Showing posts with label poems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label poems. Show all posts

Sunday, July 05, 2026

Engrams


Ludwig Sigismund Ruhl: Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860)


Soap bubbles


I don’t really remember what happened
I just know that Hutchinson

one of my school-friends
invited a group of us to come round

and play in the bush near his home
after much excitement and build-up

we all turned up
with our plastic guns

and headed for the trees
I recall crouching in a ditch

waiting for something
then    

[blank]

crying bitterly 
all the way home

the day was a failure    
my fault    of course

(default position)
perhaps a play fight 

turned into a real one?
it is the future generation 

that presses into being
by means of these soap bubbles

said Schopenhauer
sometimes I think 

he might be right 
and I should just cut myself 

some slack





Barry Miles: Call Me Burroughs (1978)


So apparently William Burroughs used to bore everyone rigid by going on and on about these things called engrams - defined as "a mental recording of a traumatic past event that occurred while an individual was partially or fully unconscious" - and how it was possible to "clean" them by recording them on tape and playing them over and over again until, eventually, they elicited no emotional response whatever.

He got this idea from Scientology, where auditors are trained to ask structured questions "intended to help a participant identify and address past experiences and emotional difficulties." They use a device called an E-meter to pick up "changes in the subject's mental state, including helping [to] identify which topics contain emotional or spiritual distress, and when a procedure is completed."
Outside Scientology, the device is regarded as a type of skin galvanometer that measures variations in skin resistance. It is not considered a scientific instrument, and its use and interpretation are not supported by evidence in psychology or medicine.
In the end, even Burroughs got tired of this procedure, and began to see flaws in its theoretical basis - not to mention developing reservations about the bizarre Scientology mythos of ancient aliens and billion-year-old struggles between all-knowing, quasi-immortal thetans and corrupt physical beings.

However, that didn't prevent him from continuing to try and identify just when the (so-called) "ugly spirit" had entered him, and proceeded to "squat on his life" (a bit like Larkin's toad work). Burroughs came to believe that it all stemmed from an early incident of child abuse:
It was Billy's Welsh nanny, Mary Evans ... who remained uppermost in his memory because of a traumatic incident that occurred when Burroughs was four years old. Little Billy was very close to his nanny, so much so that when she had her Thursday off he would throw hysterical tantrums, screaming, "All I want is Nursy!" ... Burroughs later assumed that his need for her must indicate that she fellated him to calm him and send him to sleep, but he also told one of his analysts that Nursy was "severe" and said that when she caught him masturbating she threatened to cut off his penis ...
Nursy was allegedly responsible "for a major trauma that occurred when Burroughs was four years old, something so extreme and shocking that despite ten years of psychoanalysis he was never able to properly retrieve it":
One Thursday in the late summer or autumn of 1918 ... Mary Evans took him along with her on her day out. Mary Evans had a girlfriend whose boyfriend was a veterinarian who worked from his home on the outskirts of St. Louis. They went there for a picnic. ... The general concensus among his analysts was that Mary had encouraged Billy to fellate the vet, and that, scared, Bill had bitten the man's penis, causing him to smack Billy on the head. Bill also theorized that he had witnessed Mary and her girlfriend having sex ...
In any case, "Whatever happened, it disturbed Billy greatly."

Reading the immensely detailed chronicle of Burroughs' life compiled by the indefatigable Barry Miles, I wondered from time to time if this demonisation of the nanny mightn't itself be a screen memory for some even earlier trauma to do with his parents, who supported him with saint-like patience throughout his turbulent life, but whom he seems to have (simultaneously) avoided physically, and refused to criticise on any level whatsoever.

But perhaps that's just the old Freudian in me rearing his shaggy locks again.


Ernest Jones: Life and Work of Sigmund Freud (1953-57)


The jury's out on engrams at present, but they may well be perfectly real. Defined as "a unit of cognitive information imprinted in a physical substance," they are:
theorized to be the means by which memories are stored as biophysical or biochemical changes in the brain or other biological tissue, in response to external stimuli.
The term was first coined by German evolutionary biologist Richard Semon in his book Die Mneme (1904). As a result:
Demonstrating the existence of, and the exact mechanism and location of, neurologically defined engrams has been a focus of persistent research for many decades.
It's possible that particular types of memory may be localised in particular parts of the brain. There have certainly been some suggestive results from time to time. For instance:
In 2016, an MIT study found that memory loss in early stages of Alzheimer's disease could be reversed by strengthening specific memory engram cell connections in the brains of Alzheimer mouse models.
Engrams certainly can't be detected by "E-meters", however, and there seems no reason to believe that an individual can be cleaned of them by having them played back to them again and again, as Burroughs and the Scientologists claimed.






Robert Lowell: 'To Speak of Woe That Is In Marriage' (1957)


Robert Lowell's searing mid-career poem 'To Speak of Woe That Is In Marriage' begins with a rather elliptical quote from German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer:
It is the future generation that presses into being by means of these exuberant feelings and supersensible soap bubbles of ours.
Schopenhauer seems to be implying that our traumas may be driven as much by the future - what's to come for us - as by the past: what's already been. As it turns out, the title of Lowell's poem is also a quote: from the Wife of Bath in Chaucer's Canterbury Tales:
Experience, though noon auctoritee
Were in this world, is right ynogh for me
To speke of wo that is in mariage;
For, lordynges, sith I twelve yeer was of age,
Thonked be God that is eterne on lyve,
Housbondes at chirche dore I have had fyve ...
Lowell's poem, too, is written in the voice of the wife, not the husband, which is clearly not an aspect of "experience" which he could claim as his own. The husband in question does sound a bit like a self-portrait, though:
My hopped up husband drops his home disputes,
and hits the streets to cruise for prostitutes,
free-lancing out along the razor’s edge.
This screwball might kill his wife, then take the pledge.
If so, it's a pretty searing indictment.



Whether or not there are actual physical "engrams" involved, I'm sure that we all have our fair share of traumatic experiences involving "emotional or spiritual distress" (as the Scientologists put it). The question is if they can be cleared in any way by repetition, as Burroughs - at least initially - believed.

The poem "Soap bubbles", above, is an attempt to record one of my own childhood traumas: albeit one as masked and inaccessible to me as Burrough's own alleged experience of infantile abuse.

Mine may be a minnow beside his sperm whale, but it used to bug me nevertheless - until I wrote it down. I began to notice, over the years, that when I'd forced myself to write about any particularly puzzling or embarrassing experience, that it had the effect of externalising it. After that, it was simply a syntactic artefact which could be worked on and revised like any other piece of work.

Strangely enough, this process also robbed it of its potency somehow.


Edward Gorey: Cover illustration for Lucky Jim (1954)


Kingsley Amis, in an early novel, has his protagonist Jim Dixon refer to "those three or four memories which could make him actually twist about in his chair or bed with remorse, fear or embarrassment":
... the present top-of-the-list item [was] the time he'd been pushed out in front of the curtain afer a school concert to make the audience sing the National Anthem. He could hear his own voice now, saying in those flat tones, heavy with insincerity: 'And now ... I want you all ... to join with me, if you will ... in singing ...' And then he'd led off in a key which must have been exactly half an octave above or below the proper one. Switching every few notes, like everybody else, from one octave to the other, half a beat in front of or behind everybody else, he'd gone through the whole thing. Cheers, applause and laughter had followed him when he ducked his burning face back through the curtains.
I recognised that churning, twisting sensation when I first read Lucky Jim. I can't count how many such memories bedevil my life. So gradually, bit by bit, I've tried to disarm them - by writing them down. Admittedly, new ones arise as I deal with the old ones, so I doubt that the process will ever be finished. Sometimes it results in work I feel can be shared with others; sometimes not. It doesn't seem to make much difference to the effectiveness of the technique.

I don't know if this approach would work for anyone else, but I do think there's something in William Burroughs' ideas. They might sound a bit eccentric on the surface, but there's generally a bedrock of good sense beneath them. Anyway, I don't what else one can do about these self-imposed torments: writhing about or punching the wall doesn't really seem to help longterm. A modified version of his engram theory very well might.

Burroughs himself appears to have tried this "externalisation" idea quite early on, in a passage from an early draft of Naked Lunch, written in Tangier around 1957-58:
We are prepared to divulge all and to state that on a Thursday in the month of September 1917, we did, in the garage of the latter, at his solicitations and connivance, endeavor to suck the cock of one George Brune Brubeck, the Bear's Ass, which act disgust me like I try to bite it off and he slap me and curse and blaspheme. [...] The blame for this atrociously incomplete act rest solidly on the basement of Brubeck, my own innocence of any but the most pure reflex move of self-defence and - respect to eliminate this strange serpent thrust so into my face [...] so I [...] had recourse to nature's little white soldiers - our brave defenders by land - and bite his ugly old cock.

William S. Burroughs: Interzone. Ed. James Grauerholz (1989)


When he included this passage in the late compilation of outtakes, Interzone, Burroughs' longterm friend and editor James Grauerholz did some background research which failed to reveal any veterinarians named George Brune Brubeck in St. Louis at the time, although "there is an Edward H. Brune":
'Brune' ...B-R-U-N-E ... 'the Bear's Ass' ... bruin ... this name, although unearthed from a work of fiction, seems well established in Burrough's mind. With all due respect to the late Dr. Brune's descendants, we cannot convict him on this slender evidence, but it certainly points in an interesting direction.
I can't help feeling that the engram theory may take us in a more helpful direction here than such direct attempts to identify the true nature of the crime, interesting though Grauerholz's speculations undoubtedly are.

"And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (John 8: 32). Possibly so. But the mere act of writing it down, then editing it for rhetorical effectiveness, might have the same result of making it no longer simply a part of you. As the wiseacres are keen to tell us, you don't actually remember things, you just remember yourself remembering them, and then remember yourself remembering yourself remembering them - and so ad infinitum.

If you want to get rid of them, they have to be first snared in the ether, then fixed and mounted on some kind of memory board: real or metaphorical.


Joseph Cornell: Untitled (Butterfly Habitat) (c.1940)





Sunday, March 29, 2026

Emma Smith: Dead Man’s Block (18/4/2026)


Emma Smith: Deadmans Block (2026)


Mōrena🐈‍⬛.

I’m excited to share details of my upcoming exhibition, Dead Man’s Block. This show is on for two hours only on April the 18th, 11-1pm. It’s at the New Lynn Community Centre in the Active Recreation Hall.

I’m very grateful to the indomitable Bronwyn Lloyd and Jack Ross for their accompanying texts and as ever the wonderful William Bardebes for fabrication, design and everything besides.

I hope if you live in Tāmaki you can make this show. 45 Totara Ave. There is loads of handy parking out the back and it’s right next to the train station and bus depot. Love to see you there!

- Emma Smith (22/3/26)

Tin Grew: Emma Smith (2011)










Han Shan Cave: Cold Mountain & friends


This is the poem I wrote for Emma's show:

Reading Cold Mountain
in interesting times


for Emma Smith

Cold Mountain: there’s no through trail – Gary Snyder I The little dog’s better he’s with the monks now Bronwyn assumed I’d remember she told me that the Buddhists walking across the States to raise awareness had sent off their dog to get his leg fixed he’s glad to be back he wagged his tail II This morning John sent me a link to a doco about Cold Mountain Han Shan a poet who lived 1000 years ago he may have been Taoist or Buddhist but was really just a crazy old man who scribbled poems on rocks as the old lady said he faded into the walls of his cave III In Hoffmann’s Mines of Falun a sailor gives up the sea after coming back from a voyage to find his mother dead the old man who lures him to work underground is a ghost or a demon or something like that they both end up stoned in veins of ore IV Cold Mountain this hermit who gave up on life to clamber up here had nothing to teach if you’ve nothing to learn there are statues of him and his buddies they’re ugly and red Red Pine laughed when he saw them the filmmaker asked him why because he would have laughed however he looked

[24-26/1/2026]


Rachel Heller: The Mines of Falun (Sweden)





Bianca Moorman: Aloka the Peace Dog & friends (Aiken Standard, 8/1/26)


Monday, August 25, 2025

Euhemerism


Tim Severin: The Jason Voyage (1985)
Tim Severin. The Jason Voyage: The Quest for the Golden Fleece. Drawings by Tróndur Patursson. Photographs by John Egan, Seth Mortimer and Tom Skudra. Hutchinson. London: Century Hutchinson Ltd., 1985.

The other day I picked up a rather handsome secondhand copy of Tim Severin's book The Jason Voyage for a trifling sum. I wasn't actually planning on reading it right away, but somehow it grabbed my attention and diverted me from all the other odds and ends - biographies, short story collections, graphic novels - I'm working my way through at the moment.

I remember seeing a documentary about the making of Severin's replica twenty-oar Bronze Age galley the Argo some years ago, and it was interesting to compare that to the rather more contextual approach to the myth he takes here.


Apollonius of Rhodes: Argonautica (2014)
Apollonius of Rhodes. The Voyage of Argo. Trans. E. V. Rieu. 1959. Rev. ed. 1972. Introduction by Lawrence Norfolk. Illustrations by Daniel Egnéus. London: The Folio Society, 2014.

After a while I thought I should check on the critical response to some of Severin's more audacious claims about the original voyage of the Argonauts, and found the following review on the Goodreads site, contributed by a certain Koen Crolla (29/10/2020):
... Tim Severin spent much of the '70s and '80s and other people's money recreating some historic boat journeys; in this case, that of Jason and the Argonauts, from Iolcus (now Volos in Greece) to Colchis (now Georgia)...
The book covers everything from the construction of the replica Argo in Greece to their successful arrival in Poti, (Soviet) Georgia, and, in the epilogue, their engine-powered return, but Severin is neither a classicist nor an archaeologist, so many of the more interesting detail [sic.] are skipped over: you'll find plenty of anecdotes illustrating the boat-builder's personality, for example, but few details regarding the construction of the ship itself, and none at all regarding the archaeological basis of the design.
During the journey itself, too, Severin's thoughts on the Argonautica range far beyond what conscientious euhemerism will actually allow, with every coincidence becoming a confirmation of the definite historical fact of Jason and everything he encounters. It doesn't help that Severin's knowledge of Bronze Age Greece is rudimentary at best and tainted by Gimbutasian nonsense ... but some of the blame surely falls on two archaeologists (Vasiliki Adrimi in Greece and Othar Lordkipanidze in (Soviet) Georgia) for filling this gullible oaf's head with nonsense.
Still, things are such that even dodgy experimental archaeology often yields useful results, and if you ignore everything Severin writes about landmarks that are definitely 100% the locations mentioned in the Argonautica, there's still actual information left about the feasibility of crossing the open sea and rough currents in a crappy galley, even with doughy and/or middle-aged rowers — even if Severin is enough of a narcissist that large swathes of his account are clearly unreliable. (At least National Geographic took a lot of pictures.)
And though the write-up is kind of a lost opportunity, it's still decent entertainment; I would have liked to have been one of the crew.

Tim Severin: Rowers in the Bosphorus (1985)


How surprising that they didn't think to invite Mr. (or is it Dr?) Crolla to accompany them! His lively good humour would have left the whole crew in stitches, I'm sure - especially that little side-swipe at the "doughy and/or middle-aged rowers" Severin enlisted to help him. Not according to the photos he included of their sinewy bodies toiling at the oars - talk about "sitting well in order smite / The sounding furrows" (Tennyson, "Ulysses") ...

There were a couple of other points of interest in Koen Crolla's review, though. First of all, there was that intriguing word "euhemerism," which I must confess was new to me. Not any more, though:


Euhemerus of Sicily (fl. 4th century BCE)


Euhemerism:
is an approach to the interpretation of mythology in which mythological accounts are presumed to have originated from real historical events or personages. Euhemerism supposes that historical accounts become myths as they are exaggerated in the retelling, accumulating elaborations and alterations that reflect cultural mores. It was named after the Greek mythographer Euhemerus ... In the more recent literature of myth ... euhemerism is termed the "historical theory" of mythology.

Tim Severin: The Jason Voyage (map)


Well, there you go. You learn something new every day. That really is a perfect description of Severin's diegetic method. Nary a rock or a headland can be glimpsed without his pointing out how perfectly it matches Apollonius's description in the Argonautica: an epic poem composed in the 3rd century BCE, roughly a thousand years after the actual events of the original voyage are supposed to have taken place.

I was also intrigued by Crolla's side-reference to "Gimbutasian nonsense." Again, this was not an adjective familiar to me, but I presume it refers to Marija Gimbutas:
a Lithuanian archaeologist and anthropologist known for her research into the Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures of "Old Europe" and for her Kurgan hypothesis, which located the Proto-Indo-European homeland in the Pontic Steppe.

Marija Gimbutienė: Lithuanian postage stamp (2021)


The "Kurgan hypothesis" turns out, on investigation, to be a fairly well-regarded theory about the origins of the proto-Indo-European (or "Aryan", as they used to be called) languages in an area north of the Black Sea. What I think Crollas must be referring to, though, is her later work:
Gimbutas gained fame and notoriety in the English-speaking world with her last three English-language books: The Goddesses and Gods of Old Europe (1974); The Language of the Goddess (1989) ... and the last of the three, The Civilization of the Goddess (1991), which, based on her documented archaeological findings, presented an overview of her conclusions about Neolithic cultures across Europe: housing patterns, social structure, art, religion, and the nature of literacy.
The Goddess trilogy articulated what Gimbutas saw as the differences between the Old European system, which she considered goddess- and woman-centered (gynocentric), and the Bronze Age Indo-European patriarchal ("androcratic") culture which supplanted it. According to her interpretations, gynocentric (or matristic) societies were peaceful, honored women, and espoused economic equality. The androcratic, or male-dominated, Kurgan peoples, on the other hand, invaded Europe and imposed upon its natives the hierarchical rule of male warriors.
Aha! The penny drops. I'm certainly familiar with all the ideological battles over whether or not there ever was an ancient, peaceful woman-centred culture in Europe which was supplanted by the incursion of violent, male-dominated, warrior tribes. Once again, one point up to Crolla, though his reference to Severin as a "gullible oaf" still seems a little uncalled for.




Tim Severin: The Ulysses Voyage (1987)
Tim Severin. The Ulysses Voyage: Sea Search for the Odyssey. Drawings by Will Stoney. Photographs by Kevin Fleming, with Nazem Choufeh and Rick Williams. Hutchinson. London: Century Hutchinson Ltd., 1987.

It isn't really the voyage of the Argonauts that's the problem, though. It's the Odyssey.

After rowing his painstakingly constructed galley through the Aegean and across into the Black Sea to reenact the Argonautica, the second part of Severin's master-plan clicked into action. Now he would attempt to sail the same boat from Troy, on the coast of Asia Minor, to the island of Ithaka, in order to chart the much-vexed Odysseus's difficult ten-year journey home.

Here's one of the standard interpretations of this voyage:



And here's Tim Severin's own route from Troy all the way to the Ionian sea, as navigated (for the most part) by his own Trojan-war-era galley:


Tim Severin: The Ulysses Voyage (map 1)


And here's an overview of his blueprint for the entire voyage:


Tim Severin: The Ulysses Voyage (map 2)


Both versions agree on a side-trip to North Africa, and a long haul back from there. The difference, however, is that the earlier version has Odysseus's 12-ship flotilla blown all the way down the coast to Tunisia, whereas Severin calculates that the ships must have battened down and furled their sails and thus made landfall far further east, in Libya.

Severin therefore postulates a much shorter trip back to Greece, followed by some cruising around the island of Crete, whereas the other theory has Odysseus landing in Sicily, followed by excursions to the Balearic islands - possibly even as far as the Pillars of Hercules!



Which of these two routes sounds more plausible to you: the one Severin actually sailed in his own boat, or the one dreamed up by desk-bound scholars measuring distances on the map?

Here are a few of the problems I foresee arising from any attempt to answer this question:
  1. It presupposes that there was once a person called Odysseus / Ulysses
  2. It assumes that he took part in the Trojan War
  3. And also that there was an actual, historical "Trojan war"
  4. It also takes for granted that legitimate, topographically precise details of his journey home can be gleaned from the Odyssey, a poem probably written around the 8th or 7th century BCE, about a war which took place at least 4-500 years earlier, around the 12th or 13th century BCE
  5. There are further assumptions built into it about the poet we refer to as "Homer", who may (or may not) have been the "author" - whatever precisely we mean by that, in a predominantly oral Bardic culture - of both the Odyssey as well as the Iliad
  6. And isn't it just a little bit problematic that the one fact all accounts of Homer agree on is that he was blind? Could he really have been the keen yachtsman and ocean swimmer postulated at certain points in Severin's narrative?
Do I need to go on? Without wanting to be a spoilsport about it, I feel that we need at least a few plausible answers to the questions above before we start debating if an obscure Cretan folktale about three-eyed cannibals may have given rise to the story of the Cyclops, or whether or not the Straits of Messina are too wide to have been the abode of Scylla and Charybdis.


Robert Graves: Homer's Daughter (1955)


Such speculations can be a lot of fun, mind you. I'm a big fan of Robert Graves' historical novels, one of which resuscitates Samuel Butler's hypothesis - from The Authoress of the Odyssey (1897) - that the real maker of the Odyssey was a Sicilian woman, who employed well-known landmarks from her own island for most of its more famous incidents.

Graves has her casting herself as Nausicaä, while her hometown is forced to play double duty as both Phaeacia and Ithaka. The whole concludes with a massacre, just like the Odyssey itself.


Robert Graves: The Golden Fleece (1944)


And then there's his earlier novel The Golden Fleece [retitled "Hercules, My Shipmate" for the US market], which turns the whole quest into a "Gimbutasian" struggle between Goddess worshippers and savage Apollonian invaders.

Or, as one of the more positive commentators on Goodreads puts it:
The Golden Fleece is an encyclopedic novel of all things Greek and pre-Greek. Graves incorporates or refers to many myths and legends, from the cosmogony through the trade war between Troy and Greece and the Twelve Labors of Hercules. And from various cultures, including Pelasgian, Cretan, Thracian, Colchian, Taurean, Albanian, Amazonian, Troglodyte, and of course Greek, he works into his novel many interesting customs, about fertility orgies, weddings, births, funerals, and ghosts; prayers, sacrifices, omens, dreams, and mystery cults; boar hunting, barley growing, trading, and ship building, sailing, and rowing; feasting, singing, dancing, story telling, and clothes wearing; boxing, murdering, warring, and treaty negotiating; and more. It all feels vivid, authentic, and strange.
In other words, there's no harm at all in reimagining and reinterpreting these old myths, as long as it's in the interests of sharpening our responses to the stories themselves - as well as the consummate works of literary art in which they've been preserved.

However, it's important to bear in mind that Apollonius of Rhodes was a scholar and librarian at the Library of Alexandria when he composed the Argonautica. Homer was - well, nobody really knows, but probably a Bard and performer of his own poems, in a possibly pre-literate culture. They were, in other words, completely different poets, from widely separate eras of Ancient Greek culture, who lived 500 years apart.


Sir Thomas Malory: Le Morte d'Arthur (1485)


Try transposing these dates onto Le Morte d'Arthur, Malory's version of the Arthurian legends, published by William Caxton as one of the first printed books in English. The five and a half centuries between Malory and us should give you some idea of the actual distance in time between Homer and Apollonius.

If you extend the metaphor, and go back 1,000 years from Malory, you'll find yourself in the approximate era of the real King Arthur (if there ever was such a person). That gives you some idea of the gap between Apollonius and his own heroes, Jason's Argonauts.

Homer, by contrast, lived only 500-odd years later than his subject-matter, the siege of Troy (and its myriad dire consequences). Malory certainly could (and has been) used as a kind of guidebook to Arthurian Britain, but the more precise and "euhemeristic" these educed details become, the more absurd the whole project seems.



It'd be lovely to go back in a time machine and check out the facts for ourselves - though it might be a bit difficult to square the border region referred to in Hittite records as Taruisa (Troy?) or Wilusa (Greek "Wilios" or "Ilios") with the Troy of our imaginations.

Enterprises such as Severin's are certainly not futile. There is, however, little doubt that he tends to take an ahistorical, over-literal approach to both the textual and topographical details of the folktales that inspired his journeys. Whether or not this assists us in interpreting these myths, and the poems that embody them, is more debatable.



An alternative approach can be found in the work of the modern Greek poet C. P. Cavafy, who set out instead to remind us of the deep metaphorical significance of these legends for all of us - but particularly those who still inhabit those ancient lands today. Here's his great poem "Ithaka" (along with my own attempt at a version for contemporary travellers):


C. P. Cavafy: Ithaka (1911)


Ithaka


Before you set out for Ithaka
pray for a long itinerary
full of protracted stopovers.
Customs officials, Interpol,
the zombie Police Chief – not a problem:
as long as you keep your shit together,
staple a smile to your fat face,
they won’t be able to finger you.
Customs officials, Interpol,
the paparazzi, will look right through you
– unless you invite them up for a drink,
unless they’re already inside your head.

Pray for a long itinerary:
landing for the umpteenth time
on the tarmac of a third-world airport
at fiery psychedelic dawn;
haggling in the duty-frees
for coral necklaces and pearls,
designer scents & silks & shades,
as many marques as you can handle; 
visiting every provincial town,
sampling every drug & kick …

Never forget about Ithaka:
getting there is your destiny;
no need to rush – it’ll still be waiting
no matter how many years you take.
By the time you touch down you’ll be bone-tired,
happy with what you snapped in transit,
just a few daytrips left to do.
Ithaka shouted you the trip,
you’d never have travelled without her.
She’s got fuck-all to show you now.

Dirt-poor, dingy … she’s up front.
It’s over now; you’ve seen so much
there’s no need to tell you what Ithaka means.


(30/8-12/10/04)

Korina Cassianou: Odysseus of Ithaka (2011)





Wednesday, May 07, 2025

Confederates


Alex Garland, dir.: Civil War (2024)


I couldn't quite bring myself to go and see Alex Garland's much-hyped action film Civil War when it first hit the cinemas last year. It felt like an unnecessary incitement to violence at the time, pre-US election, when it still seemed possible - likely, even - that reason would prevail.

Now, a year later, having finally watched the movie, it's hard to see what what all the fuss was about. The Trump-like president, played by Nick Offerman, who's somehow hijacked his way into a third term, is opposed by a helicopter and tank-toting band of uniformed secessionists who appear to have almost infinite resources at their command.


Civil War core cast:
[l-to-r: Kirsten Dunst, Wagner Moura, Stephen McKinley Henderson, Cailee Spaeny]


No, the morality of the plot is all to do with the coarsening effects of passively witnessing - and, in some cases, getting off on - other people's violent acts, in the guise of objective reportage. Kirsten Dunst (who plays a kind of updated version of World War II photojournalist Lee Miller) has become severely burnt out in the process.

She and her band of misfit reporters all learn a lot about themselves, and each other, in their perilous trek across war-torn America - replete with tortured looters on gibbets and corpses being trucked into mass graves - but unfortunately such self-knowledge seems to equate with being too slow to get out of the way of bullets in this movie, so most of the information ends up getting lost in transmission.


Tony Horwitz: Confederates in the Attic (1998)


The main reason I decided to watch the film at all was because I'd just finished reading the book above, Tony Horwitz's 25-year-old exposé of the sheer extent of sympathy with the so-called "Lost Cause" of the Confederacy - not only in the Southern States, but across the United States as a whole.

Horwitz tries to stress the humorous side of this obsession, as in his account of a five-man reenactment of Pickett's charge by a squad of hardcore neo-rebels:
A lobster-red woman in a halter top matched Rob stride for stride, carefully studying his uniform.
"What are you guys?" she asked.
"Confederates," Rob mumbled.
"Ferrets?"
"Confederates," Rob repeated.
"Oh," she said, looking underwhelmed.
- Confederates in the Attic: 278.
It all seems considerably less quaint and amusing now, after the 2021 Capitol riot and the exponential growth of such extremist groups as the Proud Boys and other far-right militants.


Tony Horwitz (1958-2019)





Edmund Wilson: Patriotic Gore (1963)


It's not that unusual for me to read several books simultaneously. Sometimes I move through them at about the same rate; other times one takes over altogether. It can be quite a long drawn out process to get to the end of all of them.

Alongside Confederates in the Attic, I found myself rereading Edmund Wilson's rather ponderous set of "Studies in the Literature of the Civil War", Patriotic Gore. The two books have a lot more in common than simply treating the same subject in different ways.

Tony Horwitz won the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting in 1995, so he's no light-weight, despite the rather garish design and packaging of his book. But Edmund Wilson is certainly far more of a name to conjure with: one of America's most celebrated literary critics, three-time finalist in the National Book Awards (the second time for Patriotic Gore), he remains a distinctly impressive figure.

However, his dismissive, off-the-cuff verdicts on such present-day luminaries as H. P. Lovecraft ("Tales of the Marvellous and the Ridiculous," 1945) and J. R. R. Tolkien ("Oo, Those Awful Orcs!," 1956) have become so notorious that they now threaten to overshadow his more substantive achievements.



Actually, Wilson's greatest legacy may well turn out to be the idea behind the Library of America (1979- ), a uniform set of classic works from the United States, based loosely on the French Bibliothèque de la Pléiade (1931- ). It came to fruition only after his death, largely through the efforts of Jason Epstein and others, but it wasn't until a quarter of a century later that Wilson himself finally joined its ranks with a double-volume selection from his literary essays and reviews.


Edmund Wilson: Literary Essays and Reviews (2 vols: 2007)


The two books, Wilson's and Horwitz's, were published exactly 35 years apart, the first during the intense period of self-examination triggered by the Civil War centennial in the early 1960s, the second in the late Clinton era, pre-9/11, when the much-touted Pax Americana could still be seen as a valid concept.

In between the two came Shelby Foote.




Ken Burns: Shelby Foote (1916-2005)


Or rather, in the early 1990s, Ken Burns's phenomenally successful 9-part PBS documentary series The Civil War (1990) had the inadvertent effect of propelling a hitherto largely unknown Southern writer to international stardom.


Shelby Foote: The Civil War: A Narrative (3 vols: 1958-74)


That's the other book I've been rereading recently: Foote's immense narrative history of the civil war - a labour of love which took him more than twenty years to complete. I've already written a couple of posts on this subject - one in the larger context of the literature of the Civil War, the other as part of a piece on the alleged "amateurism" of narrative historians in general.

In the first of these pieces, written over a decade ago, I was content to echo Foote's own assessment of his authorial stance:
Foote corrects the Union bias of earlier historians: an unabashed Southerner, he achieves a kind of imaginative empathy with the principal protagonists in the drama which is unlikely ever to be repeated or surpassed. This is certainly the best history of the war to date. It is a military history above all, though - if you want political insights, then Foote still needs to be supplemented by various others.
In the second, composed more recently, in 2023, I'd altered my view somewhat:
Since the appearance of Ken Burn's ... Civil War ... which made Shelby Foote a star, his epic narrative history of the war has somewhat fallen from grace.
It's true that he does consciously go out of his way to present a more Southern view of the so-called "irrepressible conflict" than such Northern historians as Bruce Catton and Allan Nevins in their own multi-volume works. [Moreover], his view that the two undoubted geniuses produced by the civil war were Abraham Lincoln and Nathan Bedford Forrest is no longer seen as an amusing paradox, but rather a clear statement of "Lost Cause" belief.
Certainly he was a man of his own time and place. Stuart Chapman's critical biography of Foote reveals the complexity of his upbringing and self-positioning in the America of Jim Crow and the early Civil Rights movement.
For myself, I find it far too facile to arrange the writers and thinkers of the past into convenient columns of "right-thinking" and "aberrant". It's perhaps going too far to say that tout comprendre, c'est tout pardonner, but being a liberal Southerner in the mid-twentieth century was not an easy row to hoe.
The fact that he's been criticised roundly by both sides for his views is surely some kind of testimony to his even-handedness? He's no apologist for racism by any means: no hagiographer of Southern rights, unlike General Lee's biographer Douglas Southall Freeman.

C. Stuart Chapman: Shelby Foote: A Writer's Life (2003)


It was rather a salutary experience to read Stuart Chapman's biography of Foote. The fact that it appeared two years before the writer's death may have inhibited Chapman somewhat in his analysis of the contradictions between Foote's warring ideological positions: on the one hand, sympathy for the South first and last; on the other, recognition of the futility of their continued refusal to recognise civil rights. Nevertheless, there was still much there to ponder.



Anove all, Chapman highlights Foote's passionate admiration for the dashing bravado of Nathan Bedford Forrest, slave-trader, military wizard, and first Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, contrasting it with the historian's slightly grudging respect for the genius of the Union hero, Abraham Lincoln.


Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)


I had thought that the two opposing principles were held in some kind of equilibrium - albeit precarious - in Foote's actual history of the war, but I now think I was wrong. What I detect there now is a resolute denial of the evidence for virtually any Southern atrocities (the Fort Pillow massacre, the appalling conditions at Andersonville prison), and a strange method of attributing victory to the side reporting the fewest overall casualties, regardless of the strategic consequences of such "triumphs". Antietam and Gettysburg become, for him, near-Southern successes rather than Union victories.

I can now see what his despised "professional historians" were complaining about when they criticised Foote for his uncritical use of a single, often unreliable, source when discussing complex issues and events. His failure to provide the complete set of references he'd earlier promised for the end of his third volume also begins to look a little suspicious in hindsight. Essentially he used the information which best suited his thesis, even when it came from dubious "Lost Cause" apologias.

In this respect, the chapter "At the Foote of the Master" in Horwitz's Confederates in the Attic makes even more interesting reading today than when it was first written. Rather than any kind of reconciliation with Yankeedom, it's Foote's fierce Southern nationalism which comes out most strongly in Horwitz's interview:
His great-grandfather [Colonel Hezekiah William Foote ... who owned five plantations and over one hundred slaves] had opposed secession but fought without hesitation for the South. "Just as I would have," Foote said. "I'd be with my people, right or wrong. If I was against slavery, I'd still be with the South. I'm a man, my society needs me, here I am. The difference between North and South in the war is that there was no stigma attached to the Northern man who paid two hundred dollars to not go to war, or who hired a German replacement. In the South you could have done that, but no one would. You'd have been scorned." [149-50]
The saddest thing about all this is that the reader feels increasingly that this romanticising of the old South has come to mean more to Foote than any attempt to get at the truth - and also to suspect that the motives behind it are largely personal.

Although Foote did serve as an artillery captain in World War II, he missed going into combat on D-Day as a result of being court-martialled for falsifying documents: to wit, a mileage report he wrote to cover a clandestine trip to Belfast to see his then girl-friend (later wife).
Returning to America, Foote enlisted as a private in the marines and went through boot camp. But the war ended just as he was bound for combat again, this time in the Pacific. To paraphrase what he'd said of the Civil War, Foote had missed the great trauma of his own generation's adolescence. [149]
His views on race are also somewhat troubling. He remarks on the consequences of Reconstruction:
"What has dismayed me so much is the behavior of blacks. They are fulfilling every dire prophecy the Ku Klux Klan made. It's no longer safe to be on the streets in black neighborhoods. They are acting as if the utter lie about blacks being somewhere between ape and man were true." [152]
This particular diatribe, from a man who claims to have always supported racial integration, concludes with a comparison of the Klan "to the Free French Resistance to Nazi occupation," together with an "explanation" that:
"Freedom riders were a pretty weird-looking group to Southerners ... The men had odd haircuts and strange baggy clothes and seemed to associate with people with an intimacy that we didn't allow. So the so-called right-thinking people of the South said, 'They're sending their riffraff down here. Let our riffraff take care of them.' Then they sat back while the good ol' boys in the pickup trucks took care of it, under the Confederate banner." [154]
And, à propos of Foote's claims about the greater social stigma of a failure to serve in the Confederate than in the Union army, it's curious that he fails to mention the 1862 "Twenty Negro Law" in the Southern States which "exempted from Confederate military service one white man for every twenty slaves owned on a Confederate plantation."

It was at this point in the conflict that the soldiers began to complain about a "rich man's war and a poor man's fight" - or, as Confederate soldier Sam Watkins put it:
Soldiers had enlisted for twelve months only, and had faithfully complied with their volunteer obligations; the terms for which they had enlisted had expired, and they naturally looked upon it that they had a right to go home ... War had become a reality; they were tired of it. A law had been passed by the Confederate States Congress called the conscript act. A soldier had no right to volunteer and to choose the branch of service he preferred. He was conscripted. From this time on till the end of the war, a soldier was simply a machine, a conscript ... All our pride and valor had gone, and we were sick of war and the Southern Confederacy.
That has more of the ring of truth about it - to my ears, at least.


Samuel R. Watkins (1839-1901)





Ronald F. Maxwell, dir.: Gettysburg (1993)
[Based on The Killer Angels, by Michael Shaara (1974)]


A good deal of Tony Horwitz's book is concerned with the growing craze of Civil War reenactment. I remember seeing a vast horde of these reenactors - most of them looking disconcertingly well-fed - puffing up the slopes towards the Union centre in the "Pickett's Charge" scenes of Ronald Maxwell's four-hour war epic Gettysburg.

It's largely as a protest against such dilettantish, "farb" reenactments that Horwitz's friend Robert Lee Hodge and his friends perform their own hommage to Pickett's Charge - the one referred to in the passage quoted above.

Hodge and those like them try to recreate the actual - not the counterfeit - garb and physique of Confederate soldiers, as well as admiring their ethos. Another of his neologisms is "wargasm": an intense series of visits to as many classic battle sites as possible in a severely limited time-frame. And while it's hard to dispute Old Glory-author Jonathan Raban's view that he
would as soon tramp bare-foot through a snake-infested Ecuadorian marsh as spend a week in period costume, in the undiluted company of Robert Lee Hodge on a Civil Wargasm.
It's almost equally difficult to disagree with his claim that "Horwitz deserves some sort of medal for valor on the reader's behalf as he immerses himself in a society that most readers would instinctively shun":
his version of the South is solidly credible throughout - and seriously bad news for the rest of America.
Yes, the sting is in the tail there. It was - and still is - bad news for the rest of America. And while it may only have been the central concern of a few hardcore eccentrics in 1998, now, in 2025, the lunatics have definitely taken over the asylum.

I wish I could claim to have foreseen something of the sort some years ago, when I wrote the following poem - based on a viewing of the interminable Gettysburg (1993) and its even more tedious successor Gods and Generals (2003). Alas, at the time, like Horwitz, I still saw the whole thing as a bit of a laugh.




Ronald F. Maxwell, dir.: Gettysburg (1993)


Gettysburg


The worst fake beards
in the history of cinema

Tom Berenger in particular
looked like the pirate king

in panto
but more to the point

I never realized
so many Confederates

detested slavery
regretted it hadn’t

already been abolished
what they were fighting for

was liberty of conscience
independence

pushing back Northern invaders
(by invading the North)

nor did I know that Robert E. Lee
had never abandoned a battlefield

in the face of the enemy
Antietam?

so the whole thing was just
a ghastly mistake

where the Northerners took advantage
of their nobler opponents

in their mechanistic way
In Gods and Generals

the prequel
we further learn

that not only did Jackson too
hate slavery

but that he used to prance round
playing horsey

with five-year-old girls
and weeping buckets

when the latter died
he’s crying for all of us

for the whole war

said an awestruck aide

I know just how he felt


[20/1/16-22/10/17]

James Ryder Randall: Maryland, My Maryland (1861)





Tony Horwitz (2009)

Anthony Lander Horwitz
(1958-2019)

    Books:

  1. One for the Road: a Hitchhiker's Outback (1987)
  2. Baghdad Without A Map (1991)
  3. Confederates in the Attic (1998)
    • Confederates in the Attic: Dispatches fom the Unfinished Civil War. A Sceptre Book. NSW: Hodder Headline Australia Pty Limited, 1998.
  4. Blue Latitudes: Boldly Going Where Captain Cook Has Gone Before [aka "Into the Blue: Boldly Going Where Captain Cook Has Gone Before"] (2002)
  5. The Devil May Care: 50 Intrepid Americans and Their Quest for the Unknown (2003)
  6. A Voyage Long and Strange: Rediscovering the New World (2008)
  7. Midnight Rising: John Brown and the Raid That Sparked the Civil War (2011)
  8. BOOM: Oil, Money, Cowboys, Strippers, and the Energy Rush That Could Change America Forever (2014)
  9. Spying on the South: An Odyssey Across the American Divide (2019)


Tony Horwitz: Spying on the South (2019)