Tritones & Sad-Eyed Ladies: Chronicle 66

“We have to bring out knowledge where we don’t expect it.” – Roland Barthes

Isn’t it a fascinating quote?

We bring out knowledge in articles, in schools, in books: exactly WHERE we expect knowledge to be shown, that’s good.

But why should we do this in “unexpected” places? To create surprises? To aim at a new audience? Elegance of life?

I don’t know but I find it interesting.

But OK: where?

At work? Social media? Could we talk about Barthes on TikTok?

Knowledge? Music isn’t knowledge. So, what? Humanities? History? How? What form? Courses?

oOOo

Ahhh a day off, and a lonely time…

Let’s choose a musician (Gustav Holst, Chick Corea), ask some web pages, take some books, and explore. Finding names: “The Could Messenger”, “Now He Sings, Now He Sobs”. But I ended listening to “Jan Bang, Erik Honore, Gaute Storaas and Arve Henriksen – (2013) – Knut Hamsuns Victoria”.

A piece of quiet music:

oOOo

I have a draft here named Blood Family/Soul Family but I only have the title here. It’s an old structure, we know and see what it is. The problem is that we “know” our blood family – the soul family is elsewhere. We meet them later, maybe never. Maybe some work is needed to find the soul family. Not some work, but some… accuracy, or attention. But not being a tracker, right? One does not hunt a soulmate, but one can be ready to meet one.

oOOo

I made some photos which need some poetry.

oOOo

In French, there’s a song: “J’attendrai” (I will wait) – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%27attendrai. See lyrics. Other versions.

oOOo

Riskiest modulation of The Beatles: If I fell. It’s funny to hear it “explained” by a scholar with tritones, knowing that John Lennon liked to build song by “making piles of random chords”. I used to do it. Listening to the chords in loop triggers melodies.

oOOo

I opened a book about Bob Dylan and found that he had be signed on Columbia in the sixties by a guy named John Hammond. Hmm:

“What I wanted to do with Bobby was just to get him to sound in the studio as natural, just as he was in person, and have that extraordinary personality come thru…. After all, he’s not a great harmonica player, and he’s not a great guitar player, and he’s not a great singer. He just happens to be an original. And I just wanted to have that originality come thru.”

Producers who… feel something – the archetype probably being George Martin, often called the “fifth Beatles” (producer, arranger), and there’s another man, the manager (Brian Epstein). Hmm:

“…as John Lennon and Paul McCartney joined in with jokes and comic wordplay, that made Martin think that he should sign them to a contract for their wit alone.”

Stig Anderson was one of the dominant figures behind ABBA. He built them, co-wrote lyrics, etc, he’s sometimes called “The fifth member or ABBA” (well well), etc…

It is funny to read about the “guy behind”, when you read about big music stars. Who’s behind Queen, Elvis Presley? I’d like to find a book about them. What did they bring? What did they see? What have they in common?

oOOo

I opened a book about Bob Dylan’s songs, finding pages about one single song: Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands. In itself, a big source of analysis games.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sad_Eyed_Lady_of_the_Lowlands

  • It’s a very long “poem”, full of mysterious words. I found a French web page about Dylan’s lyrics style, closer than Rimbaud than American or English poets ( https://www.bobdylan-fr.com/articles/jeffreyside.html -> Google Translate it!).
  • Instead of “stories” or descriptions, images so weird that people scratch their heads in wonder. Like in Umberto Eco & the Open Work, the audience built their signification.
  • Therefore everybody finds something talking about themselves. Read the comments everywhere.
  • Dylan’s recording of the song is interesting.
  • It’s said to be a “hymn” to his lover. But some guys think that it’s about Dylan’s “anima” (the unconscious feminine side of a man – animus being the unconscious masculine side of a woman).
  • It’s a waltz.
  • The album was released in 1966; I’ve seen June, but also May 16th (I was born on May 15th this year).
  • The sleeve’s blurry.

Well: voilà some seeds, dig a hole, put the seed, see what blossoms.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anima_and_animus

With your mercury mouth in the missionary times
And your eyes like smoke and your prayers like rhymes
And your silver cross, and your voice like chimes
Oh, who do they think could bury you?
With your pockets well protected at last
And your streetcar visions which you place on the grass
And your flesh like silk, and your face like glass
Who could they get to carry you?
Sad-eyed lady of the lowlands
Where the sad-eyed prophet says that no man comes
My warehouse eyes, my Arabian drums
Should I put them by your gate
Or, sad-eyed lady, should I wait?

Here it is by Joan Baez :

oOOo

Isn’t the best stimulant the curiosity of the person you love?

Thanks for reading. Happy New Year!

JP

the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken

I decided then to take as a guide for my new analysis the attraction I felt for certain photographs. For this attraction, at least, I was certain. What to call it? Fascination? No, this photograph which I pick out and which I love has nothing in common with the shiny point which sways before your eyes and makes your head swim; what it produces in me is the very opposite of hebetude; something more like an internal agitation, an excitement, a certain labor too, the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken.

Roland Barthes – Camera Lucida

 

img767

Photo : Burt Glinn

 

…what it produces in me is the very opposite of hebetude; something more like an internal agitation, an excitement, a certain labor too, the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken.

Isn’t it great? Isn’t it the great, perfect expression of a seed for a thinker? What catches your brain, and why? A photography, a poem, a music? A conversation, an idea, a blog article?

Who knows this? :

the pressure of the unspeakable which wants to be spoken

A thinktool for bloggers : Intertextuality (“the meaning of a text does not reside in the text”)

In this article I chose the French way, Barthes’ interpretation :

“An intertextual view of literature, as shown by Roland Barthes, supports the concept that the meaning of a text does not reside in the text, but is produced by the reader in relation not only to the text in question, but also the complex network of texts invoked in the reading process” (Wikipedia)

Barthes always attacked the notions of “stable meaning and unquestionable truth” : any text offers a plurality of meanings and is also weaved out of numerous already existing texts – Barthes probably hated being told to sit still!

Thus there are two types of readers :

  1. Consumers who read the work for stable meaning
  2. Readers who are productive in their reading

 

Worse (or better, depends on you) :

“It is language which speaks, not the author; to write is… to reach the point where only language acts, “performs”, and not “me””

plus :

“The author has the role of a compiler, or arranger, of pre-existent possibilities within the language system”.

 

OK, that’s enough. Here we are with a pattern which can be examined and played by bloggers :

  1. Do you write to say your say, do you aim stable meaning, or do you wish your readers to be the second kind, the “producers”, who will take your ideas/tools and use them THEIR way?
  2. Of COURSE you stole all your articles from others : books, magazines, articles, conversations. What did you do with this material? You simplified? You combined? You linked? You melted? What are the engines you use in your writer’s brain?
  3. “It is language which speaks, not the author”, what does that mean? How (and why) would you try to reach that curious and magic state? Where’s the balance between your logic and your flow?
  4. Do you draw maps? What stays opened in your articles? Do you “close” all of them at the end? Do you offer fishes, or ways of fishing?

 

“The role of the artist is to ask questions, not answer them.”
Anton Chekhov

 

Thanks for reading!

(wjtk_o)11378263_1599589950323633_277534454_n.jpg

Instagram : wjtk_o

 

Continue reading

Embrace, Clasp, Sweet Immobility…

Nahhh it’s not a “hug”, it’s not sex, not at all!

It’s when you’re in bed with your lover. You hold each other.

Each couple has its way. You can hold hands. You can hold the other one like a baby. You can protect your lover. You can lay one next to the other, and hold hands only. You can stare at each other, or close your eyes. You can… spoon.

You know exactly what to to. And you know exactly when you both don’t move anymore…

Right?

Here you are.

Immobility

Then, after a moment, it stops. Your desire climbs. Or… you talk. Words weaving, words of love. Or you laugh – too much happiness!

 

Have a nice Sunday!

1204622722203367760_1204809845.jpg