Holidays in Eden

 

With the latest Marillion deluxe release, it is back to where it started - for me. June 24th 1991, Holidays in Eden is released. One month after my initial [brief] encounter with Marillion.  The band’s second effort with frontman Steve Hogarth very much repeated the pattern of the original incarnation of the band.  This was their difficult sophomore attempt, their next Fugazi.  Whereas their first release as a new group easily found music inspired from without (in this case the music written with Fish), this one required a what now? period of motivation.  Additionally, the record company (as always) was pressuring them to release material that was commercially viable and recreate their brief highpoint of chart recognition.  The result, emerging from a much larger contribution from H, including tracks from his previous alternative career, was indeed their most commercial attempt. This legacy has haunted the album, considered by many to be too pop, and an album of commercial singles.  However, as my entry point into new-release Marillion, this record has always presented core, classic Marillion - built around the ethereal and intense guitar work that Rothery had been exemplifying for at least three albums. Cover My Eyes (adapted from How We Live’s Simon’s Car), Dry Land (a How We Live cover), and No One Can are the radio-friendly cuts. Call them whatever you want, but the first two are about as close to perfect pop/whatever songs (and then squared) as you can get, and I would dare call the original Dry Land a New Wave album.  For the third, every time I start to get that feeling that it’s an overly-sweet, sappy love song, I am overcome by the transcendental quality of the guitar line, and it might be the most innocent, positive song the band has done, without something dark lying right beneath the surface.  While many consider this a complete diversion in style, and for those following through the 80s, and from earlier prog entries, this may make sense.  For myself, being an entry point, this album makes perfect sense as a quintessential sound, and as I was already encountering what I knew would be decisive change from the Fish material, it didn't seem that much more of a reach than Season's End, and by the end of the summer 1991 all six albums seemed like a contiguous whole. Emerging as music of the time, as Marillion moved away from their pre-1980s influences, resulted in something more like U2 (incorporated into a higher level) than the aging idols of progressive rock.  Although, as the accompanying documentary reveals, there still remained a lot of classic influences which were directly re-articulated in these songs, namely Yes and The Who, which once brought up, makes perfect sense. 

Holidays in Eden, the next in line with a commercial structure, is in my opinion, despite the far-from-unanimous appreciation from the community, the most Marillion title and theme they have created. Let me take a moment to digress. Everything they have written somehow returns back to the idea of the self (and the ultimate self-facing you must do) in opposition to the world.  Stepping out of the social construct of the symbolic world, one encounters the Real.  A complete change of context results in an internal change as the self is constructed out of the meaning around it, it is, we are, being-in-the-world.  Thus, in a Heideggerian sense, a change of context results in a new self.  Furthermore, a collapse in worlds changes the center of our existential being and our relation to authenticity.  Experiencing such a world as Eden, in opposition to our own highly problematic society (as Marillion often engages), and then exiting that world would result in such a collapse, and require us to disclose new meanings in the process of finding authenticity. This theme is mirrored in the opposite way in the This Town- 100 Nights trilogy, where the surrounding environment, the city, forces the self “to become” what it is, rather than being directed internally. The result is a decent of the self into a morally unclear position and the initial relations of the song meet a seemingly disastrous end.  There is always a consistent theme in H's work regarding the loss of innocence and the dangers just below the surface in any ostensibly benign situation - the unavoidable, ever-present, forces of change, the inevitable crack emerging in what one thought would remain unchanged, and the Real surrounding the Symbolic stability of one's immediate life -the need to wear your gun to Neverland,

As a product on the dividing line of a much larger world and time at the end of the 80s, this record was a little ahead of its time, foreshadowing the 1990s.  Season’s End had shown us many of the larger external predicaments of the final chapter of the Cold War.  Here we are presented with a more optimistic, open future.  Gone are so many of the past problems, leaving the self as the challenge to be taken on.  The most important view was now inward, as a reflective exploration.  Of course, even more forward looking, this would be short lived, and the dark storms of larger forces would again return on Brave, with a following return to the self on Afraid of Sunlight.  As Pete claims in the documentary, this was the first attempt at their Sunlight. And, again, that now makes sense.


Splintering Heart is the mini-epic of the record, a slow-build-up rock song. In addition to the straight-forward rock and pop songs, the This Town-The Rake’s Progress-100 Nights trilogy is the full epic of the album, and has always been classic Marillion.  Waiting to Happen is the acoustic-type ballad of the record, and while the band considers it a “classic” presence, The Party has always been the odd-one-out track to me. The updated release attempts to correct the sound away from the late 80s / early 90s zeitgeist in order to allow some of those dismissive fans to re-hear the record out of that context, as well as satisfy the band’s persistent desire to finally finish a not-quite-complete product, as in the case of Fugazi. The impression I get on the initial listening is that it really does emphasize the overall album, and brings out each part in a very positive way.

The package includes a live show from Hammersmith on the 1991 tour.  Alongside the usual HD and 5.1 mixes, like the Script and Fugazi releases, the blu-ray also includes a live concert video from the tour, a surprisingly well done upgrade for a shot-on-video release from thirty years ago.  It is worth it for video documentation of Freaks alone.  As an excellent representation of the band in their prime, this upgrade from my incomplete record-show purchase of a VHS bootleg might become my favorite video release of theirs. Unfortunately the live discs are not duplicated on the blu-ray which does includes all of the B-Side material from the 1998 remaster, which provides an interesting alternative album: including the original versions of Splintering Heart and This Town, the original Epic (Fairground) which became 100 Nights and included material from the post-Clutching at Straws session, as well as the other How We Live track You Don’t Need Anyone, considered as an alternative to Dry Land (and whose existence was denied for seven years). If you ask me, all of this material, and maybe a recording of yet another How We Live track, Games in Germany, could be remixed, finished and made into a fine album on its own. On the more acoustic side, the creepy-yet-intriguing track A Collection and the cover of Sympathy are here as well. Not included is the acoustic session released over the Dry Land singles, which included the Who’s Substitute.  In my own playlists, I’ve found that adding the other included B-sides of How Can It Hurt (amazingly played at the 2022 weekend) and I Will Walk on Water, adds more Holidays in Eden -like songs and fills out an amazing rock album. Additionally, You Don’t Need Anyone fits in exceedingly well with the trio of concise singles (unsurprisingly of similar origin) - of course this is the direction that so many people were apprehensive of embracing.  But, this collection of songs doesn’t get weighed down in overly long attempts (*ahem, last four releases, ahem*).  This is the side of the band that get straight into the rock (I’ll leave the magnitude up to you) and directly and without hesitation dives into the point of the song.  These are the songs, when included in contemporary setlists, that break up the long journeys found in newer material, and continue to provide a momentum that always deserves to be included in anything involving Rothery.

Murder Machines

Be hard on yourself
You've been spoilt for years
Be hard on yourself
You'll be glad you did 

                - Marillion - Be Hard on Yourself

 

While I’ve been attempting to comprehend the pandemic era's place within contemporary history, as well as preparing to absorb Marillion’s proclamation that we only have an hour until it’s dark, the Real has once again further intensified as another intrusion as the 2020s progress. Of course, this is from the perspective of a very complacent time period in history. With the exception of 9/11 and the following economic turbulence, the era since at least 1984 has been considerably uneventful, particularly 1991- 2001. We got too used to it. As one meme recently expressed, we don’t want all of the twentieth century coming back in the 2020s. But, now we have it, the largest wart in 70 years, in geo-political terms. As I noted before, following the devolution of 2016, some will suffer. We weren’t prepared for it to be in such an advanced nation, entering into the first world, and inextricably linked to the second. One day life was perfectly normal, and the next morning it was definitely not. I have also noted George Friedman’s prediction that we would go to war with Russia in the 2020s. [1] This seemed to be far too much of a stretch. But, here we are.

For those that mindlessly place the blame on the current administration, I defer to Marie Yovanovitch, Fiona Hill, and John Bolton. [2] Not only because it has been their job to understand this context, but they were actively involved in the implementation of policies of the previous administration. An administration that explicitly promoted the idea of the US exiting NATO, which would result in its dissolution allowing for unchecked Russian expansion. Furthermore, plenty of blame can be located in the Libertarian rhetoric of questioning the existence of NATO for the last decade. Without its continued deterrence, this situation would have developed much sooner, and at the cost of the sovereignty of many countries. The purposes of the Western alliance has now been revealed and proven, and any further attempts at its deterioration can be seen for the political propaganda it is. [3]

It could be argued, and is now becoming quite apparent, that we wasted thirty years ignoring improvements to Russia-Western relations. I contended in the 90s that there should be improved agreements between Russia and the US to diminish the risks of confrontation. However, after 1999, maybe even 1998, I’m not sure this would have really been possible. There was only a small window. And the subsequent republican administrations dismantled arms agreements rather than enhancing them.

That said, the idea that the West is to blame is nonsense. There was no agreement to not expand NATO, and although it is undesirable for Russia, particularly leadership that wants to reform the Soviet Union, that is the playing field that we have legitimately inherited. The idea that the US and the USSR disengaged from the Cold War on equal terms is pure fantasy. Wars have consequences. The reality is that the USSR lost. Their untenable political-ecomonic system failed and they were the ones that were forced to change (and replace that system with another corrupt, untenable system). The result was a victory for the US, providing the advantage. Disregarding the desires of American influence, the issue of NATO membership is openly free to the existing nations (unlike the Warsaw pact). It is those countries that are freely expressing interest in membership. And now, under direct threat of nuclear attack, we can see the pressing need for these countries to participate, as well as the continued mission of NATO.

Further nonsense is the ubiquitous comparison to the American invasion of Iraq. While the invasion was a massive strategic blunder, undermining not only the whole of US history, but that of the Western Liberalism as well.

However: this event emerged from a specific context. First, the US was actually attacked, prompting a response. Although it was the wrong country to prosecute such a response, Iraq was not altogether removed from the situation. The region was already involved in a complex multitude of conflicts which were intertwined with Islamic terrorism. Iraq was ruled by a dangerous dictator, had invaded other countries, was committing its own war crimes, and had been in violation of international law. Repeated violations, and concerns of its weapons program were a concern for the international community. The US response not only had support of its close allies, but NATO and UN support as well. Even Russia hesitantly agreed that the weapons inspections were not working. There was not a great international resistance. Saddam did not have the support of the people, and had intervention been done in a less destructive way, could have been better supported by the populace. While there were war crimes committed as part of the campaign, the operation itself was not a war crime. US policy did not target civilians, flatten civilian infrastructure, or siege cities. Grave mistakes certainly happened, and should have been fully prosecuted, but were not an intentional element of strategy.

I think the most damning condemnation of it is to judge it by the standards of the legacy of the Untied States, which supposedly attempts to uphold rigorous enlightened standards and democratic principles. In the overall field of history, it is less suspect to scrutiny, and this is why it was such a disappointment and should have been avoided

As nuclear powers, now toe-to-toe on the red line, it seems time is the dimension that will determine the fight. Before Russia can gain an advantage, and block international aid, US intervention must be able to prolong the resistance to ultimately weaken the Russian force. All we can do is:

1. Provide as many weapons as fast as possible.
2. Find ways to provide humanitarian assistance and prevent war crimes.
3.Wait out a Russian defeat (of itself).
4. Re-think military alliances, both in terms of internal NATO requirements, and NATO’s relationship with intermediate countries.
5.Affect regime change in Russia
6.Assertively pursue new arms limitation agreements, to reduce the dangers of escalation in future stand-offs. 

Perhaps the most startling revelation of this confrontation, is the test of the Russian military.  We know know that the most feared military for 70 years is impotent in combat against a peer nation, let-alone one that outspends, and out-trains it, by many, many factors.  Given US combat experience, there is no match.  But, more worrisome, is the fact that Russia now knows we know.  This means they have no conventional threat. And, they have no economic threat.  We have already beaten them is these two arenas That leaves only the strategic threat of WMDs. We are now in uncharted territory.

[1] who also noted that there would be a significant labor shortage and the US would have to import workers. I think its time for a re-read.

[2] Bolton, the most right-wing war-hawk in the Trump administration not only reveals that Biden is not "weak," but, predictably, claims that Trump couldn’t even find Ukraine on the map - which is quite telling.

[3] At this point, I’m firmly convinced that the Libertarian “party” is only a propaganda arm of Russian authoritarianism. Look at how fast they started posting memes of Russia as a utopia once, it;s cut off from the West. Ethnically singular, legally protected from the “fake news” of non-State media, excepted from the social programs of public health (vaccines), etc. Clearly it is the Russian Oligarchs that are the idolized position of the Libertarians, free to exploit all others for their own gain, as they clearly only support libertarian freedom for “me,” separate from the authoritarianism needed for all needed for all the dirty masses who must kept in ideological line. Never again can they be trusted.

 

Note: The above graphic is not meant to suggest that B-52s, or the USAF, are a murder machine (currently), although, of course, they potentially can be.  We have now reverted to a pre-post-Cold War stance, in which the defenses and deterrents that combat those current murder machines have the potential, through escalation, to cross the line into strategic mass destruction. Waking up to see potentially nuclear-armed B-52s headed towards the border of a nuclear aggressive country, certainly, marked the point of departure between these eras of relative global stability and possible catastrophic confrontation.

My Songs

 

While I'm on the subject of Sting, I finally got around to the 2019 My Songs album.  There's probably a quite a bit of criticism about Sting's continual touring of his back catalog (and the re-releases such as this).  However, it could be argued that it shows a lot of dedicated hard work to his art, fans, and legacy (although he could add in some more thorough US tours)  This is an interesting collection of reworked material, a much better idea in my opinion than a greatest hits work. I think this could have been a great opportunity to put  together a definitive collection of his body of work, but as it is it's a little half-baked.  First, the songs that are only remixed really don't belong here. As far as the songs of The Police finally done as solo studio versions, the question might be: what took so long?  It's interesting that while these songs are definitely part of his musical DNA, going back to the beginning, the songs I Can't Stand Losing You, So Lonely and Next To You were all shelved for 25 years, only re-emerging in his sets after the Police reunion. As for Fields of Gold, and Shape of My Heart, there is a nagging question of why these songs needed rerecording?

Despite an intriguing idea, this collection feels a little thrown together.  What I would have like to have seen would have been a one or two volume double-disc collection either studio or live in the studio   recordings with Dom and David Sancious, and Vinnie or Josh. Start disc 1 with the essential Police recordings.  As I've mentioned elsewhere, I'd really love to see his first two solo records re-recorded with Dominic and with him back on bass. This would have been the perfect opportunity.  Just using the live post-1990 arrangements would be satisfying for a Volume 2, perhaps adding highlights of the albums with a few revisits to the forgotten, although significant, tracks: Love is the Seventh Wave, Lazarus Heart, History Will Teach Us Nothing.

Tracks done with this band so far: If Your Love Somebody, Love is the Seventh Wave (rare), Russians, Children's Crusade (rare), We Work the Black Seam (studio only), Consider Me Gone, Moon Over Bourbon street, Fortress Around You Heart (truncated), Be Still My Beating Heart, Englishman in New York, They Dance Alone (somewhat rare), Fragile, We'll Be Together, Straight to My Heart, Rock Steady (rare, excerpt), Little Wing (rare), Sister Moon

Newer songs seem unnecessary for re-recording, although this inclination of Sting's could always be questioned. Perhaps selections from Brand New Day and Sacred Love could use a stripping-down, and brought back to a tight rock-band feel (although live versions would probably suffice).

As it is, the Special Edition with live disc makes the purchase worth it (although, why he can't just release live albums from each tour is beyond me)

Bags of Blood (More Songs About Death and Water)

 "The world has seen enough impatient bags of blood" - Marillion - Be Hard on Yourself

“We are but bags of blood and bone.” - Sting - The Bridge

As we emerge from the morass of 2020/21, one of the first questions to elicit a response is how the pandemic will influence the cultural subconscious and how that will be manifested in artistic constructs, since it certainly could not be avoided.

Of personal interest, both artists of primary significance to me, are releasing albums at the same time, both consisting of themes admittedly motivated by the pandemic event. In an example of synchronicity, both artists (the pre-eminent songwriters about death and water) have converged on the "bag of blood" image of post-pandemic human reflection. 

 

The first "single" release from Marillion's An Hour Before It's Dark - Be Hard on Yourself is a promising track, following FEAR's attention to the larger global threats to civilized stability. Musically this is clearly a continuation of fifth-era [1] Marillion, with structure similar to Sounds that Can't Be Made and FEAR.   But this time there is the feeling of a more dynamic motivation and tension, an ongoing momentum, unlike the tempo slow-downs on FEAR which impeded the flow of the songs, and undermined the critical urgency of the content. Their piece-together-a-bunch-of-musical-bits approach has yielded some great music, although it retains some clunky transitions and could perhaps use some more editing (where a less-is-more attitude might improve the flow). Hearing Hard, along with a snippet of Care, Marillion has seemingly evolved the experiments of the last two records into something that more resembles their essential sound.  As for any water themes, we'll have to wait until March for the full release. 

As a side note regarding the title (and yes I know I do not yet have the full context, but as it is my page here, I'll give my initial thoughts), the titles of this era have seemed a bit . .. awkward.   Returning to something a bit more concise and literary, Before Dark would have seemed sufficient and appropriate, but then I think titling Sounds That Can't Be Made as simply Power, would have exerted ... more power.

As for Sting's record, the pandemic force has seemingly pushed him in the opposite direction.  While The Bridge is a nice collection of songs, the first thing I would say is that this is not a rock record.  It is the most stripped down work he has ever done.  There is acoustic guitar, and presumably some bass, but overall not much electric guitar or drums, and lacking in foreground keyboards (maybe next time we'll see the return of the venerable David Sancious). This is a work of classical, traditional English, and folk music.  While Miller's classical approach to guitar has had a tremendous impact on the direction of  Sting's composition for the last 30 years, this work feels, finally, like a collaboration between the two, with Miller's style merging with Sting as a singer and writer/storyteller.  While there are hints of Ten Summoner's Tales, it is with a post-57th & 9th band and mentality.  There are also a lot of hints of Mercury Falling, both the best and worst results of that session. [2]  Thematically, like Ten Summoner's Tales, Mercury Falling, and Sacred Love, this is collection of tales - morality tales.  There is a lot here about God and redemption, in a quite explicit manner.  Similar to much of Marillion's work, this could be viewed as a religious work, without the religious ideology, ritual, and dogma over-dominating the personal experience found in examining the self as coming-to-terms and living with itself.

[1] Eras: 1- Fish, 2- Classic H (SE through TSE), 3 new sounds (Radiation through Anorak), 4- the 5 discs in 4 years output of cross-session songs (Marbles through Happiness), and 5- the post-near-breakup return with the stitch together method.

[2] Best: traditional maritime "water" style, worst: 70s feel (with horns).  Less apparent on the album is the classic Blue Turtles to Soul Cages feel.

Fugazi

 

 

Do you realise, this world is totally fugazi
Where are the prophets, where are the visionaries, where are the poets?

With the deluxe release of Fugazi now out, I thought I would take some time to catch up my thoughts about this re-release series.  Fugazi finishes up the Fish years, and holds a peculiar position in Marillion history, being a classic-but-forgotten album.  This mostly stems from H's avoidance of its material, leaving it essentially dead as far as Marillion themselves are concerned.  But, even before Fish's departure, songs like She Chameleon had disappeared from the setlist before the tour. Furthermore, both fans and the band found the mixing disappointing, a situation which has now been rectified with this opportunity.  I confess this applies to my own listening rotation as well.  Randomly select any point on Fugazi and you will instantly hear top quality classic Marillion music. Given that my introduction to Marillion started with Brief Encounter, Real to Reel and The Thieving Magpie, these tracks were part of the core sound that fascinated me as a new musical world.  Certainly, you could say that this is where Marillion developed their sound. Although they were at the lead of pushing the genre into the neo-progressive era, the first album consisting of much material which was aligned with what previous bands had done, as well as pre-developed material from the early proto-Marillion band members. But, this album as a whole just seems . . . incomplete? Unfinished? Short? Missing one more anchoring track? While Assassing and Fugazi are strong songs in the band's history, Jigsaw and Emerald Lies, while being excellent deep cuts, somewhat reside in the shadow of those book-end songs, and both Incubus and She Chameleon now seem a bit dated and controversial from a post-2010 viewpoint. The only single, Punch and Judy is perhaps the one Marillion track that most foreshadows Fish's post band career. Every thing done here would eventually come together more coherent and powerful on the next record.  Really, this is a prototype for Misplaced Childhood, and may have worked better in that album's ultimate format.

The deluxe series, being theoretically the definitive version of each album session, is in a difficult position.  Marillion has done an excellent job of releasing just about every recorded note of value to outside listeners.  The remasters series with collected demos and B-sides covered the original eight records (starting with their emergence only four years after the band left EMI).  And, the Making-of series beginning with Brave has covered not only the demo sessions, but the pre-demo musically sketches.  Appropriately, Afraid of Sunlight has revived the most coverage with the deluxe version containing demo material beyond the remaster release and the Refracted making-of.  There simply isn't much old material to be found.  On the live side, Marillion might be the best documented band in history (at least for the last 15 years of material), featuring 50-some live albums, considerable tour downloads since 2008, two live box sets covering the EMI period and the 50 FRC live albums which also represent the H period well.  Only the Fish years have possibly been under represented, and the only unreleased material that could have been included would come from that live history.  Torch Song had a dozen live performances in 1987 (and was recorded), including that with Clutching At Straws would have been the first release of it's live version. As for Script (and its live connection to Fugazi), inclusion of the 1982 Marquee show would have been the first release of the song Institution Waltz as well as a unique release of the original version of She Chameleon (provided there exists an adequate recording).  Other than these performances there doesn't appear to be anything unreleased.

Regarding the form and structure of the new releases, the main selling point of the deluxe series resides in the live shows documenting each corresponding tour, the making-of interviews, and the new mixes, including 5.1 and 48K or 96K stereo versions.  With maddening inconsistency, this series has progressed to show an evolution (ignoring chronological order) that makes later releases "definitive". Script added video content with the addition of Recital of the Script to the Blu-ray, and Fugazi includes an extra bonus with a 1984 live performance video.  Both of these discs also include HQ versions of their corresponding live discs. Furthermore, a second documentary has been included for Fugazi. There has been much whinging about the extra tracks being moved to the BD disc (although the 2-disc remasters have been around for twenty years for those unwilling to give up their CDs).  Unfortunately, the Brave release omitted some of the extra tracks even on the BD disc, and Script ignored some of the Market Square Heroes material and demos, every other release has included all of the 2-disc material (and Clutching at Straws, Brave, and Afraid of Sunlight containing the original mixes of the album).  I have grown to find the format of the last two releases preferable as the Blu-ray contains the full HQ album, the extra tracks, the live album in HQ and the video content all on one disc. Looking back, it would be nice to have the first four releases to have HQ live material and extra tracks on that disc. As for the live video, it would have been a great advantage on those other releases, but being rare and expensive at the time, and dependent on the rights-holders, it is understandably not present. One issue regarding Fugazi content involves the relegation of Cinderella Search to the video disc.  While not complete for inclusion on the original album, both fans and the band alike view this track as one of the strongest of the session (it is even included within the song commentary).  Given this recognition, and the perceived shortness of the album, as a retrospective opportunity it would have been an added value to included it on the album disc (and remaster/ mix it) as both a convenience and aesthetic choice.

With the upcoming Seasons End and Holidays In Eden releases, the band's most important evolutionary period will be covered, leaving only the Racket years left for possible revisiting. While it will be nice from an aesthetic viewpoint to have the following ten (or twelve) albums done in this format, the period has been so well documented that there probably won't be any further primary material to be excavated, leaving 5.1 mixes, documentaries, and a complete collection all in one singular release as their raison d'être.

It seems prescient that Fugazi became the first post-pandemic release, a statement of the times, as the world truly has become Fugazi.

Jeremiah Blues 2020+

 How can one make sense of the experience of 2020?  Perhaps the best way is the realization of the no-sense that underlies history.  There is clearly a sense that 2020 will be a crossroad point in history, with change of direction that will lead the path into the future. A convergence of replays of 1918, 1929 and 1968 (and the 1860s) have dislodged our sense of stability and security.

    The initial "historic" event of the year, COVID-19, was beyond what most had experienced in several generations - the inability to "solve" the emerging problem, the uncertainty  (with its certain destructive impact), and the inescapable ubiquity of a true pandemic have undermined our modern society.  The necessity of realizing the breakdown of normality has  caused a psychological trauma within our collective unconscious, the first felt by most outside of "unthinkable" modern spaces like Sarajevo or Syria).  This force has infiltrated and subverted the impregnable defenses of the unshakable first-world. The only way to comprehend the unnegotiability of this event, is to realize it as an intrusion of the Lacanian Real into the "Stable" construct of Symbolic Reality.  Our language, laws, ideology, principles, and even our science, cannot contain it or shield us.
     

As Tony Myers has described the Real, it is:
    "anything that is interpreted differently discloses the presence of the Real. AIDS is a good example of this. Some people interpret it as a punishment for homosexuals, a divine retribution for carrying on a  non-Christian way of life. Others see it as part of a plot by the CIA to stem population growth in Africa, while other people consider it the result of humankind's interference in Nature. All these explanations circle around the same brute fact of the disease which carries on regardless of the reasons attributed to it. In other words, AIDS is an irruption of the Real. It is meaningless in itself and all these interpretations of it are attempts to Symbolize it, attempts, we might say, to divine a message in the Real where none exists. For the Real is meaningless and senseless-it just persists, and meaning can only be found within the reality of the Symbolic Order."

This example of another coronavirus illustrates the trauma of Covid as as an intrusion of the Real.  It's a Chinese plot to destroy Trump.  It's an American plot to destroy China.  It's a global plot to inject microchips into the population. All ways to interpret this brute intrusion.  This event itself would be historic enough in its direct impact on the totality of individuals that constitute global activity.  However, beyond that we must ask: How does history happen?  Do events, (and their resulting cultures, policies, and world-views) occur as we pre-plan and enact them through reasonable and practical considerations? Or do they involve a certain amount of randomness, occurring beyond the precise world that we can carefully control?  Like our own best-laid lives, history "is what happens while we make other plans."

Against the background of a Covid world, the tension was going to inevitable break into violence, and the Real infiltrates not only nature, but society. For those "law and order" advocates that condemned the protests-turned-riots by the criminal undesirables, let us not forget Philadelphia 1985 when police bombed (literally) and burned down a neighborhood, killing 11 people, including five children.   It is interesting to note Jean Baudrillard's work America, in which he discusses the concept of asepsis:

"In Philadelphia, a radical sect named ‘MOVE’, with a bizarre set of rules, including one forbidding      both the practice of autopsy and the removal of rubbish, is cleared out by the police, who kill eleven    people by fire and burn down thirty adjacent houses, including those (the irony of it!) of all the neighbours who had called for the sect to be removed. This, too, is a clean-up operation. They are getting rid of rubbish and patina, getting back to an original state of cleanliness, restoring. ‘Keep America Clean.’"

Of course, now that the radical right has shown definitely that it isn't really about the law, its about control (Fascism), and power defines what the law means.  There is nothing above it (or more fundamental). It was the transition into a new year and new political landscape that finally synthesized social violence and politics. A breakdown of both political and daily social function has shown the intrusion of the Real into the Symbolic systems that found our everyday functioning. Of course, the right-wing propaganda compares the 2020 election to the 2016 one, and the capitol siege to the 2020 riots. 

As for the election, in 2016 the Democrats were accused of refusing to accept legitimate results when they wore pink hats and had peaceful marches.  Far removed from organized (conspiracy) attempts to overthrow the legitimate 2020 results.  No one on the left claimed the Trump did not officially occupy the office of president, only that he was sworn in on a technicality - a deficiency built into the fabric of our system,- and the outcome, however legitimate, was a result of  voter influence by foreign propaganda and political maneuvering (Comey).  The impeachment did NOT exonerate him from these accusations.  He very much did NOT have a mandate.  A professional, honorable person in that position would have been very prudent and should have appealed to the opposite side - the majority- for cooperation.  As for being President by upholding the office through professional action, the four years revealed a failure in this respect, culminating in the capitol siege.

In terms of the violence, the comparisons would be laughable in less serious circumstances. Once again, the left is accused of condoning the riots.  Of course no one in any rational manner, or in any political capacity endorsed, condoned, encourage, incited or promoted such activity.   As criminal activity, it was never labelled as anything but criminal.  Two major differences stand out:

1. It was extra-political, or at the least extra-legal.  While making a political statement and attempting political goals, these events aimed at something outside of the parameters of the functioning governmental process. While groups like BLM are closer in thought to the Democratic party,the are not synonymous, nor was it was a Democratic sanctioned issue.  No one did in the name of Democrats and no one sported shirts or flags and acted in the name of an individual.  Furthermore, the protestors have a legitimate cause. The problem is that the justice required for the solution is not to be found with the justice system nor the political process.  Without recourse to an established system, only no-legal means might remain, hence an extra-political situation.  As such, the manifestation of frustration and anger may be illegal, but whether it is unethical remains in question. Certain from inside the system it appears so.  But, as already revealed the system is incomplete and any progress to an equitable system may necessitate criminal behavior.  When criminal behavior is enacted for a purpose, it is up to the individual to commit to responsibility for it.  They must consider the repercussions and be prepared to face them.  If they find that justice will be further advanced, then the ethical decision is for them to make. For example, freeing a slave pre-Civil War was clearly criminal. Nevertheless it was the correct action.  While the circumstances are not currently as clear-cut as that, it may be proven in the future that discrimination in civil rights requires revolution outside of the system. Reflecting on the serious of rioting, let's not forget that some rioting is quickly overlooked (and it's a bit of an American tradition).  Burning garbage cans, overturned cars, and broken windows are not unheard of results of sporting events, and have no inherent value at all.  But, these crimes are dismissed as nothing (but crimes). So, to claim that the 2020 riots were downplayed in respect to 2021 is disingenuous at best.

 However, what just happened was not equivocal, it is distinct level  , and direct comparisons area category mistake.

 2. The siege was Anti-American. A far larger difference between the two events involves the political overlap.The siege was not just criminal, it was a higher level of violation: treason.  In attempting to overturn the election and destroy the legal process, it attempted to negate the very laws of the land.  In this itself, this event has no relation to the riots. But, far worse, is that this insurgency is led by the Comander-in-Chief himself.  Not since Emperor Palpatine have I heard of a leader controlling two forces pitted against each other.  With some Senator and Representative already complicit in treason with the President, the insurgency is both internal and external to the established government and unequivocal to criminal riots. 

Before the Capitol siege, the State Capitol takeovers by Militias in the summer were already well beyond protests. If you attend a protest armed- that is terrorism, plain and simple.  Even worse if do it on government property.  As a way of influence politics through fear and intimidation, brandishing weapons is terrorism.

What we are dealing with is not just differences of policy, and beyond differences with ideology.  It is meta-ideology.[1] A deeper ideology which has co-opted, corrupted, and radicalized the conservative ideology.  The growing cult (influenced by QAnon) has expanded to redefine the Deep State as to include The media, academia, the FBI-CIA-intelligence agencies, the Supreme Court, Mitch McConnell, Fox News, Big Tech, Walmart, the cabinet, and VP Mike Pence. Every thing and everyone the defends the Constitution becomes a target, an enemy of the state.  America as a state is now the enemy of the "patriots." The coup of the Republican party is evident in the RINO accusations, when solid conservatives are condemned as not real Republicans.  The is absurd and obviously backwards.  That split is apparent only because the party was commandeered by a far more conservative and radical ideology.  A more authentic party, clear in its ambitions and presentation would be honest in its alternative to the Republicans, something like "The America First Party", "or the American Fascist Party." As a far-right party, the choice would be clear for voters.  Instead, we have political action on false pretenses, a cult unlike any previous party - stores of propaganda merchandise, shirts and flags with an Messianic icon. It is a Twenty-first century update of the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, patterned on the Book of Revelation.  It is more than a political movement, it the foundations of a religion, a very false and dangerous one. "Draining the swamp" means destroying a democratic society and leaving an omnipresent swamp of corrupt oligarchy. Fighting the Deep State means ignoring, violating and overriding the US Constitution.

Ultimately, the Republican party was the Frankenstein that built the monster of Trump. And, Trump is the Frankenstein that built the monster of his cult. It is all out of their control.  And, the spreading danger it possesses needs to be eradicated before it consumes American democracy. Covid was not the only virus to mass spread in 2020, and we are now living in the Real, hoping for a Symbolic reconstruction to normalize history.

Addendum: I just noticed that the last post I made, High Rise, involves the fracture of the Symbolic social order into the Real. Although written by April, I was reading it at the end of 2019.  I guess 2020 was doomed to be the coming storm.

[1] Not only is it an ideology - a viewpoint considered universally true and foundational (when it is contingent and arbitrary), but one that resides secretly underneath an ideology- creating a double falsity.

High Rise

High Rise by J.G. Ballard (1975)

It has been suggested that J.G. Ballard was beyond psychological help. High Rise is an example of this reaction, a story of conditions that spiral out of control into some colossal external force which creates situations that no rational person would ever consider possible.

In terms of the film: The first thought I had while reading the book, was how interesting this story would be in terms of 21st century consumer technology, with our constant surroundings of multiple screens which present new challenges in interpersonal interaction. Given the emphasis on batteries to power the first generation of portable devices - tape recorders, cameras, etc- in the absence of functional municipal power, and the alluded transformation into cybernetic lifeforms (bio-robots), the current human state of always-wired-wirelessly only enhances Ballards original thought.  Therefore, I was quite disappointed that the film chose to keep the setting in the 1970s. Not only is the entire 1970s aesthetic something we don't ever need to revisit, the 70s view of excess and tuned-out reality, exemplified in orgiastic sex events, detracts from the core story in my view. Conversely  there is an opposition to the free-love counterculture with A Clockwork Orange feel and its 70s appreciation for violent anarchy and rejection of the system.  Additionally, although Ballard's writing contained a strong surrealist vision, this is cinematically presented in a psychedelic approach which makes the film overly strange and hard to follow. I'm not sure what someone who had not read the book would think of the film, although looking at Amazon reviews it seems pretty clear. The film simply doesn't present the story clearly. Unsurprisingly, it simplifies the story, but it also reduces the horrific elements to a tamer, more acceptable representation. As the novel reaches its most intense point, Laing cannot even descend the building because of the stench of a pool filled with rotting corpses, (reduced in the film to a far less graphic scene showing the few causalities being laid to rest in the pool.) In the novel, this scene is extremely unsettling and jarring as its shows a local holocaust which occurred without a rational explanation and, even worse, not at the hands of external tyrannical forces, but only by the participant residents themselves.

What I find significant about High Rise, is its relevance to the current state of the world. As a story of the fragile nature of the social construct which can completely unravel from small disruptions, there is something to learn for now. This social de-evolution, to a state that is completely unthinkable does actually occur. In recent memory it has happened in Syria and Sarajevo, and the modern first-world currently hangs on the edge of sliding down such a steep precipice. The most prominent question that arises asks: why don't the residents simply leave? But history shows again and again people gripping onto their section of the world even as it erupts into total chaos, as they grip tighter in spite of this, possessing what is "their" even as it turns to rubbish. There is a Luciferian notion that it is better to rule in Hell, than serve in Heaven - that outside civilization which is maintained by someone else. After being immersed in dysfunctionality, Wilder finds time away from the building "dreamlike in its unreality" and eventually Laing cannot even force himself to leave. Like a lobster being boiled, each event which worsens conditions is not recognized to be part of an on-going chain with extreme results. Perhaps people are ultimately too optimistic. How can the world be progressing along, and all of a sudden we are living inside a nightmare that no one chose to stop before it started (as happened so many times in the twentieth century).  This is an exploration of that phenomena.

The additional political messages inserted in the film seem to only over-emphasize the theme, which is already overly presented and all too clear in the novel- as the building, with is numerical hierarchy of residents, is an obvious metaphor of class systems. But, this seems overly idealized in the film with Wilder's low class (level) flat displaying a Che Guevara poster and the closing Margaret Thatcher quote. This quote: "There is only one economic system in the world, and that is capitalism." is interesting in itself in that it completely embodies ideology. If it is taken to mean that Capitalism is the only possible system, in an end of history view, than it is total ideology without any objective value or meaning, as it dismisses any alternative possibilities. Conversely, if it is taken to mean that all economics are capitalistic in nature, then it turns the two terms into synonyms and strips away any meaningful distinction of capitalism. I don't find the story a compelling challenge to capitalism, although it makes strong statements about consumerism.  Rather it concerns a more fundamental layer of human nature, the initial ideological conditions before they are systematized into economic structures.  What is most interesting is Royal's response to the complete breakdown of his utopia, as he embraces this breakdown rather than attempting to fix it, a position that Laing also embraces and continues.  So the resulting message becomes maybe everything needs to be destroyed before it can be rebuilt, but the dangers of nihilism are a serious threat without meaningful response that is left unconsidered in the work.

The film is disappointing not because it's bad, in fact it is unique enough to leave a strong impression,  but because it could have been so much better. There were so many things that could have been done different to explain the story, while at the same time not explicitly hitting the viewer over the head.  So many interesting scenes I was waiting for ultimately never occurred, instead being replaced by some 1970s acid induced psychedelic trip or watered down, destroying the effect.  However, in both version, the story leaves a chilling, disconcerting afterimage.

As Ballard's characters "surrender to a logic more powerful than reason," the underlying proximity of the Real becomes apparent.  Safe within the stable realms of our Symbolic world, we can function on a level far evolved from barbaric savagery.  But, really, this stability is an illusion, we are only existing on a fragile coating of a surface suspending us out of the Real.  A simple crack in this layer can easily disintegrate the chain of meaning that sustains society.  Reason can only manifested through Symbolic mechanisms, but the more fundamental conditions of the Real always persist within us.  And as the more fundamental level of existence, it contains its own logic, not as articulate-able propositions, but as forces.  Recent shifts of political thought have shown this fragility, as pressure exerted from the narrow, but vocal, political movements which have caused further forceful  ideological balkanization, pushing us all deeper into factions built on our own adopted Symbolic systems.  The field has been set for final disintegration, with each person ready to take up arms for their own banner.  While the full potentiality of this political disintegration is only now becoming clear, Ballard seemed well aware of the unsustainability of civilized modernity back in 1975, once again showing tremendous foresight.

Postmodern Picard

With what sounded like a miracle, it was announced that we would finally be able to continue exploring the world of the 24th Century with the return of Jean Luc Picard.  The release of Picard itself, however, has driven a fissure through the world of Trek fans.  Both in terms of its structure and its 24th century content, it is far removed from the last time we viewed the Next Generation Era.   Trek has always reflected the real-world conditions of its time.  1960s Star Trek dealt with themes of gender and races analogous to the cultural transformations of that decade, along with directly mimicking its styles.  The situations of The Next Generation, along with the concurrent TOS films, reflected a world anchored in the outlook of 1990, environmentalism, gender orientation, economic disparity, all at the approaching end of the millennium when it seemed that society might finally make progress into a more stabilized form. Within this evolution, the end of the Cold War was perhaps a decisive element.  The stand-off between the Super-powers of the galaxy  that drove the politics of TOS was now in a dynamic shift.  The sudden crumbling of the Klingon Empire reflected the end of the Soviet Union, and while Picard existed in a post-Klingon universe, Kirk had to directly, personally deal with the transformation.  Now that we have returned to the Federation, 20+ years after Next Generation, these underlying dynamics have shifted the stable foundations of the world.  Many Trek fans are disturbed by the less-than-optimistic view that is at odds with the established Roddenberry universe.  It must be remembered that as Trek has reflected points in the later 20th Century, the newest 21st Century continuation must also reflect where we are at.  Much has change (not for the better) since we last saw Picard aboard the Enterprise.  We have had to endure the aftermath of 9/11 (which undermined the post-Cold war optimism we briefly encountered), followed by economic collapse and the disintegration of political stability.  The criticism that the Federation at the dawn of the 25th century does not hold the same ideals as the Federation we have known is missing the point.  Political entities do not remain static, and all such entities will undergo periods of crisis and de-evolution.  Returning to a Federation with a 1990 viewpoint would not posses the depth that we would ultimately expect from the world of Trek.  Along with the Klingons, the Cardassians, Romulans, and, ostensibly, the Borg has left the Federation as the sole super-power of the quadrant.  Without political challengers, and no one to answer to, the Federation is adrift in its own power.  Where one could rationally suppose a unified utopia could be finally achieved, as history has shown, entities define themselves in terms of the other.  Without peer-adversaries, one has to look for scapegoats to account for inadequacies.  The idea of a corrupt Starfleet is not a new idea at all.  Several Next Generation and Deep Space Nine stories were concerned with such a contingency (And were able to simply overcome the problem within one or two episodes, never to be concerning again).  Furthermore, the notion of a lees-than-equal class of non Starfleet citizens was always a nagging concealment.  There has been a long standing argument that the Federation is a Starfleet- controlled military dictatorship, with civilian life a more austere existence than the Socialist utopia it purports to be.

What Picard displays is the non-Starfleet life that is flourishing in a less restrictive environment.  It is a world with experience life on the surface, rather than anchored to a stable foundation of principle and goal.  Places like Freecloud are emerging, embracing the expansion of personal freedom, all entwined within economic relations.  The connected world of the Federation, presumably much more able than our own internet-connected world, had been previously shown to be a no-nonsense, utilitarian transfer of information.  Now, the fringes of commercial society can release their own vision.   Rather than simple browser pop-ups, orbiting such commercially free planets enables frivolous full 3D holographic pop-ups.  The everyday tech of the Federation has taken extraordinary leaps in 30 years (like our own).  The new instant walk-through street transporters are stunning compared to the limitations negotiated in TOS, forcing a inquiry of how they might work - how does the system know where you're going (assuming that they are not, inefficiently,  simple single-destination systems).  If there is an answer to that, I predict it will be: there's an app for that!  Now that all digital display screens (and controls) have become holographic projections, it seems plausible that everyone carries around the credit-card size digital device that replaces phones, tablets and computers.  Pre-selecting you destination before walking into the nearest transporter might be the most convenient method.  With this new level of tech, residents of the 25th century live with a slick, glowing augmented reality, far removed from a more grounded, organic existence.

As for the form of the show, many will ask: why can't we have stand-alone episodes.  Conversely, I have, for a while now, asked what if Next Generation had been able to be constructed as a long arc, it could have been epic.  The 40 minute episode didn't really have a beginning, middle, end,  structure.  There was a build-up of the problem-at-hand, and a resolution with less than a minute to go.  There wasn't much of and end, just a stop to the episode.  A good portion of the series felt like discrete points, without much continuity other than involving the same characters.  So, count me as one who does not miss the stand-alone episodes.  There is some difficulty in finding a position between vastly separated episodes,  and fragments of one story. I think this an area that the Mandalorian could have handled better, as it feels like a bunch of separate tales trying to be one unified story.  If there is a let-down to the form of Picard, it is that, even as a season-arc, the end comes with a few minutes to go, without addressing the major crisis at hand.  After millennia of preparing to eradicate galactic life, some extremely  powerful entity is quickly thwarted, and no one gives it a further thought. In very non-Starfleet thinking, no one attempts to question who this race is, what they might really be about, or how to avert their potential threats in the future.  Furthermore, the appearance of hundreds of Starfleet vessels, of the latest class, and in nearly instant time, is pure fanboy ridiculousness. Where previous crisis situations required the attention of the ONLY, incomplete, vessel with the region, now entire advanced fleets are ready on a moments notice to intervene on non-Starfleet missions.  The video-game fell ruins the internal logic that the Star Trek world is built upon.  But, if this series is still finding its way, like its progenitors, the future of Star Trek looks ready to continue the quality reflection of our own world, 55 years on.

Mazes and Zones: Part 1

While the vast majority of the discussion of post-modern television has focused on its stylistic formulation and structure (non-linear narrative, intertextuality, pastiche, etc), it has largely ignored the substance of content that is fundamental to the era of post-modernity.  As an intellectual progression of history, post-modernism is the shift from a question of epistemology (and its potential) to one of ontology: not just what can we know, but what is real? [1].  As television progresses into a mature medium of artistic form (and a post-modern construct itself) to challenge and (in the case of the popular conscious) supplant literature, it has now begun in its new golden age to successfully articulate and reveal the reflections of post-modernity as such.  The narrative content can now possess the substance of these questions: the shifting nature of the experience of our surrounding realities,  the unavoidable perspectivism of truth, the elusiveness of identity and the self.

Literature eventually reveals the underlying conditions of an era, but the illustration of an actual event presents them much more poignantly.  This is the case with Chernobyl, an A-grade drama that blends perfectly with the top television works of the era, but with an added weight of the history that it faithfully tries to represent. Chernobyl is perhaps the first real-world zone on Earth, a place that doesn't exist, that no longer has history, that doesn't function in synchronicity with the rest of existence.  From this real heterotopia, the series forms a complete integration of dramatic narrative and history, inseparable as the drama elucidates the significance of reality while the reality exhibited dramatic and unreal elements. Most striking is how the function of the perception of reality in wake of the event is still an ever increasing problem.  The total elevation of political opinion over scientific facts is a condition that firmly places the Chernobyl event within our own era (and it is not a coincidence that this event was one of the final break-downs of the Soviet Union, thrusting history fully into the post-modern in 1991).  Presenting one of the first real-world fixed zones, the narrative of Chernobyl realizes the concept of displaced places, and therefore makes a great companion piece to the expanding collection of neo-golden-age television which can accurately be called postmodern television.

Regarding the structure of the external world, the postmodern age has revealed that the order of discrete spaces, delineated by borders, with individual rules, laws, and underlying meaning, has become obscured, as it was based on illusion. Space is no longer a series of spaces, but non-contiguous zones in which meaning may materialize as it fluctuates, overlaps, and diminishes.

In Philosophy and Film Noir, Jerold Abrams presents Umberto Eco's analysis of mazes. The first kind of maze is the classical labyrinth, in this maze "you can enter and leave without difficult; and, while the string may help a little, the only real problem is the Minotaur."[2] This illustrates classical thought - reality is straightforward and is clearly perceptible with unproblematic access to knowledge (perhaps with the help of divine oversight).  With the advent of modenism the maze became "mannerist."  Faced with "distortion of perception," "nothing is what it seems"- "getting out is (with your sanity intact) is all the challenge requires. But that will never happen unless you have the all important modern [string] - pure reason." [3] In the post-modern era, the maze has transformed into the rhizome, which has "no center, it has no perimeter, and worst of all, it has no way out.  Here, the Minotaur is still the form of the labyrinth itself, but now there is no escaping him with reason (or faith, or any combination of the two."[4]  This is our problem.  There is no knowledge that can explain the entire structure of our reality.  Neither reason or faith can give us the answers, leaving us in an existential condition of of blind self-reliance as the only means of navigation.

Man in the High Castle

The Sinner is another series thoroughly dealing with post-modern difficulties.  Each season is concerned with reconstructing an elusive self, built upon shifting and failing systems of memory, while being somewhat constructed through intensive external conditioning.  In this case the maze involves recreating the hidden history of events and the labyrinth of the subconscious.In season two, the labyrinth/Mintoaur metaphor becomes an explicit (even visual) representation and "escaping the labyrinth" articulated as the explicit problem.

Taking a quirky, positive, light approach to the problem, Lodge 49 also explicit confronts the contemporary ontological problem, as characters attempt to see "above the maze," get to the "center of the maze," and uncover the "hidden reality" underneath the everyday, mundane world of continual difficulties, setbacks and soul-crushing difficulties.  Behind the events which shape the community and change the cultural and economic forces are deeper levels of groups and individual who influence events, unknown and unidentifiable  at the surface. This notion of ever-increasing levels of hidden power is prevalent in much of recent art-televison, perhaps starting with Lost and featured in series such as Breaking Bad, in which the accosiates Walter White encounters become much more insidious with each season, with power increasing in relation to invisibility, from street dealers to drug cartels to international conglomerates forming a pyramid, with the fundamental base always deeper and obscured.

At the other end of the spectrum Westworld is disturbingly dark examination of this condition. Explicitly confronting the question of reality, Westworld brings in all of the postmodern substance.  Set in an intentional heterotopia, the park presents meaning from the historical past, but it is not just a simulation, but a simulacrum, as it reflects a history that is not faithful to true reality.  Within this zone of constructed historicity, Hosts attempt to achieve consciousness by reaching the "center of the maze."  Delos

Owing much to Lost as a direct predecessor, with underground bunkers, and mainland institutions at work pursuing their own nefarious plans, both series feature those trapped inside, unaware of the structural laws,  looking for the exit and the meaning in transcendental terms.*

Unlike those works which attempt to navigate the maze of  contemporary society, the Walking Dead series examines the zone as a the totality of existence. All borders, as elements of structure, are completely gone.  There is no particular meaning to any space.  It is not a heterotopia, a space beyond an event horizon marking the normality of an attempted surface structure.  Like Chernobyl, The Walking Dead explores the unavoidable catastrophic encounter of the Lacanian Real beyond the artificial construct of the Symbolic that we perceive as fundamental reality  While spaces like Westworld and Chernobyl exist as zones through their own laws in relation to a larger external structures, outside of history, there is here no longer any difference here; all is pure disorder, as there is no longer any history in a functioning sense.

While existence becomes realized as a maze rather then a single, clear plane, the contemporary disintegration of space renders the search for the center of the maze as a contradiction - as space is a rhizome without a center.[5] The maze then becomes only relevant to the self, the internal subject which stands in opposition to the disorder of externality, the zone.  The new golden age of TV, this art-televison, realizes this condition and fully engages with this postmodern question of space in relation to knowledge and being, as postmodern literature and science fiction began doing during the twentieth century.



[2] Mark Conard. The Philosophy of Film Noir. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2006. 70.
I've mentioned the analysis of  this article before, and I think it only becomes more relevant in the new era of film/TV/literature.
[5] Compare this to modern cosmology is which no place in the expanding universe is center or edge - everywhere is.

Song of the Lark

Thoughts on Song of the Lark by Willa Cather (1915)

     The most prominent theme that stands out to me is the commitment to one’s art, and within that process there is a necessity to form one’s own identity. In this book there is an ever present awareness of the roles one should play in society, and the subtle authority that exists behind it.  The divide between the ethnicities of Moonstone, and Thea’s willingness to overcome it, is one aspect of this social convention.  The role of religion is another.  At some point Thea may have to diverge from the comfortable pre-determined belief system that she has acquired from her family.   An interesting exchange between Mrs Kronborg and Giddy illustrates two ways of thinking when she states that:

     “I believe a man's watched over, and he can't be hurt on the railroad or anywhere else if it's    intended he shouldn't be.”
     Giddy laughed. "Then the trains must be operated by fellows the Lord has it in for, Mrs. Kronborg.     They figure it out that a railroad man's only due to last eleven years; then it's his turn to be smashed."
     "That's a dark Providence, I don't deny," Mrs. Kronborg admitted. "But there's lots of things in life that's hard to understand." (121)

     This suggestion of providence could be applied to Thea and the idea that she is destined for greatness in whatever she does.  But Giddy’s witty response shows a practical understanding of the world.  Life is usually not that simple, or safe.  If one wants to be an artist, as in Thea’s case, then one might have to fight for it against the odds.  The artist, or other kind of committed individual, must be willing to actively create oneself without just passively going where life takes him or her.  If everything is destined to happen, then there is not much use in striving for something that will happen anyway.  However, this is a big gamble to take if one is ambitious about something, in which case it is better to take over control and not blindly trust providence. 
     Up to this point the book has been a chronology of events without much tension to the story.  There are no real problems, setbacks, or mounting struggles that would define Thea’s character.  Even when the money to continue study seems like it will be a problem a solution presents itself and she is able to advance from teacher to teacher.  The end of Part 2 notes a “turning-point”:

This time, when Thea left Moonstone to go back to Chicago, she went alone. As the train pulled out, she looked back at her mother and father and Thor. They were calm and cheerful; they did not know, they did not understand. Something pulled in her -- and broke. She cried all the way to Denver . . . It was all behind her, and she knew that she would never cry like that again. People live through such pain only once; pain comes again, but it finds a tougher surface. Thea remembered how she had gone away the first time, with what confidence in everything, and what pitiful ignorance. (246)

Finally, we get to some character growth and some intensity of experience.  I expect the first half of the book was all about setting up events for a much more dramatic situation in the second half, when Cather can make a significant statement about the artist or individual existing in opposition to the world.
     The second half of The Song of the Lark seems to really emphasize the isolation the artist must go through in order to be committed to his or her art.  There is clearly a separation between Thea and the rest of the world. This extends beyond her family and the residents of Moonstone to include personal social relations and also members of her own profession at the end.  Life in her hotel suite seems to be a quiet, cloistered one.  However, there does seem to be a definite reason for this, not only giving Thea the time and space to perfect her art, but to give her the perspective on life that is very different from others.  She has a significant revelation during her time in the world of the “ancient people.”  She asks herself  “what was any art but an effort to make a sheath, a mould in which to imprison for a moment the shining, elusive element which is life itself, -life hurrying  past us and running away , too strong to stop, too sweet to lose?” (286).  This awareness is the kind of thought that most people don’t have and compels Thea to move on her with art, unable to return to a simple life.
     This notion of a “shining, elusive element” that is at the core of life’s vitality suggests Cather shared an aesthetic vision with Frederich Nietzsche. There are a number of Nietzschean elements that come through in the book. Cather’s mention of a “Nietzsche Club” in passing in the section “Stupid Faces” suggests her awareness of his work regarding the artist. Nietzsche viewed ancient art as containing a Dionysian element of chaos that acknowledged the inner vitality of life which eventually became suppressed by the Apollonian element of rationality and order.  Losing connection with the Dionysian means one loses the connection to their most essential being.  One location that Nietzsche was able to see the return of Dionysian expression was in the operatic works of Wagner.  Another aspect is revealed when Dr Archie is reflecting on his past and considering the most important years of his life:

He fell to looking back over his life and asking himself which years of it he would like to live over again, - just as they had been,- and they were not many. His college years he would live again, gladly. After them there was nothing he would care to repeat until he came to Thea Kronborg. (375)

This examination contains a hint of the Nietzscean concept of “eternal recurrence,” the idea that one must be willing to experience everything in their life is order to give an affirmative “yes” to the value of their life. Dr Archie seems to think that knowing Thea created a value that compensated for all those years that he would rather not relive. Finally, Thea eventually states that:

You can’t try to do things right and not despise the people who do them wrong. How can I be indifferent? If that doesn’t matter, then nothing matters. . . What one really strives for in art is not the sort of thing you are likely to find when you drop in for a performance at the opera. What one strives for is far away so beautiful . . . that there is nothing one can say about it. (429)

She continues by discussing the feeling produced by art, something that can’t be wholly contained within language. There seems to be a division here, not only between the artist and others, but between different artists when ranking bad art versus good art. Thea’s response here clearly shows a value system and an attempt to overcome the nihilism that Nietzsche predicted by rejecting a system that supports the idea that “nothing matters.”
     The lack of Thea’s point of view in the second half indicates how much she had faded out of the social world and into a world of her own making. Her life was an attempt to find that elusive element in a way that only the individual can. Others who have not had the same experience of revelation that she had would be unable to fully appreciate it and coexist with her, since it is a world that in many ways exists beyond language.

Tender is the Night

Thoughts on Tender is the Night by F. Scott Fitzgerald

     Despite the expansive setting and intricate interactions between characters of this novel, there seems to be a notable lack in regards to a depth of feeling within the story itself. The activity in this world is limited to shopping, leisure travel, and throwing elaborate parties, without much concern for money or the fundamentals of life. There does not seem to be a foundation under this problem-free lifestyle from which it can be sustained or given meaning. Fitzgerald may be suggesting that this particular world, however culturally active, is superficial. The characters, particularly Dick, seem to have no commitment to their own life, no focus, and no concrete goal to pursue. They passively move through life, as elements of a social construct, rather than as autonomous agents. This superficiality is indicated by the discussion of acting: “[I]n the theatre, No. In the theatre all the best come­diennes have built up their reputations by burlesquing the correct emotional responses—fear and love and sympathy” (288). The world of actors involves creating a presentation to others and being able to slide in and out of character in order to produce a desired response.
     In contrast to the structured facade of acting, the field of psychiatry plays a significant role. Dick begins a downward spiral as he us is unable to separate his roles of doctor and husband, and he realizes his own behavior is not unlike that of Nicole’s father.  This realization suggests that the causes of illness and the corresponding cures are delicately linked with each other.  Additionally, some of the roles that we assume in life are not compatible with each other. As he dives into his own psychology, Dick is faced with the danger and disorder that is present in the human mind. The conflict between the external calculated behavior and the internal unknown motivations is suggested when Dick goes to meet Rosemary at the studio:

He knew that what he was now doing marked a turning point in his life—it was out of line with everything that had preceded it—even out of line with what effect he might hope to produce upon Rosemary. Rosemary saw him always as a model of correctness—his presence walking around this block was an intrusion. But Dick’s necessity of behaving as he did was a projection of some submerged reality: he was compelled to walk there, or stand there. . . (91)

     The struggle between ordered structure and chaotic forces can be seen on a larger scale with the references to World War I. The opulent period of the 1920, an apparent celebration of the end of war, would seem to have given a false optimism to this generation. While discussing the World War I battlefield, Dick claims that “No Europeans will ever do that again in this generation” (57).  This is an unfortunate position for the character to take given the events that would happen ten years later, and by the time the novel was published Fitzgerald must have had an idea that this prosperous and peaceful period was coming to an end, given the condition of Germany and Hitler’s influence on European politics.
     Tender is the Night was apparently poorly received during the Great Depression, when the “difficulties” found in the lives of the rich were not taken as particularly pressing. The same reaction could probably be said of the world of The Great Recession. However, Fitzgerald already seemed aware that this lifestyle of the elite trying to participate in the Zeitgeist was unsustainable, and that the authentic life of the individual who is irreversibly connected to others was a more valuable alternative.  In this sense it would seem to be the antithesis to Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls, in which the lead character actively chooses a direction and a goal for himself despite the negative consequences involved. This kind of authenticity is not felt in the world of the Divers.

Purchased Experiences: Identity and Consumer Culture in Generation X

    Douglas Coupland’s 1991 novel Generation X presents a view of life in the contemporary world which can be further understood by Marxist criticism, as it aesthetically embodies the theoretical views of such criticism.[1]  The novel revolves around three characters, Andy, Dag, and Claire, all near the age of thirty.  They have left their career-oriented lifestyles, and moved to the Mojave Desert to live in Palm Springs.  Here they work “Mcjobs” and entertain each other by telling stories.  Being hyper-conscious of the world of the late twentieth century, Generation X criticizes the prevailing class structure of consumer society.  This has led to accusations of the novel being pretentious and unrealistic. Why are the members of this generation more dissatisfied with life than previous generations were?  Does the world presented by Coupland correspond to external reality, or is it one writer’s personal dissatisfaction and disillusionment with the world?

     Marxist criticism seems useful in analyzing this work, perhaps even more now than when it was published in 1991 and Marxism was still a powerful political force that overshadowed its critical effectiveness.  Marxist criticism provides insight into the world of the late twentieth century, where economic class and status have become the most important factors in social life. The Marxist idea that economic class is fundamental to everything that happens in culture reveals more about the characters in the novel than is immediately apparent  While Paul Fussell has laid out the division between classes and the similarities of the members of each class, the ideas found in the postmodern theory of Frederic Jameson are highly illuminating for understanding this novel.  In Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, published at roughly the same date as Generation X, Jameson details the change in culture after World War II, manifesting in the emergence of a consumer society, claiming that the postmodern split happened in the 1960’s, at roughly the point that “generation x” came into being. As the importance of participation in the consumer world has increased beyond this split, authenticity of the individual has been replaced with an artificial and superficial public stream of economic interaction - participation in the latest trends as a source of meaning. What you buy defines who you are, so the individual works just to buy stuff; work becomes the field in which to experience life while the resulting economic exchanges define the individual.

    The well developed theories of Marxist criticism suggest that the postmodern world depicted in Generation X is an accurate one, and the novel presents us with illustrations of how we should approach living in such a confusing and challenging time period.  Coupland remarks that “There is no weather in Palm Springs - just like TV.  There is also no middle class, and in that sense the place is medieval . . . Nonetheless, the three of us chose to live here, for the town is undoubtedly a quiet sanctuary from the bulk of middle-class life” (10).  Escape is an important concept in the novel as each of the main characters recalls their exit from traditional society.  Furthermore, they compare their lifestyle to other characters who have decided to stay in the mainstream society. In “An Anatomy of Classes” Paul Fussell analyzed contemporary society by dividing it into nine classes, revealing the negative aspects of each class by presenting the conformity inherent to each one. He then proposed a “Category X” of people who attempt to escape from the rigid class structure.  This category of Fussell's analysis has been mentioned by Coupland as a possible influence on his generational concept.  The idea of a “medieval” lack of the middle class can be understood as the middle-class being a very modern development, and Jameson argues that there was a pre-communist state that existed before capitalism widened the split between classes.  The novel's comparison of Palm Springs to TV shows a postmodernist awareness of real places feeling fake and fake illusions presenting themselves as real.

     While attempting to escape from the construct of the consumer society that has been created, the characters in this book find themselves in a fragmented existence, alienated from the world and each other, and internally from their own cohesive past.. They exist in isolation, trying to relate to each other.  The characters view their lives as discreet, separate experiences which seem story-like.  As they attempt to get through life and relate to each other, they tell stories, which take on a significance of their own, revealing much about the characters and the world they see themselves in.  The historical events of their lives are reduced, while the fictional stories of their imaginations are elevated, thus blurring the division between reality and non-reality.  The idea of postmodern fragmentation is readily apparent here, both the fragmentation of individuals into different groups within society, and as time fragmenting into a series of "perpetual presents,” as understood by Jameson.

    Coupland's Generation X asks "Why work? Simply to buy more stuff?  That's just not enough" (23).  This line alone communicates much of what Marxist thought would condemn about our consumer society. We go to work to make money to buy things, and then the cycle repeats itself.  The death of the subject presented by Jameson is also an important idea here.  The characters feel that if they exist in that consumer world, they lose some level of consciousness and become an automatic part of that system.  They feel restricted by their jobs, career choices and life choices. In order to become creative and have the ability to develop their own individual being, as well as experience a sense of aesthetic possibility, they must drop out of the structured world of class.  They leave behind the career track and live moment to moment.

    Andy, in one of his untold stories, imagines a future city where "its boulevards were patternless, helter skelter, and cuckoo.  Everywhere there were booby traps of moustetraps, Triffids, and black holes . . and directions were impossible" (51).  The dangers and confusions of contemporary existence found in this work correspond to the postmodern world envisioned by Jameson as “a mutation in built space itself,” a hyperspace, like the confusing maze of the Bonaventure Hotel which has become a physical manifestation of the fragmented, rhizomic structure of late capitalism. Andy warns of a future with no clear paths, exits, or methods of clear navigation.

     As Andy reflects on his home-life, he states that "I get this feeling--.  It is a feeling that our emotions, while wonderful, are transpiring in a vacuum, and I think it all boils down to the fact that we're middle class.  You see, when you're middle class, you have to live with the fact that history will ignore you.  You have to live with the fact that history can never champion your causes and that history will never feel sorry for you, It is the price that is paid for day-to-day comfort and silence.  And because of this price, all happiness is sterile; all sadnesses go unpitied." (147)  Here we see the idea of the middle class forming a bland, uncreative existence, like what had been presented by Fussell.  It may be comfortable, but it is not adventurous.  While recalling his youth during the Vietnam War, Andy notes ". . . they were ugly times.  But they were also the only times I'll ever get - genuine capital H history times, before history was turned into a press release, a marketing strategy, and a cynical campaign tool.  And, hey, it's not as if I got to see much real history, either - I arrived to see a concert in history's arena just as the final set was finishing.  But I saw enough, and today, in the bizarre absence of all time cues, I need a connection to a past of some importance, however wan the connection." (151). In the post-modern world where time becomes a fleeting series of discreet points the connection to a linear progression of history and self is lost, identity becomes unanchored from events resulting in an artificial presence, an existential alienation from the larger world. After the radical break in history, Jameson argues that "there is a disappearance of the sense of history, the way in which our entire contemporary social system has little by little begun to lose its capacity to retain its own past, has begun to live in  perpetual present and in perpetual change that obliterates traditions of the kind which all earlier social information have had in one way or another to preserve" (214).  This description could apply to Coupland's novels as well as the world at large.  Throughout the book Coupland's characters speak in phrases like “my hair doesn't look 1940's enough," as well as making extensive references to “dead TV shows,” Elvis, and Marilyn Monroe.  Through these references we can see Jameson's understanding of nostalgia, the idea that “we seem condemned to seek the historical past through our own pop images and stereotypes about the past, which itself remains forever out of reach.”  (Jameson, 208) If there is no way to map the future, no clear sense of direction, then sensible meaning can only come from the past. Furthermore, we can also see other aspects of postmodernism at work, such as the implosion between disciplines, where history becomes entangled with advertising, politics with entertainment, etc.

     Other theories, such a a psychological approach, could focus on the few disillusioned characters, and claim that this book is really just about three misfits who have a strong sense of nonconformity.  What is really important is their understanding and reaction to the world, and these understandings may not accurately represent the world at large.  In this sense the world would be a production of their attitudes, rather than the characters being the production of the social construct.  But, this interpretation becomes much too solipsistic, leaving every individual with an isolated reality.  Rather, the Marxist critique presents each individual relating to the same world, and is therefore more useful, as it deals with what is “out there,” rather than inside one’s own mind.  The base that society functions on determines the psychological consistency of its individuals.  Generation X can be seen as a story that explains the experience of existing culture, the one which has produced the characters,  as well as the readers.  This culture is indeed the one of consumerism and late capitalism described in detail by Jameson.  As it is based almost exclusively on economics, this society is therefore understood best in the terms of Marxist criticism.  It is not just a story of a few characters that have a particular psychological aversion to society.  As the novel is aware of the economic and social pressures that exist, it attempts to analyze those conditions rather than passively ignoring them, undermining the idea that modern mainstream consumerism is a natural state of existence. As Jameson notes, postmodernism explains the logic of consumer capitalism, however, "The more significant question is whether there is also a way in which it resits that logic" (214).  Coupland's work is a response to that. In the form of stories, through the aesthetic, meaning can emerge from the subjective individual experience.  Generation X is an exploration of the first generation to experience Jameson's radical break of history.

Sources:
Coupland, Douglas, Generation X. New York: St Martin’s Press. 1991

Jameson, Frederic.  “Postmodernism and Consumer Society.”  Everyday Theory.  Ed. Becky McLaughlin and Bob Cole, Pearson Longman. 2005. 201 -215.

Original version written as an outline (2010)

[1] Note here that I am using the academic mode of Marxism as it was originally conceived in philosophy as a critique of capitalism, and not a particular political ideology. Remember Marx was an actual philosopher and his critique was inseparable from the actual emerging conditions of capitalism (they are intertwined views).  Non-theoretical later uses by political parties are inauthentic distortions, which may or may not represent Jameson's views.