in the shower
i have been thinking more about identity, motives, sincerity, irony, and the like. and the following has been a sort of lightning rod for my thinking:
gerard manley hopkins should rise from the dead and revoke jack kerouac's poetic license.
much like stalin, roosevelt, and churchill, there is a big three in any young man's literary self-education. these are salinger, kerouac, and bukowski. now, there was a certain point in my life where i would answer any question regarding my favorite writer with a resounding "jack kerouac!". like so many others, i went crazy for on the road and subsequently began devouring all of his authorly output. however, a number of years ago, i re-read the dharma bums for something like the fourth time and i despised it. my mindset was beginning to shift like tectonic plates and old ti jean fell right into a crevasse. i became very aware of his pretensions, a perception which continues to this day, i might add. in the dharma bums specifically, i couldn't deal with all his "dharmakaya" this and "bodhisattva diamond sutra" that. it seemed more like a man who was trying to convince himself of something and less like someone who was actively engaged in learning the buddhist way, much like gary snyder/japhy ryder. the second example is his use of poetic license in creating words. this is where the hopkins reference arises. i like when hopkins does it; i like when he refers to a "dapple-dawn-drawn falcon". but believe me when i say that i hate how many times throughout all of his work, kerouac describes something or someone as "-eyed". sad-eyed, kind-eyed, they're all there. it works on my nerves after awhile, and this is because it smacks of someone who is thinking too much when they are trying to be "spontaneous".
but prior to this literary example, i actually began thinking about all of these things when i watched ghost world two weeks ago. of course, identity, sincerity, irony, et al. are all represented in this film. so much of art is an exercise in the search for one's sense of self and i think it is beautifully illustrated in ghost world. enid is obviously searching for her real identity or one she can be comfortable with. over the course of the film, she attempts to change her identity several times. from original ramones punk rock look to jazz club moll look. she identifies with the secondary characters who exhibit sincere identities. doug the parking lot guy, the wheelchair starbucks guy; they don't know irony. seymour is the shining example. he likes laurel and hardy movies and old blues records. he's living his life in the only way he knows how. in which case, we start feeling uncomfortable for him when he begins dating the too-normal missed-connections woman. it becomes painfully obvious that he is subverting his true identity. ultimately, this same kind of idea is what breaks up the friendship between becky and enid. becky takes a more ironic approach to the things that enid feels sincere about. at one time, it may have been funny to laugh at the wheelchair starbucks guy (denoting an ironic point of view), becky separates herself from enid because enid actually laughs with the wheelchair starbucks guy (denoting sincerity). enid: "that guy rules", becky: "no, he really doesn't, actually."
so these ideas of kerouac and ghost world translate themselves to my personal life. and this is where salinger comes in. and the part about motives. i am constantly observing and analyzing people's reasons for doing things. i want most everything to have some kind of meaning attached. i want things to be done for pure, sincere reasons. example: long island is a young marriage machine. by twenty-five you should be making plans to marry. the question presents itself in my mind when i watch people who are going to get married: are they doing it for love or because it is what they're "supposed" to do? and this concept applies itself to many other situations. another such case is the acceptance of predictable roles that people acquire for themselves. i'm _____, so i have to be/wear/look like/listen to/believe _____. the perfect example of this is the american socio-political system. whereas i am disturbed by people who so blindly and unwaveringly follow bush, i am almost similarly troubled by people who are full steam behind kerry. (yes, we all know kerry has to win so all hell doesn't break loose, but i don't have to like it so much.) i can dislike michael moore and his films without being some kind of traitor to the cause. "i am from long island, so that means i go out with my friends on the weekends to hit the bars and clubs, i want to become a police officer, and i want to marry a schoolteacher by the time we are twenty-seven." i say, be who you want to be, believe what you want to believe, appreciate what you want to appreciate, support what/who you want to support for no other reason than that it elicits a sincere response from somewhere inside you. "follow your bliss" is derived directly from the essence of your being, in which case, your motives should come from the same place as well. i have a problem with predictability in people and roles and irony. because if that's what you are chasing, then you are running further away from the truth of who you are.
gerard manley hopkins should rise from the dead and revoke jack kerouac's poetic license.
much like stalin, roosevelt, and churchill, there is a big three in any young man's literary self-education. these are salinger, kerouac, and bukowski. now, there was a certain point in my life where i would answer any question regarding my favorite writer with a resounding "jack kerouac!". like so many others, i went crazy for on the road and subsequently began devouring all of his authorly output. however, a number of years ago, i re-read the dharma bums for something like the fourth time and i despised it. my mindset was beginning to shift like tectonic plates and old ti jean fell right into a crevasse. i became very aware of his pretensions, a perception which continues to this day, i might add. in the dharma bums specifically, i couldn't deal with all his "dharmakaya" this and "bodhisattva diamond sutra" that. it seemed more like a man who was trying to convince himself of something and less like someone who was actively engaged in learning the buddhist way, much like gary snyder/japhy ryder. the second example is his use of poetic license in creating words. this is where the hopkins reference arises. i like when hopkins does it; i like when he refers to a "dapple-dawn-drawn falcon". but believe me when i say that i hate how many times throughout all of his work, kerouac describes something or someone as "-eyed". sad-eyed, kind-eyed, they're all there. it works on my nerves after awhile, and this is because it smacks of someone who is thinking too much when they are trying to be "spontaneous".
but prior to this literary example, i actually began thinking about all of these things when i watched ghost world two weeks ago. of course, identity, sincerity, irony, et al. are all represented in this film. so much of art is an exercise in the search for one's sense of self and i think it is beautifully illustrated in ghost world. enid is obviously searching for her real identity or one she can be comfortable with. over the course of the film, she attempts to change her identity several times. from original ramones punk rock look to jazz club moll look. she identifies with the secondary characters who exhibit sincere identities. doug the parking lot guy, the wheelchair starbucks guy; they don't know irony. seymour is the shining example. he likes laurel and hardy movies and old blues records. he's living his life in the only way he knows how. in which case, we start feeling uncomfortable for him when he begins dating the too-normal missed-connections woman. it becomes painfully obvious that he is subverting his true identity. ultimately, this same kind of idea is what breaks up the friendship between becky and enid. becky takes a more ironic approach to the things that enid feels sincere about. at one time, it may have been funny to laugh at the wheelchair starbucks guy (denoting an ironic point of view), becky separates herself from enid because enid actually laughs with the wheelchair starbucks guy (denoting sincerity). enid: "that guy rules", becky: "no, he really doesn't, actually."
so these ideas of kerouac and ghost world translate themselves to my personal life. and this is where salinger comes in. and the part about motives. i am constantly observing and analyzing people's reasons for doing things. i want most everything to have some kind of meaning attached. i want things to be done for pure, sincere reasons. example: long island is a young marriage machine. by twenty-five you should be making plans to marry. the question presents itself in my mind when i watch people who are going to get married: are they doing it for love or because it is what they're "supposed" to do? and this concept applies itself to many other situations. another such case is the acceptance of predictable roles that people acquire for themselves. i'm _____, so i have to be/wear/look like/listen to/believe _____. the perfect example of this is the american socio-political system. whereas i am disturbed by people who so blindly and unwaveringly follow bush, i am almost similarly troubled by people who are full steam behind kerry. (yes, we all know kerry has to win so all hell doesn't break loose, but i don't have to like it so much.) i can dislike michael moore and his films without being some kind of traitor to the cause. "i am from long island, so that means i go out with my friends on the weekends to hit the bars and clubs, i want to become a police officer, and i want to marry a schoolteacher by the time we are twenty-seven." i say, be who you want to be, believe what you want to believe, appreciate what you want to appreciate, support what/who you want to support for no other reason than that it elicits a sincere response from somewhere inside you. "follow your bliss" is derived directly from the essence of your being, in which case, your motives should come from the same place as well. i have a problem with predictability in people and roles and irony. because if that's what you are chasing, then you are running further away from the truth of who you are.