They say aging
is getting in touch with
what is it they say?
I can't remember
I know some things it's not
it's not giving up on lust
(but it moves into dream)
it's not giving up on joy
(it embitters like dark chocolate)
it's not even the memory loss
(file dumps on Fights Past)
What it is then?
The snow comes again
this time in April
proving everyone wrong
But it is white and soft
like the first snow of November
And I saw, good,
I had no plans today
anyway
Other than
allowing time to
pass through me
Monday, March 31, 2008
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Paradox (poem)
It occured to me
in a horrid flash of truth
I hate them, well,
dislike them anyway
now
People
like the magazine
only the real ones
walking around
Hate
is too strong a word
but faux extroversion
the last flash
has given way
to a codgerism of death
turtle shell
snapping turtle
armored and defiant
prehistoric
burying (her) eggs
on the side of the dirt road
How can you tell her?
She's too defiant to care....
She is me, as the Jungians say,
she is my dream and I'm her
nightmare
humans and their road graters,
me as guilty as the next
How can this be --
can this "hating people" as you say
be a form of liberation?
a kabbalahistic sephiroth,
ultimately for teaching purposes
as one climbs
(vainly, pathetically)
up the so-called Tree of Life
But I like it
Try it on like a fedora in a thrift store
is this me?
I look around at them
but it is not hate that I feel
not hate
something else
something more philosophical
(not pity either)
Does one, can one "feel" wisdom
"in her mind/body" she always says
like the rest of us, one day,
may catch up
In my mind/body the feeling
is paradox
an insight into a chuckling god
We love freedom
We hate freedom
Anything where there is strong feelings
whatsoever
it applies.
Try it:
love, parents, pets, work,
vehicles, technology, art,
America
You see
You may now explore this
sephiroth
We call it
aging
Friday, March 28, 2008
St Peter's Gate (poem)
It's beginning to get to me.
the rejections. the inability to finish things.
the "ADD" like symptoms
exacerbating....
waiting for fame to come to me...
and it's passed me by
(the man waits for the bus
the bus don't come 'round here no 'mo)
what is gracefully bowing out?
i see why the retired die now.
if there is no one wanting what they have
(not even the wisdom we once wanted
from our elders)
what's the point in taking more
food&air from the children?
yet
i am fierce
more critical than ever
more
seer of the dangers
everywhere
from the well meaning
globalists of both stripes
all stripes
all who have the answer
the undulating of
our monkey angel natures
(yeah yeah god)
answers come and go
but they hold up a device
we never had this!
before
no?
they called it a hand tool once
way back
the loss of memory
a partial blessing
you remember the coffee
only
not all the petty squables
of "family" and Family and
all that...
the notorious crankiness of the aging
is this is
st peter's gate?
Thursday, March 20, 2008
To write or paint, that is the question (timed)
The smart lady at the arts center who reminded me of Angelica Huston (when do I tell her this? will she "like" that she is like Angelica Huston, how could you not like being compared to an intelligent and elegant--though old--star?).... says I see 300 "artists" (my quotes) a year and, well, she says, you have to choose.
Choose? I ask.
Basically she says between writing and painting.
Oh, I say (thinking Schnabel, thinking... generally renaissance and a little F-U in there, too).
I don't see people making it who don't choose.
So here's the thing.
I've been thinking writing is my MAIN THING for about 16 or so years (I judge by Nic's age).
Sixteen years. What do I have to "show" for it? I have two FINISHED but UNPUBLISHED novels, and one short story published and one contest won. I have (perhaps) over a hundred rejections, mostly from agents (some of whom actually read stuff) but also from publishers. No one is exactly and particularly interested in publising my work.
So we go to the college counselor (for Nic) and she says colleges are interested in (his) parents. Hmm. I think, damn, an unpublished (read: wanabe) novelist and a "sunday (if popsurreal) painter." Poor Nic. Poor me! What a nothing-to-show-for-it-life. Damn.
So combining that with (her name is Kathleen not Angelica)'s question... choose? the Red Pill or the Blue Pill. (red state, blue state, ha ha).
And I think I should just F-ing pay Ian his $30,000 "pound of fleshala" and get my book
published. People don't ask if you made sales (or they do but you can be vague "getting better" you can say) they ask if it was published. Hmm.
Am I desperate or what?
[It's not surprisingly the money, I have the money. Will i feel shame, or feel "ripped off" when and if Ian's enterprise (a) folds or (b) is discredited by Poets'nWriters?]
I don't know.
What are the arguments:
I am actually enjoying writing now more than ever, though what I am writing is "more" experimental and despite a fantasy that it MAY appeal to Dave Eggers (please please please make me a knight in your empire!) it will APPEAL LESS to serious agents who was serious easy to place books. I mean, literary is hard enough, but "experimental"... sheesh.
So it's not likely that my "luck" such as it has been will change by THIS PEICE I AM WRITING. To top it off, I am beginning to wonder if my FINISHED novels truly reflect the best "who" I am , or (sorry MW) have they been too compromised by this project: PLEASE NEW YORK?
There are argments for making painting my "main" thing:
Choose? I ask.
Basically she says between writing and painting.
Oh, I say (thinking Schnabel, thinking... generally renaissance and a little F-U in there, too).
I don't see people making it who don't choose.
So here's the thing.
I've been thinking writing is my MAIN THING for about 16 or so years (I judge by Nic's age).
Sixteen years. What do I have to "show" for it? I have two FINISHED but UNPUBLISHED novels, and one short story published and one contest won. I have (perhaps) over a hundred rejections, mostly from agents (some of whom actually read stuff) but also from publishers. No one is exactly and particularly interested in publising my work.
So we go to the college counselor (for Nic) and she says colleges are interested in (his) parents. Hmm. I think, damn, an unpublished (read: wanabe) novelist and a "sunday (if popsurreal) painter." Poor Nic. Poor me! What a nothing-to-show-for-it-life. Damn.
So combining that with (her name is Kathleen not Angelica)'s question... choose? the Red Pill or the Blue Pill. (red state, blue state, ha ha).
And I think I should just F-ing pay Ian his $30,000 "pound of fleshala" and get my book
published. People don't ask if you made sales (or they do but you can be vague "getting better" you can say) they ask if it was published. Hmm.
Am I desperate or what?
[It's not surprisingly the money, I have the money. Will i feel shame, or feel "ripped off" when and if Ian's enterprise (a) folds or (b) is discredited by Poets'nWriters?]
I don't know.
What are the arguments:
I am actually enjoying writing now more than ever, though what I am writing is "more" experimental and despite a fantasy that it MAY appeal to Dave Eggers (please please please make me a knight in your empire!) it will APPEAL LESS to serious agents who was serious easy to place books. I mean, literary is hard enough, but "experimental"... sheesh.
So it's not likely that my "luck" such as it has been will change by THIS PEICE I AM WRITING. To top it off, I am beginning to wonder if my FINISHED novels truly reflect the best "who" I am , or (sorry MW) have they been too compromised by this project: PLEASE NEW YORK?
There are argments for making painting my "main" thing:
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
timed writing 031803
liberal fascism continues to reverberate in my thinking. it's not that i think the book is SOOOO great, it's flawed in many ways.
what the reverberation is all about (i think) has to do with
(a) what we hear on the news
and
(b) who is the enemy
let's take (a), though they're related. Obama, for example. his speech defending his nutso minister has to cast an enemy and who does he look for -- corporate america!
what goldberg is saying is that 1. corporations are not and have never been truly right wing (i.e. free market capitalists).... they are ostensibly about wealth creation (the show of ceo pay extravagance) but are now, have been and will always be involved in the world of partnering with government (ie fascism/ new deal). they do this sometimes as "good guys" (liberal corporations held in high regard for their support of liberal causes from environmentalism to gay marriage) and sometimes as "bad guys" -- ie. big tobacco who ultimately partnered with government to use their evil products to support states' general funds. (all with very little cognizance from the general public of the multiple ironies involved).
so "the enemy" (ie. the corporations -- how can free marketers be an enemy? they have no power) are ALREAY COOPERATING WITH GOVERNMENT and the WHOLE ARGUMENT either from the "left" (extreme would be nationalization -- from schools to health care) or the "right" (mcCain, i guess, getting them to do cap and trade on CO2 for example) is really all an argument about a degree of overtness in this "cooperation" which goldberg calls fascism.
so
what's the bottom line for me personally?
it's all a sham
there is NO ONE advocating free markets
it's all about leaning in one direction or another
at least economically
(i suppose you could still say there are differences in foreign policy, as obama is likely to extend his "we are all victims" philosophy to embrace the 'legit' grievances of terrorists.. thus
we are less likely to engage in aggressive wars or world policing, which means iran will get the bomb and china and others less hobbled by public opinion will rise in the world.)
the other thing
do i have to choose between writing and painting??
huh?
what the reverberation is all about (i think) has to do with
(a) what we hear on the news
and
(b) who is the enemy
let's take (a), though they're related. Obama, for example. his speech defending his nutso minister has to cast an enemy and who does he look for -- corporate america!
what goldberg is saying is that 1. corporations are not and have never been truly right wing (i.e. free market capitalists).... they are ostensibly about wealth creation (the show of ceo pay extravagance) but are now, have been and will always be involved in the world of partnering with government (ie fascism/ new deal). they do this sometimes as "good guys" (liberal corporations held in high regard for their support of liberal causes from environmentalism to gay marriage) and sometimes as "bad guys" -- ie. big tobacco who ultimately partnered with government to use their evil products to support states' general funds. (all with very little cognizance from the general public of the multiple ironies involved).
so "the enemy" (ie. the corporations -- how can free marketers be an enemy? they have no power) are ALREAY COOPERATING WITH GOVERNMENT and the WHOLE ARGUMENT either from the "left" (extreme would be nationalization -- from schools to health care) or the "right" (mcCain, i guess, getting them to do cap and trade on CO2 for example) is really all an argument about a degree of overtness in this "cooperation" which goldberg calls fascism.
so
what's the bottom line for me personally?
it's all a sham
there is NO ONE advocating free markets
it's all about leaning in one direction or another
at least economically
(i suppose you could still say there are differences in foreign policy, as obama is likely to extend his "we are all victims" philosophy to embrace the 'legit' grievances of terrorists.. thus
we are less likely to engage in aggressive wars or world policing, which means iran will get the bomb and china and others less hobbled by public opinion will rise in the world.)
the other thing
do i have to choose between writing and painting??
huh?
Monday, March 17, 2008
Liberal Fascism Take 2
Dear Jonah Goldberg,
The thing that is most interesting about (your) book is that it's a shift in my thinking.
Quickly: my background is radical-left in college (mostly to get girls), then married a liberal (not a reader) and drifted back to my "ethnic" conservative (catholic) goldwater roots. I live in a hyper-blue state (MN) and 95% of the people I know are variations on knee-jerk liberals.
That said:
I learned in my radical days that "fascism" is the worst thing in the world, especially in its Nazi form. I learned that the left was (DESPITE Stalin, Mao, Castro... ) the "farthest thing" from fascism because fascism was a phenomenon of the RIGHT. This meant (mainly) that it had something to do with corporations (having and/or sharing power) and an intolerant minority (in the German version the Aryans, in the "Bush" version the wealthy, the corporate, the Republican blue bloods).
So, in "connecting" the history of progressivism to fascism you actually clarify some things and
confuse others for me.
The clarification is this: ah, so that's why every time I get close to the core beliefs of the hyper-liberals I "feel" the fascist boot even though, say, some lesbians I know say they are afraid of Bush rounding them up and putting them into camps! Get close to an environmentalist, a smart growth advocate, an animal rights activist, an anti-globalist, and there it is: we should ALL do it THIS WAY. Or Else.
This was one of the things that turned me off to the hippie movement, the "guilt" at the Co-op, you didn't have to work, but if you didn't you got the evil eye.
So, I get it that underneath the Nice is the jackboot if you will.
What's harder to get is that no one is the "opposite" of fascist, not even the most libertarian
(or anarchist) person you can find. We all are about degrees of fascism, degrees of controlling our neighbor.
OK. Fine.
I would probably look next to a sociobiological explanation: that in our (monkey) genes somewhere is a craving for a strong leader (troupe leader, king, beloved leader, etc.) There is a way we (as monkeys) feel comfortable with a strong leader and are willing to forgive their (many) foibles.
OK. I can accept that, too.
What you're saying is that conservatives (generally) lean toward one type of control, liberals another. As conservatives, we are used to being called fascists, and know this is hyperbole of the adolescent mind. Liberals (apparently) are quite incensed about being dirtied by ANY connection to the ugliness of Nazism, I suspect mostly for the Holocaust, and some for their militarism. But what if a Mussolini (non anti-Semite) had "conquered" Europe and won, and turned it into an "EU-ish" version of the Soviet Empire. Wouldn't the liberals be looking at that with envy? I suspect so, even as the real EU slouches its way in that direction now.
The thing that is most interesting about (your) book is that it's a shift in my thinking.
Quickly: my background is radical-left in college (mostly to get girls), then married a liberal (not a reader) and drifted back to my "ethnic" conservative (catholic) goldwater roots. I live in a hyper-blue state (MN) and 95% of the people I know are variations on knee-jerk liberals.
That said:
I learned in my radical days that "fascism" is the worst thing in the world, especially in its Nazi form. I learned that the left was (DESPITE Stalin, Mao, Castro... ) the "farthest thing" from fascism because fascism was a phenomenon of the RIGHT. This meant (mainly) that it had something to do with corporations (having and/or sharing power) and an intolerant minority (in the German version the Aryans, in the "Bush" version the wealthy, the corporate, the Republican blue bloods).
So, in "connecting" the history of progressivism to fascism you actually clarify some things and
confuse others for me.
The clarification is this: ah, so that's why every time I get close to the core beliefs of the hyper-liberals I "feel" the fascist boot even though, say, some lesbians I know say they are afraid of Bush rounding them up and putting them into camps! Get close to an environmentalist, a smart growth advocate, an animal rights activist, an anti-globalist, and there it is: we should ALL do it THIS WAY. Or Else.
This was one of the things that turned me off to the hippie movement, the "guilt" at the Co-op, you didn't have to work, but if you didn't you got the evil eye.
So, I get it that underneath the Nice is the jackboot if you will.
What's harder to get is that no one is the "opposite" of fascist, not even the most libertarian
(or anarchist) person you can find. We all are about degrees of fascism, degrees of controlling our neighbor.
OK. Fine.
I would probably look next to a sociobiological explanation: that in our (monkey) genes somewhere is a craving for a strong leader (troupe leader, king, beloved leader, etc.) There is a way we (as monkeys) feel comfortable with a strong leader and are willing to forgive their (many) foibles.
OK. I can accept that, too.
What you're saying is that conservatives (generally) lean toward one type of control, liberals another. As conservatives, we are used to being called fascists, and know this is hyperbole of the adolescent mind. Liberals (apparently) are quite incensed about being dirtied by ANY connection to the ugliness of Nazism, I suspect mostly for the Holocaust, and some for their militarism. But what if a Mussolini (non anti-Semite) had "conquered" Europe and won, and turned it into an "EU-ish" version of the Soviet Empire. Wouldn't the liberals be looking at that with envy? I suspect so, even as the real EU slouches its way in that direction now.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Timed 031408
liberal fascism
still reeling from this. my thoughts are that everyone craves a strong leader, we "pretend"
in various ways that we don't. We kill kings, and eschew royalty, but we turn around and make "new" royalty -- celebrities, musicians, sports figures, a few creatives...
We LIKE (enjoy, are used to... ) the feeling of being not required to make it to the top. Others are already there. We pretend we don't even WANT to be there (but play the lottery, in hopes... that we will).
We are full of contradictions.
If you really believed that you could (pull yourself up from your bootstaps into the meritocracy) it would be daunting. That's why we make fun of (japanese parents trying to their kids into the right preschool) we don't really BELIEVE "we" could make it. we like the idea that there are a ton of reasons we can't.
When a reporter asked Keith Richards what he thought about the Vietnam War, he said"What the fuck are you asking ME for?"
He knew his place. He was a rocker, a musician, he was NOT EDUCATED as a policy wonk.
Today, does anyone do this?
No, every celeb (think F.A.G. from Team America)
has an opinion
they MIGHT BE slightly more sophisticated than "War is bad for children and other living things" but probably not.
INTO THE WILD... though i watched the movie on fastforward, it seemed that it was more
forgiving of the kid than the book. sure he lost some weight, but he "accomplished" his mission to live in the wild. IF IT HADN'T BEEN FOR A MINOR MISCALCULATION THAT THE RIVER WOULD BECOME IMPASSABLE he would have sauntered out, thin, but "changed", sure to be "happier" than his (stupid rich) parents.I remember in the book there was more of a tone that this kid was arrogant to think he could go into the wildnerness unprepared. it was disrespectful of the people that lived there. sure, there was some of this in the movie (the trucker, his last ride, takes pity on him and hands him a pair of rubber boots) but i think Monsieur Penn was more on the side of the kid's nobility than Junger who seemed to be saying look what kind of kids we've made -- angry and stupid.
Maybe it's different for Penn, he had to deal with the family (obviously they had to be grieving their loss) and casting the kid as heroic but making "one critical mistake" was the kinder way to go.
I thought it didn't have the bite of the book.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Timed Writing 011308
it's a weird life. what would i do if i got famous. what would i do (different) if the money were mine? that's interesting question. am i still financially in-sex-ure after all these years? i don't really think that's it. i think it's looking at my kids' faces.... disappointment, anger... (about imaginary divorce)... it would all be SO much easier if their mother (my wife) got the bug up her butt to take a lover, preferably a woman that would make it all so... so... what? new agey weird. but then i'd get the kids and i'd have to explain to them that daddy's decided to date men.
shit. makes you wish you never left the city. need to be surrounded my urban eccentrics. where's smart growth when you need it?
ha.
the work.
in my hermitage all going well. Darger With Money, ha.
Howard Hughes with a paint brush and a word processing program. that would have been interesting, huh? what would he have SAID.
(still, the celebrity art sites aren't all that interesting other than IMAGINING guy's like pearce brosnan with a sunday afternoon beret on...) still --
[martin mull's were seriously "progressive" works]
still -
i'm finding a way into the characterization of Marion (Sontag). I'm having to steal from Land somewhere else
which is fine
not sure i'll ever get to that. back to that.
i'm sort of despairing on the CULTURE WALLS... like the MN book awards, the "left" if you will has so FIRMY grasbed the (steering) wheel of culture. everywhere you look. everywhere.
i can't even tell my secretary-helper that i'm not a leftie
everyone assumes
if you're "nice" and "creative" and wear blue jeans you are a leftie...
reading a lot about mussolini now. how he wasn't (at first) a racist, how he and hitler didn't really care for each other, how hitler never really had a coherent philosophy, but he knew how to speak and rile people up.
took a break to visit the national review online's liberal fascism blog
ok the timer went off
whew
long live add
is there ADD in heaven?
does god have ADD?
shit. makes you wish you never left the city. need to be surrounded my urban eccentrics. where's smart growth when you need it?
ha.
the work.
in my hermitage all going well. Darger With Money, ha.
Howard Hughes with a paint brush and a word processing program. that would have been interesting, huh? what would he have SAID.
(still, the celebrity art sites aren't all that interesting other than IMAGINING guy's like pearce brosnan with a sunday afternoon beret on...) still --
[martin mull's were seriously "progressive" works]
still -
i'm finding a way into the characterization of Marion (Sontag). I'm having to steal from Land somewhere else
which is fine
not sure i'll ever get to that. back to that.
i'm sort of despairing on the CULTURE WALLS... like the MN book awards, the "left" if you will has so FIRMY grasbed the (steering) wheel of culture. everywhere you look. everywhere.
i can't even tell my secretary-helper that i'm not a leftie
everyone assumes
if you're "nice" and "creative" and wear blue jeans you are a leftie...
reading a lot about mussolini now. how he wasn't (at first) a racist, how he and hitler didn't really care for each other, how hitler never really had a coherent philosophy, but he knew how to speak and rile people up.
took a break to visit the national review online's liberal fascism blog
ok the timer went off
whew
long live add
is there ADD in heaven?
does god have ADD?
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
HOW TO MAKE CHARACTERS 20 min
I'm really torn on how to get the background stories for my characters. i'm BALKING at MW'S "make a dossier" thing, why?
--because if it feels arbitrary then I can't remember it
--because he suggested it
I could use the LOST method and just develop stories via "flashbacks" (ie. just chapters about their lives)
I think this is promising.
but torn between
"making it up" -- what would susan sontag's life be like
(some leftover baggage from earlier attempts to flesh out her life... lurking like ghosts)
i got this other idea that these "people" could all be ASPECTS of moi, like Jungian
dreams
they're all you...
ah, big surprise
voice over at the end of lost -- and they were all connected as carbon based life forms...
(if we're carbon based isn't calling co2 a pollutant self-hating?)
ha
aspects of me....
hmm
does that generate?
or
is it "tony soprano AS VISUALIZED by moi.
another approach is to do it
GRAPHICALLY
(PORTRAIT-CHART)
or graphic novel-ish
should i start with marion?
--because if it feels arbitrary then I can't remember it
--because he suggested it
I could use the LOST method and just develop stories via "flashbacks" (ie. just chapters about their lives)
I think this is promising.
but torn between
"making it up" -- what would susan sontag's life be like
(some leftover baggage from earlier attempts to flesh out her life... lurking like ghosts)
i got this other idea that these "people" could all be ASPECTS of moi, like Jungian
dreams
they're all you...
ah, big surprise
voice over at the end of lost -- and they were all connected as carbon based life forms...
(if we're carbon based isn't calling co2 a pollutant self-hating?)
ha
aspects of me....
hmm
does that generate?
or
is it "tony soprano AS VISUALIZED by moi.
another approach is to do it
GRAPHICALLY
(PORTRAIT-CHART)
or graphic novel-ish
should i start with marion?
Timed Writing 031208
wow
what's going on?
a definite stretch of
"too much househusband"
writing's been weird. uneven. how to i reign it in? if i'm using the "painting model" what's the equivalent of looking at it a lot?
printing it out? making an ongoing book?
what?
interesting reading LIBERAL FASCISM. even embarrassed to show J the cover, that's it's too strident, too "rush limbaugh" (feminazi)... namecalling that closes down communication.
having said that
it's a fascinating story
about WHY "we" have a hard time understanding fascism, because it's inaccurate to
call it "right wing"
the logic is this-- (not wholly unfounded) that the "right" likes CONTROL (ie. moral majority sort of non-libertarianism) and generally favors MILITARY (solutions) as in paranoia, everyone's out to get us (where the left of today favors "talking" the therapy approach)
so it's not totally nuts to call fascism right wing as these are components.
still
economically there is NOTHING like capitalism or freedom
and there is a disdain for rules of government (today more associated with the left as in
"disenfranchisement" and stolen elections, etc.)
the guts of his argument is that fascism is a "state religion" and a lot of the personality cult stuff we're seeing around Obama now is very reminiscent of the "strong leader" (craving) that SEEMS to be the ultimate appeal of fascism. [He does mention that we MIGHT be hard-wired to want a "king" which makes the whole argument about the evolution of democracy cast in a strange light]...
nevetheless
it does explain the APPEAL of liberalism. i often "don't get it" where they get their ENERGY from. they want (intrusive) rules that can be enforced only they want them to be THEIR rules (organic food to mass transit)...
also
historically
the left has been the pro-sex party (even today with the Elliot Spitzer scandal breaking, a lot of people are using the "clinton defense" hey, it's ONLY sex. grow up, etc.).
[the vignette comes to mind of IlDuce asking the women of Italy to send him their wedding rings to help pay off Italy's war fines. whoa.]
Putin and the russians have always had this sort of double standard ("free and equal" women but the men prove their right to rule through virility, ie. fucking (over) women)
in any case
the history of the early progressive movement and the amount of admiration so many had for mussolini and fascism
[wonder how ezra pound got blamed for it. the story i always heard was that he was 'crazy' as well as talented and that's why he ended up supporting fascism and being anti-semitic) BUT
many famous writers (ts elliot) were anti-semitic and still we read them and revere them as moderns. pound got 'pounded' because he stuck to his like of mussolini which was shared (PRIOR to WWII) by a vast number of america's leading "progressive" intellectuals.
my book cover was damaged
i'm sure it was from a seattle based warehouse rat (doing his part).. i HOPE my second book (i rationalized buying one mostly to see if i'm caught up in an amazon conspiracy)
is also damaged.
what's going on?
a definite stretch of
"too much househusband"
writing's been weird. uneven. how to i reign it in? if i'm using the "painting model" what's the equivalent of looking at it a lot?
printing it out? making an ongoing book?
what?
interesting reading LIBERAL FASCISM. even embarrassed to show J the cover, that's it's too strident, too "rush limbaugh" (feminazi)... namecalling that closes down communication.
having said that
it's a fascinating story
about WHY "we" have a hard time understanding fascism, because it's inaccurate to
call it "right wing"
the logic is this-- (not wholly unfounded) that the "right" likes CONTROL (ie. moral majority sort of non-libertarianism) and generally favors MILITARY (solutions) as in paranoia, everyone's out to get us (where the left of today favors "talking" the therapy approach)
so it's not totally nuts to call fascism right wing as these are components.
still
economically there is NOTHING like capitalism or freedom
and there is a disdain for rules of government (today more associated with the left as in
"disenfranchisement" and stolen elections, etc.)
the guts of his argument is that fascism is a "state religion" and a lot of the personality cult stuff we're seeing around Obama now is very reminiscent of the "strong leader" (craving) that SEEMS to be the ultimate appeal of fascism. [He does mention that we MIGHT be hard-wired to want a "king" which makes the whole argument about the evolution of democracy cast in a strange light]...
nevetheless
it does explain the APPEAL of liberalism. i often "don't get it" where they get their ENERGY from. they want (intrusive) rules that can be enforced only they want them to be THEIR rules (organic food to mass transit)...
also
historically
the left has been the pro-sex party (even today with the Elliot Spitzer scandal breaking, a lot of people are using the "clinton defense" hey, it's ONLY sex. grow up, etc.).
[the vignette comes to mind of IlDuce asking the women of Italy to send him their wedding rings to help pay off Italy's war fines. whoa.]
Putin and the russians have always had this sort of double standard ("free and equal" women but the men prove their right to rule through virility, ie. fucking (over) women)
in any case
the history of the early progressive movement and the amount of admiration so many had for mussolini and fascism
[wonder how ezra pound got blamed for it. the story i always heard was that he was 'crazy' as well as talented and that's why he ended up supporting fascism and being anti-semitic) BUT
many famous writers (ts elliot) were anti-semitic and still we read them and revere them as moderns. pound got 'pounded' because he stuck to his like of mussolini which was shared (PRIOR to WWII) by a vast number of america's leading "progressive" intellectuals.
my book cover was damaged
i'm sure it was from a seattle based warehouse rat (doing his part).. i HOPE my second book (i rationalized buying one mostly to see if i'm caught up in an amazon conspiracy)
is also damaged.
Friday, March 7, 2008
Free Write 030708
meeting with the philosopher JD
author and authority are related -- what kind of author-ity does your (author) need? who is the author, you are the author.
in animals, do they think of others. yes, predators--concealment, they are aware that the gnu doesn't see me (the lion), "I" am concealed, my concealment is helpful to my goal (dinner)
the main issue is
when you are in the creative phase how useful is it to have access to YOUR VERSION of objectivity, i.e. what you are writing is a GOOD WRITE ah, but is it also a GOOD READ?
when and if do you engage that question
and how
in my painting, it's immediate and visceral. it's DO I LIKE LOOKING AT THAT (MORE). Am I intrugued by what I'm doing?
(yes)
Do I worry/wonder about how it's going to appear to others?
yes, in a way. it would be nice to SHARE DELIGHT, but, on the other hand, when john said i should be "less dark"... however gently he said it... i felt uninterested, angry, misunderstood. this has always been the confusion and when i did "commercial art" it was horrible. i could never handle the difference between what PLEASED ME and what THEY WANTED. in that arena there was an objective measure (money/ client pleasure) ... the most LOGICAL way to "win" that game was get all the money.. hire people to do what clients wanted and become a CEO.
anyway.
now i'm in the situation of the non-insane outsider artist. the work is compellingly interesting to ME, but i have no ideas if it will be (a) interesting -- well, i have some evidence from arist friends that it is "interesting", (b) interesting ENOUGH to SELL it and (c) i have the further issue that I am not all that interested in SELLING, though i LIKE the idea of having a show, a party, and being "SOLD OUT"...
I told JD somewhat tentatively that what he told me last week about atemporality (in films, like la vie en rose and klimt) and our whole discussion Picasso was PRAGMATIC and helpful. he said he LIKED pragmatic (surprise, surprise) that it's root (greek?) is the same root as "practice" and "ascetic" (not sure how ascetic is related). pragmatic (program?) is about a program. i have a program
funny: 12 step PROGRAM
(pogrom... the perversion)
back to the issue of THINGS GOING THROUGH YOU... the root of phenomenon is about
SOMETHING APPEARING (ghosts, muses...) spirits of the dead working through you
new book
DANGEROUS IDEAS
love and hate it.
Csikszentmihalyi's was bad. a standard academic/unconscious marxist "why does profit have to matter so much?" not dangerous, unless you count the MILLIONS DEAD from marx's fantasies.
i rather liked Jared Diamond's input, somewhat politically incorrect -- where did we get the fantasy that aboriginal man was anything but "savage" (ie hard on each other, hard on the environment)...
the more dangerous idea is that the Rousseauian notion of "noble savage" (see INTO THE WILD) is now "noble nature" (even to the extent that wouldn't it be nice to read a book about us NOT BEING HERE?) no, but... don't get me started.
noble (sweet kind cuddly) nature is (waa-waa) being 'powuted' by CO2 etc. waa-waa.
we are once again planetary bullies.... (poow widdo powa beaw)
author and authority are related -- what kind of author-ity does your (author) need? who is the author, you are the author.
in animals, do they think of others. yes, predators--concealment, they are aware that the gnu doesn't see me (the lion), "I" am concealed, my concealment is helpful to my goal (dinner)
the main issue is
when you are in the creative phase how useful is it to have access to YOUR VERSION of objectivity, i.e. what you are writing is a GOOD WRITE ah, but is it also a GOOD READ?
when and if do you engage that question
and how
in my painting, it's immediate and visceral. it's DO I LIKE LOOKING AT THAT (MORE). Am I intrugued by what I'm doing?
(yes)
Do I worry/wonder about how it's going to appear to others?
yes, in a way. it would be nice to SHARE DELIGHT, but, on the other hand, when john said i should be "less dark"... however gently he said it... i felt uninterested, angry, misunderstood. this has always been the confusion and when i did "commercial art" it was horrible. i could never handle the difference between what PLEASED ME and what THEY WANTED. in that arena there was an objective measure (money/ client pleasure) ... the most LOGICAL way to "win" that game was get all the money.. hire people to do what clients wanted and become a CEO.
anyway.
now i'm in the situation of the non-insane outsider artist. the work is compellingly interesting to ME, but i have no ideas if it will be (a) interesting -- well, i have some evidence from arist friends that it is "interesting", (b) interesting ENOUGH to SELL it and (c) i have the further issue that I am not all that interested in SELLING, though i LIKE the idea of having a show, a party, and being "SOLD OUT"...
I told JD somewhat tentatively that what he told me last week about atemporality (in films, like la vie en rose and klimt) and our whole discussion Picasso was PRAGMATIC and helpful. he said he LIKED pragmatic (surprise, surprise) that it's root (greek?) is the same root as "practice" and "ascetic" (not sure how ascetic is related). pragmatic (program?) is about a program. i have a program
funny: 12 step PROGRAM
(pogrom... the perversion)
back to the issue of THINGS GOING THROUGH YOU... the root of phenomenon is about
SOMETHING APPEARING (ghosts, muses...) spirits of the dead working through you
new book
DANGEROUS IDEAS
love and hate it.
Csikszentmihalyi's was bad. a standard academic/unconscious marxist "why does profit have to matter so much?" not dangerous, unless you count the MILLIONS DEAD from marx's fantasies.
i rather liked Jared Diamond's input, somewhat politically incorrect -- where did we get the fantasy that aboriginal man was anything but "savage" (ie hard on each other, hard on the environment)...
the more dangerous idea is that the Rousseauian notion of "noble savage" (see INTO THE WILD) is now "noble nature" (even to the extent that wouldn't it be nice to read a book about us NOT BEING HERE?) no, but... don't get me started.
noble (sweet kind cuddly) nature is (waa-waa) being 'powuted' by CO2 etc. waa-waa.
we are once again planetary bullies.... (poow widdo powa beaw)
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Timed Writing 0300508
The trick I think is to (I don't know why but I think of one of the few 'smart' things Lindy Hough "was allowed" to say) which was, simply, do you value your thoughts?
Does it really come down to this?
and if this is soooo great then isn't the internet diarrhea of the mind supposedly "good"?
Hmm,
I don't know.
Most people's thoughts are NOT that interesting.
why?
because (hello Mr. Gurdjieff) are somewhat unconscious of where their thoughts come from. Oh, I don't mean the "family of origin" piece, i'm totally burned out on that (you're a republican because your alcoholic father was a republican and this is some kind of loyalty, while I am a democrat despite the fact that my dysfunctional family was also democrat. huh?)
i think what did me in on all that
was that i saw "prejudices" (unconsciousness) running rampant under the guise
of
"science" -- psychologists armed with the new universal theory of disfunction (everyone has been abused)
"myth" the influence of Joseph Campbell and Robert Bly -- that there is a "mythic" way of thinking that goes something like this: "I (fill in important person's name here) like Rumi's poetry so Rumi must be somehow "important" to "our time".... if I follow (MY) intuition it will lead me (BACK) to a (neo) tribalism that seems to resemble early hippie imaginings of utopia, however, I am not culture-bound, but you are."
i think in the end that's why I "returned" to conservatism.
the conservatives have no real sense that IMMINENT (and/or total or global) WORLD IMPROVEMENT is (merely) accessible via (environmentalism, progressivism, et al) and that
WERE THEY TO JUST GIVE US A CHANCE it could all be different.
conservatives believe that human nature isn't easy to change
is very very tricky, a combination of greed and compassion, (good and evil)
they also don't easily panic
they tend to respect history (more)... and see there is a history of panic
I am thinking of the skeptics take on the Koran
"Is it more logical to believe that an angel of god dictated these words to a merchant soldier or a talented, possibly epileptic man digested and reworked the myths and legends common to his time and level of learning, calling it something new."
um, let me see.
I am thinking a lot of Miranda July. Perhaps I should make her a character in my new novel.
Dave Eggers : where we should invade next. it's no error that in the end his position is more yippie (?) than contrarian. he's clearly left -- war is bad, old white general can and should be deposed via laughter (first then maybe a Che style execution)
I'm not sure you could do what he's doing without being left.
contrarians have difficulty leading people.
they're too thoughtful.
etc.
yadda yadda
is my 5 minutes up yet
Does it really come down to this?
and if this is soooo great then isn't the internet diarrhea of the mind supposedly "good"?
Hmm,
I don't know.
Most people's thoughts are NOT that interesting.
why?
because (hello Mr. Gurdjieff) are somewhat unconscious of where their thoughts come from. Oh, I don't mean the "family of origin" piece, i'm totally burned out on that (you're a republican because your alcoholic father was a republican and this is some kind of loyalty, while I am a democrat despite the fact that my dysfunctional family was also democrat. huh?)
i think what did me in on all that
was that i saw "prejudices" (unconsciousness) running rampant under the guise
of
"science" -- psychologists armed with the new universal theory of disfunction (everyone has been abused)
"myth" the influence of Joseph Campbell and Robert Bly -- that there is a "mythic" way of thinking that goes something like this: "I (fill in important person's name here) like Rumi's poetry so Rumi must be somehow "important" to "our time".... if I follow (MY) intuition it will lead me (BACK) to a (neo) tribalism that seems to resemble early hippie imaginings of utopia, however, I am not culture-bound, but you are."
i think in the end that's why I "returned" to conservatism.
the conservatives have no real sense that IMMINENT (and/or total or global) WORLD IMPROVEMENT is (merely) accessible via (environmentalism, progressivism, et al) and that
WERE THEY TO JUST GIVE US A CHANCE it could all be different.
conservatives believe that human nature isn't easy to change
is very very tricky, a combination of greed and compassion, (good and evil)
they also don't easily panic
they tend to respect history (more)... and see there is a history of panic
I am thinking of the skeptics take on the Koran
"Is it more logical to believe that an angel of god dictated these words to a merchant soldier or a talented, possibly epileptic man digested and reworked the myths and legends common to his time and level of learning, calling it something new."
um, let me see.
I am thinking a lot of Miranda July. Perhaps I should make her a character in my new novel.
Dave Eggers : where we should invade next. it's no error that in the end his position is more yippie (?) than contrarian. he's clearly left -- war is bad, old white general can and should be deposed via laughter (first then maybe a Che style execution)
I'm not sure you could do what he's doing without being left.
contrarians have difficulty leading people.
they're too thoughtful.
etc.
yadda yadda
is my 5 minutes up yet
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
Timed Writing 030408
amy hempel
ok so chuckP likes her. i wanted to see his "roots" it could just as easily have been hemingway, but no, amy hempel. why did i think she lived here? anyway she doesn't. but she DOES live in an exurban locale not unlike where I live now and she has a lot of involvement with her dog. a sign of a "good book as soon as i open it and read a little i think of people i could send it to, like greg or elizabethG... would my book club think her too fey -- feminine, short stories--? do i care? she reminds me a bit of miranda july (see TIN HOUSE: FANTASTIC WOMEN) though MJ is clearly "out there" (i mean anyone with performance art and film in their resume... maybe i should claim that! LOL... king charlatan's game etc.
miranda july
thinking about (did i dream about her?)miranda july a lot. what should i do with our connection? write her a letter? wouldn't i just be another marginally sane fan... like, um, our cats were neutered at the same place... wanna have coffee? funny. i want in some way to "betray" her dad/parents... like ha ha i know your secret you really HATE them that's why you changed you name to JULY. i understand I too was injured by them, yadda yadda. but that's all nasty and silly and a waste of time.
maybe i can transform all this into a PIECE of writing, not unlike BEING JOHN MALKOVICH but i mean could it be called BEING MIRANDA JULY.. a memwaaa? who would be on my side? LOL.
more later
oh, one more thing it's funny that gregH was the one who told me about her parents etc.
he's such a strange one in my life.
in a way i admire him -- rigorously independant, long suffering (traveling salesman), hard-as-nails inner core (philosophy of crystal with a pulsing heart--what am i ginsberg?)
mostly he's one of the few people (like elizG) who "get" something about life... sorry i don't put dear J in this category as she believes in things -- that, um, we are here all improvising, it's funny and tragic and inclusive and no one really cares what you think anyway so why not be independant and contrarian...
i don't know
what do i know
memory lane(s)
gregH kept saying what am I tom graetz? like he's jogging my memory (how did he know i watch LOST's "explanatory" CONTACT... no, CONTROL (?) last night all about time travel, and dreamt about it...
tom graetz was a social challenge in 4? 5? 6th? grade? fat, ugly, he decided he "liked" me and was also mean and a bully. one time (when???) he pinched me very hard. he demanded to be my friend. my mom told me to be nice to him, thanks mom. i told him i didn't want to be his friend. not sure when where or how this happened, but it did. some kind of turning point or other -- i don't HAVE to "give myself" (HELLO richard adams and ABUSE therapy) to anyone who wants me. I can say NO.
why is greg bringing him up now?
LOST
in a way, relief. ah, it's all "sci-fi" (dr who) stuff. goofy machines that make rats travel in time. and strange islands and geeky science boy/men and scary industrialists (penny's dad)...
it's going to have comic-like explanations...
i could cry
PHIBro
i could write and write about this. my memory has been jogged.
gary wickham, bill ridgeway, dave bancel (the guy who died), ron vance, the secretaries -- the guitar gal and the black lady -- pam -- who named her kid Krystal or something.
the boss in cowboy boots, the perfume salesman,
jan juras, the mine, hammond lead (the old man) dan briedegan (east penn batteries)
greg hengesbaugh and tom graetz
alice and palahniuk
ok so chuckP likes her. i wanted to see his "roots" it could just as easily have been hemingway, but no, amy hempel. why did i think she lived here? anyway she doesn't. but she DOES live in an exurban locale not unlike where I live now and she has a lot of involvement with her dog. a sign of a "good book as soon as i open it and read a little i think of people i could send it to, like greg or elizabethG... would my book club think her too fey -- feminine, short stories--? do i care? she reminds me a bit of miranda july (see TIN HOUSE: FANTASTIC WOMEN) though MJ is clearly "out there" (i mean anyone with performance art and film in their resume... maybe i should claim that! LOL... king charlatan's game etc.
miranda july
thinking about (did i dream about her?)miranda july a lot. what should i do with our connection? write her a letter? wouldn't i just be another marginally sane fan... like, um, our cats were neutered at the same place... wanna have coffee? funny. i want in some way to "betray" her dad/parents... like ha ha i know your secret you really HATE them that's why you changed you name to JULY. i understand I too was injured by them, yadda yadda. but that's all nasty and silly and a waste of time.
maybe i can transform all this into a PIECE of writing, not unlike BEING JOHN MALKOVICH but i mean could it be called BEING MIRANDA JULY.. a memwaaa? who would be on my side? LOL.
more later
oh, one more thing it's funny that gregH was the one who told me about her parents etc.
he's such a strange one in my life.
in a way i admire him -- rigorously independant, long suffering (traveling salesman), hard-as-nails inner core (philosophy of crystal with a pulsing heart--what am i ginsberg?)
mostly he's one of the few people (like elizG) who "get" something about life... sorry i don't put dear J in this category as she believes in things -- that, um, we are here all improvising, it's funny and tragic and inclusive and no one really cares what you think anyway so why not be independant and contrarian...
i don't know
what do i know
memory lane(s)
gregH kept saying what am I tom graetz? like he's jogging my memory (how did he know i watch LOST's "explanatory" CONTACT... no, CONTROL (?) last night all about time travel, and dreamt about it...
tom graetz was a social challenge in 4? 5? 6th? grade? fat, ugly, he decided he "liked" me and was also mean and a bully. one time (when???) he pinched me very hard. he demanded to be my friend. my mom told me to be nice to him, thanks mom. i told him i didn't want to be his friend. not sure when where or how this happened, but it did. some kind of turning point or other -- i don't HAVE to "give myself" (HELLO richard adams and ABUSE therapy) to anyone who wants me. I can say NO.
why is greg bringing him up now?
LOST
in a way, relief. ah, it's all "sci-fi" (dr who) stuff. goofy machines that make rats travel in time. and strange islands and geeky science boy/men and scary industrialists (penny's dad)...
it's going to have comic-like explanations...
i could cry
PHIBro
i could write and write about this. my memory has been jogged.
gary wickham, bill ridgeway, dave bancel (the guy who died), ron vance, the secretaries -- the guitar gal and the black lady -- pam -- who named her kid Krystal or something.
the boss in cowboy boots, the perfume salesman,
jan juras, the mine, hammond lead (the old man) dan briedegan (east penn batteries)
greg hengesbaugh and tom graetz
alice and palahniuk
Monday, March 3, 2008
Free Write 3/03/08
fifteen minutes. what the fuck. why am i trying to volunteer at the prison? curiosity? sex? (LOL) "doing something useful"... getting famous for my prison art geniuses. oi vey. mondays are always hard to get started. kids gone. my slave-butler thing keeps me busy all weekend. it's hard to be talented but unknown, i have no NEED to do (almost) anything... but i write and paint... my kid asks for you? but he's trying to be mean. in a way he's right. then there's LOST. all the wrong shit: broadcast (not HBO), committee-written, directed and produced (probably too much money involved)... and i'm as hooked as any old fashioned housefrau on her soaps. what's gonna happen to jack/kate/sawyer/jinn/locke/sayid/ etc?
a perspective from outer space
could be that the "art" of our time is indeed TV. (charles mcgrath once wrote about this). having seen American Gangster recently -- it was a "short" version of the Wire with "star power" and a "true" story all which essentially worked against it. Wire feels like the real world (funny it being HBO) but the idea of one man/woman having a vision and that shaping the show. is it that way with lost? i dare not even ask as I will get pulled into "fandom" crap...
speaking of fandom, i visited Palahniuk's site. what was i thinking? that it would be small and classy, like visiting his (quiet, slightly nuts) office? it was a CULT! great. just what we need. and all the people writing LIKE HIM NOW. and me one of them. (but then Neo Rauch... how can you not be influenced by the greats of your time?... even Matthew Barney)...
someone told me Hemingway had this effect, then Raymond Carver. the "answer" in writing. (course i'm thinking men here)
i don't have any idea what's "going on" with women's writing other than every boomer with a college education is writing a memoir of some kind of abuse
but i had to laugh
when J said she was sick to death of all the whining... "why don't I get a say?"
all the whiney victimy ladies "against power structures" too selfish and lazy to HELP. they wouldn't even help in the fucking kitchen afterwards.
i wish J would come to the conclusion that it's not worth it, but then when she was home she drove me nuts. i think i encouraged her to get a job.
fuck me.
speaking of which
i could use a good fuck.
why did rome die out? Not the HBO series, but that too. my faves (rome and carnivale) always get cancelled. I guess I'm "lucky" to have LOST.
ha ha
what is the future of entertainment?
in a way it's already here.
but the web, goddam, so much crap (even this as i write)... the problem is that so many people aren't (a) original -- they're like the Garofalo character in Team America who says we should listen to the tv and repeat what they say! (2) truly thoughtful or incisive. that's why i hate liberalism so much, not that it has logical arguments (of course it does) but soooo many "liberals" i know are not readers (of current events or history) and they're like those whiners... don't WE have a say? in how the iraq war should be run? like who the fuck are you to deserve a say in military matters?
you're a fucking unemployment overweight art teacher!
a perspective from outer space
could be that the "art" of our time is indeed TV. (charles mcgrath once wrote about this). having seen American Gangster recently -- it was a "short" version of the Wire with "star power" and a "true" story all which essentially worked against it. Wire feels like the real world (funny it being HBO) but the idea of one man/woman having a vision and that shaping the show. is it that way with lost? i dare not even ask as I will get pulled into "fandom" crap...
speaking of fandom, i visited Palahniuk's site. what was i thinking? that it would be small and classy, like visiting his (quiet, slightly nuts) office? it was a CULT! great. just what we need. and all the people writing LIKE HIM NOW. and me one of them. (but then Neo Rauch... how can you not be influenced by the greats of your time?... even Matthew Barney)...
someone told me Hemingway had this effect, then Raymond Carver. the "answer" in writing. (course i'm thinking men here)
i don't have any idea what's "going on" with women's writing other than every boomer with a college education is writing a memoir of some kind of abuse
but i had to laugh
when J said she was sick to death of all the whining... "why don't I get a say?"
all the whiney victimy ladies "against power structures" too selfish and lazy to HELP. they wouldn't even help in the fucking kitchen afterwards.
i wish J would come to the conclusion that it's not worth it, but then when she was home she drove me nuts. i think i encouraged her to get a job.
fuck me.
speaking of which
i could use a good fuck.
why did rome die out? Not the HBO series, but that too. my faves (rome and carnivale) always get cancelled. I guess I'm "lucky" to have LOST.
ha ha
what is the future of entertainment?
in a way it's already here.
but the web, goddam, so much crap (even this as i write)... the problem is that so many people aren't (a) original -- they're like the Garofalo character in Team America who says we should listen to the tv and repeat what they say! (2) truly thoughtful or incisive. that's why i hate liberalism so much, not that it has logical arguments (of course it does) but soooo many "liberals" i know are not readers (of current events or history) and they're like those whiners... don't WE have a say? in how the iraq war should be run? like who the fuck are you to deserve a say in military matters?
you're a fucking unemployment overweight art teacher!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
