September 8, 2008

Shot In The Dark

Ah, blogging from the laundromat. Strange how the scent of dryer sheets can make it okay that they never clean the floors. The company is odd: a man asking me for the 70 cents he needs to take the bus to Old Colorado Springs, whom I oblige in true Franciscan fashion, but know that he could have walked there in the time it took to wait for that 70 cents of charity; in and out go a wide array of twenty-somethings either living in dorms or stuck in the same sort of low-rent apartment where I hang my hat; every once in awhile the out-of-place harried looking middle-class mom who suffered a washer breakdown and has three kids to dress for school tomorrow. There's no wireless so I fire-up AbiWord on craptop and word-process away.

If I were a wealthy entrepreneur I think I would own a laundromat just as a self-supporting way of feeding my latent magazine addiction, though I would replace Newsweek, O, and Fashion Monthly with poetry and archeology journals. I imagine that if I actually paid someone to keep the place clean and only held twenty or so subscriptions, I could break even.

'Twas Brillig and the Slithy Toves...

With so many authors to cover in our introductory unit on fables, so many books to give out, and so many diagnostic tests to give, my kids have been taking way too many notes and doing way too little classroom discussion. So, to spice things up a bit, I decided that our first poetry unit would be on Lewis Carroll. Everyone knows Alice in Wonderland and Through The Looking-glass, but it's always nice to come back to childhood classics and really see the beauty in them. In the case of Lewis Carroll, a method emerges from his madness after reading his poetry in large doses, especially when you realize that he was a mathematician and a professor of Logic and Mathematics at Cambridge for over half his life.

But, if there's one thing I love more than poetry, it's The Muppets, and as usual YouTube was one step ahead of me:


While Carroll appreciates nonsense, he resorts to nonsense because of a belief that on the other side of an experience, in the world of Alice, one is better able to see truth. I like that. It's why his artistic vision is valuable and enduring. His is just one more way to "tell all the Truth / but tell it slant," as Emily Dickinson put it.

Out of a complimentary Newsweek, as my tee's and dress socks enter their final cycle, I'm reading an interview with Woody Allen that actually reminded me a lot of Lewis Carroll. Woody Allen, it seems, despite a successful film career, a decade-long marriage, two beautiful adopted children, and all the artistic and professional freedom a man could dream of, isn't happy.

During the interview, Allen calls life "a meaningless little flicker," says that he "lies awake at night, terrified of the void," and that he "can't really come up with a good argument to choose life over death."

Despite using his films as something "to be focused on... ...so I don't see the big picture," he claims that in the end pleasures, however many and however good in themselves, are ultimately empty forms of distraction. In the words of the interviewer "the moments don't add up to redemption," and in the words of Allen "it doesn't accrue to anything."

So, how does someone who admits that he has made no progress on alleviating this nihilistic vision that he claims to have held from age five continue to entertain us after decades of movie-making? I have no clue. Before reading this article I was pretty convinced that at some time I would have to make it a point to take in a wide sampling of Woody Allen's films, but now I wonder if it would be worthwhile to do so.

Can a great artist really hold that nothing is eternal? That there are no truths and no constants? That human nature is ever-changing? That we're all that we see and seem is just a dream within a dream? Or, is Woody Allen just another form of distraction: a romance novel, a soap opera, a Harry Potter knock-off, and another sequel to High School Musical?

See you next month you great quarter-stealing monstrosity. Tu illegitime magne!!

And, because you were all waiting with bated breath, my favorite shows of all time in no particular order are: The Muppet Show, Mystery Science Theater 3000, Scrubs, The Red Green Show, and Two Guys a Girl and a Pizza Place.

2 comments:

Patrick Kilchermann said...

"Or, is Woody Allen just another form of distraction..."

There are no distractions, as you say there are. There are only people who allow themselves to become distracted.

That Allen is an actor, to me, makes more sense of the situation than less: I see a man who is uncomfortable with who he is, and enjoys being able to become something and someone else, a 'person with a purpose' through acting.

I know zero about Woody Allen other than that he was in 'Cheers' and 'The Thin Red Line'. But I do know that a portfolio and career of films is as much the sign of an artist as weaponry and a short haircut is the sign of a warrior.

Patrick Kilchermann said...

In addition to replacing "is" with "are" in both instances within that last post (originally I had just written 'portfolio' and 'weaponry'... after I added the second terms in each I didn't re-read), I'd like to elaborate on 'distractions' a little more.

I've come to know 'distraction' as quite a subjective consequence, and a judgmental description.

Where you may find 'High School Musical' as a distraction, it is possible that in it, someone else may find confidence or courage. I've never seen the show, but I do know that it wouldn't be successful if it wasn't 'good' to some degree.

The same is true for nearly* everything. Where one person may find absolute spiritual fulfillment through protestantism, the true Catholic will find it as a distraction.

Where one man may find that his heart, body, and soul truly belong in a higher institution of learning in order to further himself and his future offspring, another man may find all formal education as a distraction from what he has found matters to him the most.

Lastly, there cannot be 'distraction' unless there is a cause or object from which to distract. And who, Zach, is the human being who will determine on the world's behalf which causes or objects are worth pursuing?

I can think of no higher cause from which to distract than spiritual fulfillment, and if that is the cause you speak of, I'm not sure things like High School Musical, Soap Operas, and Harry Potter Knock-Offs... and Religious fulfillment, are all mutually exclusive.

As I originally said, I do not believe there are such things in this world as 'distraction'. I believe there are only people in this world who allow themselves to become distracted by things from what he personally has found to be his calling.

Let me know your thoughts.

Pat


*the reader shouldn't need me to elaborate on this.