‘His steed was a gigantic Prius’ – the hard thing about occasional poems

I believe (i.e. this is not a statement I can back up with scientific data) that it used to be quite common to give and receive original poems as gifts – the poems were not given in lieu of a gift, you understand – they were the gift. And speaking as someone who occasionally writes (comic) poems to be given as gifts, let me assure you that these gifts are always both expensive to buy (i.e. write) and highly valued by their recipients.

What do I mean by expensive? Well, they consume hours of time, and thousands (millions?) of kilojoules (gigawats?) of mental energy. At least, they do if, like me, you want your occasional comic poems to have action as well as description. If you want action you need a plot; if you want a satisfying plot you need a story with a beginning, a middle, and an end – not to mention at least one character that develops – and you have to cram all those things into approximately 120-150 lines. You have to be funny, too, but obvious rhyming automatically adds a pinch of humour, so trust me when I say that fitting a well-shaped plot into no more than 150 lines is the difficult part.

The poet I always have in mind when I write a comic poem to be given as a gift is Alexander Pope. Pope knew the great European epics inside out and back to front – the famous lines and ideas from these epics were constantly bouncing around inside his head. In his most famous work, The Rape of the Lock, he generated a great deal of humour (if you’re studying the book for GCSE English feel free to disagree) by describing the mundane social activities of a group of his contemporaries in a heroic, or epic, style. The (real) people he described both were and weren’t characters in an epic poem – meaning that Pope was able to ridicule and flatter them at the same time. He used his knowledge of epic poetry to much more savage effect in The Dunciad, but that’s a subject for another time.

Recently I wrote a poem to present to a couple of friends who had just married and, of course, the impulse to mock epic was irresistible. In the following (slightly anonymised) extract, Tarryn, the heroine of the poem, has a vision in which she sees her intended, Stephen, go into battle for the health of the planet. Why? Because he works in the ‘Cleantech’ industry. Yes, it’s tenuous – that’s okay too! I either did a reasonable job of parodying Spenser or stole shamelessly and unoriginally from Cervantes – YOU DECIDE:

Next Tarryn was shown her Stephen at work –
Here was no simple, paper-pushing clerk
(The heavens used metaphor, as was their right
To show sceptical Tarryn the light).
So Stephen was garbed like a Knight of old,
‘The C——– G—-’ brand, emblazoned in gold
He bore on his breastplate. His shining shield
Was a solar panel only he could wield;
His mace-like weapon was a wind-turbine,
Sharp-edged and menacing in its out-line,
And his steed was a gigantic Prius,
When he rode into battle to free-us
From our tragic dependence on fossil fuels.

Upon the horizon three giants appeared,
For battle these hulks were booted and geared,
They moved in a sun and lung-killing haze,
Shooting flames that set the green fields ablaze,
And they left behind a river of oil,
That choked the air and soaked the rich soil.
Needless to say these three demons from hell,
Were sent by BP, Texaco, and Shell.
Steve charged at them in his electric car,
Blinding their eyes with his shield from afar,
He soon drew near them and battle commenced,
Though none could withstand the knocks he dispensed,
One by one they found themselves floored,
Tasting the steel of his wind turbine sword;
The combat was brutal, the combat was quick
Each giant lay still in its own oil slick,
And Stephen stood on a pile of his foes,
Striking a bold and a heroic pose,
As the stark vision of this epic fight,
Faded fast from our heroine’s blank sight.

CM.

An armchair for the mansion of a Marquand

20160502_160126

Until I visited the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne back in May I had no idea that Lawrence Alma-Tadema was a designer as well as a painter. This chair, which has a twin in London’s V&A, caught my eye straight away.

The ever-reliable V&A collections website page is stuffed with useful background information on the piece and the suite it came from:

This armchair formed part of a luxurious suite of furniture, costing £25,000, designed for the music room of the New York mansion of Henry Gurdon Marquand (1819-1902). He was a highly successful American entrepreneur, art collector and benefactor. The armchair bears Marquand’s initials on the back.

This armchair is made of mahogany, with cedar and ebony veneer, and inlaid in ivory and abalone shell. The original upholstery was described in the 1903 Marquand sales catalogue as ‘silk of an ashen olive hue, embroidered with panels … of the Greek wave design.’

The furniture is designed in the Grecian style for the ‘Greek Parlor’ or music room of Marquand’s house on Madison Avenue in New York. This music room also housed Marquand’s classical antiquities. Other rooms were decorated in styles that reflected the different aspects of his collections. This furniture was exhibited in Johnstone & Norman’s shop in New Bond Street, London, before being sent to America.

I know what you’re thinking…what the hell is ‘abalone’? The answer seems to be: sea snail shell. So there you go.

According to the V&A:

The design of the various pieces of furniture clearly reveals Alma-Tadema’s knowledge of the Classical world, based on his studies in the British Museum, on visits to Pompeii and Herculaneum, and on his extensive photographic collection of Classical antiquities and architecture.

The whole suite of furniture included a grand piano, two piano stools, a music cabinet and two corner cabinets, two round tables, long and curved settees, four small chairs, two armchairs, and “a framed and glazed panel of sandalwood with carved decoration in ivory, boxwood, ebony and abalone, with a design of Ibis drinking from a fountain, and the same scrolling acanthus leaves and flowering tendrils as on the back of the armchair”.

The set was broken up by the Martin Beck Theatre Sothebys sale and the pieces are now spread across the world, so it’s very unlikely we’ll have the privilege of Mr Marquand’s guests, and see the furniture united once again in its rightful setting (assuming the room still exists). It must have made quite an impact at the time.

Final question, then: was it comfortable? I don’t know for certain (because I didn’t sneakily sit in it when nobody was around), but if the chairs passed down through my family by my great-grandmother are anything to go by, you probably wouldn’t want to have to sit in it (on it?) for too long…

20160502_160138

Generation X in Laos

If you’re lucky / crazy / hardworking enough to take six months off work to go backpacking in South East Asia, I’d suggest you don’t add Generation X to your travel reading list. Unless, that is, you don’t mind having your behaviour, dreams, pretensions—pretty much your whole life—slung up on a metaphorical meat hook by Douglas Coupland, who will then proceed to examine it with his perspicacious eye and skewer it with his sharp pen.

Generation X is full of new terms (i.e. neologisms), coined or seized on by Coupland in order to describe the predicament of Generation X. These neologisms, along with their definitions, are printed separately from the narrative at the bottom of various pages scattered throughout the book. And they’re pretty damn spot on.

Here are some Couplandisms that are as relevant to today’s backpackers as they were when Generation X was published in 1991:

Anti-Sabbatical: A job taken with the sole intention of staying only for a limited period of time (often one year). The intention is usually to raise enough funds to partake in another, more personally meaningful activity such as watercolor sketching in Crete or designing computer knit sweaters in Hong Kong. Employers are rarely informed of intention.

Mid-Twenties Breakdown: A period of mental collapse occurring in one’s twenties, often caused by an inability to function outside of school or structured environments coupled with a realization of one’s aloneness in the world. Often marks the induction into the ritual of pharmaceutical usage.

Poverty Jet Set: A group of people given to chronic traveling at the expense of long-term job stability or a permanent residence. Tend to have doomed and extremely expensive phone call relationships with people names Serge or Ilyana. Tend to discuss frequent-flyer programs at parties.

Expatriate Solipsism: When arriving in a foreign travel destination one had hoped was undiscovered, only to find many people just like oneself; the peeved refusal to talk to said people because they had ruined one’s elitist travel fantasy.

Virgin Runway: A travel destination chosen in the hopes that no one else has ever chosen it.

Me-ism: A search by an individual, in the absence of training or traditional religious tenets, to formulate a personally tailored religion by himself. Most frequently a mishmash of reincarnation, personal dialogue with a nebulously defined god figure, naturalism, and karmic eye-for-eye attitudes.

Native Aping: Pretending to be a native when visiting a foreign destination.

Terminal Wanderlust: A condition common to people of transient middle-class upbringings. Unable to feel rooted in any one environment, the move continually in hopes of finding an idealized sense of community in the next location.

Re-reading the full list of Couplandisms from Generation X for this post has reminded me how relevant they are to the Milliennials of today. I have a feeling Coupland’s addressed this point in his more recent works – I need to get my read on. So many words! So little time!

The joys, costs, and consequences of discovery

Before writing my last post I spent a few minutes Googling Possession-related content, and I came across this absolute gem: Romances of the Archive in Contemporary British Fiction. It’s the work of academic Suzanne Keen.

An ‘archival romance’, in case you were wondering, is a plot which relies on a portrayal of an archive (e.g. a library of books) and / or archival research (e.g. looking through books to try to discover something). If, like me, you like books about people studying books, then this extract from the Romances of the Archive blurb is guaranteed to excite you:

Using the work of Peter Ackroyd, Julian Barnes, Lindsay Clarke, Stevie Davies, Peter Dickinson, Alan Hollinghurst, P.D. James, Graham Swift, and others, Keen shows how archival romances insist that there is a truth and that it can be found. By characterizing the researcher who investigates, then learns the joys, costs, and consequences of discovery, Romances of the Archive persistently questions the purposes of historical knowledge and the kind of reading that directs the imagination to conceive the past.

BetterWorldBooks in the US is currently selling secondhand copies for £4 inc. postage; here’s the link. I don’t think I’ve ever been this excited (or excited full stop) to get my hands on a work of literary criticism.

There is a truth and it can be found…

 

AS Byatt and *those* poems

Dolly keeps a Secret
Safer than a Friend
Dolly’s Silent Sympathy
Lasts without end.

Friends may betray us
Love may Decay
Dolly’s Discretion
Outlasts our Day.

Could Dolly tell of us?
Her wax lips are sealed.
Much has she meditated
Much – ah – concealed.

Dolly ever sleepless
Watches above
The shreds and relics
Of our lost Love
Which her small fingers
Never may move.

Dolly is harmless.
We who did harm
Shall become chill as she
Who now are warm
She mocks Eternity
With her sly charm.

– A. S. Byatt / Christabel LaMotte from Possession

In December 2014 I went to see Booker Prize-winning novelist A. S. Byatt ‘in conversation’ with Matthew Beaumont and John Mullen at University College London. Her best-known novel Possession was much discussed. Especially the poetry interspersed with the prose. By the sound of it, nobody involved in getting the book to market thought the poetry was very commercial. If I recall correctly, Byatt said that the support of fellow novelist and fellow former UCL lecturer Alan Hollinghurst was critical, in that it convinced her she should insist that the poems be retained. I have my doubts as to whether *any* editor could have convinced Byatt to leave the poems out, but that’s another post.

I’ve read Possession more than once and in my opinion it would have been an act of vandalism to tear any of the poetry out of the book – on the other hand, ‘Swammerdam’, ‘Mummy Possest’, and that one about the golden apples are definitely rather tiresome…

Anyway, the inclusion of the poem above was surely uncontroversial. It’s clever and pointed and fits perfectly with the plot, and with the character in the book who is supposed to have authored it. If you want to know why, you’re just going to have to read Possession.

Bonus info: I asked Byatt what she thought about the abysmal film adaptation of Possession. She half-dodged the question, mentioned a film adaptation of one of her works that she did actually like (by way of implicit comparison), and said that the Possession movie had paid for her swimming pool. So there you go.

When is the internet art?

I’ve just finished reading Playing to the Gallery, a work written by the potter / visual artist Grayson Perry.

According to its coverleaf, the book is based on Perry’s “hugely popular Reith Lectures”, and it does contain a few good jokes of the kind that usually go down well in public lectures, so perhaps it is.

The book attempts to answer some philosophical questions regarding contemporary art – e.g. is it art? Is it any good? How should I react to it, &c.

I’m not sure what I thought of the overall book yet–I’m still digesting it, metaphorically speaking–but I did like this definition of internet art:

I asked my friend Charlie Gere, Professor of Media Theory and history at Lancaster University, for a definition of when I would know that I was looking at a piece of web art and not just an interesting website. And he came up with this. He said, ‘You know it might be art rather than just an interesting website when it has the grip of porn without the possibility of consummation or a happy ending.’

In other words, it’s all about frustrating our urgent need to double click our way to satisfaction whether in the form of a joke, an opinion, a fact, a sale, or indeed an onanistic experience, to detail and suspend us in a state of frustration and ambivalence, and to make us pause and think rather than simply react. And in many ways that’s quite a good definition of any artwork compared to any object.

Speaking as someone involved in marketing – in getting someone to click the next button and the next towards a sale – this really rings true.

N.B. In Playing to the Gallery, Perry describes his show at the British Museum, The Tomb of the Unknown Craftsman, as his greatest achievement. It was probably the best exhibition in a museum or gallery I’ve ever been to – and you can still get the book here.

More on Playing to the Gallery soon – if I can work out what I think about it…

Privacy at the Donmar Warehouse: all your data are belong to them

Privacy Donmar This is a cross-post of a review which originally appeared on The Register

Punch and Judy show assures Hampstead elite that the Grauniad has their back

Josie Rourke, mummer-in-chief at the Donmar Warehouse, was halfway through researching a new play on how ‘smart phones and the internet are changing the ways in which we live’, when The Guardian and its partners decided to leak the Edward Snowden files. This timely interruption gave Rourke new impetus and material, and the result is Privacy, a new work set to play in the decidedly unwarehouse-y environs of the Donmar until the 31st of May.

Data isn’t the only thing that’s meta in Privacy: the plot of the play, if it can be said to have a plot, sees The Director (Michelle Terry, excellent) challenge The Writer (Joshua McGuire, also excellent) to embrace the web in all its invasive, pushy, spammy, disappointing, nude-selfie-taking glory – in order to write a play about his experiences. The Writer grudgingly agrees, and sells his soul to Zuck and the folks down at the Chocolate Factory for a Facebook account and some keyword-matched advertising. While corporates and governments start to mine his data, The Writer slopes off to interview the first of many real-life experts – Josh Cohen, the psychoanalyst responsible for the book The Private Life: Why We Remain in the Dark. Once at Cohen’s mind surgery, The Writer jumps onto the therapist’s couch, and the audience jumps into his mind, which is full of politicians, hacks, mathematical wonks, civil servants, techno-bods, and shysters (played by the rest of the cast – all uniformly excellent). These figures/figments walk up and down arguing the merits of sharing personal information with large corporates (spoiler: there aren’t any), and giving intelligence agencies uncontrolled access to all the metadata they can eat. All of these characters are, like Cohen, real-life people with some skin in the great privacy-defending/eroding-game of the 21st Century, and everything they say is taken from interviews conducted by the writer of the play, acclaimed young Grub-streeter James Graham, or from the public record. For example, William Hague walks on at least twice to deliver his favourite and not-at-all-chilling chat-up line, “If you have nothing to hide, you’ve nothing to fear.”

The schizophrenia intensifies in the second half of the play as we hear testimony from the gaggle of Graun writers who were brave enough to have the story of the decade dumped in their laps by Edward Snowden (Glenn Greenwald doesn’t feature and is only mentioned once – make of that what you will). While the Graunistas goggle at their good fortune, The Writer meets with a lawyer who advises him not to go to America to view Snowden’s treasure trove for himself (“Don’t look. And if you do look, don’t look.”). Of course he does go, and he does look, and he returns home in time for a disastrous Tinder hookup with a woman who turns the tables on him with a file of information gleaned from—where else?—the internet. Realising his decision to ‘connect’ has let the genie of his privacy well and truly out of the bottle of his life, he sinks to his knees…aaaand scene.

Privacy spends a decent chunk of its running time educating its audience: on everything from what a Facebook ‘like’ is, to how Amazon’s recommendations engine works, to what exactly can be discerned from metadata (spoiler no. 2: a lot – but not enough to say for sure whether Romeo and Juliet were star-crossed lovers or terrorists with a backfiring chemical weapon). It’s an education that Reg readers are unlikely to need (or want), but one that might now be considered essential for children, teenagers, and un-tech-savvy parents. Privacy should be toured around every school in the country, starting tomorrow, not sitting in the Donmar, where most of the audience is old enough to realise that the existence of Facebook and Twitter means that discretion is the better-er part of valour.

Rourke and Graham use talking heads to create a balanced debate about privacy; this is reflected in what a horrible marketing person like me would call their ‘key takeaway’ – each new generation needs to ‘re-contract’ with the balance behind privacy and civil liberties. However, this balancing act weakens the play, which makes no persuasive thrusts – instead creating a confused tapestry of impressions in the mind of the viewer. With its use of audience participation, (novel) insistence that watchers keep their mobile phones switched on, partially borrowed script, and threadbare plot, Privacy is more of a show than a play. But it’s a decent show, and one that will probably even more relevant in ten years’ time.