This is another quatrain that concerns itself with the grape, but in this one he wonders if perhaps he's made a mistake.
First Edition: Quatrain LXIX
Indeed the Idols I have loved so long
Have done my Credit in Men's Eye much wrong:
Have drown'd my Honour in a shallow Cup,
And sold my Reputation for a Song.
Second Edition: Quatrain CI
Indeed the Idols I have loved so long
Have done my credit in Men's eye much wrong:
Have drown'd my Glory in a shallow Cup
And sold my Reputation for a Song.
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XCIII
Indeed the Idols I have loved so long
Have done my credit in this World much wrong:
Have drown'd my Glory in a shallow Cup
And sold my Reputation for a Song.
FitzGerald made only minimal changes to this quatrain. In the first quatrain he states that he has "drown'd [his] Honour in a shallow Cup" while in the second and fifth versions, it is his "Glory" that he has drowned. Perhaps the difference here is that "Honour," as he sees it, is related to personal qualities such as integrity and honesty of which he has control while "Glory" comes from the outside, more related to one's external reputation that comes from others.
The other change occurs in the second line. In the first and second editions, those "Idols" have hurt him in "Men's Eye" while in the fifth the damage to his Credit now is in "the World." I like the change for "in this World" seems to flow much more smoothly than "in Men's Eye."
The reference to "shallow cup" and "drown'd" suggest again that wine is the theme here and not God's grace for several reasons. To suggest that he has been talking about God's grace throughout doesn't make sense when one considers the reference in the first line to those "the Idols I have loved so long." To refer to God's grace as an Idol seems blasphemous for Idols in both the Islamic and Christian traditions refer to false gods. It seems more likely that those Idols refer to the sensual pleasures here in this life for over-indulgence is certainly something that would ruin his reputation in contrast to following God's commandments which would do exactly the opposite.
This quatrain also follows the theme of the two previous quatrains which focus on death. In this quatrain the Poet/Narrator seems to regret his past behavior, wondering if he has been following false gods--a very common response among many people who suddenly realize that the end is near for them--a reconsideration of their past life and what they have made of it. Deathbed conversions and repentance are not unusual, after all.
Saturday, January 5, 2013
Tuesday, January 1, 2013
Langston Hughes: Does it matter?
New Year
The years
Fall like dry leaves
From the top-less tree
Of eternity.
Does it matter
That another leaf has fallen?
-- Langston Hughes --
The Collected Poems of Langston Hughes
About ten days ago Mayan Calendar ended and a new cycle began. Today, our calendar begins a new cycle. In spite of the foolish panic of some, I really didn't see any difference when the Mayan Calender ended. And, frankly, this morning I had to remind myself that we are now in 2013 for I couldn't see anything different this morning either.
If either calendar change makes a difference, I think it's only because we decide that it does. Langston Hughes asks a question--Does it matter/That another leaf has fallen?-- and, like many other writers, doesn't answer his question. He leaves it for you and me and the other guy.
Does it matter?
The years
Fall like dry leaves
From the top-less tree
Of eternity.
Does it matter
That another leaf has fallen?
-- Langston Hughes --
The Collected Poems of Langston Hughes
About ten days ago Mayan Calendar ended and a new cycle began. Today, our calendar begins a new cycle. In spite of the foolish panic of some, I really didn't see any difference when the Mayan Calender ended. And, frankly, this morning I had to remind myself that we are now in 2013 for I couldn't see anything different this morning either.
If either calendar change makes a difference, I think it's only because we decide that it does. Langston Hughes asks a question--Does it matter/That another leaf has fallen?-- and, like many other writers, doesn't answer his question. He leaves it for you and me and the other guy.
Does it matter?
Thursday, December 27, 2012
Loren Eiseley: Darwin's Century
Actually, the full title of this book by Loren Eiseley is Darwin's Century: Evolution and the Men Who Discovered It. The most significant word is "Men" which spells outs Eiseley's thesis that there were many threads in the tapestry of the development of evolution. Darwin's book, The Origin of Species, published in 1859, did not appear in a vacuum, but was the culmination of several centuries of theorizing and debating the origin of the various types of plants and animals found on this planet. Eiseley does not present a defense or a detailed explanation of evolution: that is not his purpose here but rather to spell out the various forerunners and then the defenders of evolution against various attacks made against it.
Eiseley begins with the early theories about the creation of life including that from The Bible in Genesis and hints of a evolutionary process by various thinkers, including those from Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. Eiseley points out the irony that the Great Chain of Being, created by Christian thinkers, which was designed to demonstrate the completeness of God's creation by presenting creatures in an ascending sequence from the lowliest creatures at the "bottom level of creation" to humans at the top. Evolutionists later borrowed this scheme and used it for their own purposes. Eiseley then discusses many thinkers and theorists who had put forth their own small piece of the puzzle: Lamarck, Linnaeus, and Malthus, among numerous others.
Eiseley then brings in one of the most important works for the further development of evolutionary theory; Charles Lyell, whose incredibly influential Principles of Geology, first published in 1834, argued for a much much longer time span for the existence of the earth than the six thousand years many Christian theologians and thinkers had postulated based on their study of the Old Testament. Now, with many millions of years to work in, random selection now had the time available to be effective.
Darwin's seminal work, The Origin of Species, does not, as Eiseley argues, appear out of a vacuum. Rather it draws together many differing threads and ideas, all viewed by Darwin through a perspective gained by his voyage on the Beagle which visited various parts of the world, especially South America, where both new animals and plants appeared along with many that were to be found in Europe and Africa. This raised the question: why did some creatures, plants and animals, appear in the Old and New Worlds and why were there creatures unique only to the New World.
After the publication of The Origin of Species, Darwin faced considerable opposition from both the Christian defenders of Genesis and from scientists of considerable repute. He also gained the strong support of Alfred Lord Wallace, who also published a work on evolution shortly after Darwin, and Thomas Huxley, who became known as Darwin's Bulldog. His grandson, Aldous Huxley, is the author of Brave New World and The Doors of Perception. The opposition of the scientists was quelled by the discovery of Mendel's work on genetic inheritance and by a greater understanding of the sun. Some scientists argued that the world couldn't have lasted millions of years because the sun would have consumed itself in much less time. This was caused by an inadequate appreciation of the sun and its processes.
The only weakness in Eiseley's work is his overly optimistic belief that the opposition to evolution has disappeared. Darwin's Century was published in 1958, approximately a century after Darwin's Origin of Species, and at that time he could not foresee the rise of religious opposition once again to evolutionary theory to the point where a significant portion of the US population does not accept evolution nor any span of time longer than six thousand years of existence for the universe.
Highly recommended for those interested in the early history of evolution and for those who just en;joy reading anything by Loren Eiseley (readers like me).
Eiseley begins with the early theories about the creation of life including that from The Bible in Genesis and hints of a evolutionary process by various thinkers, including those from Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. Eiseley points out the irony that the Great Chain of Being, created by Christian thinkers, which was designed to demonstrate the completeness of God's creation by presenting creatures in an ascending sequence from the lowliest creatures at the "bottom level of creation" to humans at the top. Evolutionists later borrowed this scheme and used it for their own purposes. Eiseley then discusses many thinkers and theorists who had put forth their own small piece of the puzzle: Lamarck, Linnaeus, and Malthus, among numerous others.
Eiseley then brings in one of the most important works for the further development of evolutionary theory; Charles Lyell, whose incredibly influential Principles of Geology, first published in 1834, argued for a much much longer time span for the existence of the earth than the six thousand years many Christian theologians and thinkers had postulated based on their study of the Old Testament. Now, with many millions of years to work in, random selection now had the time available to be effective.
Darwin's seminal work, The Origin of Species, does not, as Eiseley argues, appear out of a vacuum. Rather it draws together many differing threads and ideas, all viewed by Darwin through a perspective gained by his voyage on the Beagle which visited various parts of the world, especially South America, where both new animals and plants appeared along with many that were to be found in Europe and Africa. This raised the question: why did some creatures, plants and animals, appear in the Old and New Worlds and why were there creatures unique only to the New World.
After the publication of The Origin of Species, Darwin faced considerable opposition from both the Christian defenders of Genesis and from scientists of considerable repute. He also gained the strong support of Alfred Lord Wallace, who also published a work on evolution shortly after Darwin, and Thomas Huxley, who became known as Darwin's Bulldog. His grandson, Aldous Huxley, is the author of Brave New World and The Doors of Perception. The opposition of the scientists was quelled by the discovery of Mendel's work on genetic inheritance and by a greater understanding of the sun. Some scientists argued that the world couldn't have lasted millions of years because the sun would have consumed itself in much less time. This was caused by an inadequate appreciation of the sun and its processes.
The only weakness in Eiseley's work is his overly optimistic belief that the opposition to evolution has disappeared. Darwin's Century was published in 1958, approximately a century after Darwin's Origin of Species, and at that time he could not foresee the rise of religious opposition once again to evolutionary theory to the point where a significant portion of the US population does not accept evolution nor any span of time longer than six thousand years of existence for the universe.
Highly recommended for those interested in the early history of evolution and for those who just en;joy reading anything by Loren Eiseley (readers like me).
Tuesday, December 25, 2012
Thomas Hardy: Two Christmas poems
Two Christmas poems by Hardy-- or rather I should say two very different Christmas poems by Hardy. In spite of his reputation for gloom and despair, mostly fueled by his later novels, especially Tess and Jude, the second is just as typical of Hardy as is the first.
A Christmas Ghost-Story
South of the line, inland from far Durban,
A mouldering soldier lies--your countryman.
Awry and doubled up are his gray bones,
And on the breeze his puzzled phantom moans
Nightly to clear Canopus: "I would know
By whom and when the All-Earth-gladdening Law
Of Peace, brought in by the Man Crucified,
Was ruled to be inept, and set aside?
And what of logic or of truth appears
In tacking 'Anno Domini' to the years?
Near twenty-hundred liveried thus have hied,
But tarries yet the Cause for which He died."
Christmas-eve 1899
-- Thomas Hardy --
from The Works of Thomas Hardy
Christmastide
The rain-shafts splintered on me
As despondently I strode;
The twilight gloomed upon me
And bleared the blank high-road.
Each bush gave forth, when blown on
By gusts in shower and shower,
A sigh, as it were sown on
In handfuls by a sower.
A cheerful voice called, nigh me,
"A merry Christmas, friend!"--
There rose a figure by me,
Walking with townward trend,
A sodden tramp's who, breaking
Into thin song, bore straight
Ahead, direction taking
Toward the Casuals' gate.
-- Thomas Hardy --
from The Works of Thomas Hardy
After reading the second poem, I couldn't help but think of Hardy's "The Darkling Thrush," which I had already posted once before, but I think it deserves at least one reminder.
The Darkling Thrush
I leant upon a coppice gate
…..When Frost was spectre-gray,
And Winter's dregs made desolate
…..The weakening eye of day.
The tangled bine-stems scored the sky
…..Like strings of broken lyres,
And all mankind that haunted nigh
…..Had sought their household fires.
The land's sharp features seemed to be
…..The Century's corpse outleant,
His crypt the cloudy canopy,
…..The wind his death-lament.
The ancient pulse of germ and birth
…..Was shrunken hard and dry,
And every spirit upon earth
…..Seemed fervorless as I.
At once a voice arose among
…..The bleak twigs overhead
In a full-hearted evensong
…..Of joy illimited;
An aged thrush, frail, gaunt, and small
…..In blast-beruffled plume,
Had chosen thus to fling his soul
…..Upon the growing gloom.
So little cause for carolings
…..Of such ecstatic sound
Was written on terrestrial things
…..Afar or nigh around,
That I could think there trembled through
…..His happy good-night air
Some blessed Hope, whereof he knew
…..And I was unaware.
-- Thomas Hardy --
A Christmas Ghost-Story
South of the line, inland from far Durban,
A mouldering soldier lies--your countryman.
Awry and doubled up are his gray bones,
And on the breeze his puzzled phantom moans
Nightly to clear Canopus: "I would know
By whom and when the All-Earth-gladdening Law
Of Peace, brought in by the Man Crucified,
Was ruled to be inept, and set aside?
And what of logic or of truth appears
In tacking 'Anno Domini' to the years?
Near twenty-hundred liveried thus have hied,
But tarries yet the Cause for which He died."
Christmas-eve 1899
-- Thomas Hardy --
from The Works of Thomas Hardy
Christmastide
The rain-shafts splintered on me
As despondently I strode;
The twilight gloomed upon me
And bleared the blank high-road.
Each bush gave forth, when blown on
By gusts in shower and shower,
A sigh, as it were sown on
In handfuls by a sower.
A cheerful voice called, nigh me,
"A merry Christmas, friend!"--
There rose a figure by me,
Walking with townward trend,
A sodden tramp's who, breaking
Into thin song, bore straight
Ahead, direction taking
Toward the Casuals' gate.
-- Thomas Hardy --
from The Works of Thomas Hardy
After reading the second poem, I couldn't help but think of Hardy's "The Darkling Thrush," which I had already posted once before, but I think it deserves at least one reminder.
The Darkling Thrush
I leant upon a coppice gate
…..When Frost was spectre-gray,
And Winter's dregs made desolate
…..The weakening eye of day.
The tangled bine-stems scored the sky
…..Like strings of broken lyres,
And all mankind that haunted nigh
…..Had sought their household fires.
The land's sharp features seemed to be
…..The Century's corpse outleant,
His crypt the cloudy canopy,
…..The wind his death-lament.
The ancient pulse of germ and birth
…..Was shrunken hard and dry,
And every spirit upon earth
…..Seemed fervorless as I.
At once a voice arose among
…..The bleak twigs overhead
In a full-hearted evensong
…..Of joy illimited;
An aged thrush, frail, gaunt, and small
…..In blast-beruffled plume,
Had chosen thus to fling his soul
…..Upon the growing gloom.
So little cause for carolings
…..Of such ecstatic sound
Was written on terrestrial things
…..Afar or nigh around,
That I could think there trembled through
…..His happy good-night air
Some blessed Hope, whereof he knew
…..And I was unaware.
-- Thomas Hardy --
Saturday, December 22, 2012
Emily Dickinson: "Slant of light"
#258
There's a certain Slant of light,
Winter Afternoons--
That oppresses, like the Heft
Of Cathedral Tunes--
Heavenly Hurt, it gives us--
We can find no scar,
but internal difference,
Where the Meanings, are--
None may teach it-- Any--
'Tis the Seal Despair--
An imperial affliction
Sent us of the Air--
When it comes, the Landscape listens--
Shadows-- hold their breath--
When it goes, 'tis like the Distance
On the look of Death--
-- Emily Dickinson --
The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson
Thomas H. Johnson, editor
This is one of the poems of Dickinson that I had to reread several times when I first read it, especially the first stanza, which I find one of the most engrossing stanzas that she has written. I know that "Slant of light," not from where I live now in Tucson, but in Chicago, where I grew up. It had been a grey, overcast, dull day and suddenly, just before nightfall, the sun at the western horizon breaks through the clouds and lights all with a strange golden glow that does something to the back of my throat.
Heavenly Hurt, it gives us--
We can find no scar,
but internal difference,
Where the Meanings, are--
I can't explain it, and this rarely, if ever, happens with any other poem, even those most loved by me. There is some quality to that light that is unique and disquieting.
There's a certain Slant of light,
Winter Afternoons--
That oppresses, like the Heft
Of Cathedral Tunes--
Heavenly Hurt, it gives us--
We can find no scar,
but internal difference,
Where the Meanings, are--
None may teach it-- Any--
'Tis the Seal Despair--
An imperial affliction
Sent us of the Air--
When it comes, the Landscape listens--
Shadows-- hold their breath--
When it goes, 'tis like the Distance
On the look of Death--
-- Emily Dickinson --
The Complete Poems of Emily Dickinson
Thomas H. Johnson, editor
This is one of the poems of Dickinson that I had to reread several times when I first read it, especially the first stanza, which I find one of the most engrossing stanzas that she has written. I know that "Slant of light," not from where I live now in Tucson, but in Chicago, where I grew up. It had been a grey, overcast, dull day and suddenly, just before nightfall, the sun at the western horizon breaks through the clouds and lights all with a strange golden glow that does something to the back of my throat.
Heavenly Hurt, it gives us--
We can find no scar,
but internal difference,
Where the Meanings, are--
I can't explain it, and this rarely, if ever, happens with any other poem, even those most loved by me. There is some quality to that light that is unique and disquieting.
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
The Rubaiyat: Quatrain LXVIII
This is the second of three linked quatrains that are related by his prophecy of his death and its aftermath. The previous quatrain told of his grave while this one speaks of its effects on others.
First Edition: Quatrain LXVIII
That ev'n my buried Ashes such a Snare
Of Perfume shall fling up into the Air,
As not a True Believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Second Edition: Quatrain C
Then ev'n my buried Ashes such a snare
Of Vintage shall fling up into the Air,
As not a True-believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XCII
That ev'n my buried Ashes such a snare
Of Vintage shall fling up into the Air
As not a True-believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Edward FitzGerald made only minor changes over the five editions. One surprising one is that he reversed a change he had made in the second edition and restored the term he had used in the first edition--something he rarely does. The first word of the first edition is "That" which he changed to "Then" in the second version. By the fifth edition, he had changed his mind and brought back the "That." I have no idea why he changed it initially, nor why he went back to his initial wording.
The most noticeable change occurs in the second line. In the first edition, the snare is of "Perfume" while the second and fifth versions have it as a snare of "Vintage." I think the reason for the change is clear: "Perfume" is far more obscure and it could be the odor of flowers in the Garden in which he is buried, while "Vintage" strongly suggests wine, a very common theme in the Rubaiyat. It is the aroma of wine, which of course is forbidden to True Believers, that he thinks will enter their consciousness surreptitiously and perhaps tempt them.
I don't know whether this is true also of Moslems, but there is a tradition among some Christians that an especially saintly individual will receive a special sign of God's approval after death. Instead of the smell of the corruption of the body shortly after death, the body will have either no odor or the sweet odor of flowers or some sweet smell, a sign of that person's saintliness. Dostoyevsky gives a dramatic example of this in Brothers Karamazov at the death of the revered Elder, Father Zossima. The monks and townspeople at his funeral are shocked to discover that this tradition did not hold true, at least in the case of Father Zossima.
I wonder if the Poet/Narrator is being ironic here, substituting the odor of wine for that of saintliness. In any case, it is appropriate that the quatrains now introduce the idea of death for we are coming close to the end of the First Edition of FitzGerald's treatment of the Rubaiyat.
A bit of trivia: the inside cover of my text informs the reader that The Rubaiyat has been "rendered into verse" by Edward FitzGerald, not "translated," obviously taking into account that there is much here that is from FitzGerald and not necessarily from Omar Khayyam.
.
First Edition: Quatrain LXVIII
That ev'n my buried Ashes such a Snare
Of Perfume shall fling up into the Air,
As not a True Believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Second Edition: Quatrain C
Then ev'n my buried Ashes such a snare
Of Vintage shall fling up into the Air,
As not a True-believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XCII
That ev'n my buried Ashes such a snare
Of Vintage shall fling up into the Air
As not a True-believer passing by
But shall be overtaken unaware.
Edward FitzGerald made only minor changes over the five editions. One surprising one is that he reversed a change he had made in the second edition and restored the term he had used in the first edition--something he rarely does. The first word of the first edition is "That" which he changed to "Then" in the second version. By the fifth edition, he had changed his mind and brought back the "That." I have no idea why he changed it initially, nor why he went back to his initial wording.
The most noticeable change occurs in the second line. In the first edition, the snare is of "Perfume" while the second and fifth versions have it as a snare of "Vintage." I think the reason for the change is clear: "Perfume" is far more obscure and it could be the odor of flowers in the Garden in which he is buried, while "Vintage" strongly suggests wine, a very common theme in the Rubaiyat. It is the aroma of wine, which of course is forbidden to True Believers, that he thinks will enter their consciousness surreptitiously and perhaps tempt them.
I don't know whether this is true also of Moslems, but there is a tradition among some Christians that an especially saintly individual will receive a special sign of God's approval after death. Instead of the smell of the corruption of the body shortly after death, the body will have either no odor or the sweet odor of flowers or some sweet smell, a sign of that person's saintliness. Dostoyevsky gives a dramatic example of this in Brothers Karamazov at the death of the revered Elder, Father Zossima. The monks and townspeople at his funeral are shocked to discover that this tradition did not hold true, at least in the case of Father Zossima.
I wonder if the Poet/Narrator is being ironic here, substituting the odor of wine for that of saintliness. In any case, it is appropriate that the quatrains now introduce the idea of death for we are coming close to the end of the First Edition of FitzGerald's treatment of the Rubaiyat.
A bit of trivia: the inside cover of my text informs the reader that The Rubaiyat has been "rendered into verse" by Edward FitzGerald, not "translated," obviously taking into account that there is much here that is from FitzGerald and not necessarily from Omar Khayyam.
.
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Robert Grudin: boredom's fast time and slow time
II.23
"Our sense of the slowness or speediness of time often depends on the size of the time-frame we happen to be considering. It is possible, for example, for us to be simultaneously amazed at the slowness of minutes and the speediness of years. Oddly enough, this pathetic double amazement bespeaks a single cause: our inability to make proper use of the present. For although minutes spend in boredom or anxiety pass slowly, they nonetheless add up to years which are void of memory."
-- Robert Grudin --
from Time and the Art of Living
That's why I usually carry a book with me whenever I'm out and around. It's amazing how quickly time passes when I pick up a book and read while having to wait in line or for someone to appear. Moreover, I also find I'm in a much better humor if I spent the time reading rather than fuming over having to wait. Time always seems to pass quickly when I'm doing something, yet, when I look back, I find those days seem "longer" than those in which I did little or nothing.
Tiz a puzzlement.
"Our sense of the slowness or speediness of time often depends on the size of the time-frame we happen to be considering. It is possible, for example, for us to be simultaneously amazed at the slowness of minutes and the speediness of years. Oddly enough, this pathetic double amazement bespeaks a single cause: our inability to make proper use of the present. For although minutes spend in boredom or anxiety pass slowly, they nonetheless add up to years which are void of memory."
-- Robert Grudin --
from Time and the Art of Living
That's why I usually carry a book with me whenever I'm out and around. It's amazing how quickly time passes when I pick up a book and read while having to wait in line or for someone to appear. Moreover, I also find I'm in a much better humor if I spent the time reading rather than fuming over having to wait. Time always seems to pass quickly when I'm doing something, yet, when I look back, I find those days seem "longer" than those in which I did little or nothing.
Tiz a puzzlement.
Friday, December 14, 2012
Lin Yutang: Spirit and Flesh, concl.
"A defense of the angels-without-bodies theory will be found to be most vague and unsatisfying. Such a defender might say, 'Ah, yes, but in the world of spirit, we don't need such satisfactions.' 'But what instead have you got?' Complete silence; or perhaps, 'Void--Peace--Calm.' 'What then do you gain by it?' 'Absence of work and pain and sorrow.' I admit such a heaven has a tremendous attraction to galley slav4es. Such a negative ideal and conception of happiness is dangerously near to Buddhism and ultimately to be traced to Asia (Asia Minor, in this case) rather than Europe.
Such speculations are necessarily idle, but I may at least point out that the conception of a 'senseless spirit' is quite unwarranted, since we are coming more and more to feel that the universe itself is a sentient being. Perhaps motion rather than standing still will be a characteristic of the spirit, and one of the pleasures of a bodiless angel will be to revolve like a proton around a nucleus at the speed of twenty or thirty thousand revolutions a second. There may be a keen delight in that, more fascinating than a ride on a Coney Island scenic railway. It will certainly be a kind of sensation. Or perhaps he bodiless angel will dart like light or cosmic rays in ethereal waves around curved space at the rate of 186,000 miles per second. There must still be spiritual pigments for the angels to paint and enjoy some form of creation, ethereal vibrations for the angels to feel as tone and sound and color, and ethereal breeze to brush against the angels' cheeks. Otherwise spirit itself would stagnate like water in a cesspool, or feel like men on a hot, suffocating summer afternoon without a whiff of fresh air. There must still be motion and emotion (in whatever form) if there is to be life; certainly not complete rest and insensitiveness."
-- Lin Yutang --
from The Importance of Living
Perhaps I'm wrong here, but I somehow get the idea that he doesn't take the idea of the possible existence of angels very seriously.
"we are coming more and more to feel that the universe itself is a sentient being."
I'm not clear as to how seriously we are meant to take this statement. Is he suggesting that this is just another idea similar to that of angels which is now coming to take the place of angels?
Or, is he suggesting that this may be a more rational idea which will prove that the existence of angels is untenable?
Such speculations are necessarily idle, but I may at least point out that the conception of a 'senseless spirit' is quite unwarranted, since we are coming more and more to feel that the universe itself is a sentient being. Perhaps motion rather than standing still will be a characteristic of the spirit, and one of the pleasures of a bodiless angel will be to revolve like a proton around a nucleus at the speed of twenty or thirty thousand revolutions a second. There may be a keen delight in that, more fascinating than a ride on a Coney Island scenic railway. It will certainly be a kind of sensation. Or perhaps he bodiless angel will dart like light or cosmic rays in ethereal waves around curved space at the rate of 186,000 miles per second. There must still be spiritual pigments for the angels to paint and enjoy some form of creation, ethereal vibrations for the angels to feel as tone and sound and color, and ethereal breeze to brush against the angels' cheeks. Otherwise spirit itself would stagnate like water in a cesspool, or feel like men on a hot, suffocating summer afternoon without a whiff of fresh air. There must still be motion and emotion (in whatever form) if there is to be life; certainly not complete rest and insensitiveness."
-- Lin Yutang --
from The Importance of Living
Perhaps I'm wrong here, but I somehow get the idea that he doesn't take the idea of the possible existence of angels very seriously.
"we are coming more and more to feel that the universe itself is a sentient being."
I'm not clear as to how seriously we are meant to take this statement. Is he suggesting that this is just another idea similar to that of angels which is now coming to take the place of angels?
Or, is he suggesting that this may be a more rational idea which will prove that the existence of angels is untenable?
Wednesday, December 12, 2012
Lin Yutang: Spirit and Flesh, Pt. 1
III. Spirit and Flesh
"The most obvious fact which philosophers refuse to see is that we have a body. Tired of seeing our mortal imperfections and our savage instincts and impulses, sometimes our preachers wish that we were made like angels, and yet we are at a total loss to imagine what the angels' life would be like. We either give the angels a body and a shape like our own--except for a pair of wings--or we don't. It is interesting that the general conception of an angel is still that of a human body with a pair of wings. I sometimes thank that it is an advantage even for angels to have a body with the five senses. If I were to be an angel, I should like to have a school-girl complexion, but how am I going to have a school-girl complexion without a skin? I still should like to drink a glass of tomato juice or iced orange juice, but how am I going to appreciate iced orange juice without having thirst? And how am I going to enjoy food, when I am incapable of hunger? How would an angel paint without pigment, sing without the hearing of sounds, smell the fine morning air without a nose? How would he enjoy the immense satisfaction of scratching an itch, if his skin doesn't itch? And what a terrible loss in the capacity for happiness that would be! Either we have to have bodies and have all our bodily wants satisfied, or else we are pure spirits and have not satisfactions at all. All satisfactions imply want.
I sometimes think what a terrible punishment it would be for a ghost or an angel to have no body, to look at a stream of cool water and have no feet to plunge into it and get a delightful cooling sensation from it, to see a dish of Peking or Long Island duck and have no tongue to taste it, to see crumpets and have no teeth to chew them, to see the beloved faces of our dear ones and have no emotions to feel toward them. Terribly sad it would be if we should one day return to this earth as ghosts and move silently into our children's bedroom, to see a child lying there in bed and have no hands to fondle him and no arms to clasp him, no chest for his warmth to penetrate to, no round hollow between cheek and shoulder for him to nestle against, and no ears to hear his voice."
-- Lin Yutang --
from The Importance of Living
(to be continued)
"The most obvious fact which philosophers refuse to see is that we have a body. Tired of seeing our mortal imperfections and our savage instincts and impulses, sometimes our preachers wish that we were made like angels, and yet we are at a total loss to imagine what the angels' life would be like. We either give the angels a body and a shape like our own--except for a pair of wings--or we don't. It is interesting that the general conception of an angel is still that of a human body with a pair of wings. I sometimes thank that it is an advantage even for angels to have a body with the five senses. If I were to be an angel, I should like to have a school-girl complexion, but how am I going to have a school-girl complexion without a skin? I still should like to drink a glass of tomato juice or iced orange juice, but how am I going to appreciate iced orange juice without having thirst? And how am I going to enjoy food, when I am incapable of hunger? How would an angel paint without pigment, sing without the hearing of sounds, smell the fine morning air without a nose? How would he enjoy the immense satisfaction of scratching an itch, if his skin doesn't itch? And what a terrible loss in the capacity for happiness that would be! Either we have to have bodies and have all our bodily wants satisfied, or else we are pure spirits and have not satisfactions at all. All satisfactions imply want.
I sometimes think what a terrible punishment it would be for a ghost or an angel to have no body, to look at a stream of cool water and have no feet to plunge into it and get a delightful cooling sensation from it, to see a dish of Peking or Long Island duck and have no tongue to taste it, to see crumpets and have no teeth to chew them, to see the beloved faces of our dear ones and have no emotions to feel toward them. Terribly sad it would be if we should one day return to this earth as ghosts and move silently into our children's bedroom, to see a child lying there in bed and have no hands to fondle him and no arms to clasp him, no chest for his warmth to penetrate to, no round hollow between cheek and shoulder for him to nestle against, and no ears to hear his voice."
-- Lin Yutang --
from The Importance of Living
(to be continued)
Friday, December 7, 2012
Nietzsche: on prohibitions
#48
"Prohibitions without reasons: A prohibition, the reason for which we do not understand or admit, is almost a command not only for the stubborn but also for those who thirst for knowledge: one risks an experiment to find out why the prohibition was pronounced. Moral prohibitions, like those of the Decalogue, are suitable only for an age of subjugated reason: now, such a prohibition as "Thou shalt not kill" or "Thou shalt not commit adultery," presented without reasons, would have a harmful rather than a useful effect."
-- Nietzsche --
from The Wanderer and His Shadow
in The Portable Nietzsche
I have to disagree with Nietzsche at one point for I think he was overly optimistic about the state of human reason. He seemed to think that no longer could anyone simply issue a prohibition without adequate reasons and get people to obey. Or, perhaps when Nietzsche was writing, this was true of the general population. If so, then the situation has deteriorated for I see millions of people who simply follow orders about doing or not doing something simply because they were told to do so and without questioning the rationale for such orders.
But, some, no doubt, will argue that I'm wrong here because I don't accept someone saying "God said so" or "the government said so" or some "Leader said so" as being an adequate reason.
"Prohibitions without reasons: A prohibition, the reason for which we do not understand or admit, is almost a command not only for the stubborn but also for those who thirst for knowledge: one risks an experiment to find out why the prohibition was pronounced. Moral prohibitions, like those of the Decalogue, are suitable only for an age of subjugated reason: now, such a prohibition as "Thou shalt not kill" or "Thou shalt not commit adultery," presented without reasons, would have a harmful rather than a useful effect."
-- Nietzsche --
from The Wanderer and His Shadow
in The Portable Nietzsche
I have to disagree with Nietzsche at one point for I think he was overly optimistic about the state of human reason. He seemed to think that no longer could anyone simply issue a prohibition without adequate reasons and get people to obey. Or, perhaps when Nietzsche was writing, this was true of the general population. If so, then the situation has deteriorated for I see millions of people who simply follow orders about doing or not doing something simply because they were told to do so and without questioning the rationale for such orders.
But, some, no doubt, will argue that I'm wrong here because I don't accept someone saying "God said so" or "the government said so" or some "Leader said so" as being an adequate reason.
Monday, December 3, 2012
Loren Eiseley: Some short poems and a haiku by Roka
Footnote to Autumn
Old boulders in the autumn sun and wind,
Settling a little, leaning toward the light
As if to store its summer--these remain
The earth's last gesture in the falling night.
This then is age: It is to have been worked
By the forces of frost and the unloosing sun,
It is to bear such markings fine and proud
As speak of weathers that are long since done.
The second stanza: could that refer to people? I have seen photographs of people whose faces seem to tell the stories of their lives.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Night Snow
Nothing
Is lovelier
Than snowflakes at midnight
Drifting out of the dark above the
Streetlamps.
-- Loren Eiseley --
I can remember winter nights in Chicago, looking out the window at the snow coming down in the light of the streetlight in front of our house.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Old Wharf at Midnight
Under
All decay sounds
The restless monotone
Of the sea at midnight creeping beneath
Old piers.
- - - - - - - - - - -
The Dark Reader
Old moons
these nights and years,
and moss on broken stones . . .
Who stoops by glow-worm lamps to read
your name?
-- Loren Eiseley --
from The Lost Notebooks of Loren Eiseley
- - - - - - - - - - -
Winter rain deepens
Lichened letters on the grave . . .
And my old sadness
-- Roka --
from A Little Treasury of Haiku
Old boulders in the autumn sun and wind,
Settling a little, leaning toward the light
As if to store its summer--these remain
The earth's last gesture in the falling night.
This then is age: It is to have been worked
By the forces of frost and the unloosing sun,
It is to bear such markings fine and proud
As speak of weathers that are long since done.
The second stanza: could that refer to people? I have seen photographs of people whose faces seem to tell the stories of their lives.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Night Snow
Nothing
Is lovelier
Than snowflakes at midnight
Drifting out of the dark above the
Streetlamps.
-- Loren Eiseley --
I can remember winter nights in Chicago, looking out the window at the snow coming down in the light of the streetlight in front of our house.
- - - - - - - - - - -
Old Wharf at Midnight
Under
All decay sounds
The restless monotone
Of the sea at midnight creeping beneath
Old piers.
- - - - - - - - - - -
The Dark Reader
Old moons
these nights and years,
and moss on broken stones . . .
Who stoops by glow-worm lamps to read
your name?
-- Loren Eiseley --
from The Lost Notebooks of Loren Eiseley
- - - - - - - - - - -
Winter rain deepens
Lichened letters on the grave . . .
And my old sadness
-- Roka --
from A Little Treasury of Haiku
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Kenko: "In all things I yearn for the past"
#22
"In all things I yearn for the past. Modern fashions seem to keep on growing more and more debased. I find that even among the splendid pieces of furniture built by our master cabinetmakers, those in the old forms are the most pleasing. And as for writing letters, surviving scraps from the past reveal how superb the phrasing used to be. The ordinary spoken language has also steadily coarsened. People used to say "raise the carriage shafts" or "trim the lamp wick," but people today say "raise it" or "trim it." When they should say, "Let the men of the palace staff stand forth!" they say, "Torches! Let's have some light!" Instead of calling the place where the lectures on the Sutra of the Gold Light are delivered before the emperor "the Hall of the Imperial Lecture," they shorten it to "the Lecture Hall," a deplorable corruption, an old gentleman complained."
-- Kenko --
from Essays in Idleness
Sound familiar? This was written sometime between 1330 and 1332 AD in Japan--almost seven centuries ago in a different culture. I don't think human nature has changed much over the hundreds of thousands of years we've been around. Oh, for the good ol' days.
"In all things I yearn for the past. Modern fashions seem to keep on growing more and more debased. I find that even among the splendid pieces of furniture built by our master cabinetmakers, those in the old forms are the most pleasing. And as for writing letters, surviving scraps from the past reveal how superb the phrasing used to be. The ordinary spoken language has also steadily coarsened. People used to say "raise the carriage shafts" or "trim the lamp wick," but people today say "raise it" or "trim it." When they should say, "Let the men of the palace staff stand forth!" they say, "Torches! Let's have some light!" Instead of calling the place where the lectures on the Sutra of the Gold Light are delivered before the emperor "the Hall of the Imperial Lecture," they shorten it to "the Lecture Hall," a deplorable corruption, an old gentleman complained."
-- Kenko --
from Essays in Idleness
Sound familiar? This was written sometime between 1330 and 1332 AD in Japan--almost seven centuries ago in a different culture. I don't think human nature has changed much over the hundreds of thousands of years we've been around. Oh, for the good ol' days.
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
The Rubaiyat: Quatrain LXVII
Having finished a linked series of quatrains focusing on the relationship between the Potter/Creator and the pots/creatures, we now move to a series of four quatrains that concentrate on wine. Again, while there are those who attempt to interpret Khayyam's references to wine as being a symbol of God's grace, these quatrains, as do many of the previous references, pose serious problems for them. While some can be construed in a religious sense, all four most consistently suggest that Khayyam meant wine to be simply wine. You can see for yourself.
First Edition: Quatrain LXVII
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash my Body whence the Life has died,
And in a Windingsheet of Vine-leaf wrapt,
So bury me by some sweet Garden-side.
Second Edition: Quatrain XCVIII
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash my Body whence the Life has died,
And lay me, shrouded in the living Leaf,
By some not unfrequented Garden-side.
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XCI
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash the Body whence the Life has died,
And lay me, shrouded in the living Leaf,
By some not unfrequented Garden-side.
Only one change was made in the first two lines: "my Body" in the first and second editions becomes "the Body" in the fifth edition. The change seems to make it more impersonal, more disconnected. At first it was his "Body," but now it's "the Body." He no longer owns? the Body or is connected to it, but he now sees it as something separate from him, something that exists alone.
While this is not a change, for it remains the same throughout the three versions listed, I wonder about the wording: "the Life has died." Living creatures die. We do not usually say, at least not in my experience, that life dies. We say life leaves or departs or even flees the body, but I've never heard anyone else say or write that life dies. Curious wording.
Most of the changes in this quatrain occur in the third and fourth lines. While the words have changed, the sense, though, seems to remain much the same: he is to be wrapped in a sheet made of plant leaves and buried in a Garden. In the first version, he continued the reference to the grape by requesting that he be wrapped in a "Vine-leaf." In the second and fifth edition, that becomes a "living Leaf," which makes a possible reference to the vine more ambiguous. Does the "living Leaf" refer to a "Vine-leaf," or will leaves from any plant be satisfactory?
Another change occurs in the last line where the "sweet Garden-side" becomes "some not unfrequented Garden-side." The Garden no longer has to be sweet, but it must be one that is visited regularly. What seems contradictory here is that in the fifth version, he no longer refers to "my Body" but "the Body." But, he still requests that he (his body) be wrapped in plant leaves and buried in a Garden. He seemingly has regained ownership of the Body in the third and fourth lines. Or, perhaps he never meant to suggest the separation of himself from his Body, and I'm guilty of over-reading here (something to meditate on).
My copy Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, published by Garden City Books, includes the following anecdote in the brief discussion of the life of Omar Khayyam, pp.27-40.
"Khwajah Nizami of Samarkand, who was one of his pupils, relates the following story: "I often used to hold conversations with my teacher, Omar Khayyam, in a garden; and one day he said to me, "My tomb shall be in a spot where the north wind may scatter roses over it." I wondered at the words he spake, but I knew that his were no idle words. Years after, when I chanced to revisit Naishapur, I went to his final
resting-place, and lo! it was just outside a garden, and trees laden with fruit stretched their boughs over the garden wall, and dropped their flowers upon his tomb, so that the stone was hidden under them.'"
As it is in the Rubaiyat, so it came to pass: Omar Khayyam was buried in that garden-side.
First Edition: Quatrain LXVII
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash my Body whence the Life has died,
And in a Windingsheet of Vine-leaf wrapt,
So bury me by some sweet Garden-side.
Second Edition: Quatrain XCVIII
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash my Body whence the Life has died,
And lay me, shrouded in the living Leaf,
By some not unfrequented Garden-side.
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XCI
Ah, with the Grape my fading Life provide,
And wash the Body whence the Life has died,
And lay me, shrouded in the living Leaf,
By some not unfrequented Garden-side.
Only one change was made in the first two lines: "my Body" in the first and second editions becomes "the Body" in the fifth edition. The change seems to make it more impersonal, more disconnected. At first it was his "Body," but now it's "the Body." He no longer owns? the Body or is connected to it, but he now sees it as something separate from him, something that exists alone.
While this is not a change, for it remains the same throughout the three versions listed, I wonder about the wording: "the Life has died." Living creatures die. We do not usually say, at least not in my experience, that life dies. We say life leaves or departs or even flees the body, but I've never heard anyone else say or write that life dies. Curious wording.
Most of the changes in this quatrain occur in the third and fourth lines. While the words have changed, the sense, though, seems to remain much the same: he is to be wrapped in a sheet made of plant leaves and buried in a Garden. In the first version, he continued the reference to the grape by requesting that he be wrapped in a "Vine-leaf." In the second and fifth edition, that becomes a "living Leaf," which makes a possible reference to the vine more ambiguous. Does the "living Leaf" refer to a "Vine-leaf," or will leaves from any plant be satisfactory?
Another change occurs in the last line where the "sweet Garden-side" becomes "some not unfrequented Garden-side." The Garden no longer has to be sweet, but it must be one that is visited regularly. What seems contradictory here is that in the fifth version, he no longer refers to "my Body" but "the Body." But, he still requests that he (his body) be wrapped in plant leaves and buried in a Garden. He seemingly has regained ownership of the Body in the third and fourth lines. Or, perhaps he never meant to suggest the separation of himself from his Body, and I'm guilty of over-reading here (something to meditate on).
My copy Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam, published by Garden City Books, includes the following anecdote in the brief discussion of the life of Omar Khayyam, pp.27-40.
"Khwajah Nizami of Samarkand, who was one of his pupils, relates the following story: "I often used to hold conversations with my teacher, Omar Khayyam, in a garden; and one day he said to me, "My tomb shall be in a spot where the north wind may scatter roses over it." I wondered at the words he spake, but I knew that his were no idle words. Years after, when I chanced to revisit Naishapur, I went to his final
resting-place, and lo! it was just outside a garden, and trees laden with fruit stretched their boughs over the garden wall, and dropped their flowers upon his tomb, so that the stone was hidden under them.'"
As it is in the Rubaiyat, so it came to pass: Omar Khayyam was buried in that garden-side.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Eric Hoffer: the central task of education
#32
"The central task of education is to implant a will and facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people. The truly human society is a learning society, where grandparents, parents, and children are students together.
In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists."
-- Eric Hoffer --
from Reflections on the Human Condition
I agree here with Hoffer, but I also think that he neglected a significant number of people: those who actively reject being even a member of the learned. These refuse to learn anything that conflicts with their ancient prejudices and tranquilizing dogmas and insist on remaining locked in past centuries, not just years or decades.
I wonder which of the three is most characteristic of the people of the United States.
"The central task of education is to implant a will and facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people. The truly human society is a learning society, where grandparents, parents, and children are students together.
In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future. The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists."
-- Eric Hoffer --
from Reflections on the Human Condition
I agree here with Hoffer, but I also think that he neglected a significant number of people: those who actively reject being even a member of the learned. These refuse to learn anything that conflicts with their ancient prejudices and tranquilizing dogmas and insist on remaining locked in past centuries, not just years or decades.
I wonder which of the three is most characteristic of the people of the United States.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Carl Sandburg: Phizzog
Carl Sandburg in one of his lighter moments--or perhaps rueful might be more appropriate?
Phizzog
This face you got,
This here phizzog you carry around,
You never picked it out for yourself,
at all, at all--did you?
This here phizzog--somebody handed it
to you--am I right?
Somebody said, "Here's yours, now go see
what you can do with it."
Somebody slipped it to you and it was like
a package marked:
"No goods exchanged after being taken away"--
This face you got.
-- Carl Sandburg --
Some are winners, some losers. I guess the best I can say about my prize is that I'm glad I'm on the inside looking out.
Phizzog
This face you got,
This here phizzog you carry around,
You never picked it out for yourself,
at all, at all--did you?
This here phizzog--somebody handed it
to you--am I right?
Somebody said, "Here's yours, now go see
what you can do with it."
Somebody slipped it to you and it was like
a package marked:
"No goods exchanged after being taken away"--
This face you got.
-- Carl Sandburg --
Some are winners, some losers. I guess the best I can say about my prize is that I'm glad I'm on the inside looking out.
Friday, November 16, 2012
Prometheus: a prequel or a remake or both?
When I settled down with the DVD of Prometheus, I didn't know what to expect. I had heard or read a few vague comments that suggested it was a film worth watching. So, I settled back in my recliner to find out whether it really was worth watching.
The actors were convincing in their roles, the special effects were good, the dialogue was considerably better than silly, and the plot was interesting, but I felt as the end approached that the film really didn't break any new ground. I felt it had all been done before, which may be unfair to the film, to some extent, because I've watched many SF films over the decades. It wasn't until the very end of the film that I finally caught on. I'm slow that way, partially because I get involved in the film or book or whatever and don't step back to take a good analytical look at it until I've finished, or until something jumps out at me. Frequently I have to watch or read it again to get beyond enjoying it or being bored by it. This time it was the ending that did it..
Unfortunately there's no way I can talk about this film without revealing plot details and the ending.
SPOILER WARNING!
As I mentioned above, the ending finally gave me the clue. I then did some research and talked to some knowledgeable friends and got confirmation. I'm probably the last person in the Known Universe to find this out: Prometheus is a prequel, the first of three actually, to the superb SF/Horror film, Alien, with Sigourney Weaver. I finally caught on when the critter that popped out of the giant's body at the end was the monster with the pointy head and the most frightening set of jaws in filmdom.
However, the more I thought about it, the more I was convinced there was more to Prometheus than simply being a prequel. It was the initial familiarity that I experienced long before I caught on to the relationship with Alien that got me thinking. I eventually came up with the following chart:
Director::
Alien (A) : Ridley Scott
Prometheus (P) : Ridley Scott
Set Designer:
A H. R. Giger
P H. R. Giger
Film's Initiating Event::
A. Spaceship Nostromo receives message interpreted as an SOS which later turns out to be a warning to all ships to avoid this planet.
P. Archeologists discover a drawing or illustration that is found in many cultures world wide--what appears to be a giant pointing at several stars. The pattern of stars is identical regardless of the time and place. This is interpreted as an invitation to go there, but it could as easily have been a warning to stay away.
Setting:
A: uninhabited planet with an apparently deserted alien spaceship.
P. uninhabited planet with an apparently deserted alien spaceship.
The Alien Ship:
A. appears to be a cargo ship
P. appears to be a cargo ship
Exploration of the Ship
A. It becomes clear the ship is not uninhabited but is occupied by dangerous creatures
P. It becomes clear the ship is not uninhabited but is occupied by dangerous creatures.
The Android/Robot:
A One of the crew members is an android who is responsible for bringing a creature on board ship and is directly responsible for the death of one of the crew.
P One of the crew members is an android who is responsible for bringing a creature on board ship and is directly responsible for the death of one of the crew.
The Android/Robot:
A. The android attempts to kill Ripley (the Sigourney Weaver character) but fails.
P The android attempts to kill Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (the Noomi Repace character) but fails.
The Android/Robot's Head:
A. In a struggle, the android is decapitated, and we see the android's head on the floor, still able to function.
P. In a struggle, the android is decapitated, and we see the android's head on the floor, still able to function.
The Crew:
A The crew members of the ship Nostromo are killed, leaving Ripley, a woman, as the sole survivor (plus the ship's cat, of course.)
P The crew members of the ship Prometheus are killed, leaving Shaw, a woman, as sole survivor, along with the android's head.
The Escape:
A. Ripley attempts to escape in the ship's emergency pod, but finds the creature already there.
P Shaw attempts to escape in the ship's emergency pod, but finds the creature already there.
The Ending:
A Ripley with ship's cat gets in the deepsleep capsule and heads for nearest Terran outpost.
P Shaw, with the android's head, finds another alien ship and they? head for the home planet of the giants, leaving the critter from Alien alone on the planet, awaiting the arrival of the Nostromo? She also sets up a warning signal, telling them to stay away. This is the signal that draws the Nostromo to the planet.
What do you think?
The actors were convincing in their roles, the special effects were good, the dialogue was considerably better than silly, and the plot was interesting, but I felt as the end approached that the film really didn't break any new ground. I felt it had all been done before, which may be unfair to the film, to some extent, because I've watched many SF films over the decades. It wasn't until the very end of the film that I finally caught on. I'm slow that way, partially because I get involved in the film or book or whatever and don't step back to take a good analytical look at it until I've finished, or until something jumps out at me. Frequently I have to watch or read it again to get beyond enjoying it or being bored by it. This time it was the ending that did it..
Unfortunately there's no way I can talk about this film without revealing plot details and the ending.
SPOILER WARNING!
As I mentioned above, the ending finally gave me the clue. I then did some research and talked to some knowledgeable friends and got confirmation. I'm probably the last person in the Known Universe to find this out: Prometheus is a prequel, the first of three actually, to the superb SF/Horror film, Alien, with Sigourney Weaver. I finally caught on when the critter that popped out of the giant's body at the end was the monster with the pointy head and the most frightening set of jaws in filmdom.
However, the more I thought about it, the more I was convinced there was more to Prometheus than simply being a prequel. It was the initial familiarity that I experienced long before I caught on to the relationship with Alien that got me thinking. I eventually came up with the following chart:
Director::
Alien (A) : Ridley Scott
Prometheus (P) : Ridley Scott
Set Designer:
A H. R. Giger
P H. R. Giger
Film's Initiating Event::
A. Spaceship Nostromo receives message interpreted as an SOS which later turns out to be a warning to all ships to avoid this planet.
P. Archeologists discover a drawing or illustration that is found in many cultures world wide--what appears to be a giant pointing at several stars. The pattern of stars is identical regardless of the time and place. This is interpreted as an invitation to go there, but it could as easily have been a warning to stay away.
Setting:
A: uninhabited planet with an apparently deserted alien spaceship.
P. uninhabited planet with an apparently deserted alien spaceship.
The Alien Ship:
A. appears to be a cargo ship
P. appears to be a cargo ship
Exploration of the Ship
A. It becomes clear the ship is not uninhabited but is occupied by dangerous creatures
P. It becomes clear the ship is not uninhabited but is occupied by dangerous creatures.
The Android/Robot:
A One of the crew members is an android who is responsible for bringing a creature on board ship and is directly responsible for the death of one of the crew.
P One of the crew members is an android who is responsible for bringing a creature on board ship and is directly responsible for the death of one of the crew.
The Android/Robot:
A. The android attempts to kill Ripley (the Sigourney Weaver character) but fails.
P The android attempts to kill Dr. Elizabeth Shaw (the Noomi Repace character) but fails.
The Android/Robot's Head:
A. In a struggle, the android is decapitated, and we see the android's head on the floor, still able to function.
P. In a struggle, the android is decapitated, and we see the android's head on the floor, still able to function.
The Crew:
A The crew members of the ship Nostromo are killed, leaving Ripley, a woman, as the sole survivor (plus the ship's cat, of course.)
P The crew members of the ship Prometheus are killed, leaving Shaw, a woman, as sole survivor, along with the android's head.
The Escape:
A. Ripley attempts to escape in the ship's emergency pod, but finds the creature already there.
P Shaw attempts to escape in the ship's emergency pod, but finds the creature already there.
The Ending:
A Ripley with ship's cat gets in the deepsleep capsule and heads for nearest Terran outpost.
P Shaw, with the android's head, finds another alien ship and they? head for the home planet of the giants, leaving the critter from Alien alone on the planet, awaiting the arrival of the Nostromo? She also sets up a warning signal, telling them to stay away. This is the signal that draws the Nostromo to the planet.
What do you think?
Monday, November 12, 2012
The Rubaiyat: Quatrain LXVI
This is the last in a series of linked quatrains that focus on the Creator/Potter relationship with comments by the pots or vessels expressing a variety of opinions as to the nature of that relationship. It is appropriate, therefore, that this quatrain takes place at the end of Ramadan, the holiest time of the year for Moslems.
First Edition: Quatrain.LXVI
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Hark to the Porter's Shoulder-knot a creaking!"
Second Edition:XCVII
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot a-creaking!"
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XC
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
The little Moon looked in that all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot a-creaking!"
FitzGerald made only minor changes from the First through the Second to the Fifth Editions. The first, third, and fourth lines are almost identical except for the minor changes of changing some upper case letters to lower case and the substitution of "Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot. . ." for "Hark to the Porter's Shoulder-knot . . ."
In the second line Fitzgerald rearranged the sequence from "One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:"--to "The little Moon looked in that all were seeking." as well as substituting "The little Moon" for "the little Crescent." The change of wording adds some ambiguity for a crescent is much more specific than a little moon and is far more precise considering its relationship to Ramadan.
The change also changes focus in the quatrain. In the first edition, the focus is solely on the pots whereas the rearrangement in the second and fifth versions interrupts that. The focus is on the pots in the first, third, and fourth lines, while it shifts to the Moon in the second line. The change of wording in the fourth line isn't significant for both versions suggest the pots are waiting for the sound of the Porter's shoulder-knot. The Porter is the one who will bring the food and drink for the banquet to celebrate the end of Ramadan, as signified by the appearance of the crescent.
I read somewhere (unfortunately I can't find it again) that the Porter will be bringing a tray of food and drink for the end of the fast. Since the tray will be very heavy, it will be supported by straps that are attached at one end to the tray and at the other end are wrapped around the Porter's shoulders, thus the creaking of the shoulder-knot.
From the Wikipedia entry on Ramadan:
"The Muslim holiday of Eid ul-Fitr ("festivity of breaking the fast"), sometimes spelled in English as Eid al-Fitr, marks the end of Ramadan and the beginning of the next lunar month called Shawwal in Arabic. This first day of the following month is declared after another crescent new moon has been sighted or the completion of 30 days of fasting if no visual sighting is possible due to weather conditions. This first day of Shawwal is called Eid ul-Fitr. Eid Ul-Fitr may also be a reference towards the festive nature of having endured the month of fasting successfully and returning to the more natural disposition (fitra) of being able to eat, drink and resume intimacy with spouses during the day."
The "little Crescent" in the quatrain signifies the end of Ramadan, the end of thirty days of daylight fasting. Ramadan is also the time for meditation on Allah and one's relationship to Allah, which is represented by the linked quatrains focusing on the vessels' or pots' commentaries on the Potter and their relationship to him. It seems appropriate, therefore, to end the discussion with the Eid ul-Fitr ("festivity of breaking the fast."
First Edition: Quatrain.LXVI
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Hark to the Porter's Shoulder-knot a creaking!"
Second Edition:XCVII
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot a-creaking!"
Fifth Edition: Quatrain XC
So while the Vessels one by one were speaking,
The little Moon looked in that all were seeking:
And then they jogg'd each other, "Brother, Brother!
Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot a-creaking!"
FitzGerald made only minor changes from the First through the Second to the Fifth Editions. The first, third, and fourth lines are almost identical except for the minor changes of changing some upper case letters to lower case and the substitution of "Now for the Porter's shoulder-knot. . ." for "Hark to the Porter's Shoulder-knot . . ."
In the second line Fitzgerald rearranged the sequence from "One spied the little Crescent all were seeking:"--to "The little Moon looked in that all were seeking." as well as substituting "The little Moon" for "the little Crescent." The change of wording adds some ambiguity for a crescent is much more specific than a little moon and is far more precise considering its relationship to Ramadan.
The change also changes focus in the quatrain. In the first edition, the focus is solely on the pots whereas the rearrangement in the second and fifth versions interrupts that. The focus is on the pots in the first, third, and fourth lines, while it shifts to the Moon in the second line. The change of wording in the fourth line isn't significant for both versions suggest the pots are waiting for the sound of the Porter's shoulder-knot. The Porter is the one who will bring the food and drink for the banquet to celebrate the end of Ramadan, as signified by the appearance of the crescent.
I read somewhere (unfortunately I can't find it again) that the Porter will be bringing a tray of food and drink for the end of the fast. Since the tray will be very heavy, it will be supported by straps that are attached at one end to the tray and at the other end are wrapped around the Porter's shoulders, thus the creaking of the shoulder-knot.
From the Wikipedia entry on Ramadan:
"The Muslim holiday of Eid ul-Fitr ("festivity of breaking the fast"), sometimes spelled in English as Eid al-Fitr, marks the end of Ramadan and the beginning of the next lunar month called Shawwal in Arabic. This first day of the following month is declared after another crescent new moon has been sighted or the completion of 30 days of fasting if no visual sighting is possible due to weather conditions. This first day of Shawwal is called Eid ul-Fitr. Eid Ul-Fitr may also be a reference towards the festive nature of having endured the month of fasting successfully and returning to the more natural disposition (fitra) of being able to eat, drink and resume intimacy with spouses during the day."
The "little Crescent" in the quatrain signifies the end of Ramadan, the end of thirty days of daylight fasting. Ramadan is also the time for meditation on Allah and one's relationship to Allah, which is represented by the linked quatrains focusing on the vessels' or pots' commentaries on the Potter and their relationship to him. It seems appropriate, therefore, to end the discussion with the Eid ul-Fitr ("festivity of breaking the fast."
Simon J. Ortiz: Small Things Today
Small Things Today
at my Hesperus Camp
Had a tortilla with some honey
at midafternoon. It was good.
Wished I had some chili.
Smell of apples, wet fields;
in back of the blue tent
is a box of last season's
Animas Valley apples; soon,
it will be another Fall.
Wind blows, shakes the tarp,
water falls to the ground.
The sound of water splashing.
Several hours ago, watched
a woodpecker watching me.
We both moved our heads
with funny jerks.
Rex and his sad, dog eyes.
Somebody looking around in a field,
looking for lost things.
Notice bean sprouts growing.
They're very pale and nude.
Rex doesn't like chicken livers,
but gizzards are okay.
-- Simon J. Ortiz --
from Woven Stone
Small things, little things, all sorts of unconnected things, but now linked together. I wonder how many of these small things he would have noticed if someone else had been there with him. Sometimes others are a distraction.
at my Hesperus Camp
Had a tortilla with some honey
at midafternoon. It was good.
Wished I had some chili.
Smell of apples, wet fields;
in back of the blue tent
is a box of last season's
Animas Valley apples; soon,
it will be another Fall.
Wind blows, shakes the tarp,
water falls to the ground.
The sound of water splashing.
Several hours ago, watched
a woodpecker watching me.
We both moved our heads
with funny jerks.
Rex and his sad, dog eyes.
Somebody looking around in a field,
looking for lost things.
Notice bean sprouts growing.
They're very pale and nude.
Rex doesn't like chicken livers,
but gizzards are okay.
-- Simon J. Ortiz --
from Woven Stone
Small things, little things, all sorts of unconnected things, but now linked together. I wonder how many of these small things he would have noticed if someone else had been there with him. Sometimes others are a distraction.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Eric Hoffer: desires and self-esteem
#5
"It is strange how the moment we have reason to be dissatisfied with ourselves we are set upon by a pack of insistent clamorous desires. Is desire somehow an expression of the centrifugal force that tears and pulls us away from an undesirable self? A gain in self-esteem usually reduces the pull of the appetites, while a crisis in self-esteem is likely to cause of a weakening or a complete breakdown of self-discipline.
Asceticism is sometimes a deliberate effort to reverse a reaction in the chemistry of our soul: by suppressing desire we try to rebuild and bolster self-esteem."
#6
"To believe that if we could but have this or that we would be happy is to suppress the realization that the cause of our unhappiness is in our inadequate and blemished selves. Excessive desire is thus a means of suppressing our sense of worthlessness."
-- Eric Hoffer --
from The Passionate State of Mind
In times of a personal crisis or emotional distress, how many people turn to binge eating or shopping sprees or becoming angry with those around them? Is it to distract themselves from the real problem or perhaps a misdirected way of regaining control in some way: I can eat or I can shop or I can strike out at others when I want. Could this also be a basis for an obsessive interest in collecting objects or idolizing film stars, athletes, TV series, politicians?
Is this a way of regaining self-esteem?
"It is strange how the moment we have reason to be dissatisfied with ourselves we are set upon by a pack of insistent clamorous desires. Is desire somehow an expression of the centrifugal force that tears and pulls us away from an undesirable self? A gain in self-esteem usually reduces the pull of the appetites, while a crisis in self-esteem is likely to cause of a weakening or a complete breakdown of self-discipline.
Asceticism is sometimes a deliberate effort to reverse a reaction in the chemistry of our soul: by suppressing desire we try to rebuild and bolster self-esteem."
#6
"To believe that if we could but have this or that we would be happy is to suppress the realization that the cause of our unhappiness is in our inadequate and blemished selves. Excessive desire is thus a means of suppressing our sense of worthlessness."
-- Eric Hoffer --
from The Passionate State of Mind
In times of a personal crisis or emotional distress, how many people turn to binge eating or shopping sprees or becoming angry with those around them? Is it to distract themselves from the real problem or perhaps a misdirected way of regaining control in some way: I can eat or I can shop or I can strike out at others when I want. Could this also be a basis for an obsessive interest in collecting objects or idolizing film stars, athletes, TV series, politicians?
Is this a way of regaining self-esteem?
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Thomas Hardy: Architectural Masks
I have The Wordsworth Poetry Library edition of Thomas Hardy's poetry, The Works of Thomas Hardy, which contains all of his poetry. Every so often I take it down and browse through it, seeing what pops what. I'm invariably surprised by the wide variety of his poetry, some somewhat dour, some cheerful, but all thoughtful. This is one I just came across, one I don't remember having read before.
Architectural Masks
I
There is a house with ivied walls,
And mullioned windows worn and old,
And the long dwellers in those halls
Have souls that know but sordid calls,
And daily dote on gold.
II
In blazing brick and plated show
Not far away a "villa" gleams,
And here a family few may know,
With book and pencil, viol and bow,
Lead inner lives of dreams.
III
The philosophic passers say,
"See that old mansion mossed and fair,
Poetic souls therein are they:
And O that gaudy box! Away,
You vulgar people there."
.
Hardy was trained as an architect and worked for about five years for an architectural firm. I wonder if any of his experiences as an architect are reflected above.
Architectural Masks
I
There is a house with ivied walls,
And mullioned windows worn and old,
And the long dwellers in those halls
Have souls that know but sordid calls,
And daily dote on gold.
II
In blazing brick and plated show
Not far away a "villa" gleams,
And here a family few may know,
With book and pencil, viol and bow,
Lead inner lives of dreams.
III
The philosophic passers say,
"See that old mansion mossed and fair,
Poetic souls therein are they:
And O that gaudy box! Away,
You vulgar people there."
.
Hardy was trained as an architect and worked for about five years for an architectural firm. I wonder if any of his experiences as an architect are reflected above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)