Blame it on Elder Scrolls Online

Sorry, this week has totally been a bust with regards to new posts, but I have been hanging out in Elder Scrolls Online (One Tamriel and all that), and in my efforts to level a character, I have neglected my blog.  Apologies to anyone regularly reading.

Focus would be nice

Looking over this blog there is a post referencing Carlos Pintado's "Nine Coins" and believe it or not I still have not finished it.  As such, it is my next goal, because I have way too much piled up in that chair, and the pile keeps getting bigger.

Anyway, after having spent the day in Elder Scrolls Online (ESO) doing their holiday quests, I decided to venture away from the computer.  In doing so, I found the poem "Roman Catalog" which has this final stanza:

The light would sometimes skim across him, shyly,
and I was the light
of a lamp about to go out.

This stanza is preceded by one mentioning a nude person and a wicked beast, which sets this one up nicely, but I like this stanza better.

IRL, by Tommy Pico

I forgot to mention in my earlier post that I finished Pico's "IRL" which was a fun read, well as fun a poetry is supposed to be.  It gave all the things a long poem should give you, warm fuzzies, delightful imagery, and the occasional punch to the gut.  On FB, I advised folks to add it to their reading lists, especially if it wasn't something they would normally read, and I will repeat that recommendation here.  It is a good thing I have plenty of books to read from now until April, when the second book is due.

Here is a link that should allow you to order in pdf or print.

Fragmentation (and assimilation)

Our country is supposed to be one big melting pot, and that probably worked fine never.  With our start we had the have and have-nots (slaves), and as time progressed, the have-nots moved to include the Irish, Polish, Jews, and Germans (not in that order).  The newer have-nots eventually assimilated, but the descendants of the slaves, in general, continued to be the have-nots.  We also began seeing asians and hispanics, many of which also assimilated, though as yet to not the same degree, as Chinatowns and hispanic neighborhoods in major cities attest, but give them time and eventually all will boil down into the pot.  Eventually they should all boil down into Americans, but for some reason, something has prompted the need for American to have a prefix, so now we don't have Americans, but we have Nationality/Ethnicity-Americans.  And while some of these Americans have merged seamlessly with the whole, many have not, and at the rate we are going, they won't.  For me, three groups stand out in this tapestry, African, Hispanic, and Native, as groups that still receive a disproportionate amount of bigotry, and oddly, those groups have been with us the longest.  I wish the answer was just as simple as "We are all Americans," but it isn't and until everyone, regardless of their hyphenate, is treated equally, we will continue to have problems.  At some point Euro-Americans need to get the point, and as long as they continue to believe they hold all the answers, while apparently holding none (since they don't discuss these things with the others), we will have discord.  That discord will only be amplified as Muslim-Americans are added to the mix, especially as they are being demonized, perhaps worse than the Irish.  Distrust of change is fine, but at some point that distrust needle should move forward, and how long is too long... slavery ended in this country over 150 years ago, the indigenous peoples were here before us, and after the Mexican-American war (which ended in 1848) the United States added a large hispanic population.

If assimilation is them giving up knowledge of their mother tongue and tossing their culture aside, then I would say the cost outweighs the benefits, but if assimilation means treating them fairly in the eyes of the law, perhaps we should try for that, because in this country the law is supposed to treat everyone fairly, even rich billionaires.

[This sort of rambled, but I am posting it anyway.]

What caught my eye recently (Poetry)

Perhaps I should wait until I finish them before writing about books, but I don't really want to, especially with poetry, and especially when I find a bit I want to share.  I should probably transcribe it into some notebook or whatever, but I am not doing that, I am sharing with anyone who cares to read it a few lines I liked:

Books are fallible, towers
of letters with the power
you give them.  It's heartbreaking
to watch your pillars fall
                                (IRL, p.70, Tommy Pico)

I'll keep my views to myself on this one, since I truly think everyone reads poetry differently, even those who claim not to get it, when they read it, may find something, even if that something is confusion.  Poetry is words, and I will be the first to say that I don't "get" all poetry, and if a poem doesn't grab my attention, then I will finish it, but not really look for other poems by that author.

There was something else I ran across sometime late last week.  Amongst other things I am hoping to finish up "The Best American Poetry (2015)" before the year ends.  There are a lot of gems in the book, but I really like "Body & Kentucky Bourbon" by Saeed Jones.  It started evocatively and just continued on:

In the dark, my mind's night, I go back
to your work-calloused hands, your body

an the memory of fields I no longer see.

If I am not careful, I would just type the whole poem (it is that good, and not really that long), but I am not sure the publisher would appreciate that.

Weekends mean work for me, so I don't get things updated here often then, if you are reading, don't get distressed with nothing new on those days.

Name calling and other 21st Century style political discussion

I am constantly amazed that Bill Clinton left office with a balanced budget in place, and did that while working with a Republican Congress.  What I have seen on so many comment posts about politics is they are filled with petty nicknames for the two parties which is just pathetic.  I have no love of Trump, personally I think he is a disaster, but just as I have had to listen streams of discontent with Obama over the past eight years, some coming from Trump himself, then I only think it is fair that Trump's supporters gird their loins and listen to the other side as well, even if you don't agree.  The name calling won't stop because for whatever reason it makes people feel good (I showed them I called them a name!), and the fact it makes everyone sound like they are in a schoolyard reduces the level of discourse.  I won't deny that it has always been a part of the discourse, but too often it seems to drown out the voices who bring valid points.  Frequently the counter argument is something to the effect of you (insert political party here) are so dumb you just don't get it, and to add another derail argument, "This is Fake News, so there is nothing to respond to."  Whatever the concern is it is Fake News, and if it is sourced from the government, "they can't be trusted."  The current level of discourse is such that no source is accurate or reliable.  Perhaps the left, with its general trust in government intelligence, though that intelligence has proven itself fallible, should just go out an make unfounded statements, the most egregious currently going around is about "millions of illegal voters for Clinton," a number I have seen rounded to three million, just to wipe out her popular vote margin of victory.  They repeat Trumps comments, but even Trump has no support on this one, and as pointed out by some folks, many of the states elections are run by Republicans, meaning that if there is this massive voter fraud, it was done with Republicans at the helm, which means Trump is condemning his own supporters (again, nothing new).

Here is a link to a story from my Google+ feed that has comments that support much of what I have said (prompting this post).

Lionel Shriver (again)

A few months back I commented that I supported Lionel Shriver's assertion that fiction writers should be able to write what they would like.  I still believe that, though if I had known that she had actually shown up in a sombrero, there is a good chance I would have looked at her comments differently.  Obviously she wanted to cause an uproar and start a conversation, and it is debatable whether it could have been done as effectively without such an in your face visual.  I do think fiction writers should be able to write what they would like, but I also feel that if they do a poor job, and the community wronged expresses their opinions as to why, then the author should listen.  The commentary may or may not influence the author in future works, but listening and weighing those opinions allow an author to improve.  In The Guardian (UK), someone said she handled it crassly, but I honestly do think, as Trump proved, that an in your face so you can't ignore it approach is sometimes necessary.  The conversation was started; however gracelessly, and it is one that need to be broached.  We, as humans, regardless of race or creed, need to figure out how to get along, but with no conversation even begun, then there will be no road to resolution, and because it started a widespread discussion then it was a useful bit of theatrics.  Just because something is politically correct doesn't mean that it is effective, and for proof look at Mel Brooks' "Blazing Saddles," which is so politically incorrect, but still so terribly accurate with regards to the issues it explores-- in your face is sometimes what needs to be done, though it isn't comfortable, but it makes it harder to ignore and sweep under the carpet, or bury under polite terminology.

On a side note, the recent campaign had supporters of Trump saying they weren't racist, homophobic, or misogynist, but the fact that Trump's campaign was built, to some degree, on all three indicates that as a Trump supporter you are fine with those, even if you don't consider yourself a racist misogynist, or homophobe.  Clinton didn't run a campaign suggesting the government should move everything to private servers, and the government's internal watchdogs decided not to press charges for her perceived wrongs.  I don't pretend Clinton was the perfect candidate, but I still can't comprehend what was inherently wrong with her, because considering Trump, it wasn't her character, and considering the FBI basically cleared her on the email thing, it wasn't because there was dread over impending indictment, and considering her work as a Senator and as Secretary of State it wasn't because she was unqualified.  All that seems left is the female card, but I could be wrong and maybe there was something else (to do with the Clinton Foundation possibly?).  Anyway, my step-father's preferred candidate, one he called an idiot, is now president elect-- too bad I have no interest in supporting such a misogynistic, racist, and homophobe supporting bigot, so everyone will get at least four years of what I have listened to for the last eight.

Alt Right = Fascist Nincompoops

"Our lived experience is being a young, white person in 21st century America, [and] seeing your identity be demeaned.” -Richard B. Spencer (as quoted in the Atlantic)

I am not quite sure what he means by having your "white" identity demeaned.

Perhaps because I am gay I didn't notice my "white" identity being demeaned because
too many old white dudes were too busy telling me
     what I was allowed to do in my bedroom
     or who I was allowed to marry (which is still going on).
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
I was paying too much attention to a war with Iraq,
    a war the US got into because old white men
    thought old white man thoughts.
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
the banks took America for a ride
   raping the poor and enriching JP Morgan
   and Co (more old white men).
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
not being a completely self-serving jerk off
   I was actually paying attention
   not lamenting with the old white men
            About times past, when the news didn't care about
            Lynching, Misogyny, Queers.
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
while too many white folks -young & old- complain
  I have yet to figure out what they
  bemoan so loudly as to wish for the KKK to save the day.
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
I believe Richard B Spencer is
  absolutely full of bullshit
  brandishing hate because he can.
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
the "white" identity has never been demeaned--
  cultural sensitivity is not ranking cultures
  no one culture better than another (dunderheads all).
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
while they voted for Trump, my parents
  also taught me to respect others
  though obviously that advice isn't for them.
             (Do as I say, not as I do--Mantra of parents everywhere.)
Perhaps I didn't notice it being demeaned because
I never felt demeaned because I am white
  no, but I have felt it because I am gay--
 


 

A Correlation too good not to post

As anyone looking at the photos of my book piles will attest, I generally have a bit much on the to read list.  Anyway, after I finished Smith's poetry earlier this evening, I picked up "Art in America," which is a series of essays, and which I started a few weeks back, reading something now and again as the mood struck.  Tonight, I was reading James Agee's "Introduction to Helen Levitt's A Way of Seeing,"  and what struck me most is that in much of Agee's description of photography, you could substitute internet and still be accurate.  All the hubbub over "Fake" news is what makes this section seem particularly important.

"It is probably well on the conservative side to estimate that during the past ten to fifteen years the camera has destroyed a thousand pairs of eyes, corrupted ten thousand, and seriously deceived a hundred thousand, for every one pair that it has opened, and taught."

That is the first bit that caught my attention.  Substitute internet for camera and the figures still likely match up.  The internet makes it incredibly easy to find something you can "believe," whether it is factual or not seems irrelevant, since, as the phrase goes, "it is on the internet."

"It is in fact hard to get the camera to tell the truth; yet it can be made to, in many ways and on many levels.  Some of the best photographs we are ever likely to see are innocent domestic snapshots, city postcards, and news and scientific photographs.  If we know how, moreover, we can enjoy and learn a great deal from essentially untrue photographs, such as studio portraits, movie romances, or the national and class types apotheosized in ads for insurance or feminine hygiene."

Again, replace camera with internet and this time replace photographs with websites.  Eventually you begin to see the picture that is being painted.  By website, I am referring to something lost in the ether, when the internet was newish and folks actually posted things on "their" website, rather than using Facebook or Google+.  Both of those allow some of that when you look at photos and ignore a newsfeed populated by friends rather than what the individual posted.  Facebook though, and I am guessing Google does it too, is automated enough that its hand in what can be posted can seem heavy, just recall the fracas over the Vietnamese girl Agent Orange picture when it surfaced in FB.  World famous photograph showing the horrors of war, but (until it reversed itself) FB thought it was pornography, because the girl was naked, and naked people are just not allowed.  In the age before that, if someone had complained, a computer would not have automatically censored the photo, which is why I mentioned the earlier age, before the hosting of "personal" websites actually became an act of giving all sorts of personal information to a corporate keeper.  (I am on both Google+ and Facebook, and realized Blogger is owned by Google, so I am not pretending anything or advising anyone to disconnect.)

Back to James Agee and what he said about photography.  I think the internet, for the casual peruser, can provide as much misinformation as a poorly cropped photo, where there are so many questions, it doesn't take much of a suggestion to answer them with nefarious suggestions.  Our last election cycle proved the truth of this.

Slow reading, but Poetry shouldn't be rush read

I finally finished Danez Smith's "[Insert] Boy" and was as impressed at the end as I was at the beginning.  Perhaps Neruda's "Book of Questions" wasn't the first, but in Smith's poem "Song of the Wreckage" he echoes Neruda with a series of questions.  The last three:

Who do the ants think has the best meat?

Please, will you show me something beautiful?

If I play dead, will I be acting my age?

While this Song near the end is one of the longest, if not the longest poem, in the book, I couldn't help stop and pause at these lines, especially the final one.  The entire collection deals with the gay black (african american) experience, and let me say, that his poems give an entire different light to the gay black versus gay white experience.  Aspects I could relate to, and others just moved me, and made me regret that we live in a society where such a loss of life is considered normal.  When this happened, I don't know, but too often the proof is in the newspapers, and it is an unpleasant truth, one that most Americans would pretend didn't exist.  While everyone is agreement that "Black Lives Matter," and most would argue the "ALL Lives Matter," what those people who insist on ALL are missing is that White Americans are much more "agreeable" to allowing a Black person die at the hands of the law or a vigilante than we are a White person, hence the emphasis that Black lives do matter, regardless of the indifference of Whites.  If it takes a protest to get notice, then by all means, get a protest going.  It is unfortunate that today's resurgence is just a repeat of history, and as a country we really haven't learned squat.

Before I head off to bed

I was wondering earlier today if my massive lapses in attention to this blog over the years weren't in part due to the fact that I get out of the habit of writing here.  Habits are hard to break, so I must not actually have managed to ever get into a proper one here, and I doubt that will change.  Tonight has been spent on the phone, playing Guild Wars 2, reading a Christmas romance short story, and adding a few more ornaments on the tree.  I think all of the family ornaments were hung earlier, but I hadn't put any reflective balls on it.  I think the frosted glass ornaments are pretty, and they give the tree an older feel than my plastic flamingo lights on the metallic champagne colored tree may actually deserve, but I have them, so I should use them.  I have a dozen or so medium gold balls to still hang, but that is probably tomorrow's project, and this entry is more to form habit than to share anything enlightening.

Back to the blog

I work weekends, so there is little chance I will update this on those days, unless it is before or after my twelve hour shift at work, and if it is after shift, I won't speak to how coherent any post is likely to be.  Anyway, today I received my order from Siglio Press.  Because the book I was interested in was fairly pricey, and I could get three + the one I wanted for $100, I opted to get the four.  I have started The Nancy Book, and the first essay was interesting, and my brief perusal of Joe Brainard's take on Nancy has also been fun, so if you have an interest in art from the late 60's to 70's, then I would suggest to take a gander.  One thing that struck me when I read the essay is that Joe apparently did not have much interest in making art for the investor market, so he quit rather than just produce for the sake of maximizing profits.  (The author did not put it quite this way, so you won't find that verbatim in the first essay.)

Other than that, I am still disappointed in our president-elect, and the closer we get to the inauguration, the less optimist I am, since he has yet to do anything that disproves my initial negative opinion of him, and if anything, he is increasing that bad opinion, but, hey, if he can disparage President Obama constantly for years, than certainly the populace has the ability to disparage Trump, right?  I think so, but it seems he gets a bit bent out of shape when others exercise their freedom of speech.

Frank O'Hara

One of the things I found interesting about Joe LeSueur's book (Digressions) was how totally ordinary he made Frank O'Hara's creative process seem.  He doesn't describe any great bit of drama or rituals, but rather the matter of fact style of much of the poetry relays fairly accurately the matter of fact way in which they were written.  Much of his poetry was the poetry of his days, perhaps not so esoteric as Pound, but at least it is relatable.  We all watch tv, and we have all seen movies, as well as listen to music.

I wonder sometimes if the more esoteric an author get, does it seem the audience is smaller, or just more pompous because they "get" the author?  I do think poetry should be relatable, because if it requires too much specialized knowledge, then it won't have any sort of audience.

Today's Fresh Poem (brought to you by a bit of confusion)

Here you go, what is currently obsessing me:

Fucking stupid gay white boy

Totally stressing

Race, idiotic to worry about, but

Over-ruling everything

Can I say I just like a poem?

Without mentioning the author’s race,

sexuality, gender, or whatever?

NO, I don’t want all poets to be 

Silly white boys pouting,

Complaining, kvetching,

But if the poem speaks, SINGS!

What matter the details of the poet?

Check Google+ today

All my news is there, except perhaps some comments to family on FB, though I am trying to minimize my use of that platform.  Today I read a nice article about a Reagan appointed judge who made the effort to welcome new citizens after the election, regardless of the rhetoric from the press-elect.  There was also a bit about tribal mineral rights, and whether Trump would find a way to finagle them from the tribes.  I doubt Trump truly cares about this, but as a businessman, he could certainly be swayed into seeing how money could be made by screwing the tribes over yet again.

I still haven't decorated my tree, but such is life.

Poem (#badtrumppoetry)

I posted this earlier on Twitter, but thought I would share it here, since I wonder if any of my nine followers there actually saw or could read it.  For those who can't read my scrawl, here is the transcription:

Trump will have no come to Jesus moment
Regardless what the Right thinks
His Road to Damascus
Is peppered with the bodies of children
and ends
with friends Putin and Assad

Trump will eventually get good press
Regardless what the Press thinks
His White House press room (otherwise)
Is filled with doting sycophants
so ends
with capitulation for access

Trump already has a willing Congress
Seats bought and paid for,
Their support of Fear and Hate
Pushes a disenfranchising agenda
finally ending
the Hope of America's Promise

Truly, I can't judge poetry worth diddly, and would never judge mine, since I am not sure if what I wrote technically qualifies in anything other than the Dada sense.  I like this one, and thinks it does a fair job with my thoughts, though it doesn't have the gut punch this election brought, knowing those I care about are really ok with me being second class, knowing that for whatever reason they felt the best course for this country was to court hate and discord.  The founding father's of this country did compromise, it was how we ended up with some of the less savory aspects of our history, but they did at least compromise, something these past few years has shown me that the recent Republican Congress was unwilling to do, and by that unwillingness, I think they have damaged a fundamental aspect of our government, something that at least worked towards progress, even if in small steps.

Henry Miller's Beauford Delaney piece

Tree decoration isn't going well, but reading is just fine.  My "Art in America" anthology just gave me a refresher on why I enjoy Henry Miller's writing-- that man can convey his enthusiasm, almost like you can feel it.  It probably doesn't help that I also finished a bit more of IRL, and I don't know if Pico has read Miller, but that same sort of urgency is in both of them.  In this case, both of them seem to be saying that regardless of what life tosses you, create, and make something of it.  Too often today, and I am way to guilty of this, if life tosses me lemons, I will go play a video game or get lost in a book just to avoid it.  While I am not sure how much a blog entry is something created, especially a blog entry for a blog with less than a dozen views per entry, this is something.  More of a document of what I have read, what it sparked, what I avoided doing while reading (decorating the tree), or really anything.  Maybe by the end of the year I will actually manage a total of 350 postings, which considering the age of this blog, would be a milepost of phenomenal sorts.  Those years with no postings, just mark those as years when I read or gamed or generally just stuck my head in the sand.  With the way things are going now, that may end  up being the next four years too, unless I somehow manage to keep up with The Donald posts on Google+, since I have, for the time being, stopped posting anything on Facebook, unless it is to share some bit of silliness I posted on Instagram.  Writing is good for me, just to relieve a bit of stress going through my mind.  There are some days when the blog exists side by side with the journal, though that isn't very often now.

The most important thing about social media, and the one thing that will always be my Achilles' Heel is that you need to stay active, because once you stop being active, folks go elsewhere, even friends.

OMG! 1917? Really?

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first use of the OMG acronym was in 1917, in a letter to Winston Churchill of all things.  "Letters of Note" reproduces the letter.  It surprised me that it preceded the internet and texting by so many years.  Since I am still working in "IRL,' mention of modern acronyms and other abbreviated versions of words seems fine.  I am still impressed with the book, and read a brief section tonight, as well as a bit more of "[Insert] boy," but tonight is setting up the Christmas tree, before I procrastinate until after the holiday, thereby skipping the project altogether.

Of poetry, I finally finished Joe LeSueur's "Digressions," whose title I shorten because I am too lazy to type the whole thing (or should that be keyboard the whole thing?).  I enjoyed the look into Frank O'Hara's poetry, as well as the picture of New York at that time.  It took me forever to read because I was only reading it at work, and purposefully only in small bits, like a poem at a time.  This book did do one of my favorite things for a memoir to do, which is spike my interest in other authors active at the time, and now I am contemplating ordering the works of Joe Brainard.

Aside from the tree, which still needs ornaments, today has mostly been reading from Dreamspinner Press' Advent Calendar annual event (which my browser won't open so I can link it).  "Krampus Hates Christmas" and "Matthew's Present" have been my favorites so far, followed by "The Orpheum Miracle."

What a mess of genres and books.  Someday I may actually settle down again and focus on reading those things that are supposed to be good for me (read canon), but that was twenty years ago, and while I will mingle those books in, it will likely never be my main focus again.  There is too much out there, and too many things to sample and explore.

Edited to correct spelling of Joe Brainard's name.

Romney, Petraeus, and Trump

It is interesting to note that one of the candidates for U.S. Secretary of State under Donald Trump has been convicted of the same crimes he attributed to Secretary Clinton.  How is it that while he declaimed over and over about her handling of classified materials, he is actually considering nominating someone guilty of mishandling the same types of materials.  I am going to guess that he really has no problems with the issue, and that it was just a good campaign tool.  If you need any proof of Romney's assertion that Trump is a fraud and a con-man, then look no further.

Speaking of Romney, and what will no doubt become an infamous photo of his dinner with Trump, I hope any consideration of why even meeting Trump was on the drawing board is for the same reason after her hard campaign against Obama, Hillary Clinton accepted the position, one reason being because it was for the good of the republic.  I could be wrong, but I don't recall Clinton issuing any sort of apology over what was said during the campaign, and I truthfully hope that Romney is not required to make an apology prior to accepting a nomination (if it comes down to it).  Romney spoke the truth, and it is noble to put aside differences for the good of the republic, but he should not be asked to back down from those comments.  If he does chose to do so, then I hope working for Trump doesn't eat away at his self-esteem, having taken back his words, when Trump invariably tosses him under the bus, there won't be anything left.  He is in a difficult position, but not an unheard of position, but his first priority should be to his emotional self, and if Trump chooses to force an apology prior to nominating him, then I truly hope he tells Trump to get lost.  Colin Powell is a good man who was tossed under the bus by the administration he served (and he didn't even need to eat crow first), but it still cost him greatly.  I would hate to see this recent history repeat itself on another, especially one so out-spoken in his own party about the qualities of the President-elect.