As anyone who has read this blog for a while probably knows, I have always been a staunch defender of poet Gerry Nicosia's charge, on behalf of Jan Kerouac, that Jack's mother's will was forged and that Jack's intention was to keep his archives intact and away from his last wife's family, and that his nephew Paul Blake should benefit from whatever estate there was as well.
This battle has been going on for decades, but a court has finally ruled, that indeed the will was forged and that Jan (unfortunately long since deceased) and Paul Blake should have a claim on the estate.
The most unfortunate thing about all this is how many of the old Beats and their younger supporters and wannabes defended the Sampas family's grab of the estate, even when they initially were selling it off piecemeal against Jack's known, stated, and written, wishes. The reason being that Viking/Penquin had a huge stake in developing the Jack Kerouac brand and academics who wanted access to the archives or poets and authors who wanted their books published by Viking/Penquin and not to be ostracized from the inner Beat circles, needed to "go along to get along" as they say in politics.
I always believed the reason a book of mine that was accepted by Penquin was eventually not published when Viking, the mother company reversed the decision, had something to do with my defending Gerry and Jan's fight against the Sampas family.
I've written about it enough elsewhere, most recently in a post about the publication of a book about Jan here, so I won't go into any more details about the case. But check out these links here and here, and thanks to Ron Silliman's blog for them.
Friday, July 31, 2009
Thursday, July 30, 2009
AIRHEADS
Watched this flick with my eleven-year-old today. perfect summer fare. Light, silly, fun and well done.
It made me think of TAPS and THE LAST PICTURE SHOW. Not because either of them were as light or silly, but because all three showcased the next generation of movie stars before they were.
THE LAST PICTURE SHOW introduced most of us not only to Jeff Bridges and the Bottom brothers, but to Cloris Leachman as a serious actor and Oscar contender, and of course Cybil Sheppard and Randy Quaid.
TAPS is still fun to watch despite it's over the top story line, because here's Sean Penn, Tom Cruise, and the only before the title star billing young actor, Timothy Hutton (along with George C. Scott), before they became too big for this sort of thing (I mean star wise not age wise).
AIRHEADS stars not only Brendan Fraser but Steve Buscemi and Adam Sandler in supporting roles, with David Arquette and Chris Farley in even smaller roles, close to a cameo in Farley's case.
And like I said, it's fun. I had forgotten how much I loved it when it first came out in 1994, but it's definitely the movie version of a beach book. If you haven't seen it lately, or ever, it could make you smile.
It made me think of TAPS and THE LAST PICTURE SHOW. Not because either of them were as light or silly, but because all three showcased the next generation of movie stars before they were.
THE LAST PICTURE SHOW introduced most of us not only to Jeff Bridges and the Bottom brothers, but to Cloris Leachman as a serious actor and Oscar contender, and of course Cybil Sheppard and Randy Quaid.
TAPS is still fun to watch despite it's over the top story line, because here's Sean Penn, Tom Cruise, and the only before the title star billing young actor, Timothy Hutton (along with George C. Scott), before they became too big for this sort of thing (I mean star wise not age wise).
AIRHEADS stars not only Brendan Fraser but Steve Buscemi and Adam Sandler in supporting roles, with David Arquette and Chris Farley in even smaller roles, close to a cameo in Farley's case.
And like I said, it's fun. I had forgotten how much I loved it when it first came out in 1994, but it's definitely the movie version of a beach book. If you haven't seen it lately, or ever, it could make you smile.
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
MERCE CUNNINGHAM R.I.P.
A seminal dancer and choreographer, Merce was a huge presence on the downtown NYC scene when I was coming up. And his partnership with the composer John Cage made that presence even greater in ways few avant-garde artists ever achieved.
He was ninety and still creative to almost the end.
Back in the 1970s, when the city was in terrible financial shape but the avant-garde arts scene was flourishing on many levels, there were times when it seemd like dance was the dominant art form downtown. All kinds of new and exciting choreographers were appearing, from Twyla Tharp to Sara Rudner (my alltime favorite).
If you went to any downtown arts event, like a fundraiser for a cause or a downtown arts institution, or the St. Mark's Poetry Project space for their annual New Years Eve marathon etc. there'd usually be some dance as part of the performances, and it would often be what stopped the show, impact-wise. At least for me.
Well the daddy of all that, and eventually the granddaddy, was Merce Cunningham. His experiments with "chance" as a tool for constructing any art, ala Cage in "music" or Jackson MacLow in poetry, created dances that contained gestures and movement and postures and poses etc. that no one had ever seen before on a dance stage.
To be able to create something entirely new out of something as mundane as human physicality or out of something as ancient as basic dance movements, was not only a sign of Cunningham's genuis, but of his humanity, which he seemed to me to surrender to completely, the most touching thing about his approach to dance that some critics initially found too cool, too abstract, too un-romantic.
But watch the video at the top of Ron Silliman's Cunningham's post for today, Wednesday, July 29th, (this link just goes to the blog so if you're reading this after that date, you can find it) which is one of his posts full of links (usually they're to poetry related topics but often to the other arts as well, this one is devoted entirely to Cunningham), which have become a primary source for me for news of what's happening in the avant-garde (lousy term for it these days, but "alternative" etc. works no better) poetry (and other arts) world.
It's a pretty good summary of Cunningham's methods and creative genius.
He was ninety and still creative to almost the end.
Back in the 1970s, when the city was in terrible financial shape but the avant-garde arts scene was flourishing on many levels, there were times when it seemd like dance was the dominant art form downtown. All kinds of new and exciting choreographers were appearing, from Twyla Tharp to Sara Rudner (my alltime favorite).
If you went to any downtown arts event, like a fundraiser for a cause or a downtown arts institution, or the St. Mark's Poetry Project space for their annual New Years Eve marathon etc. there'd usually be some dance as part of the performances, and it would often be what stopped the show, impact-wise. At least for me.
Well the daddy of all that, and eventually the granddaddy, was Merce Cunningham. His experiments with "chance" as a tool for constructing any art, ala Cage in "music" or Jackson MacLow in poetry, created dances that contained gestures and movement and postures and poses etc. that no one had ever seen before on a dance stage.
To be able to create something entirely new out of something as mundane as human physicality or out of something as ancient as basic dance movements, was not only a sign of Cunningham's genuis, but of his humanity, which he seemed to me to surrender to completely, the most touching thing about his approach to dance that some critics initially found too cool, too abstract, too un-romantic.
But watch the video at the top of Ron Silliman's Cunningham's post for today, Wednesday, July 29th, (this link just goes to the blog so if you're reading this after that date, you can find it) which is one of his posts full of links (usually they're to poetry related topics but often to the other arts as well, this one is devoted entirely to Cunningham), which have become a primary source for me for news of what's happening in the avant-garde (lousy term for it these days, but "alternative" etc. works no better) poetry (and other arts) world.
It's a pretty good summary of Cunningham's methods and creative genius.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
LAST COMMENT (HOPEFULLY) ON THE "BIRTHERS"
McCain's birth certificate says he was born in Panama.
Obama's says he was born in the USA.
If McCain had been elected and anyone wanted to bring a lawsuit against him saying he wasn't born in the USA, the answer from the right would be: he was born to US citizens.
Obama's mother was a US citizen when he was born in Hawaii. But if he had been born in Panama?
The hardline rightwing will never be satisfied with proof. Reality has nothing to do with their arguments. or very little. The reality is, for them, Obama is "other" and "other" is frightening and one of the forms fear most often takes is anger.
Obama's says he was born in the USA.
If McCain had been elected and anyone wanted to bring a lawsuit against him saying he wasn't born in the USA, the answer from the right would be: he was born to US citizens.
Obama's mother was a US citizen when he was born in Hawaii. But if he had been born in Panama?
The hardline rightwing will never be satisfied with proof. Reality has nothing to do with their arguments. or very little. The reality is, for them, Obama is "other" and "other" is frightening and one of the forms fear most often takes is anger.
Monday, July 27, 2009
LEGITIMIZING WINGNUTS
In the 1950s there were people in the United States who believed the world was flat, despite the fact that belief had been proven wrong centuries previous. But they were not given time to vent their belief in the national media, because their belief was not only ignorant, it was wrong—factually untrue.
After the first Americans walked on the moon forty years ago, there were many in this country who believed the whole thing was a hoax. They weren't given a voice on news shows in the national media because not only was their belief ignorant, it was factually untrue.
In the 1970s there were those who believed the world was created as stated in the Old Testament and that evolution was a hoax. But they weren't given time in the national news media to air these beliefs because they were not only ignorant, they were factually untrue.
But then something happened in the 1980s and '90s and '00s. First Ronald Reagan got elected with the help of a Republican base of rightwingers that he had helped create, and functionaries like Lee Atwater and Roger Ailes helped perpetuate and grow.
Then under the Gingrich-led Republican Congress during Clinton's administration, catering to the rightwing of the Republican party wasn't just a strategy but a reality. The rightwing had become the Republican Party, at least in Congress, and any leverage could be used to oust centrists and moderates including questioning their religious beliefs. It became a badge of merit among many Republicans to scorn a lot of scientific fact as "relative" (of course they used the opposite claim against liberals in the area of morality). They deliberately misrepresented—leading to much misunderstanding of—the use of the word "Theory" in "The Theory of Evolution" to imply it hadn't yet been proven, though it had. Just as the "Theory of Gravity" was proven.
And of course under the last administration the capitulation to the rightwing nuts was completed, no matter how ignorant and factually untrue, any rightwing nutty idea had to be catered to for fear of attack from the right and being cutoff from access to the White House (as well as being fired by the mostly rightwing owned media).
Which brings us to the present, where despite the factual reality of Obama's birth in Hawaii, those who question this FACT are not only given time and presence in the national news media, but so is every crack pot laughable red herring raised by the rightwing nuts. As in: Obama's health plan is socialist! The same argument Ronald Reagan made in the 1950s as a spokesman for the then marginalized right. He claimed that the creation of Medicare would lead to not just "socialized medicine" but to the government telling you where you would work and live, etc.
None of that came true of course, but the same arguments are being used and this time given not just a fraction of air time, but supposed "equal time" (although what is meant by that now is every time a centrist or moderate makes a factual point a rightwing nut has to be given "equal time" but not a leftwing perspective.).
If all these rightwingers don't believe in the climate changes that are factually occurring (rising seas, thawing tundra, melting glaciers and ice caps, stronger storms, etc.) fine, let them talk among themselves, but don't give them media time to pretend their perspectives have any scientific validity. (The only scientific argument is over what it means and how much humans are contributing to it, and even there the general consensus is pretty consistent.)
If the rightwingers don't dig socialized medicine, or what they call that (any plan that has the government involved in any way), then if they're veterans, like me, they should refuse any use of veterans benefits or veterans hospitals etc. And if they're on Medicare, they should refuse that too. If they're in Congress, they should refuse the plan used by our "representatives" and instead be faced with the same kinds of choices most working citizens of this country are faced with when it comes to health care as now practiced (and let the right wingnuts not be given media time to claim our system is the "best in the world" since factually, judged by most healthcare or healthy citzenry statistic, we come in way behind most and often all other "industrialized" countries and even many "developing" countries).
[Here's a link to news that doesn't get mainstream media coverage, and here's another related to climate changes.]
After the first Americans walked on the moon forty years ago, there were many in this country who believed the whole thing was a hoax. They weren't given a voice on news shows in the national media because not only was their belief ignorant, it was factually untrue.
In the 1970s there were those who believed the world was created as stated in the Old Testament and that evolution was a hoax. But they weren't given time in the national news media to air these beliefs because they were not only ignorant, they were factually untrue.
But then something happened in the 1980s and '90s and '00s. First Ronald Reagan got elected with the help of a Republican base of rightwingers that he had helped create, and functionaries like Lee Atwater and Roger Ailes helped perpetuate and grow.
Then under the Gingrich-led Republican Congress during Clinton's administration, catering to the rightwing of the Republican party wasn't just a strategy but a reality. The rightwing had become the Republican Party, at least in Congress, and any leverage could be used to oust centrists and moderates including questioning their religious beliefs. It became a badge of merit among many Republicans to scorn a lot of scientific fact as "relative" (of course they used the opposite claim against liberals in the area of morality). They deliberately misrepresented—leading to much misunderstanding of—the use of the word "Theory" in "The Theory of Evolution" to imply it hadn't yet been proven, though it had. Just as the "Theory of Gravity" was proven.
And of course under the last administration the capitulation to the rightwing nuts was completed, no matter how ignorant and factually untrue, any rightwing nutty idea had to be catered to for fear of attack from the right and being cutoff from access to the White House (as well as being fired by the mostly rightwing owned media).
Which brings us to the present, where despite the factual reality of Obama's birth in Hawaii, those who question this FACT are not only given time and presence in the national news media, but so is every crack pot laughable red herring raised by the rightwing nuts. As in: Obama's health plan is socialist! The same argument Ronald Reagan made in the 1950s as a spokesman for the then marginalized right. He claimed that the creation of Medicare would lead to not just "socialized medicine" but to the government telling you where you would work and live, etc.
None of that came true of course, but the same arguments are being used and this time given not just a fraction of air time, but supposed "equal time" (although what is meant by that now is every time a centrist or moderate makes a factual point a rightwing nut has to be given "equal time" but not a leftwing perspective.).
If all these rightwingers don't believe in the climate changes that are factually occurring (rising seas, thawing tundra, melting glaciers and ice caps, stronger storms, etc.) fine, let them talk among themselves, but don't give them media time to pretend their perspectives have any scientific validity. (The only scientific argument is over what it means and how much humans are contributing to it, and even there the general consensus is pretty consistent.)
If the rightwingers don't dig socialized medicine, or what they call that (any plan that has the government involved in any way), then if they're veterans, like me, they should refuse any use of veterans benefits or veterans hospitals etc. And if they're on Medicare, they should refuse that too. If they're in Congress, they should refuse the plan used by our "representatives" and instead be faced with the same kinds of choices most working citizens of this country are faced with when it comes to health care as now practiced (and let the right wingnuts not be given media time to claim our system is the "best in the world" since factually, judged by most healthcare or healthy citzenry statistic, we come in way behind most and often all other "industrialized" countries and even many "developing" countries).
[Here's a link to news that doesn't get mainstream media coverage, and here's another related to climate changes.]
Saturday, July 25, 2009
SOME FAVORTIE TWO-WORD-STARTING-WITH-THE-SAME-LETTER BOOKS, RECORDINGS AND MOVIES
Remembering what a terrific read ANGELA’S ASHES was when Frank McCourt recently died, got me to thinking last night when I was falling asleep of other favorite books with two word titles in which the words started with the same letter ala ANGELA’S ASHES.
That made me think of songs I dig that fit the same category, and then movies. So I came up with some couplets, or pairings if you will, of some favorites.
ANGELA’S ASHES by Frank McCourt (memoir written like great fiction)
TRACY’S TIGER by William Saroyan (fiction written like a uniquely “modern” fable)
BORSTAL BOY by Brendan Behan (the Irish playwright’s memoir of his time in a juvenile prison for IRA activity)
BAD BOYS (the Sean Penn movie about a USA juvenile prison)
LION LION by Tom Raworth
MONDAY, MONDAY by David Trinidad (both unique collections of poetry)
MOSCOW MANSIONS by Barbara Guest
SATIN STREET by Merril Gilfillan (two more unique collections of poems)
SUNG SEX by Kenward Elmslie & Joe Brainard
TOPIARY TREK by Kenward Elsmlie & Karl Torok (Elmslie’s poetry + the artists’ illustrations)
RIP RAP by Gary Snyder
PEACE PIECE—Bill Evans (the former poetry and latter solo piano, but both seminal works of art that had the same impact on me when first encountered)
SPLISH SPLASH—Bobby Darrin (my introduction to Darrin’s musical virtuosity)
SPLISHY SPLASHY—Lisa Hannigan (one of my recent favorite songs)
MRS. MINIVER
MUCH MORE—Barbra Streisand (a Hollywood classic movie + one of Streisand’s first recordings when musicians and music lovers alike were stunned by her chops and originality: what’s the connection? both have some deeper meanings in common)
RED RIVER
SEVEN SAMARAI
BILLY BOY—Ahmad Jamal
SEXY SADIE—The Beatles
BUT BEAUTIFUL—Bing Crosby
HIGH HOPES—Frank Sinatra (two wonderfully positive songs, despite their different musical moods)
FUNNY FACE (the movie)
FUNNY FACE—Fred Astaire (the song in the movie)
BLUE BAYOU—Roy Orbison
BLUE BAYOU—Linda Ronstadt
CRISS CROSS—Thelonious Monk
MONK’S MOOD—Thelonious Monk
KING KONG (the classic black-and-white original with Fay Wray)
DR. DOLITTLE (the remake with Eddie Murphy)
That made me think of songs I dig that fit the same category, and then movies. So I came up with some couplets, or pairings if you will, of some favorites.
ANGELA’S ASHES by Frank McCourt (memoir written like great fiction)
TRACY’S TIGER by William Saroyan (fiction written like a uniquely “modern” fable)
BORSTAL BOY by Brendan Behan (the Irish playwright’s memoir of his time in a juvenile prison for IRA activity)
BAD BOYS (the Sean Penn movie about a USA juvenile prison)
LION LION by Tom Raworth
MONDAY, MONDAY by David Trinidad (both unique collections of poetry)
MOSCOW MANSIONS by Barbara Guest
SATIN STREET by Merril Gilfillan (two more unique collections of poems)
SUNG SEX by Kenward Elmslie & Joe Brainard
TOPIARY TREK by Kenward Elsmlie & Karl Torok (Elmslie’s poetry + the artists’ illustrations)
RIP RAP by Gary Snyder
PEACE PIECE—Bill Evans (the former poetry and latter solo piano, but both seminal works of art that had the same impact on me when first encountered)
SPLISH SPLASH—Bobby Darrin (my introduction to Darrin’s musical virtuosity)
SPLISHY SPLASHY—Lisa Hannigan (one of my recent favorite songs)
MRS. MINIVER
MUCH MORE—Barbra Streisand (a Hollywood classic movie + one of Streisand’s first recordings when musicians and music lovers alike were stunned by her chops and originality: what’s the connection? both have some deeper meanings in common)
RED RIVER
SEVEN SAMARAI
BILLY BOY—Ahmad Jamal
SEXY SADIE—The Beatles
BUT BEAUTIFUL—Bing Crosby
HIGH HOPES—Frank Sinatra (two wonderfully positive songs, despite their different musical moods)
FUNNY FACE (the movie)
FUNNY FACE—Fred Astaire (the song in the movie)
BLUE BAYOU—Roy Orbison
BLUE BAYOU—Linda Ronstadt
CRISS CROSS—Thelonious Monk
MONK’S MOOD—Thelonious Monk
KING KONG (the classic black-and-white original with Fay Wray)
DR. DOLITTLE (the remake with Eddie Murphy)
Friday, July 24, 2009
QUOTE (POEM) FOR THE TIMES
"Even after all this time
the sun never says
to the earth
'You owe me.'
Look what happens
with a love like that.
It lights up the
whole sky."
—Hafiz (the 14th-Century Persian poet, from a new translataion by Mahmood Karimi-Hakak and Bill Wolak)
the sun never says
to the earth
'You owe me.'
Look what happens
with a love like that.
It lights up the
whole sky."
—Hafiz (the 14th-Century Persian poet, from a new translataion by Mahmood Karimi-Hakak and Bill Wolak)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
