Home
seekingferret [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
seekingferret

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Jul. 2nd, 2008|09:11 am]
I am tempted at this time to make a post that just says "These are strange times to be a Jew." But I just had a short quote post from Gaudy Night and I don't want to make that my thing.

The Yiddish Policemen's Union is a very, very good novel. Especially if you're a Jew, steeped in Yiddish/Yinglish culture, you should read it when you get the chance.

I was stunned to read reviews accusing the novel of antisemitism when it first came out. Michael Chabon, it seems to me, has unreproachable credentials as a semitophile. Is the novel ambivalent about Israel? Yes, in some ways. But the novel argues about how much worse life would be without Israel.

Israel has created a transformation in the Jewish psyche that we don't think about enough. Israel created the Jew as strongman, as homesteader, as normal citizen. These are aspirations of Chabon's Sitkaniks, but they were aspirations of every generation of Jew. But they are now a reality, and the power and momentousness of that reality is what Chabon is calling attention to.

Meyer Landsman is a brilliant character, who manages to subsume Marlowe without sacrificing anything of himself. Whereas Marlowe's moodiness can seem shallow or empty, Landsman's seems deep, if endemic. Perhaps this is because Marlowe's life is empty, whereas Landsman's is filled with important friendships. Perhaps this is because Chabon endows his characters with more humanity than Chandler could.

Landsman's quest for personal redemption parallels the Sitkanik's quest for redemption. Which means that the Jew's doubt about Messiah is a primary motif of Landsman's personal search. He is never sure, even at the end, if it's worth it to wrench himself out of alcoholism and save himself. Everyone around him has more faith in him than he does.

Berko Shemets at one point, questioned by Landsman about Messiah, answers, "You know it was never about belief with me." But as Shemets loses faith in his father, belief becomes the only thing left. At the end of the book, as 'strange times for the Jews' reach the point of no return, the only thing Chabon leaves his characters is tenuous, uncertain, groping belief.

One can't help but feel inspired.
link4 comments|post comment

[Jun. 26th, 2008|10:03 pm]
"Placetne, Magistra?"

"Placet."







SQQQQQUUUUUUUUUUUUUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!1
link3 comments|post comment

Alternate Theory [Jun. 25th, 2008|11:22 am]
[Tags|]

Most critics think that Ulysses is called Ulysses because Leopold Bloom becomes a Ulyssean figure as he wanders in epic fashion through the streets of Dublin. My friend Stephen had an alternate approach.

Leopold Bloom buys some soap in Chapter 5. He puts it in his pocket, and over the course of the day shuffles it around on his person. The traditional critical approach to the soap is to call it a symbol for Molly- its fragrance reminds Bloom of her, so it's as if he's carrying her around all day. The other major critical approach is to call it a symbol of British cultural imperialism, which Bloom helplessly carries around with him all day. There is good evidence for both these approaches.

But Stephen, going off a line in Circe that fancifully calls it the Wandering Soap, thought differently. He concluded that the Ulysses figure in Ulysses is that soap. After all, it goes on the same odyssey as Leopold Bloom. But somehow the soap seems a more heroic figure.
link5 comments|post comment

[Jun. 24th, 2008|11:26 am]
I'm wondering if I haven't misread "As Cool As I Am" a bit. I described it in my initial post as arguing for 'Self-reliance as a way of life'. And I'm not totally sure I think that anymore.

What did I miss? I missed the fact that "I will not be afraid of women" might mean "I will be afraid of men." In my new read, the song's thesis is that the song's villain works to create division among women, by making them jealous of each other. But our singing protagonist is 'not that petty'. She ditches the man and finds solidarity in the sisterhood of women, among 'the others'.

This is a read that is less inclusive to me, but it's still a powerful read. What do people think? Am I allowed my inclusive read of the song, or is that stealing away its feminist message?
link2 comments|post comment

[Jun. 19th, 2008|03:25 pm]
[Tags|]

I have decided that the man in the mackintosh is Mack the Knife. My evidence? Initially, the novel spells it 'macintosh'. Then, it starts spelling it 'mackintosh'. Clearly MacHeath is stalking Leopold Bloom.
linkpost comment

Notes on Aeolus [Jun. 18th, 2008|11:44 am]
[Tags|]

Aeolus is a weird chapter. There are the interspersed headlines, a strange set of factual comments and odd editorializations that don't really fit neatly with the narrative. Occasionally, they overplay the significance of something seemingly minor. At other times, they mock the narrative. Sometimes, the comment they make is impenetrable for me.

There's the obsession with wind, the chapter's Odyssean parallel, in the form of elaborate speeches with little relevance to the plot. There's the representation of the newspaper office as a pair of lungs, with the doors opening and closing to represent respiration. There's the switch from Leopold's inner monologue to Stephen's, the first time in Ulysses that that switch happens mid-chapter. There's a lot of weirdness.

Most of the time when I'm reading this is a chapter I just read for the pleasure of it. It's got lots of humor, lots of parodic figures, lots of good Bloom moments and lots of good Stephen moments. And aside from the headlines, it's a very straightforward chapter to read. Some hidden secrets, of course- I discovered this time, for example, the reason why Bloom had to call the newspaper office again once he had left. Still, it's an easy chapter to take at face value and just wander through.

But a critic I read wants us to read one of the novel's central meta-messages here. The idea of Aeolus, he says, is the failure of communication at a most basic level. Ulysses, she argues, goes through all the writing styles it does in a desperate experimentation, trying to find one that is actually genuine, true to human life. "Joyce has freed us from the superstition of syntax," as a character quips in Dorothy Sayers's "Clouds of Witness". But it wasn't without purpose. It's all leading toward "Penelope", the ultimate liberation from syntax and the deepest an artist has ever delved into the psyche of a character. Ever.
linkpost comment

[Jun. 12th, 2008|02:42 pm]
We're back down to 2% Obama. The Jim Johnson thing hasn't helped, frankly, but there's a deeper cause. Obama hasn't made a speech like The Speech since The Speech. He's become more and more soundbitey and the soundbites are sounding increasingly stupid. Here's the thing- Obama is not good at soundbites. That's why one of the refrains you'll hear from non-supporters is "He doesn't seem to stand for anything- except 'change'." It's because if all you hear is his soundbites, you hear nothing. But I don't even need to say what Speech I'm talking about when I talk about Obama's Speech. It was that brilliant and that gutsy and he hasn't followed it up with anything of substance that I've seen.
link10 comments|post comment

Clues Part 1 [Jun. 7th, 2008|09:42 pm]
[Tags|]

My main goal in reading Ulysses is to figure out who the man in the mackintosh is. He first surfaces in Hades, so let's look at the clues. All pages/line numbers are from my Gable edition

p.90 6-805
Now who is that lankylooking galoot over there in the macintosh? Now who is he I'd like to know? Now I'd give a trifle to know who he is. Always someone turns up you never dreamt of.

p.90 6-824
Mr. Bloom stood far back,his hat in his hand, counting the bared heads. Twelve. I'm thirteen. No, the chap in the macintosh is thirteen. Death's number. Where the deuce did he pop out of? He wasn't in the chapel, that I'll swear. Silly superstition about that thirteen.

p. 92 6-891
-And tell us, Hynes said, do you know that fellow in the, fellow was over there in the...
He looked around.
-Macintosh. Yes, I saw him, Mr Bloom said. Where is he now?
-M'Intosh, Hynes said scribbling. I don't know who he is. Is that his name?
He moved away, looking about him.
-No, Mr Bloom began, turning and stopping. I say, Hynes!
Didn't hear. What? Where has he disappeared to? Not a sign. Well of all the. Has anybody here seen? Kay ee double ell. Become invisible. Good Lord, what bacame of him?
linkpost comment

Hmm... [Jun. 6th, 2008|09:40 am]
[Tags|]

Out of curiosity, has any of my posting about Ulysses interested anyone in the novel? I'm mostly writing these thoughts because they help me organize the way I think about what's going on, but I'm interested in any responses people have to them.
link8 comments|post comment

[Jun. 4th, 2008|11:59 am]
Last night was pretty wonderful. Highlights include:

-I heard Tom Disch refer to himself as God for an hour. His voice is oddly musical, his language is positively beautiful, and his sense of humor is perfectly warped.

-I got Thomas Disch and Norman Spinrad to tell stories about Philip K. Dick. That has to be any hardcore SF fan's dream, right?

-I got a slice of pizza from the good kosher pizza place in the East Village.

-I entered a subway station at the same time as two girls. The station was empty, which meant that we had just missed a train. So we sit down at a bench to wait. As soon as we sit down, a train came. We popped up, smiling. One of the girls is bubbling about how this has never happened to her- The trains never just come. I smile and say, "It's because of me." The third girl argues, "How do you know it's not because of me?" The train approaches without slowing down and we start to get nervous. It passes us, empty, with 'not in service' flashing on its side. As we trudge back to the bench, we are shouting at each other, "It's because of you!" "No, it's because of you!"

-Two people are having a discussion on the street about Bill Clinton's role in Hillary's campaign. One of them argues that if Clinton doesn't become president, a historic opportunity will be lost. Bill doesn't get any title- there's no such thing as Second Lady/Man. To prove his point, he says, "Do you remember Al Gore's wife's name. No? Neither do I." I have been walking behind these people on the sidewalk and trying to find an opening to pass them. At this juncture in the conversation, I pipe up, "Tipper," and speed up to pass them on the left.

-I was completely unable to fall asleep on the bus ride home. And considering I had little sleep the night before because of the hockey triple overtime, I am running a bit low at the moment. Okay, that's not so wonderful But the rest of the night was a lot of fun. I miss New York City.

"People found this city because they love other people
They want their secretaries, they want their power lunches."

~Dar Williams, "Mortal City"
link1 comment|post comment

[Jun. 4th, 2008|10:05 am]
[Tags|]

Poor Dignam!
linkpost comment

[Jun. 2nd, 2008|03:59 pm]
[Tags|]

In chapters 4 and 5 of Ulysses, we sing a song of sixpence. But we learn the maid is missing from the garden, the countinghouse is an outhouse, and the queen is not in the parlor but in the bedroom. What, then, is the point?

Triangularity is the first point. Leopold and Molly are King and Queen, but there is always a third party in their relations. Leopold introduces Martha into his life. Molly adds Boylan. As we learn in Ithaca, Molly and Poldy have not been sexually intimate in eleven years- since the death of Rudy. But they still have sexual lives- through the missing maid.

The maid tells us something important, I think- that the third parties may be essential, but they're always subordinate to the relationship between Molly and Leopold. Theirs is not entirely a sham marriage.

And the fact that the maid is not in the garden tells us we need to look carefully to find her. Evidence of Molly's assignation with Boylan and Bloom's complicity with it is all over Ulysses, but I would not have seen most of it if I weren't aware to look for it. It is obliquely referred to in most instances. There is a delicacy that is observed, amidst the crudity of the affair.

And the Queen being in the bedroom confirms that we're looking in the right direction here. Molly is a being of sexuality in a relationship that denies it. What was the queen doing in the parlor? Eating bread and honey. What does Molly do in the bedroom? Satiate her other appetites.

But Bloom is the King, sitting on his outhouse throne. One might recall the ballad of the Joking Jesus and Mulligan's loutish attempts to remove the sanctity of that King. Bloom (reincarnated Odysseus, King of Ithaca) doesn't require much effort to destroy his sanctity. But his Kingship may work the opposite way, bestowing dignity on a man who lacks obvious dignity. The hidden dignity of Leopold Bloom in the midst of Dublin is one of the things the novel slowly reveals for us.

One critic I read today writes that Stephen mistakenly acts as Prince Hamlet instead of Telemachus. It's pretty funny, mostly because it's eerily true. Stephen prances melancholy through the novel, complaining of usurpation while clothed in black. So I wonder if maybe Bloom's Kingship makes him King Hamlet. But Stephen's algebraic theory of Hamlet contorts the texts of Hamlet and thus Ulysses into a new and unrecognizable shape. Prince Hamlet is King Hamlet is Shakespeare is Shakespeare's son, all at once. And Bloom is the one who encounters his father's ghost over the course of the day. So who exactly is in the countinghouse?
linkpost comment

Chapter Four Thoughts [Jun. 2nd, 2008|11:33 am]
[Tags|]

Kalypso is one of my favorite chapters. It introduces Leopold Bloom with such a aplomb and such careful and loving humor. It opens with Bloom's animal nature, his hunger for meats, his conversation with cats. It ends with Bloom's spiritual nature, his literary nature, his affection for Dignam.

Because Bloom is everything to everyone, there are some subtle inversions. His hunger for meats is described with serious, polysyllabic detail. His respect for his dead friend is discussed glibly, with the plinking, musical "Poor Dignam!" that concludes the chapter.

I kept breaking out in hysterical laughter as I read and had to keep explaining the laughter to my brother, sitting next to me. Bloom makes what I've heard called "Bloomisms", blundering misstatements of fact. I diagnose them to be the result of Bloom taking a field where he knows a little something and speaking as if he knew more a lot. In Bloom's hands, a little knowledge can be dangerous. But we have to admire the breadth of Bloom's knowledge anyway. He dips his toes into so many areas of knowledge. He is an expert at nothing, but he can hold a conversation about anything.

So when he starts into a sophisticated and fairly accurate explanation of metempsychosis and then says that it's like Nymphs, merely because they're both Greek concepts, we laugh. He has pushed a bit too far and said something comical, but we respect Bloom for trying, far more than we respect Stephen for knowing.

I wrote a paper on Bloom's interactions with his cat the first time I read the novel. Having only just met Bloom and not fallen in love with him yet, I spoke ambivalently about him. I wrote of his sensitivity to animals, but suggested that the combativeness that occasionally emerged suggested an ungenerous side. My professor told me that I would soon rethink that, and I have. In rereading the chapter, I see now how generous Bloom was in according personhood to the cat.

Part of this is just Bloom's natural affection for animals and the way they touch his own animal nature. But my reread, and discussion a few months ago with 'nix, has pointed me to a new conclusion. Metempsychosis is the idea that a dead person will be transmigrated, reincarnated, into a new body- possibly an animal body.

Bloom, the lapsed Jew, the twice converted Christian, seems to bear some belief in reincarnation. (How natural, when he himself can be thought of as Odysseus reincarnated into a 20th Century newspaper canvasser in Dublin). I think Bloom wonders if Dignam has been reincarnated into his cat. A close textual analysis reveals clues that offer confirmation.

Next, I'm going to wonder about a pocket full of rye.
linkpost comment

[May. 28th, 2008|03:11 pm]
[Tags|]

This is a fun passage from chapter 3.

"One of her sisterhood lugged me squealing into life. Creation from nothing. What has she in the bag? A misbirth with a trailing navelcord, hushed in ruddy wool. The cords of all link back, strandentwining cable of all flesh. That is why mystic monks. Will you be as gods? Gaze in your omphalos. Hello! Kinch here. Put me on to Edenville. Aleph, alpha: nought, nought, one.

He starts by watching a pair of midwives wandering onto the beach. He likens them to the one who gave birth to him, the ultimate act of navel-gazing. Stephen is in the midst of extreme navel-gazing, as it were, his strange and frightening attempt to impose Aristotelian rationalism on the world.

But he then transfigures this image of the omphalos, the umbilical cord, in a really neat way.

First, he uses the image of the homunculus- the nineteenth century biological/religious idea that all life existed in the initial creation of man and is being unfurled more with each generation.

He imagines the link back to the original generation goes through the umbilical cord, 'strandentwining cable of all flesh'. Then he transfigures it into a telephone cord to place a call back to "Edenville". Eden's phone number, Aleph, alpha, nought, nought, one, is a remarkably generative image. My professor held it to suggest that in the beginning (alpha/aleph), something (one) was created from nothing (nought, nought). He also pointed out that the transmutation from aleph to alpha is in line with the chapter's Proteus theme of mutating words. In particular, the jew-greek mutation seems important throughout the novel. I shall save my discussion of jewgreek for later, though.

I have other ideas about where the phone number goes, though. In aleph-nought we have the fundamental Cantorian concept of the transfinite. Stephen isn't just placing a call back to Eden. He's placing a call through the infinite stream of history. One needn't wonder hard what Stephen would say in such a call. "History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake." This still seems to me the central evocation of Stephen's cause, so we can imagine an explosive confrontation. Yet Stephen makes his call with a winking sense of humor, jolly-sounding. He calls himself Kinch, Mulligan's nickname for him, a name he doesn't seem to like. It's rare for Stephen to make fun of himself like this.

What is my point? I think this shows that Stephen recognizes the futility of arguing with God. His rejection of his Jesuit upbringing isn't caused by a lack of belief. It's caused by a lack of belief in the value of belief. He knows his struggle against history is a battle against the infinite, that his attempt to call Eden and speak to the man in charge is absurd.

He does it anyway.


(It should be noted that the first time I read this book, I viewed Stephen as a hopelessly idealistic sourpuss. I think reading him as a knowing Quixote will lead to me not hating him as much)
link3 comments|post comment

Notes on Chapter 2 [May. 20th, 2008|12:35 pm]
[Tags|]

Some thoughts on "Nestor", chapter 2 of Ulysses.
You're supposed to dislike Deasy. He's supposed to be the Nestorian figure, old and absurd and wrongheaded. He's closely associated with Haines, either by repeating things Haines says or by Stephen having the same response to both. But Deasy seems better than that, for most of this chapter. He's supportive of Stephen's teaching, conciliatory despite their conflicting politics, a thorough schoolmaster. His advice to Stephen to save is good advice, and Stephen even admits at much, if not out loud. I was finding it hard to remember why I was supposed to dislike Deasy as I reread.

Then the spigots unload and we hear the same garbage anti-semitism from Deasy we heard from Haines. The jew merchants have taken over England and are ruining everything. It's a motif that made sense within "Telemachus" because of the usurpation idea of that chapter. But it seems foul and out of place in "Nestor". It especially becomes cringe-worthy in the chapter's faux-Parthian shot, with Deasy running breathlessly up to Stephen to throw out a one-liner he had forgotten earlier. Deasy's transformation into a buffoon is completed here.
I can't quite figure out the meaning of anti-semitism in Ulysses. I can make some attempts to explain it, though.

A first attempt will look at the repeated overt linkages between Zionism and Irish Nationalism, which are natural because of the Stephen/Leopold parallels and even more natural because of Stephen's Jesuit tendency to take inspiration in scripture and Leopold's insecure need to exploit any similarities between the Irish and the Jews he can find. So is anti-semitism just anti-zionism --> anti-irish nationalism? Maybe... Both anti-semites thus far have been British sympathizers. This trend doesn't continue, though. We find that among those who hold anti-semitic feelings are some die-hard Irish.

Deasy says that the reason Ireland hasn't persecuted the Jews is because they haven't let them in. This line is so important that Joyce gives it space to breathe by ending the chapter with it. And on its simplest level this just foreshadows Leopold's entrance two chapters later. But I wonder if there aren't deeper ideas being hinted at here. My deeper meaning detector is going off, but I can't quite connect the dots...

Hey, what about this? Maybe we can synthesize both of my earlier ideas. Deasy is telling us that the Irish have concealed their anti-semitism by avoiding Jews. Similarly, the Irish have concealed their unwillingness to seize their independence, their complicity in British sovereignty, with empty gestures of rebellion.
linkpost comment

Notes on Chapter 1 [May. 19th, 2008|05:03 pm]
[Tags|]

'nix and I and a handful of other Alcovians have undertaken to read Ulysses this summer. It's a reread for me, a first thorough read for 'nix, and an initial encounter for the rest of the gang. I think we can expect some thoughts on each chapter as I go through, along with quick hits like my Buck Mulligan double dactyl.

I finished Chapter 1 of Ulysses on Saturday. So some scattered thoughts on Stephen Dedalus, the chapter's hero, based partially on discussions with 'nix and partially on things left unsaid in that conversation.

We the reader hear so much of Stephen's thoughts in this chapter and they don't match at all with his out-loud pronouncements. Out loud, everything Stephen says is pithy but pompous. It's also sporadic. Mulligan does most of the talking in the chapter, clowning around, entertaining Haines, mocking Stephen, pontificating. Stephen's lines are few and sparsely located, but they almost always consist purely of epigrams. Stephen is very good at epigrams, mind you, but they're still epigrams. "I am a servant of two masters, an English and an Italian" or "The cracked looking-glass of a servant- the symbol of Irish art", or in the next chapter, the king of them all, "History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake."

And we're listening to Stephen's internal monologue, all the things left unspoken, and it's a very different story. Stephen's imagistic remembrances of ghostly visitations by his mother, filled with memories of smells and colors... His lyrical meditations on the sea, sharply contrasting the crudity of Mulligan's "the scrotumtightening sea". Stephen in these thoughts isn't just sensitive, and he isn't just intelligent- he's remarkably insightful.

Maddie blames all this on Stephen's overwhelming insecurity. She thinks Stephen's true poetic soul is left mostly masked because of his fear of being damaged in revealing himself, I suppose.

I wonder sometimes, though, if maybe the surface tells the whole story. The image of Stephen in Mulligan's eyes seems fairly complete to me. "Jejune Jesuit" seems to sum up a lot- explaining in two alliterated words Stephen's love for his mother and his refusal to pray for her. Could it be that Stephen really is just a shallow master of wit, and the internal monologue is the lie, the self-deception? Perhaps there is more in common between Dedalus and Wilde than Stephen is comfortable with.

And maybe... and I think this fear is one that dominates all of Ulysses... maybe Stephen is just a second-rate poet in the capital of a second-rate country. Maybe everything is far less exceptional than it seems.

But what makes Stephen interesting, even if this were true, is the Telemachus theme: The idea of usurpation that rides dominant through the chapter. All of Stephen's shortcomings, even all of Ireland's shortcomings, can be blamed on usurpation. The British stole Irish national identity and a particular Briton is stealing Stephen's identity. There are a lot of funny lines in the chapter, but none funnier than Haines absurdly apologizing for British sovereignty by saying "It seems history is to blame."

Stephen's claim to greatness has been denied to him by the usurpers and somebody needs to accept fault. But Haines's comic apology shifts blame off of Britain onto history itself! History cannot shift the blame- the motif of omphalos throughout the chapter tells us that history just started happening, without cause. So Stephen, in Ulysses, as Telemachus, will be locked in a struggle against history itself.

Through this lens, doesn't "History is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake" make a lot more sense? How noble a quest is Stephen embarking on! How quixotic and absurd! Only Stephen Dedalus, named for the man who flew too close to the sun, could dare.

More later on the homosexuality of the chapter, maybe.
link3 comments|post comment

Two Questions on Global Warming [May. 18th, 2008|12:33 pm]
The long-running argument about Global Warming in my family got a little louder than usual yesterday, so I want to know if anyone can steer me to answers to these two questions:

1) Where can I find the primary source analyses of Global Warming? I'm not a climate scientist, and all this stuff is entirely out of my experience, but hell, I've had three years of thermodynamics and two years of fluid mech... it can't be that far out of my domain, can it? I understand that global temperatures have increased lately. I can read a bar graph. I want to know, definitively, whether this increase is unprecedented or if its consistent with the normal shifts in global climate. I want to see the computer models that say that it's carbon dioxide emissions that are causing the increase in temperature. I want to see the computer models that say that it's the temperature increase that's responsible for an increase in devastating weather events. And I don't want it mediated- I want it straight from the mouths of the people doing the studies. I've seen An Inconvenient Truth, and it's impressive, but seriously... Al Gore is not a scientist. If I'm going to argue about this issue, I want to actually know what the hell I'm talking about.

2) I have not heard a single positive effect of global warming. This is unheard of, to me. Every change in the environment has positive and negative effects. Wouldn't you think that increased insolation would mean greater crop yields? Has this happened, or is there some reason it hasn't happened? If there are more catastrophic storms in some areas, are there other areas that have seen calmer weather? For every polar bear that's losing its habitat to glacier melting, is there a creature whose habitat is expanding? Where can I find the benefits of global warming discussed?
link15 comments|post comment

"Mortal City" by Dar Williams [May. 16th, 2008|11:14 am]
This was the first artist since Jethro Tull in this project who I've listened to before. This was the first artist in the project who I've seen perform live. So some of the songs on "Mortal City" were not new to me, and that made this a very different experience. Not a discovery experience but a deepening experience. Equally interesting, I think.

Dar Williams has some tools in her bag that few musicians do. She has an uncanny ability to create surprising phrases. A willingness to stretch a piece out past its breaking point to see what happens, without losing the awareness that she is stretching it too far. A deeply piercing, poignant voice that can also laugh- in the most heartbreaking ways. And most of all a refusal to simplify.

"The Christians and the Pagans" could be cheesy or saccharine, but it's not. Why not? Because she doesn't wrap the ending up in a bow. She lets it stay messy. The most shocking words in the song are 'the best that they are able.' Williams hands us a victory, but it's only a partial one. And her shrill voice, with its tearful laughter over the lines "When Christians eat with Pagans only pumpkin pies are burning", always makes me cry. I cry with delight and frustration, mixed together.

Then there are, in "February", exchanges like "He said it's a crocus- I said what's a crocus- He said it's flower. I tried to remember, but I said what's a flower- he said I still love you." The patter is perfect, the moment sublime: Suddenly, a harmless conversation takes a completely serious twist, with delightful result. Yet the song has been carefully developing an extended metaphor about the coming of spring and within that metaphor the entire conversation was serious, and the final line the deviation, the place where the metaphor broke down and came into contact with the actuality. Again, the refusal to simplify. Lyrics that eat at you with their incisiveness and subtlety, until you come to an understanding.

Or "As Cool As I Am", the clear highlight of the album. She begins by saying she's "running out of time and one-liners", but if she may be running out of the former, she's certainly not near the end of the latter. The whole song is one clever line after the next, yet they fit together into a coherent story and a coherent idea- self-assertion is more than just a defense mechanism, it's a way of life.

So to give some of those lyrics the attention they deserve... Let's start with "And I could teach her how I learned to dance when the music's ended." Like the crocus lyric, this is a line that functions within and without the extended metaphor of the song. Of course, this is a subtler song than "Feburary" and the lines between the two blur much more. But we have this image of a woman on a dance floor, who catches the singer and her lover's eyes because of the power of her dance. And the singer ascribes it to "loneliness, suspended to our own by grappling hooks." She is dancing out of desperation, clinging to the music and to the people to fight a loneliness she cannot shed, to reach and independence she cannot find. And within the metaphor of the song, dancing when the music's ended is about finding a life after a break-up. The singer is promising to teach the hard-earned secrets of surviving independently. But the image isn't just metaphor. The singer's lover is a creep who flirts with any girl they see, and the singer is directly telling them that the things they do are just taking advantage of others desperate loneliness. And you will notice that I purposefully used the 'singular they', because I find 'ze' silly but the lover in this song is carefully and defiantly ungendered. Which is a statement made more powerful by the fact that everyone else in the song is strongly identified as a woman, especially in the chorus's promise "I will not be afraid of women." This could be a song about a male predator in a world of women. Or it could be a song about a female predator in a world of women. It doesn't matter. She's not that petty.

"And then I walked outside to join the others- I am the others." The ultimate triumph of this song is just to walk away alive from the manipulative relationship, and become another of the anonymous women of the song. And yet it's completely triumphant, in a way no other song on the album is. Williams is unambiguous here- she has won the fight.

"The Blessings" is a strange song, but I think I like it, though it sounds a little too much like Morrisette's "Ironic". Williams's lyrics are more interesting, though, as usual. I'm not totally sure, but I think it's about perspective. How you never get a good perspective until it's too late, yet even too late, finding that wider perspective is still a blessing. We grow into wisdom, slowly.

And lastly, the song's title track "Mortal City", which I didn't like the first time I heard and liked a huge amount the second and will continue to waver on. It's about the two ways to look at the bigness and anonymity of the City. One is to become overwhelmed by it and feel lonely. The other is to sense your place amidst the crowd and feel connected by a sense of shared community. I switched between those two modes at various times when I lived in NYC. I really understand what the song is getting at. So why didn't I like it? Because the melodrama is pitched way too high. You don't need a catastrophic icestorm to make you realize the double-edged sword that is the Mortal City. So sometimes I cringe at Williams's over-the-top antics and sometimes I just feel deeply the core of the message- that as long as you can hear the sounds of the City around you, you need never think of it as a Mortal City but always as a Living City.
link7 comments|post comment

I'm a bad person... [May. 13th, 2008|03:45 pm]
[Tags|]

So I started rereading Ulysses today. I got all of two pages in before getting hopelessly distracted. See, there's a character named Buck Mulligan, a roommate of Stephen Dedalus. His real name is Malachi Mulligan. This, he points out, is two dactyls.

So I had to run out and write a double dactyl.

Hackery Sackery
Malachi Mulligan
studied his medicine
in Dublin town.

And reprehensibly,
homophobically
mock'd Stephen Dedalus
till he fled town.
link5 comments|post comment

Politics [May. 12th, 2008|02:40 pm]
After an enlightening conversation with the Democratic candidate for Congress in New Jersey's 5th District (thank you, scav), I'd say I am up to maybe a 5% chance of voting Obama.
link4 comments|post comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]