Monthly Archives: January 2006

start

Posted on by

“We can safely assert, even, that human civilization has added no essential feature to the general idea of play. Animals play just like men. We have only to watch young dogs to see that all the essentials of human play are present in their merry gambols. They invite one another to play by a certain ceremoniousness of attitude and gesture. They keep to the rule that you shall not bite, or not bite hard, your brother’s ear. They pretend to get terribly angry. And – what is most important – in all these doings they plainly experience tremendous fun and enjoyment. Such rompings of young dogs are only one of the simpler forms of animal play. There are other, much more highly developed forms: regular contests and beautiful performances before an admiring public.”

(Johan Huizinga, Homo ludens: a study of the play element in culture.)

found epigraphs, cont’d.

Posted on by

“. . . Kearns had the fortune to meet the two fighters who in my opinion had the best ring names of all time – Honey Melody and Mysterious Billy Smith. Smith was also a welterweight champion. ‘He was always doing something mysterious,’ Kearns says. ‘Like he would step on your foot, and when you looked down, he would bite you on the ear. If I had a fighter like that now, I could lick heavyweights. . . .”

(A. J. Liebling, The Sweet Science, p.69, quoted in Alice Notley’s notes on Ted Berrigan’s “Sonnet XIX”.)

eagleton for [some other] day

Posted on by

“. . . but he suffered from the empiricist illustion that what was real was what you could smell with your own fingers. Samuel Johnson held much the same view – and if Johnson is the kind of ‘character’ the English adore, it is not only because they take a stoutly individualist delight in the idiosyncratic, but because a ‘character’ represents the tangible truth of a person rather than the abstract truth of an idea.

Hence the English obsession with biography, which is among other things a covert anti-intellectualism.”

(Terry Eagleton, “Reach-Me-Down Romantic” in the London Review of Books, 19 June 2003)

mandeville

Posted on by

“Though Sir John Mandeville (in his Travels, among the earliest and most heroic of plagiaries in the French) confessed, “Of Paradise I cannot speak properly, for I was not there”: what matter? Here above, the concrete cliffs had disappeared, only their lights studding darkness which posed as space and postured firmament.”

(The Recognitions, p. 387.)

the girl (ii)

Posted on by

The girl (II)

On a bench along an avenue sat a girl. All around her lay gardens with charming houses inside, and the girl, you might say, was lovely to look at.

Everyone who saw her sitting quietly on her own had a desire to engage her in conversation. Soon someone stepped up and offered her a book to read. Thanking him, she turned down his offer, however, saying she wished nothing more than to sit quietly.

The rejected one withdrew, and then another courteous individual approached to ask whether he might have the pleasure of inviting her to dinner.

Her response to this generous petition was to reply that she had no desire to eat, she was luxuriating in the simplicity of her wants, which afforded her complete satisfaction with herself and the world around her. She thought it more pleasant to sit quietly than go to a restaurant.

When the inquirer had left, there appeared before her attractive face a person who tried to persuade her to venture a gondola ride with him.

Such an excursion would lead to something else unnecessary, she instructively brought forth, adding she would rather think quietly upon her bench about some arbitrary matter than be prevailed upon to amuse herself.

When the chivalrous one had left the scene of his efforts to be gallant and generous, she was offered a bouquet of flowers. She shook her head, stating she wished to sit quietly and not so much as stir a finger to accept this small tribute, which might allow her to give herself airs.

Small birds were trilling in the treetops, the sun shone down the avenue, people strolled to and fro, and water swam past the girl.

She was grateful to the sun, the twittering she found delightful, and the people she compared to the water that came and went.

(Robert Walser, trans. Susan Bernovsky)

quoted quotes

Posted on by

“How, he asked, could these people prate of realism when they had never even begun to understand what goes on in a painting? That’s what reality is.”

(Pierre Daix, Picasso: life and art, trans. Elizabeth Emmet (New York: Harper Collins, 1993), 320, quoted in William S. Wilson, “Picasso”, College Art Association Art Journal, Spring 1997)

as above . . .

Posted on by

“‘To the pure, all things are pure,’ an artist said to me in 1955, while gathering art supplies in the gutter as part of an apologia for anomalies.”

(W. S. Wilson, “Report from New York: Abstract Expressionism, on a Manhattan ice floe II”, Artspace, July/August 1992)

. . . so below

Posted on by

“[Jasper] Johns lets the conventional laws of thought lapse in order to be in more direct touch with his experience. ‘”Looking” is and is not “eating” and “being eaten.”‘ This thought, uninhibited by the laws of thought, can be compared with a tragic European thought of a woman who later died of malnutrition. Simone Weil writes that the great sorrow of humans – La grande douleur de l’homme – which begins in childhood and lasts until death – qui commence des l’enfance et se poursuit jusque à la mort – is that to look and to eat are two different operations – c’est que regarder et manger sont deux opérations différentes. Eternal bliss is a state in which to graze is to eat: La béatitude éternelle est un état où regarder c’est manger. Weil had to go to the sphere of the eternal, to logical space, where ideas can be turned that they fit upon each other, where looking can be eating.”

(Wilson, ibid)