read John Irving's Until I Find You. What a superb writer he is.
This spring, my reading, my nights of dialog with Will, and the approach in a year or two of retirement have flooded my mind with nostalgia, with memories especially of Jim and Jake and Julian. Completing a first typed draft of my novel has added to all of this remembrance as well.
Spring has also brought storms and shifts in feeling with the shifting extremes of temperature (today began at 36 and went in mere hours to 76). And so it goes.







Atlanta Lightning
from Wikipedia
Jack







Monday, March 07, 2011

Howl


The review below of the film is as much about Ginsberg, himself, as the film, which is why I like it so much...

Colin Carman
Howl
Directed by Rab Epstein
& Jeffrey Friedman
Werc Werk Works Production

“I’M COMING thru a stage of puberty and new horizons are opening up. ... I am no longer bored by life in general because of my extra-curricular activities. I haven’t the time to be bored.” The author of this diary entry from 1941 is the famed American poet Allen Ginsberg who, at the tender age of fourteen, vowed to never be bored, or boring, again. When Time profiled the writer and his circle in 1959, the magazine mocked the 33-year-old poet as that “recognized leader of the pack of oddballs who celebrate booze, dope, sex, and despair and who go by the name of beatniks.” “Howl,” Ginsberg’s landmark poem and preface to the Beat generation, has been called a lot of things since its publication in 1956—radical, visionary, vulgar—but the one thing it’s not is boring.

    Neither is Howl the movie, co-written and co-directed by Oscar-winning documentarians Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman (The Celluloid Closet), which opened last year’s Sundance Film Festival and stars James Franco as the counter-cultural icon. The film is a composite of three interlocking narratives: a candid interview with the writer on the genesis of both his poem and his proud homosexuality; an incantatory reading of “Howl” at the Six Gallery in San Francisco in the fall of 1955 (with Jack Kerouac and Ginsberg’s sexual muse, Neal Cassady, in attendance); and animations by art director Eric Drooker, whose hallucinatory renderings of the poem’s “angelheaded hipsters” and “saintly motorcyclists” breathe new life into Ginsberg’s lines. There are kaleidoscopic visions of copulating couples, saxophones that shoot fire, and a graphic representation of what Ginsberg called the “heterosexual dollar” in which the pyramidal eye on the dollar bill explodes into scenes of childbirth and fellatio. This triptych makes Howl less of a biopic than a genre that scarcely exists on the big screen: a “lit flick,” an explication de texte, a work of literary exegesis on film.

    Recreating the 1957 obscenity trial of Lawrence Ferlinghetti for publishing Howl and Other Poems, Epstein and Friedman stage a veritable round-robin of name actors: David Strathairn for the prosecution and Mad Men’s Jon Hamm for the defense, along with Treat Williams, Jeff Daniels, and Mary-Louise Parker as witnesses who either defend or deny the poem’s artistic merit. Then there’s Franco, a surprising choice to play Ginsberg, spurring Vanity Fair (Oct. 20, 2010) to quip: “I saw the best movies of my generation destroyed by miscasting.” Franco’s goyish glamour is indeed distracting—he’s a veteran of the “Spider-Man” franchise and a Gucci model—but he faithfully captures the poet’s north Jersey accent as he beds Jon Prescott (as Cassady) and Aaron Tveit (as Peter Orlovsky, Ginsberg’s lifelong partner) with all the playful tenderness that defined the poet’s persona. Not your typical leading man, Franco recently appeared in drag on the cover of Candy, a magazine devoted to what it calls “transversal,” and in 2008 he played Scott Smith to Sean Penn’s Harvey Milk. Coincidentally, Franco is enrolled in a writing program at Columbia University, Ginsberg’s alma mater (from which he was suspended in 1945). He told The New York Times (Sept. 12, 2010): “I’d have the little book with me, and I’d listen to him, and I’d just read along with him to just ingrain that voice in my head.”

    Howl poignantly explores the writer’s irrepressible need to shock. Ginsberg, after all, went to incredible lengths never to bore his lovers or his listeners. When a heckler at a reading in Los Angeles in 1957 shouted “What are you trying to prove?”, the author exclaimed “Nakedness!” and promptly disrobed on stage. Howl the film examines this impulse from a more personal angle, giving us those excruciating moments when Ginsberg’s dirty jokes fell flat in front of his first loves, Kerouac and Cassady. Catching up with the two after the road trip that inspired Kerouac’s On the Road, Ginsberg spent what biographer Jane Kramer called in Allen Ginsberg in America (1969) an “awkward month” with the pair, feeling every bit the “lonely college boy who needed love ... and a lot of attention.” Howl the film undresses that need, suggesting that nakedness in both its physical and verbal forms was Ginsberg’s idea of perfection. The film’s most revealing moment comes at the end when the poet, fixing himself a cup of tea and reflecting on the cultural movement he defiantly inspired, tells his interviewer that “Howl” is not the “promotion of homosexuality” it was perceived to be, but a promotion of honesty more generally. “When people are frank about homosexuality in public, it breaks the ice,” says Franco in a fake-looking beard, “then people are free to be frank about anything, and that’s socially useful.”

Colin Carman, PhD, is a frequent contributor to this magazine, and teaches English literature at Colorado Mountain College.

http://www.glreview.com/article.php?articleid=316





Friday, March 04, 2011

Ouroboros




Ouroboros
From Carl Jung's


From Egypt's and the North Africa/Middle-East's uprisings and revolution to Carnival and Mardi Gras in such cities as Rio, Sydney, Venice, and New Orleans, the quest for primal unity and Dionysian ecstasy coincides this year with the arrival of springtime and the approach of the Vernal Equinox. A Tidal Wave is arising from the Collective Unconscious. 2011 is becoming a year of upheaval.


Last night I watched the Jung themed episode of the UK version of Skins in which key character Tony fucks his  beautiful Jungian Anima and finds wholeness for himself and his loved ones. It is a remarkable 46 minutes as full of meaning and rich symbolism as Jung's Man and his Symbols. 
(I know this is hard to believe- I was amazed)
(Watch it yourself-- though you won't know a few details.)

There is a new film soon to appear about Jung and Freud-- A Dangerous Method
If it generates new interest in Jung, so much the better, though I wonder how much it will expand over the provocative relationship the 30-year-old Jung had with his creative, voluptuous 18- year- old patient Sabina.

Today, I have read about Octavio Paz and reviewed material on Marx and the existentialists, especially Sartre.  Along with Simone De Beauvoir, they all write of the alienation and dread the modern world has brought. Here is the heart of what is amiss in the world and that Jung recognized so well-- We have been cut off from the essence of life, we are cut off from nature ecologically, from life by our meaningless jobs or our need for money, from one another ethnically, from our collective unconscious wholeness by our lost and competitive egos. We crave festivals, drunkenness, drugs, oblivion to remove the alienation and loneliness of life in a materialistic world ruled by greed and war. 

Such has been our condition since the industrial age, worsening in the emptiness of the Eisenhower years and the wrong-headed war in Viet Nam. The Beats, Ginsberg, Kerouac, poets, song writers, artists have all seen the alienation and spent their lives trying to reconnect us with our holistic center, our Buddha Natures, Our beatitude. It takes art, poetry and music to bring us to our authenticity. And I still wonder whether it is possible to go beyond isolated communes of awareness, little gardens of Epicurean wisdom, to an expanded state of global consciousness that will save us from our doom.

For now, for the first week of March, a glass of champagne, Michael Cunningham's new novel, and ten glorious days with no obligations other than a hike in the woods along the trails of Cloudland Canyon.

Here is a fascinating Audio of an interview with Jungians. (CLICK)