Arabian Nights


For some reason, I was recently possessed with a desire to pick up my copy of The Arabian Nights. Of course, that copy has to be the translation by the nineteenth century explorer, adventurer, writer, and libertine – Richard Burton. Nothing else will do.

No other translation dies so deeply into thick, decadent language. It’s like thick, sexy syrup. And it is so very sexy. As a child, I was put into giggles and delight by the sheer number of synonyms he found for sex and kissing (‘bus’ and ‘futtering’ being my two favorites). It’s like Scott Moncrieff’s Remembrance of Things Past. I may accept that it is not really the most accurate translation and that it may miss many clear stylistic authorial intentions, but it’s old fashioned rhythms are so much better on the tongue than the other English options.

Nimoy


Someone once said to me that she would break down and cry when (and if – modern medicine can do miracles, I hear) Patrick Stewart were to pass away. Of course, she wasn’t thinking of his masterful performances on stage as Lear and Prospero, but rather as Captain Jean-Luc Picard.

I love Patrick Stewart, but she was obviously younger than me, because my Star Trek memories are of the original series in syndication and the original movies (especially Wrath of Khan). As good at Stewart was, the others are only pretenders to the throne. Of the original duo, Kirk and Spock… Spock, aka Leonard Nimoy, has shuffled off his mortal coil.

He did more than Spock, of course (remember In Search Of?), but it is because he was Spock that I am reminded of a certain cultural mortality.

If I have children, they will never really know who Spock was and if I try to show them, they will merely mock an old man for watching something with such shoddy production values.

And one day, Kirk will be gone, too. And after that, there will soon be little memory of my Star Trek. Which, I suppose, is really just saying that one day, I will be dead and there will be a day, some time after – maybe years, maybe decades, maybe more, but there will be a day – when there will no longer be any memory of me or my world.

Happy hump day, folks.


2015/01/img_4467.jpg

‘Heart Of Darkness’


I read this article from The Atlantic (I know; reading The Atlantic is an embarrassing proposition these days) where the writer talks about loving Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. It is such perfect construction of a novel. Brief, yet dense.

And the writer points out his favorite scene – and it’s mine, too, and I suspect it might be everybody’s favorite. It’s nothing to do with Kurtz (directly; symbolically, yes, of course it’s related). It’s that French gunboat shelling the impossibly dense and dark African continent. No enemies visible. Just these pathetic pops as their bristling guns fire. At war with something implacable, impervious, and unnoticing of their very existence.

Not mentioned in the article, Conrad’s storyteller says that he heard they were dying at the rate of two or three a day of fever onboard the gunship.

There were other scenes and moments (I love the tiny bit about the ‘papier-mache Mephistopheles’ in one of the corporate/colonial outposts).

But that French gunship. Just there. No rhyme nor reason. More than ‘the horror, the horror,’ it is that boat’s actions that is the most indelible and existentially terrifying moment in an existentially terrifying novel.

Rae Armantrout At The Phillips Collection


For the last six years, one of the poetry readings in the Folger’s poetry series is held at the Phillips Collection, a private museum in DC. It bills itself (and I don’t doubt it) as the first modern art museum in America (it was founded in the twenties).

Rae Armantrout read in dialogue with an exhibit of Man Ray’s work entitled, Human Equations.

I got into the museum about twenty minutes early, so did a quick stroll through the Man Rays and also their permanent collection.

My father and I had just been talking about smaller, regional museums and their acquisition struggles. It is often a choice between buying first rate pieces by second rate artists or second rate pieces by first rate artists (the Phillips doesn’t have this problem – it’s got a first rate collection, through and through). Specifically, we talked about the Montgomery Museum of Art in Montgomery, Alabama. They have an excellent Hopper (my father noted) and a very good Rothko (I mentioned; though the Hopper is better).

Well, I’m strolling and what do I see but nearly half a dozen very fine Hoppers (though smaller than the one in Montgomery). A moment later, I walk by a sign for the ‘Rothko Room.’ Inside were four, good sized Rothkos (do you ever see a small Rothko? I don’t think I have). However, save one, they had color or color combinations that I found almost physically repulsive (that yellow!). I usually enjoy his work but… eewww.

Armantrout, it turns out, for me anyway, is better read on the page.

She admitted to not having a massive interest in art and having not had any particular interest in nor experience of Man Ray before being invited. Her comments about the pieces were shallow and the connections between her chosen poems and the art were flimsy and unconvincing. I can understand reservations about Man Ray, but she radiated a palpable disdain for the man and his work. I actually asked a question that came down to: Do you like Man Ray’s work? She said yes, but I am not persuaded.

Guy Raz from NPR moderated the conversation and it’s clear he know little about poetry. His questions were of a high school variety – variations on ‘how do you write a poem?’

Even though, once she’d signed my book, I still have forty-five minutes left to further peruse the museum (they’ve got a great De Kooning), I was so turned off by the event that I just left.


IMG_9390.JPG


IMG_0142.JPG

‘Mary Stuart’ (The Book)


In addition to going to see Mary Stuart performed at the Folger, I also have a copy of the play and I’ve been reading it.

There was no good way to do this: either I’m spoiling a play I’m about to see or else I’m rehashing in book form a play that I just saw. I went for the latter.

It’s good, but also reinforces something that nags at the brain.

It’s not as good as Shakespeare.

Well… duh. Neither is Edward Albee, yet we can mostly agree that Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf is pretty darn good. So what’s up?

Oswald deliberately uses iambic pentameter and the play itself actually takes place in Shakespeare’s lifetime, so the comparisons cannot be avoided. And some of the themes of power, nobility, loyalty, as well as the wonderful little plots and conspiracies are very much out of the Bard’s history plays. And it can’t stand up to the (admittedly, unfair) comparison.


IMG_9393-0.JPG


IMG_0376.JPG