Posted on by the coffee philosopher

What Made Pele Great? Hint: It’s Probably Not What You Think


Take a look at this video of Pele’s top twenty goals.

What stands out? Is that Samba magic, like Ronaldinho juggling the ball and teasing the defenders. Not really. His runs from the halfway line down to the goal, dancing effortlessly pass opposing defenders like he was Mikhail Barishnikov? Not so much. What about devastating speed? Not that either.

These things happened, but it’s not what stands out.

You could even argue that Pele was very different from the Platonic ideal of the Brazilian footballer.

Firstly, he was known at his peak as the best header of the ball alive and thrived off his teammates launching balls into the air in front of the goal, rather than them delicately slipping past defenders to feed him the ball.

Part and parcel of that was that he was a power player. He does jink past defenders in tight areas, but his moves are efficient rather than flashy. No step-overs for him. When a defender does get on him he uses his physical strength to hold them off and stay on his feet. Most importantly, he goes direct for goal.

You could say he’s a classic poacher, haunting the eighteen yard box for a ball to latch on to. When he finds such a ball, he was absolutely clinical with the finish. Which is also why he also put away a lot of rebounds, because he always stayed as close as he could to the goal.

Even his long distance strikes are poacher’s goals. What do I mean? That he’s not taking speculative shots. He sees that a opposing defender is screening him from the goalie, so that the goalie won’t be able to clearly see him take the shot. He also sees the open space in the goal. He’s not trying for the spectacular, he’s just always looking for the smallest opening to strike.

Posted on by the coffee philosopher · 1 Comment

Satirical Poetry


I read Scarriet merely for the occasional pleasures of being outraged by the writing of ideologues. Consequently, I don’t go there too often. I live near our nation’s Capitol,  so I get exposed to enough Republican rhetoric to satisfy whatever desire I might have to expose myself to the gamma rays of ideological bulls–t. But sometimes I’m a glutton for punishment.

Anyway, Scarriet published this little gem of poem recently.

Silliman’s Lament
by Marcus Bales

For Ron Silliman, who posted on FB how far he’d driven.

I’m a poet and critic, a serious man –
The School of Quietude’s my famous phrase –
From right around the Chatterley ban
Til now I’ve followed my poetry plan:
To argue that poetry ought not scan.
I’ve driven for 1200 miles in the last three days.

There isn’t a city where I won’t go –
My revolution important and potent as Che’s –
To see that no more arts are beau
So quietudeness doesn’t grow,
And maybe make a little dough:
I’ve driven for 1200 miles in the last three days.

I also write my famous blog
Where only I may speak, but all may gaze,
No meter, only prose’s slog
Should leave the po-biz crowd agog
And that’s the lang-po creed I flog:
I’ve driven for 1200 miles in the last three days.

With postmodernism’s new malaise –
Not just wrong, but wrong in the wrong maze –
I must redouble my drive to raze
Your art so our art may amaze
As all that’s left us after the blaze.
I’ve driven for 1200 miles in the last three days.

Envoi

Armantrout! Mix your final muddle
Uninspired enough for me to praise!
Then join me in a pure Platonic cuddle:
I’ve driven for 1200 miles in the last three days.

It’s not my cup of tea, but it did make me think about satirical poetry.

Satire used to be one of the prominent uses of poetry, especially in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Kings and princes treated satirical poems as serious matters. The original coffeehouses in the seventeenth century – the ones that Samuel Pepys patronized – were considered potential hotbeds of insurrection for the satirical poems distributed with the polemical pamphlets.

You don’t see that too often anymore.

And perhaps this is an argument for poetry having become too self-important for its own good and that political and personal satires of this sort were once the key to poetry’s prominent place in letters.

But it should also be noted that 99.95% of those kinds of satirical poem were absolute crap (Alexander Pope excepted).

Posted on by the coffee philosopher · 5 Comments

How Should One Read A Book Of Poetry?


Here are some thoughts.

Posted on by the coffee philosopher

Ezra Pound: Canto LVIII


This one bounces around a bit, making the narrative (such as it is) hard to follow.

The Canto‘s opening setting is Japan under the Shogunate. But it gets confusing from there. Firstly, it appears to be, at least in part, about the early trading contacts with Europe. Certainly, there is some conversation about the introduction of Christianity to the island:

And because of the hauteur of
         Portagoose prelates, they drove the Xtians out of the Japan
till were none of that sect in the  Island

But it quickly moves back the mainland, with switches between Korea (‘Corea’) and China (and the ‘Tartars’ get mentioned again – though I have been assuming that this word is used simply to refer to those viewed as barbarians by the Chinese).

The intermittent story of a Père Ricci and his work in the East (the historical Ricci was a Jesuit Father) also features, though in a very fragmentary fashion.

Posted on by the coffee philosopher

What Borders Employees Didn’t Tell Us


In honor of America surviving its first full week without a Borders Bookstore in decades, here are some gnostic revelations from former employees at one, unnamed and now defunct Borders location.

Things We Never Told You
Posted on by the coffee philosopher · 8 Comments

A Challenge To Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity?


Scientists at the CERN facility in Switzerland think they’ve detected a sub-atomic particle that moves faster than light.

Not only is this super cool for fans of science fiction, looking for a decent basis for ‘hyperdrives,’ ‘jump drives,’ ‘FTL drives,’ and ‘Heisenberg compensators,’ but it would overturn the Special Theory of Relativity which is kind of a building block for our understanding of the universe so, you know, that might be important even for people who don’t read science fiction. But I don’t know for sure, I don’t hang around people who don’t read sci fi so I won’t pretend to know what weird, kinky things they think are important. Probably place settings or coupons. I don’t know.

So anyway, some neutrinos appear to have covered a distance of 730 km 60 nanoseconds faster than light.

Posted on by the coffee philosopher

United Draws 2-2


Last night’s game was a little uncomfortable.

Not because I still have feelings for the DC United’s opponent, Chivas.

But because the Red & Black’s performance was not good.

They lined up with an unusual formation. Ostensibly, it was no doubt intended to be a midfield diamond with two wide players, a defensive midfielder and a trequartista at the tip of the diamond. In practice, it got a little more complicated.

On the right, youthful Honduran phenom Andy Najar played a good game. He provided some real width to the team and drew the foul that produced DC’s first goal off the ensuing set piece.

On the left, right footed Santino Quaranta played pretty narrow, staying closer to the center than to the sideline.

One of the strikers, Josh Wolff, actually played pretty deep and spent much of the game close to the trequartista, Dwayne DeRosario.

This essentially left Charlie Davies as the lone striker, which is not actually a problem. He’s got a quick first step to accelerate past defenders and can be lethal inside the box, with great ball control to dribble in tight areas.

But with, in effect, two attacking midfielders playing in the same areas, it left some gaps between the defensive midfielder – Clyde Simms – and the rest of the midfield. It also put a great deal of burden on Simms to protect the backline.

Neither Wolff nor DeRo nor Quaranta put in much defensive work (though Najar did yeoman’s work, tracking back to help the fullback and harrying opposing attackers coming down the right.

Also, when Simms or the defense won the ball, there was often too much distance between them and a player able to move the ball further forward.

Consequently, we saw a long of ball hoofed up the field towards Davies. Even that wouldn’t have been so bad if they had been balls hit with pace over the top, allowing Davies to use his speed to get behind the defenders and latch onto it. But they hit them high and slow and the shorter Davies is not going to win many headers in the open field against a big, burly defender.

When they tried to move the opposition around, rather than forming triangles in the midfield, which means that the player in possession will always have an outlet to pass the ball, they would try highlight reel cross field passes that the winger had a 50-50 chance, at best of being able to reach, win, and control.

The reason you play the formation set out is to play possession soccer. You have players in Quaranta, Najar, DeRo, and Wolff who are able to dribble the ball and pass the ball around, probing for an opening. They play defense from the front by keeping the ball away from the opposition.

But if you play long balls, then the defensive players must shoulder their burden alone. Not only that, but you a ceding a lot of possession to the opposition, who can attack and tire out your players by making them chase the ball.

It’s not surprise that first ball came from a too rare period of players holding the ball and running at the opposition rather than launching it towards the goal and hoping a teammate finds it. Najar ran at the defense and forced them to foul him, gifting DC a critical free kick.

Finally, after Chivas pulled a goal back to reach 2-1, Coach Olsen pulled off both natural strikers (though not at once), with attacking midfielder, DeRo, moved to striker.

The players he put on the field made sense: Stephen King, a central midfielder who can move up an attack, but will also hang deeper to help out the defense; and Austin de la Luz, a left footed midfielder who could provide some width on the left side.

But it should have been Quaranta and just one of the strikers taken off.

Also, it only makes sense, once again, if you are going to try to keep the ball and play for possession. Make quick, short passes to make the opposition chase you and allow you to keep the ball with little effort.

But they hadn’t been doing that all game.

So when Chivas scored to draw level, United had little in the way of options to claw ahead for a win.

Yes, we won a penalty kick, which was saved. But it wasn’t DeRosario’s fault for not burying that. He should never have been forced in that situation. If Davies were still on the field, he would surely have scored that PK. Or if we’d played like we’re supposed to, we should have been able to finish the game at 2-1.

[sigh]

Posted on by the coffee philosopher

Harold Bloom


An interesting, somewhat critical piece on the literary theorist and critic, Harold Bloom

Posted on by the coffee philosopher

Did I Mention I Love Dinosaurs.


Yeah.

Posted on by the coffee philosopher · 1 Comment

Theo Dorgan and Paula Meehan at the Folger


Greek by Theo Dorgan

The Folger Shakespeare Library kicked off its 2011-2012 poetry series last night. Naturally, I attended (I actually invested in a subscription for the season – a deal, really, if you attend more than five of the eight events, which I certainly did last season).

I had not heard of the two Irish poets reading – Paula Meehan and Theo Dorgan – but surely part of the point of these things is to learn about new (to me) poets?

Of course, there is nothing quite like good poetry being read in a true Irish accent. Both poets talked about the song tradition in Ireland and Paula Meehan, in particular, was very musical in her reading style – though both were amazing readers and Dorgan, as he got into the swing of things, was a very engaging (and openly political) personality as he read.

Naturally, I purchased a book. I went for Greek by Theo Dorgan (don’t you love how the cover alludes to those inexpensive Dover publications of classic literature?)

Meehan was a beautiful reader, with mesmerizing sing-song intonations and a great ebb and flow to her speech. Her poetry is also peppered with alliterations which, to the ear, made for Emily Dickinson-like slant rhyme effect. Her poems were also often very sexual. Not explicit, but filled with sensual language and references to sexual activity (a field being described as having been the place of first “smokes, tokes and gropes” for example).

But I went for Dorgan for several reasons.

Firstly, the way his poems grew on him. Though not as obviously an appealing reader, he had a certain fiery, political passion that slipped out, as well a certain fumbling for meaning that fitted my sensibilities better. I also like his allusions to ancient Greek and Roman literature, with references to Odysseus (though he actually used the Roman formulation, Ulysses – fitting for a post-Joycean Irishman, no?) and Cicero. Yes, I am a sucker for that kind of thing (I’m reading the Cantos, aren’t I?).

Also, I do not comprehend things orally. By which I mean, when I read, I do not ‘hear’ the words in my head. The reverse, actually. When I listen, I ‘see’ the words written in my head.

Meehan, to me, sounded very much a poet who had to be read aloud to be properly appreciated (she even writes radio plays), while Dorgan, I feel, translates better to the page.

Dorgan was unfailingly polite when signing my book and spoke with me briefly about our mutual love of Cavafy and Seferis (he even admitted to having appropriated from Seferis).