What Do I Want?

 

Franz Kafka once wrote that he never looked at adverts as he always ended up wanting something. I was reading the new issue of a music magazine which I used to have a subscription to, I read the article that I bought it for and then was flicking through when I came upon the reviews section. I remembered how I used to read them and then end up wanting (and often buying) things which I never really listened to or read or watched. Flicking through there were a couple of things I already knew about and am interested in and thought ‘maybe one day’ and as for the rest I barely read or glanced in their direction.

 

I have accumulated a fair number of books, cds and films over the years. The cds are now digitalised and gone (except the few special special editions and sentimental ones) as are the DVDS. I have a couple of cassette tapes and video tapes for sentimental reasons and my library is much smaller than it was. Last year I had to move to a new city and in the move I realised the unfeasible collective personality that I have. Over a few months over a thousand books went by the way side which still left too many. A friend of mine came from China last year and a fair portion of my remaining library went to her as I had already digested the contents and my ability to forget enough to reread is diminishing and she (coming from state-run China) knew nothing of the contents- books on philosophy, literature, economics, astronomy, mythology, children’s classics and so on and so forth and, of course, Dr Seuss. When she returns for a few months next year, I already have the next instalment of her library ready, books I never thought I’d part with. But why? Firstly education is very important to me and if one genuinely wants to learn then they should be able to free of cost. Secondly, which is more important? Having the books gathering dust so that I can ‘enjoy’ my library which I never touch or give them to someone to whom they are far more important due to the sentimental reasons and the possibilities which they open?

 

Oh, the flowers of indulgence and the weeds of yesteryear

Like criminals, they have choked the breath of conscience and good cheer

The sun beat down upon the steps of time to light the way

To ease the pain of idleness and the memory of decay

I gaze into the doorway of temptation’s angry flame

And every time I pass that way I always hear my name 

 

Dylan

 

This journey that I am on is not new to me, it is a path well-trod and it is, ironically, in many of my remaining (but still far too many) books that I find the keys to the path (Pilgrim’s Progress, Dante, Goethe et al). Although the world is filled with easy temptations it is important to remember that the path of happiness (if such thing exists) is a path in which self-control is key for the over indulgence in pleasures keep us from the true pleasures of life and that it is not ‘what do I want’ but, rather, ‘what do I need’ that matters, for as it is written in Mathew 7:14 (word 28, syllable 56, just kidding)

 

Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

 

So next time you are confronted with a delightful temptation ask yourself, is this something I want or something I need? And bear in mind sometimes what we need may appear frivolous which could be why we need it!

 

‘till next time

…The Value Of Nothing

 

We don’t write the play, we don’t produce it, we don’t direct it, and we’re not even actors in it. Everybody eventually comes to the conclusion that things are not unfolding exactly the way they wanted, and that the whole enterprise has a basis that you can’t penetrate. Nevertheless, you live your life as if it’s real. But with the understanding: it’s only a thousand kisses deep, that is, with that deep intuitive understanding that this is unfolding according to a pattern that you simply cannot discern.

Leonard Cohen

 

 

One of the most interesting things about Leonard Cohen’s life and work is that in the early work he is searching for some truth and in his latter work (although quite early relatively) he concludes that there are answers and that the answer is that we cannot find the answers.

 

Having spent time with people in different walks of life I have noticed that the similarities outweigh the differences. Regardless of the role or place in life (society) the same arrogances, insecurities and so forth exist. Why is this? Counselling and psychology courses won’t take applicants (generally) who are under 25 and who don’t have hours of experience under their belt. How one, generally, ends up in their place in life is due to factors which are impenetrable such as genetics, social structure, external expectations and, possibly, fate. The reason why the aforementioned courses do not accept very young applicants is that to be good at the work you have to, not only have a good understanding of yourself, the type which comes from living life with the highs and lows (all true knowledge is born of suffering) but also you have to know that this is something that you truly wish to do, not something which you are positioned towards. Of course this is rarely the case, one person whom I know has started training to be a psychologist due to familial expectations and yet once the role is obtained, the expectations will not be sated and the person will have to go on proving them self. Is this not absurd? To prove them self to others?

 

The roles which we value most in society, and reward most with pay, acclaim etc. are not the roles which should be rewarded most. Educational and medical staff are given low pay and hellish conditions whilst all of the acclaim goes to people who distract us away from our lives (many whom seem to be terrible people). The values which we have as a society are superficial and predetermined. If I was to ask you, which is of more value- an alchemist who can turn lead to gold or an alchemist who can turn gold to lead you would, probably, reply the former. However, gold has a predefined value and can not be more (or less) than it is, however, to turn gold into lead is to create something of unmeasurable value and that is potential and yet to acknowledge this we would have to throw away our preconceived values and enter a world of uncertainty which, as you can imagine, is not the kinda place one wants to be, not even for a picnic.

 

Sartre writes about bad faith in which people take on roles and act the roles but insincerely. This leads to the question, is not everything (or most of the things) we do insincere? How many can say that they are where they are due to personal discovery and not due to factors beyond their control which they cannot even understand or even know are there? Spinoza is often considered the ‘noblest’ philosopher as he turned down prestige to remain a lens-grinder (the glass of which caused his death) yet none who praise him as such are willing to follow his lead. I was told of a girl who asked if a library could be alphabetized. She was looked upon with pity but if she had achieved a level of fame and (helpfully) was dead and people didn’t have to interact with her her actions would be looked upon as brilliantly independent. However, as she was still alive and unknown she was looked upon as being not normal.

 

A person’s true value is in who they are in self-discovery and if they can make the world a better place. Everything else is just nonsense so next time you sneer at a street sweeper and swoon over a Nobel Prize winner, ask yourself are they where they truly are due to self-determinism or are they simply acting out a role which was predetermined for them?

 

‘till next time

A Whisper

To Sevan Naccashian

A whisper of snow fell

And then was gone

Lost in the light

That ignites the sky

The world felt emptier

The landscape had no life

The trees had shed their leaves

The ground was just mud and grass

I saw the things on the shelf

I had meant to send to you

But had never had the time

Blurred by tears they sat there

Frozen monuments to

A lost time

My friend spoke the words to me

That in my darkest thoughts

I had started to suspect

The light flickered in the sky

And then was gone

A single particle of light

Dancing on the breeze

It touched our lives

For a single moment

And then it moved away

It moved upon the ocean of time

Rising ever up and down

Until it came to the great

River of light

That leads up to the sun

We stood and watched you go

Broken and in pain

Until you passed from our sight

And darkness fell again

Thank you for everything

You were my true friend

And I pray that one day

I will see you

A particle of light dancing

In eternity

Free from the suffering of life

And there we will talk again

Au revoir

Until we meet again 

I’m, just Marshall Mathers…

 

I’m, just Marshall Mathers

I’m just a regular guy,

I don’t know why all the fuss about me

 

Eminem, as you know from the mainstream media, is the creation of a man called Marshall Mathers who created Eminem (who then created Slim Shady) as an altar ego, a nom de plume. Marshall Mathers is held up for his intelligence and humour which litters his music (his early work anyway)

 

My p***s is the size of a peanut

Have you seen it?

F*** no you aint seen it

It the size of a peanut (huh?)

Speaking of peanuts

You know what else is bad for squirrels?

Ecstasy, it’s the worst drug in the world

 

Or not… Eminem is often held up as the poster boy for the problems in America, the bane of parents, something he speaks about in his songs

 

These ideas are nightmares to white parents

Whose worst fear is a child with dyed hair and who likes earrings

Like whatever they say has no bearing, it’s so scary in a house that allows no swearing

To see him walking around with his headphones blaring

Alone in his own zone, cold and he don’t care

He’s a problem child

 

Something which baffles him, especially given his self-doubt whether he would have made it if he wasn’t white

 

Look at these eyes, baby blue, baby just like yourself, if they were brown, Shady lose, Shady

Sits on the shelf, but Shady’s cute, Shady knew, Shady’s dimple’s would help, make ladies swoon

Baby, {ooh baby}, look at my sales, let’s do the math, if I was black, I would’ve sold half, I

Ain’t have to graduate from Lincoln high school to know that

 

 

But why are we talking about Eminem today? At the BET Awards Eminem released a 4 1/5 minute video of him freestyling (check it on Youtube) and in the video he talks about Trump and how so much of what Trump says and does is meant to distract away from real issues, this is obvious right? There is no way this needs to be said? Right? And if even so, especially not by the guy everyone points their fingers at when there is some social tragedy in America

 

So I point one back at ’em, but not the index or pinkie

Or the ring or the thumb, it’s the one you put up

When you don’t give a f***, when you won’t just put up

With the bulls**t they pull, ’cause they full of s*** too

When a dude’s getting bullied and shoots up his school

And they blame it on Marilyn … and the heroin

Where were the parents at? And look where it’s at

Middle America, now it’s a tragedy

Now it’s so sad to see, an upper class city

Having this happening (this happening)…

Then attack Eminem ’cause I rap this way  

 

Brooke Baldwin (CNN) hosted a panel to talk about the US Secretary of State calling Trump a ‘moron’ (leading to MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle clarifying that her source said Tillerson called him ‘a f*****g moron’). On the panel was Heather Conley, Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, under George W Bush. Mrs Conley was talking about the effect the argument between the President and Secretary of State on policy but was interrupted by Brooke Baldwin who wanted to show a montage of Trump talking about his IQ and the IQ of others.

Trump talking about IQs, staging Mike Pence walking out of NFL games as kneeling as a form of peaceful protest (and saying that the ‘son of a b****’ Colin Kaepernick should be fired leading to Mr Kaepernick’s mother to tweet ‘Guess that makes me a proud b****!’) is disrespectful to the army (soldiers such as McCain whom Trump attacked for being a POW), calling CNN fake news is all done as a diversion tactic away from his terrible, racist policies, many done just to spite Obama. It is so obvious that he is doing that and why he is doing it but broadcasters such as CNN, MSNBC have fallen for it and become partisan tabloids and names such as Cronkite, Hearst and Murrow have been replaced, not by news anchors, by the names of popular culture stars such as Eminem

 

Little b****, put me on blast on MTV

“Yeah, he’s cute, but I think he’s married to Kim, hee-hee!”

 

 

Yeah…

 

 

‘till next time

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Just A Perfect Day

 

Just a perfect day

You made me forget myself

I thought I was

Someone else, someone good

 

One of the most misunderstood songs in modern popular music is Perfect Day by Lou Reed. Most lazy folks go ‘yeah, it’s about drugs’   and then slap themselves on the back for repeating what someone else once said. However, as with many things, what is perceived to be ‘true’ is not actually true. Perfect Day, whilst its genesis comes from a love affair, is actually a modern day Amazing Grace

 

Amazing Grace, how sweet the sound,

That saved a wretch like me.

I once was lost but now am found,

Was blind, but now I see

(John Newton)

 

Lou Reed’s complexities (he was a complex man and seemingly, in reading memoirs and biographies, could be a very unpleasant one) seem to stem form an inability to understand the world and vice versa.

 

‘He was depressed, anxious, and socially unresponsive. If people came into our home, he hid in his room. He might sit with us, but he looked dead eyed, non-communicative. I remember one evening when all of us were sitting in our den, watching television together. Out of nowhere Lou began laughing maniacally. We all sat frozen in place. My parents did nothing, said nothing, and ignored it as if it was not taking place.’

(Merrill Reed Weiner- his sister ‘bunny’)

 

The Reed family were clearly let down by the medical knowledge at the time yet one thing which seemed to have stuck with Lou was his belief in the power of love, from the early Do Wop bands that he loved

 

 

You’re my every thing

Soon you’ll wear my ring

As long as there’s sand

And as long as there’s a sea

You’ll be my Coney Island, baby

 

(The Excellents)

 

to his relationships.

 

Reeds work is littered with the search for understanding (i.e. the Warhol characters that ‘walk on the wildside’), love and amazing grace

 

I find it hard to believe you don’t know

The beauty that you are

But if you don’t let me be your eyes

A hand in your darkness, so you won’t be afraid

When you think the night has seen your mind

That inside you’re twisted and unkind

Let me stand to show that you are blind

Please put down your hands

‘Cause I see you

 

And, it seemed that Reed understood the most devastating thing that a person can do is to withdraw their love

 

Caroline says

As she gets up from the floor

You can hit me all you want to

But I don’t love you anymore

 

 

The last solo record that Reed released was for charity and was his proposal to Laurie Anderson

 

You know me I like to dream a lot

Of what there is and what there’s not

But mainly I dream of you a lot

The power of your heart

 

The epitaph of Reed’s musical life was an album he made with Metallica, which was panned by fans and critics before they even heard it. The album was loosely based on Frank Wedekind’s Lulu plays (je june plays about lust and sex) and yet the last song seemed to be Reed bringing his musical life to a full circle, reaching back to the child who wrote I’ll Be Your Mirror.

 

It took him a life time to learn to ask himself for help and by then it was too late. Thus is the tragedy of Lou Reed

 

Would you come to me

If I was half drowning

An arm above the last wave

Would you come to me

Would you pull me up

Would the effort really hurt you

Is it unfair to ask you

I will teach you meanness, fear and blindness

No social redeeming kindness

Or oh, state of grace

Say hello to junior dad

The greatest disappointment

Age withered him and changed him

Into junior dad

 

Amazing Grace

 

‘till next time

Choices And Frames: The Tragedy Of Hamlet

 

‘To be or not to be’ thus spake Hamlet in William Shakespeare’s play of the same name. The tragedy of Hamlet is, as everyone knows, his uncle murdering his brother (Hamlet’s father) and marrying his sister-in-law, however, is this the real tragedy?

 

The play starts late at night with an unnatural silence (well, for us modern folk anyway) and then the silence is broken by the ghost of Hamlet’s father coming to speak to his son. This, in itself, is accepted by the reader within the context of the play. No tragedy here.

 

The tragedy is what comes next. The king has two choices. When seeing his son he can either a) say ‘it is great to see you son, don’t mourn my passing and go on with your life and become the brilliant man I know you are’ or b) say ‘your uncle murdered me, get revenge!’

 

This is the tragedy. Hamlet, who has just lost his father and seen an incestuous marriage (Father? Uncle?), is visited by his father who has a choice, and that is how to frame the situation. His father’s choice throws the already fragile prince into an existential crisis in which Hamlet ends up asking not whether to continue his life as it is but rather whether to continue the life his father has just created for him by framing Hamlet’s life as being an extension of his revenge fantasy thus making ‘to be or not to be’ more accurately ‘should  I endure this life my father has created for me and follow the path to despair, murder and the destruction of self or should I consign myself to the unknown?’. The existential crisis which is created destroys the life not only of Hamlet but also of Ophelia, Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and many more, lives which could have been spared had the dead king made a different choice and created a different frame.

 

Such choices are not restricted to Hamlet. Sophocles’ play Oedipus Tyrannus is another tragedy in which a family is torn apart. However, as with Hamlet, the tragedy can be easily avoided. The play is often understood in the Freudian terms of parricide and unconscious sexual desires towards the mother. However, the basis of the play, the framing of the play, is oft overlooked. The play starts with a prophecy that the son will kill the father and marry the mother. Instead of letting the child grow up, explain to him the situation and prevent the prophecy coming true, the parents attempt to kill the child and, when that doesn’t work, fail to get the hint and send him away. Oedipus comes back and slays the evil king who terrorises the kingdom and marries the queen. Upon finding out the truth, Oedipus tears out his eyes and cries

 

‘Dark, dark! The horror of darkness, like a shroud,

Wraps me and bears me on through mist and cloud.

Ah me, ah me! What spasms athwart me shoot,

What pangs of agonizing memory?’        

 

as his literally falls into the darkness in which he has dwelt the whole time, that of ignorance.

 

The tragedies of Hamlet and Oedipus are not the tragedies that one originally thinks but rather show the significance of the choices one makes and how the choices create frames into which others are pulled. One must ask, if Hamlet’s father had refrained from telling the truth and if Oedipus’ parent’s had been honest would the tragedies have unfurled?

 

 

‘till next time