This Month’s Poll

I occasionally use the poll feature on Blogger. It amuses me. However, this month, I thought I would submit a question that I’ve been considering for a while. Ever since the inception of imaginary magnitude, I’ve used the pseudonym “Apostata” (which derives from Julian the Apostate). I chose to obscure my identity in order for me to say certain things about certain places/things with, well, impunity. Thing is, if I am critical at times it’s not without reason and I’m not being abusive or unduly disrespectful. In other words, I wonder if I should be “me”.

Of course, not being one who subscribes to referendum politics, how you vote may not in the end reflect my decision, but I do appreciate your feedback. I’ll have an answer to this question in February – stay tuned.

Share

Book Review: St. Petersburg: A Cultural History, by Solomon Volkov

This was one of the 500lb (226.79 kg) gorillas I had on my plate, which I was delighted to finish before the end of 2007. Delighted, I say, not necessarily because it is the best book but rather that I’ve been reading it on and off for the last three years and, like a stagnant relationship, I was looking forward to the inevitable end.

I’m an involuntary Russophile. There is no Russian blood in my family, not even neighbours. I suppose it started when I was living in Alberta, just outside of Stony Plain. It was Grade 9, and we happened to be taught Russian history. I couldn’t get enough of it. I loved it more than anything I’d had shoved down my throat to that point.

Anything I can say about Russia, I can only say as someone who’s never been there and has only read about it. In other words, I only know enough to get me in trouble. However, when I read Russian authors, hear Russian music, and see Russian art, I see a tenacious, almost ruthless, intellectual veracity. If something passionate can be dispassionately analyzed and then expressed upon, the Russians will find a way to do it definitively, the first time, and do it in such a way as to set an example for the rest of the world. When you look at Russia’s cultural contributions (art, literature, dance, film), even when produced under the worst of political/economic circumstances, the sheer quantity of excellence is devastating. I won’t even go into chess…

So, when a colleague lent me their copy of Solomon Volkov’s St. Petersburg: A Cultural History, I felt obligated to read it, if only to broaden my understanding of this cold, isolated country (as opposed to mine). Volkov is best known to music aficionados for Testamony, his controversial account of composer Dmitri Shostakovich’s life in relationship to the chilling environment set by then-ruler Josef Stalin. In St. Petersburg, Volkov tells the story of what used to be more than just the cultural capital of Russia (indeed, since the time it was forged by Peter the Great, up until when the Communists decided to uproot its status in 1918, it stood above Moscow as the nation’s crown jewel). From the inspired/tyrannical vision of Peter to build a European-styled capital, through the fall of the tsars, the rise of Communism and its slow dissolution, St. Petersburg accounts for the artists whose work boldly defined the city, its people, and who helped contribute to what Volkov puts forth as a tragic mythos.

St. Petersburg’s cultural icons are represented chapter-by-chronological chapter: Pushkin, Diaghilev, Akhmatova, Balanchine, Shostakovich, Brodsky, as well as tens (if not hundreds) of others within each part. Volkov’s effort buckles under the weight of its inclusion of *every* notable figure – the book is 624 pages long. Too long, to be honest, if you’re looking for “breezy”. I’m not sure if anyone is (or should be) looking for a “breezy” historical cultural synopsis of St. Petersburg, but this ain’t it. As a result, the book is not only exhaustive in content, but exhausting as a read. However, Volkov approaches St. Petersburg with a desire to put on paper the lives and trials of everyone who mattered – a commendable effort, if difficult to absorb for anyone who isn’t working on a thesis.

Reading how St. Petersburg was renamed Petrograd during the First World War (as a measure of anti-German sentiment), only to have it re-renamed Leningrad (regardless that Lenin couldn’t stand the place) after the rise of the Soviet Union demonstrates how the city was often cruelly abused by political authority of different stripes. For me, the horrific tragedy of what happened (not only to St. Petersburg, but to the whole of the country) after the second revolution is fascinating to read. People disappearing in the night, to be killed for treason or sent to gulags with little in the way of a trial. The state criticizing your art as “formalist” as means to bury you and any reputation you have. This is the stuff that people need to understand, not just so they understand what happened specifically during Soviet rule, but so that similar developments can be thwarted in the future.

Whether this is the book people should be reading to have an understanding of St. Petersburg’s history is another question. As mentioned, it’s extremely dense and the tone is often encyclopedic, which is not exactly easy on the eyes. Volkov is successful in portraying a parallel mythology of the city that is transmuted by history, but less successful in creating any real urgency to keep reader’s attention. Constructed in chronological chapters, the sixth and final is a mess in places – obvious copyediting errors and the sense that, structurally, it was pieced together in a rush. In the end, this is a worthy reference piece for its extensive (and sometimes first-hand) information, but I wouldn’t recommend this for someone looking for a digestible (read: concise) narrative.

St. Petersburg: A Cultural History, by Solomon Volkov (ISBN: 978-0028740522), is available at a fine independent bookseller near you, or online at various sources.

Note: I would like to go to St. Petersburg some day. If you are familiar with the city and have any tips on places to stay (or not stay), sights to see, and/or cultural anomalies that a traveller should be aware of, any information would be appreciated.

Share

Tidings

A warm hello from a cold part of the world (-14 C, without the windchill). Glad tidings to all those who pass by this part of the woods, whether you be regular passers-by or new readers. It looks like 2008 will be an interesting year, if only because I want it to.

As you may have noticed, I’ve been able to post more photographs lately (lest my photoblogs.org membership be contested), even though they were taken last September. I’ve been so swamped with work since then that I was only able to pick up my camera yesterday to take some shots of the new snow. I hope to have some shots up within the next month. For those who don’t know (prefaced here), I’m a traditional analog photographer – I use a Russian-made Leica rip-off manufactured in the 1960’s and shoot slide film. For all you junior rangers, that means shooting the roll, taking it to a lab, getting the slides back, scanning them, formatting/tweaking them digitally, and then uploading. You kids and your fancy-dancy digital cameras…

The new year welcomes, among many assorted developments, a new blog from the man who was my mentor at Humber College’s School for Writers, DM Thomas (author of The White Hotel). Also, as normally happens during the “holiday season”, the new year brings the beginnings of spiralling chaos somewhere in the world – this time it’s Kenya. Normally, the holiday horror is courtesy of a South Asian tsunami or some other badly-timed natural phenomena or accident (I’m looking at you Bangladesh, you and your less-than-impervious ferries). In Kenya’s case, it’s an election, the disputed results of which have inflamed tribal mistrust, culminating in the burning of a church where 50 people – women and children – were taking shelter. They all died. The Guardian has a reasonable summary of what’s going on there. Lastly, speaking of democracy, 2008 offers the possibility of an immensely entertaining spectacle south of the border as Democrats and Republicans in the US sort out their bullshit in public. I can only hope that, some day, the word “Independent” won’t be so distasteful in their political lexicon.

I’ll have more book reviews to come this year, featuring the new translation of War & Peace – but keep in mind that it’s over 1,200 pages, with the original French dialogue intact, with contextualized notes on every page…in other words, if I finish it in 2008, I’ll post a review. But I can multi-task, so there will be books read in the interim period. The previous year saw my completion of reading Solomon Volkov‘s St. Petersburg: A Cultural History – an on/off process that’s taken me a couple of years. One 500lb (226.79 kg) gorilla down, another to go.

Oh, if anyone from one of the three magazine publishers who I submitted to in the late summer of 2007 are reading this, I would appreciate something…anything from you in the mail. Even a rejection letter. It’s the waiting that is hardest.

Take care, all.

Share

Language and Meaning

The limits of my language mean the limits of my world

– Ludwig Wittgenstein

I was reading the New York Times Sunday Magazine last weekend and caught this article, written by Michael Pollan, about the rise of agricultural diseases. In it, he begins with bemoaning the decreasing power of the word “sustainability”, seeing as it has been turned impotent; yet another zombiefied corporate catch-phrase designed to make what one does appear useful even when in practise the reality is much more ambiguous.

There is a biting summary of this phenomena in the second paragraph of Pollan’s article:

Confucius advised that if we hoped to repair what was wrong in the world, we had best start with the “rectification of the names.” The corruption of society begins with the failure to call things by their proper names, he maintained, and its renovation begins with the reattachment of words to real things and precise concepts. So what about this much-abused pair of names, sustainable and unsustainable?

I sat at the breakfast table, thinking about this paragraph. It stunned me, because my awareness of the philosophical questioning of language – its power to distort and clarify – didn’t extend as far as back in time as Confucius. To read it made me understand that this conflict – the fight to keep language from becoming a meaningless putty in the hands of technocrats – has been going on probably since the dawn of communication. It wasn’t until reading, of all people, Confucius – that old aphorism-spewing chestnut – speak about it that my understanding of the conflict was deepened.

The two writers who outlined this conflict most beautifully for me were Wittgenstein, quoted at the top (from his treatise, Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus) and John Ralston Saul, who rallied against the rise of technocrats most effectively in his books Voltaire’s Bastards, and The Unconscious Civilization. Each fulfilled a means of illuminating the power of language in a way that was neither impractically academic nor precious. Saul warns about how the images and words we share can be/have been actively distorted by those with corrupting self-interest. Wittgenstein’s very philosophy is about the parsing of truth and falsity (or senselessness, as he would put it) in how we use language to construct a world view.

With the discovery of Confucius’ addition to this subject, I now have more to research and reflect upon. I suppose I’m fascinated with this subject, and for reasons I don’t think are trivial. We are beset by corrupted means of communication every day: images that lie as well as they seduce, thoughts withheld from publication/broadcast because of vested interests. And yet, most importantly, I believe it’s also language that can save us – the very tools used to fool us can be used to liberate.

I suppose one of the first questions I have is whether there are more than a handful of people out there who give a shit, or whether this is a pursuit (non-Quixotic, I insist) only a begrudging elite will ever have interest in following. Sometimes I’m haunted by the words of writer William Sturgeon, who – when asked if it was true that he thought 90% of science fiction was crap – answered that, actually, 90% of everything is crap. What haunts me is how this somewhat off-the-cuff pronouncement translates into the percentage of everyday people who truly care enough about things like this. It’s important to me that people understand that the corruption of language (visual, textual, audible) is not simply an academic concern, and that it’s possible to put up an effective, civil defense against it.

Update: For more on Confucius and the “rectification of names”, please see this link for some context.

Share

Book Review: The Odyssey, by Homer

“As soon as Dawn with her rose-red fingers shone once more […]”

Homer’s Odyssey is one of the 500lb (or 226.796kg) gorillas I’ve been reading as of late. I came to it strangely. You see, eventually I want to read James Joyce’s Ulysses (a gorilla estimated to weigh a half-tonne). I knew that it was going to be a slog, so I did some research in preparation. Lo, it was suggested I read The Odyssey, as Ulysses tends to make reference to it. And thus, the Fates, if not Athena herself, recommended my next book.

The Odyssey isn’t a novel, but rather a song/poem much in the same way as the ancient epic, Gilgamesh (and if you don’t know what that is – and no, it’s not a reference to the evil magician from the Smurfs – don’t worry about it. I’m just trying to find another example that isn’t also another Greek work from the same period). It was never originally written down, but rather carried from person to person in the same way you would hand someone a CD of a song you’d like them to hear. Preserved through history as an oratorical epic, Homer’s Odyssey is an account of Odysseus, the Achaean king/hero, and his Job-like 10 year quest to return to his homeland, Ithica, having fought a decade before in the Battle of Troy (recounted in Homer’s earlier work, The Illiad).

What’s immediately engaging about the telling of The Odyssey is its surprisingly non-linear construction. We don’t start with the fall of Troy and Odysseus’ return to Ithica. Rather, we begin with the immortal goddess, Athena, seeking to undo the curse laid upon Odysseus from the earthquake god, Poseidon. From there, she confronts Odysseus’ son, Telemachus, living with his mother, Penelope, in Odysseus’ Ithican palace, now taken over with young suitors angling to wed Odysseus’ abandoned wife, laying waste to his kingdom in the process (note: the Greek gods tended not to come down and appear to mortals as themselves, but rather as fellow mortals – presumably shy folk that they are).

It is only after this substantial preamble that we – in filmic terms – cut to Odysseus, stranded on the isle of the immortal goddess, Calypso, where she has kept him for years as her…well…is “recalcitrant love-slave” applicable? Yes? Okay then. It is only through Athena’s indirect intervention that Odysseus is allowed to leave and finish his journey. Along the way, he is eventually allowed to provide the details of his painful journey since the fall of Troy: the land of the Cyclops, the Sirens, the Lotus Eaters, the thunder of Zeus, the House of Death, the nature of Poseidon’s curse. If you have any inkling or interest in swashbuckling adventure, heroic tragedy, monsters, mythology, or men transformed into sheep, there is no reason not to follow Odysseus’ tale.

Even preserved in verse-form (read: there’s half as much text on the page as in a typical novel), The Odyssey moves at a fast clip – though its thickness may intimidate you at first glance on the shelf. It’s a legendary tale that’s not like cough syrup to read – in fact, you may just find inspiration in its construction, evocativeness, and imagination.

The Odyssey, by Homer (ISBN: 978-0140268867) is available at a fine independent bookseller near you, or at any number of online sources. Please note: this review is based on the award-winning 1996 translation by Robert Fagles, who also produced a version of Homer’s Illiad. For those on the fence, there is a very readable summary of the book and its history here.

Share

Requiems Not Required: Jazz and Classical

Just today, I was sitting in the kitchen of a post production audio house – my current temporary office – and found myself inexplicably tuning in to what was playing on the radio: Schubert’s Symphony No.5. It’s a dreadfully beautiful piece of music. I say dreadfully, because it’s so evocative as to remove my mind from the mountain of very important things I have to tend to.

Thing is, I’m pretty sure I’m the only one in the building who could either name what was being played, or who would allow themself to be affected (nay swoon). But it’s not like I set out one day in my youth, predetermined to “learn” classical music. I don’t think anyone does, regardless of what it is we end up liking. Often we come across these things circumstantially. If it hadn’t been for my watching A Death in Venice on TV one night long ago, I probably wouldn’t have sought Schubert’s symphony, nor the original story by Thomas Mann. I should also thank the old Warner Brothers cartoons, in particular the Bugs Bunny classic The Rabbit of Seville (riffing brilliantly and faithfully on Rossini’s Barber of Seville).

Jazz came to me later, introduced by my flipping around the radio, looking for something other than Top-40 pap. And like everything I love, once I get hooked I find myself wanting to know more, filling in the holes illuminated by the light of my curiosity. I’m prone to infatuation and, not entirely unlike the tragic protagonist of Mann’s Venice, find myself obsessed to learn as much as possible about these things.

The problem is that both Classical and Jazz, while not dead, are held in a stasis by so-called Classical and Jazz “lovers” who seek, paternalistically, to coddle them like glass-boned children, halting their growth (intentionally or not) and – as a dire result – their acceptance to new generations.

To some, this statement is nothing short of heresy. In Reflections of a Siamese Twin, John Ralston Saul – writing about the aggressive protectionism of French language in Quebec – made two valuable insights which also reflect on the state of Classical and Jazz music. First, that culture is not something which society should attempt to create, control, or destroy to meet our fashionable needs – it’s a living organism which follows its own path. Second, that the only languages which need protection are dead languages. That is to say, he was criticising those who strove to legally protect and manipulate something which didn’t require it in the first place.

The problem isn’t that most of us don’t tune-in to Classical or Jazz radio. The problem is that most everything programmed on these stations (with varying degrees, depending upon where you’re located) is safe, old, and terribly predictable. Say what you will about the soulless depths of corporate-run, computer-programmed Top 40 radio, but one thing you can’t deny is that they play songs written during this century (already nearly 8 years old). Jazz and Classical radio suffers from a predilection: only play the standards. Their philosophy: who cares if you play three different interpretations of Lullaby of Birdland seven times a day – it’s a standard. Who cares if the daily playlist is the same tired variation of Mozart, Brahms, and Beethoven – they’re popular.

They’re partially correct: Lullaby of Birdland is a standard, and those three dead white German guys are popular. For both genres, deservedly so. But, in a contemporary sense, it’s only to the extent of pleasing people who have no desire to see either Classical or Jazz develop in different directions. When was the last time you heard anything from Miles Davis’ Bitches Brew on the radio? That album was released almost 40 years ago – when was the last time you heard a single Classical composition written within this time?

We can’t rely on movie soundtracks and cartoons to bring notice to the brilliance of older forms of music – if we do, they will always remain “older forms of music” rather than the living, breathing spirits which they are. We do both Classical and Jazz a disservice by sneering at contemporary innovation – I contend that it’s the snobs who have done the most damage. We can’t rely solely on the likes of Wynton Marsalis as appointed sentinels to tell us what is or what is not jazz music. We can’t forsake contemporary composers, like Alexina Louie, to keep programming the same tiresome Mozart/Brahms/Beethoven lineup for our orchestras.

People should be freely exposed to different forms of music. Often. However, it should be neither prescriptive nor mandated. Assuming we are only as developed as the environment we are exposed to, it makes critical sense to see, hear, and experience as many things as possible. It is for this reason that protectionism makes no sense.

[author’s note: when using the terms “Classical” and “Jazz”, I’m using popular terminology. Technically, within both (admittedly very broad) genres, there are countless sub-categories (Baroque, Be-Bop, Fusion, Romantic…).]

Share