Woody Allen’s Midnight in Paris has so many delights for those old enough to catch all or nearly all of Allen’s quips (did you get the one about Djuna Barnes?) that choosing which one to start with is yet another delight all its own.

The way Allen skewers Hemingway is a mere thirty-seven or so lines of dialogue may be the most brilliant achievement of his career.  Hemingway and the whole msytique as it has been dogmatized by AmLit and CrTveWrtg industry professionals.  Corey Stoll is young enough to not give a hoot about the man or the myth but he plays the part with full knowledge of how great a small role it is by the great writer and director.  Sure, the next generation might say Ehh, Allen, Schmallen, too.  I enjoyed finding out via Wiki (cut and paste coming) that Allen re-wrote the role for Owen Wilson.  It was not a specific actor he had had in mind but the difference between East coast intellectuals and west coast romantics.

“Allen originally wrote the character Gil as an east coast intellectual, but he rethought it when he and casting director Juliet Taylor began considering Owen Wilson for the role. “I thought Owen would be charming and funny but my fear was that he was not so eastern at all in his persona,” says Allen. Allen realized that making Gil a Californian would actually make the character richer, so he rewrote the part and submitted it to Wilson, who readily agreed to do it. Allen describes him as, “a natural actor”.[9] ”

Finished 1Q84.  Should I now go and dig into 2666?  First I could finish Melancholy of Resistance.  In the Book Discussion section tacked  on at the end the publisher lists one Vonnegut book for suggested further reading—Slaughterhouse Five.  Stephenson’s Cryptonomicon I’ve never heard of.  The others suggested I have read–Auster’s New York Trilogy, Cortazar’s Hopscotch, Eco’s The Prague Cemetery (not read), and Wallace’s Infinite Jest.

 

I was going to say think of Vonnegut heavily infused with Beckett, salted with Stendhal and finished with ?  can’t come up with one more–tale of Genji perhaps—something Japanese–oh, the hari kari guy, Mishima—of course.

 

Simply because I know so little of Japanese literature.  I mean there has to be some essential element of Japanese culture to the book—Phil would say it is the restraint, the resistance toward any serious revelation of feeling or even clarity of event.  All is hidden behind screens of superficiality.  Does seem so.  The idea is then that the tension is all the greater, the emotional impact and implication all the moreso.  It’s a pretty good, classical aesthetic and centuries old in most of the high cultures.

 

And yet I’m going to go ahead and say I liked it.  But I wouldn’t urge it on many other readers I know—if you’re going to like Murakami you have to know what you’re getting into, taking on. Priscilla’s reading group wouldn’t like it, nor would I suggest it to them.   Eco, Auster, Cortázar—these do give you a good idea.  Stephenson’s title is great but makes clear to me that I don’t want to read it.  Just looked it up.  Too recent, too sci-fi.  For me Murakami is not at all sci-fi.  He’s Asian & Japanese tale crafting.  Like Genji and like folk tales where dimensionality is easily played with.  Also Carl Jung.  Murakami plants a rather too heavily obvious reference to Jung smack in the last third of the book.  The book is not moving so much as intriguing in ways that you just haven’t met in many other literary works.  It is a giant waste of time.  Pretty much like The Red and the Black is a waste of time, or Tolstoy.  Except that in that grand waste there are explorations into our imaginative lives that we need.  Orwell said the best works tell us what we already know.  Murakami comes closer to doing that than Franzen in Freedom and even than Eugenides in The Marriage Plot, which I thought was much better than Freedom.

 

I exaggerate and ironize in talking about “wasting my time.”  I did not and I knew I was not after I paused around page 100 or 200 and wondered if I wanted to go on.  I’m glad I did.  It seems like the main pull is “what will happen?”  You think that is at bottom what keeps you going.  But I think that is the real mcguffin of Murakami.  You know you’re being allowed think you’re catching on to his mcguffinistic techniques for keeping you lured and seduced.  But what really works is something else, something you can’t quite put your finger on.  He’s got some talent that is not evident in discussion of technique.  Like most pretty good writers.   You know what will happen next so what you’re enjoying much more than that is how will he tweak it moment by moment, what unexpected details will be used, what sort of angles will he describe, what refinements to the characters and their decisions and situations. I remember, for example, the ugly quasi-detective guy, Ushikawa, eating canned peaches at one point late in the book and the old formalist in me said at the time, why the heck describe these canned peaches at this particular moment?  Looking back via the Kindle I find I had been asleep at the wheel—he eats more peaches than I had realized, so its a marker for the character.  And what else?  Dissertations waiting in the wings to be written for sure.  And with this character Ushikawa there is the longish section with his corpse in the white room.  Yes, puzzle gamers can have a field day with Murakami’s books, but that aspect doesn’t interest me.

 

 

“Dreamlike” always comes to mind with Murakami.  This book is so long that the long slow dream is what it is like.  And after it is over even as it has worked out as you expected and intuited, it lingers well, a lingering dream of something—creativity–spiritual longing, love, loneliness, dissociation and of course writing and re-writing a book—book as air chrysalis–an alternative reality in which we readers live for a while like the characters in their experience of the alternate reality of 1Q84 where there are two moons, not one.

 

A fine wintertime read, a few pages a day, not too many.  Just how I made it  through The Red and the Black, and Proust.  But I think Proust was two winters and one summer.  Maybe even two summers.  Reminder here—one of the main character’s in this novel reads Proust, or tries to while she is in hiding after her second act of murder.

Roy Stephenson is Virginia’s cousin, lives in Santa Fe, New Mexico.  Born and raised there.  Lawyer who sends epic song/poem Updates every three or four months.

Liked a lot of his recent missive — accompanied with photos of his family—

here’s one passage–  colors are Roy’s

EVERY BABY IS THE CHRIST CHILD

The word {DNA} become flesh;

The spirit become body;

The genes going on;

Life recycling, replicating, perpetuating itself;

Filling the world w/ Love Incarnate~

 

here’s another

 

entering yoga =
a good energy of students in tuning…
GROAN OF AGING!
followed immediately by the
GROAN OF GRATITUDE TO BE STILL AGING!
tho Buddha is all about preparing for death,
the end of the journey;
so remember to take in the sensations along the way~
hands together before the heart, angeli mudra

                 as if you are holding a tiny songbird between them~

 

So much music:

     that  delicious linkage from B to Berry to Beatles via Blues…

          perpetual pleasure~c’est le pie!

 

and the finale

 

IF YOU CAN’T LIVE THE LIFE YOU LOVE,
THEN LOVE THE LIFE YOU LIVE.

you know you’re in the fe

when a fellow exerciser walks into the club

whistling “Yellow Submarine” and

he’s a cop w/a tattoo that says,

“om mane padme hum.”

 

music is magic
divinely inspired
from simple birdsong

 

LOVE IS THE HIGHEST POWER

LOVE IS ALL YOU NEED

EVERY GOOD DEED

IS LIKE A MAGNET OR A SACRED SEED

IF YOU WANT TO EAT, LEARN TO FEED

(couldn’t get all the color changes as the original has)

Paper Letters Again

Stephen Elliott brings back paper mail and real–almost–letters as literary venture.

So I had the craziest idea yesterday, and since I’m the type of person that tends to act on an idea right away before I can change my mind I have an announcement to make. Letters In The Mail, the first print subscription from The Rumpus.

This is how it works, you get a letter in the mail three or four times a month. You can subscribe here.
That’s it really. They’ll be letters, just like the kind you remember getting from your more creative friends twelve years ago or so. I’ll write some of them, longer letters that I would have sent as a Daily Rumpus maybe, but Letters In The Mail will not be available online. Ever. This is a totally print only publication.
I went through a phase, after I left my fiance, where I would write letters, changing them slightly, and mail them to eight or ten different people. I don’t know why I did it; it was kind of a compulsion. They were personal, but they weren’t so personal that they had to go to only one person. It was a fill-in, I guess, for the letters I sent my fiance when she was away. We were together two-and-a-half years but only in the same city for eleven months.
We’re charging $5 a month (cheap!) for subscriptions and since we’re charging for subscriptions we’re paying the letter writers. Nick Flynn has already agreed to write one, as well as Wendy MacNaughton. I’ve also asked Tao Lin, Lidia Yuknavitch, Emily Gould, Dave Eggers, and Steve Almond. Any of those people might say no, but I have a good feeling.

Mid-mid zen

The trusty Kindle tells me I’m at

Location 15501 of 21994 * page 655 0f 925

in Murakami’s long new book 1Q84.  At this point I could drop it and not go back.  I could also keep going.  Murakami might well be, having brought me this far with nearly perfect equilibrium of response, the great zen writer of our time, even of the first x section of the new millenium.  Could also be the pure zen effect of a cold, sunny day in winter.  January zen.

How to Talk About Being Quiet

First day.  What a bang.  Almost 50 outside.   No snow visible.  Long walk on bum left foot.  Baked pumpkin pie.  Waiting for the turkey.  Printed out vegan recipes from the Times.  Watched tv.  Unpacked rowing machine box.

most emailed pieces in the Times today—finding Quiet by Pico Iyer and science of weight loss (not very encouraging).

Iyer quotes all the usual suspects, especially Merton and Steindl-Rast–haven’t seen his name in a good while –

of course Iyer had a year full of big trips too.  But then so did we.  So here is the paragraph that catches me most—

“None of this is a matter of principle or asceticism; it’s just pure selfishness. Nothing makes me feel better — calmer, clearer and happier — than being in one place, absorbed in a book, a conversation, a piece of music. It’s actually something deeper than mere happiness: it’s joy, which the monk David Steindl-Rast describes as “that kind of happiness that doesn’t depend on what happens.”

this is the best moment in the column—

the other key passages—can’t help but think that Iyer has these on a convenient file like an old Rolodex for churning out an article such as this one, on command as it were, for either Times—or both—or just an easy google search—

“Distraction is the only thing that consoles us for our miseries,” the French philosopher Blaise Pascal wrote in the 17th century, “and yet it is itself the greatest of our miseries.” He also famously remarked that all of man’s problems come from his inability to sit quietly in a room alone.

“None of this is a matter of principle or asceticism; it’s just pure selfishness. Nothing makes me feel better — calmer, clearer and happier — than being in one place, absorbed in a book, a conversation, a piece of music. It’s actually something deeper than mere happiness: it’s joy, which the monk David Steindl-Rast describes as “that kind of happiness that doesn’t depend on what happens.”

“Even half a century ago, Marshall McLuhan, who came closer than most to seeing what was coming, warned, “When things come at you very fast, naturally you lose touch with yourself.” Thomas Merton struck a chord with millions, by not just noting that “Man was made for the highest activity, which is, in fact, his rest,” but by also acting on it, and stepping out of the rat race and into a Cistercian cloister.

“most Web pages, researchers find, are visited for 10 seconds or less

that doesn’t depend on what happens.

oh dear, that is indeed my hardest addiction to imagine giving up or trying to give up, get free of—and yet— the selfish joy of utter absorption in one-ness is really it, isn’t it.

“ Nothing makes me feel better — calmer, clearer and happier — than being in one place, absorbed in a book, a conversation, a piece of music.

I would not have guessed that Iyer is already 55.  Still—this piece seems so typical of him.  He advertises his semi-celebrity life-style, his moving to northern Japan to escape the noise and demands of manhattan and the marvelous big trips he takes in one year

“I took pains this past year to make separate trips to Jerusalem and Hyderabad and Oman and St. Petersburg, to rural Arkansas and Thailand and the stricken nuclear plant in Fukushima and Dubai.

and he makes frequent trips to New Carmoldi, the Big Sur Benedictine monastery where of course he is recognized by some producer from mtv —   hippest benedictine place in the States.  I visited Santo Domingo de Silos, though, in late July of this year.  Also Benedictine, also packed with tourists, also hip.  We were only there for a few rushed moments though.  See all my snaps posted on Flickr of the famous beautiful sculptures and carvings from the 14th? C.  Our private guide took us as well to the 12th C hermitage of San Baudelio de Berlanga—the one that had its magnificent frescoes stolen and sold eventually to the Cloisters, back in the 1920s.

in other words, as a celebrity piece, it is a flawless piece of self-congratulation—

great interview quote about French designer Philippe Starck—a name I first took cognizance of last June when we were trying to figure out how to use the restuarant bathrooms in the newly renovated Musée des Arts Decoratives, at one end of the Louvre.  The restrooms, including the big square ultra looking water closets. were, it was noted, the design of Philippe Starck.  Since then I’ve been on the lookout for his name, and it is everywhere.

“designer Philippe Starck. What allowed him to remain so consistently ahead of the curve? “I never read any magazines or watch TV,” he said, perhaps a little hyperbolically. “Nor do I go to cocktail parties, dinners or anything like that.” He lived outside conventional ideas, he implied, because “I live alone mostly, in the middle of nowhere.”

he notes “hyperbolically” to show he’s no fool —

there’s the fault-line in Iyer’s whole approach to all this joyful silence.  He urges himself and us to it not for its own sake so much as the ultimate one-up-manship way to “remain so consistently ahead of the curve.”  As he demonstrates in this very piece in the Times on the first day of the new year.  (well, it was first published on the 29th of the previous)

Iyer seems in Merton’s mold indeed.  Cistercian monastery, sure, and then reams of publications about the virtues of the silent life for the next twenty years as the superstar writer of spiritual silence ministering to the terrible, noisy modern world “out there.”

In contrast?  Robert Lax, Merton’s old friend from Columbia.  He went to live in Greece, few have ever heard of him, he did not become a superstar writer.  Nor did he travel famously to important and importantly forgotten places in order to keep writing books about each move.  See my new book about him on Amazon. Well, it is an old chapbook which I just re-published.

Now I am at the crossroads.  Should I post all of this on my blog?  or should I keep it quiet here in the silence of my laptop?  Or has the internet not given us the third way—I’ll post it and then a tiny handful of web surfers might scan it for ten seconds and move on.

“most Web pages, researchers find, are visited for 10 seconds or less

If I don’t toot my own horn, who else will?  Pico Iyer sure won’t, but here I’ve gone and added to his darned fame for the moment.  Oh well, anything to protect my own tranquil privacy.

Historian John Lukacs told us fifty years ago in his european history class that in the future the true aristocrats would be those people who knew how to guard their privacy.

Why do I feel that I have just failed the test as successfully as has Iyer?

Hope Springs Eternal, or Another Song of New Year’s Day

Box carefully opened.  Ready to check the list of parts.

Workspace cleared of most of the junk, ready to receive the laying out and naming of parts.

But not so fast.  First we need another pie.  Yesterday I baked a splendid minced meat pie and made terrific hard sauce.  The group devoured it last night.  Today I made this pumpkin pie, added a fresh yam and improvised an oatbran crust.  We’ll see how it tastes after the turkey breast and salad.  Tomorrow we can continue with the naming of parts.

King Corn and Queen Soy

Article on Salon about a new book on the American diet.  These two paragraphs strike me as particularly fascinating.

In the first chapter of the book, you talk about the “polyunsaturated explosion,” during the 1950s that led Americans to eat much differently than they had in the past. What changed and why did it happen?

I don’t know if I normally subscribe to the principle that history is driven by the actions of a few influential people, but in this particular case there were two people who did exert a very big influence on our national diet. One was coming from an economic perspective and the other was coming from (what he believed) was a nutritional perspective. After Dwight Eisenhower had a major heart attack, when the American public became much more focused on heart health and nutrition, a popular nutritionist by the name of Ansel Keys made a lot of impact. He was committed to the notion that saturated fat was the culprit in the heart disease epidemic in the U.S. He advised Americans to replace saturated fat with polyunsaturated fats, in particular corn and soybean oils. Meanwhile Earl Butz, Nixon’s secretary of agriculture, had been tasked to get food prices lower. He decided to heavily subsidize and commoditize corn and soybeans in order to make them really cheap. So corn and soybeans became the basis of our entire food production system. And it continues today. The amount of these oils in the American diet increases significantly every year.

And you point out in the book that corn and soybean oil are high in a compound called omega-6, which is detrimental to health, especially for women. What is omega-6 and why does it make people fatter?

Omega-6 is a category of fat. It is technically a fatty acid. Omega-6s are one category of polyunsaturated fats found in seeds and grains. Now, it’s not bad to eat grains, it’s not bad to eat corn, and it’s not bad to eat soybeans. Whatis bad is that food processors extract and concentrate these oils from plants. In an ear of corn there isn’t that much corn oil, but when you subject it to industrial processing and extract everything but the oil, now you’ve got a lot of omega-6. It’s this heavy industrial processing of seed crops that makes our diet so unnatural. Omega-6s make us fat in a variety of ways. They promote fat storage. Omega-6 is also the precursor for certain signaling molecules called endocannabinoids. Will likes to call them the body’s home-grown version of marijuana. Endocannabinoids give you the munchies just like cannabis does. So the omega-6s are telling the body, “Store the fat you have.” And they are also telling the body, “Eat more, I’m hungry!”

whole article is at    http://www.salon.com/2011/12/19/why_women_need_fat/

More Zeitgeist Modulations

www.funnyordie.com

Newt Gingrich A Bad Lip Reading

I should give up on this blogging—can’t even get the video posted in here properly.  But my theme today is humor and how it gets lost in translation.

We watched the Steve Carrell movie from the summer last night called “Crazy, Stupid, Love.”   Enjoyed it and all.  Slow beginning and couldn’t be sure just where it wanted us to go but after about minute 37 it finally kicked in, got funny and was fun.  Mostly.  It is also offbeat and quirky in the “new” modes–and however I phrase what comes next will date me but here goes and who cares–post maybe the tv show “the Office” and other such.  In other words, I can feel my age when I see these new comedies because while I know how I’m supposed to laugh at them there are still so many new codes in place I’m never quite sure and I am sure I don’t laugh at them as effortlessly as I did those great comedies made when we were in our heydays—say, Woody Allen’s “Sleeper,” and the Diane Keaton one.  But then that might be one where my sense of humor started its own private tectonic slide.  Are tectonics even mentioned any more?  What about paradigm shifts?  Maybe I just haven’t been part of any paradigm shifting conversations lately.

“Crazy Stupid Love” seems to belong in that category of “The Kids Are OK.”

Or is it “all right?”  Sappy but not too sappy, trendy and very trendy, family upbeat comedies.  Only thing left to google today is whether Ryan Gosling really did do his own “Dirty Dancing” uplift dance effects.  The camera pulled back so it could have been a stunt double.