Tosh Berman's Blog, page 177
August 5, 2016
"Mad Like Artaud” by Sylvére Lotringer / Translated by Joanna Spinks (univocal)
"Mad Like Artaud” by Sylvére Lotringer / Translated by Joanna Spinks (univocal)
I read books on Antonin Artaud like a Dodger or Yankees fan eating peanuts in a game. I can’t get enough of Artaud, and almost every book on him, at the very least, is super interesting. “Mad Like Artaud” by Sylvére Lotringer, is the best. So good in fact, that at times have a hard time believing that Lotringer actually interviewed these key people who were Artaud’s doctors as well as the woman who ran his literary estate. By hook or crook.
In French literary circles the issue of Artaud and his madness and therefore his stay in a mental hospital during the occupation is quite controversial. The Letterists had a campaign to annoy the doctor who helped (or destroy) Artaud in the mental hospital - and here we get fascinating long interviews with two of Artaud’s doctors: Jacques Latrémolière and Gaston Ferdière. Lotringer is very aggressive in his questioning for both doctors, but more so for Latrémolière, who clearly didn’t care for Artaud’s work. In fact, he finds it hard to believe that he has any importance whatsoever. On the other hand, Ferdière has a great appreciation for Artaud and his work - and, weirdly enough, has the hatred from the Letterist. What is interesting, as we get an inside view of Artaud’s craziness as well as his life in the hospital. At the start, he almost starved to death, but due to his friend, the poet Robert Desnos, he was spared the misery. So now we have the push and pull of people around Artaud, and in a way it is sort of madness in itself. The most saddest to me is Paule Thèvenin, who is a controversial figure in the Artaud world. She was the head of his literary estate, with some unhappiness on the part of his family. Still, the bitterness comes through after many years.
There is some fiction in the book, where Lotringer meets Artaud as an dying old man - which makes the whole book kind of hmmm. Nevertheless, a fascinating book, and truly a superbly written one as well. For sure a classic Artaud study, but also a fascinating look into the world of a French mental hospital in the post-war years as well as during the occupation. A must for the Artaud lunatic, but also anyone who is interested in 20th century French literature.
ISBN: 9781937561413 Univocal- Tosh Berman
August 1, 2016
Lun*na Menoh Conducting Her Version of Maurice Ravel's BOLERO
Lun*na Menoh conducting her own version of Maurice Ravel's BOLERO. All sounds from the sewing machine. What she has done is take Ravel's masterpiece back to the Industrial Age, when the sewing machine first started to appear in people's homes. Probably the first mechanic machine that appeared in the everyday home. Ravel's dad worked in a factory, so he was aware of the rhythms of the factory, and then therefore "Bolero."
Lun*na worked from the original score by Ravel, so it is probably one of the most accurate versions of the orchestrated piece in existence. It's 18 minutes long, which was the original length that Ravel wanted for Bolero. Some orchestrations speed up the piece, but Ravel consistently asked for it to last 18 minutes. Lun*na honored the composer, by following his suggestion. As well, as bringing it all back to the factory. Pretty much a masterpiece by both Ravel and Lun*na.
- Tosh Berman
July 30, 2016
Two Albums I Purchased Yesterday (at Mono Records)
I used to own this album in 1977 (the year it was released) but had to sell it to Moby Disc for money for some reason I totally forgot. Nevertheless, it has been in the back of my mind for 35 years of so. As I was taking one of my strolls down Glendale Blvd, I found a copy at Mono Records. A great record store. The best thing about a record store is when you go in to look for a specific album, and you find something else instead. And usually something much better than the other record you're looking for. The above John Cage album fits that category. Prepared Piano pieces on a double album, and on the great Tomato Records label. Beautifully mediative as well as intense. How does two work together is sort of like enjoying a Tom & Jerry cartoon. You need the violence, as well as the pairing of the duo.
On the same record store visit, I found this fantastic album by Jack Scott. Recorded in 1958, as well as in Detroit (I didn't know he lived or made music there). This is a fantastic rockabilly album of great strength . Jack wrote most of all (except one) of the songs on this album. "The Way I Walk" of course is the masterpiece here - and the extra happiness is that the recordings are in mono, which gives it that extra concentrated punch over the speakers. Released in France, this album must have been on a steam liner, and then crawled to Glendale Blvd. I'm happy to have it in my home. Also the combination of Cage and Scott is rather good. Again, going back to Tom & Jerry, the perfect yin and yang. Separate, but yet, together.
- Tosh Berman
July 28, 2016
Our Trump by Tosh Berman
The beauty (and I'm using that word 'very' loosely) of Trump is that one can't really comment on him. You can expose him, you can look at his tax returns, break into his e-mail account, interview every woman he may or may not harmed, go through his business records, and re-visit his older quotes, and you will get zilch. Because we already know all the answer to all above. Trump doesn't have the higher moral ground, so therefore, he does not have to follow any moral code, except his over-the-top egoism. There are no rules in his world, because such nouns have no meaning in his life. He's a combination of a good James Bond Sean Connery era villain and a character out of an Alfred Jarry work of fiction. In other words, he's a mess, and he does not give a damn. He does whatever he does, because he can.
In a way, he is like a reflection off a mirror. You want to read these things in and on him, but that is virtually impossible. At times, I think he clearly wants to lose the election. He has the ability to say the most ridiculous things at the right time (for him of course). His recent comment on Russia should search and locate more of Clinton's e-mails is almost DADA like, in that he is only reflecting on the fear of the Democratic Party world and throwing it back like Nero as he lights his interiors to start the big fire.
To be honest, he himself is not that interesting. What's interesting is how such a figure can single handily destroy the Republican Party. It's not an issue of money, but more of a talent he is, to surf on the surface, and somehow makes it profound to his audience and enemies. And Trump, not only desires love, but also hatred. To him, it's equal, and a win-win situation. He is for sure, thin-skinned, when it comes to criticizing him, but he looks at the bigger picture, which is, people are talking about him. The thing is, and this is a true oddity, you can't really make fun of him. Because no matter how outrageous the parody is, he's way beyond the parody. Or, when one makes a speech against him, it comes off just plain, compared to a Trump performance. And make no mistake, he's a performer like any politician, but he is actually more of a genius type than say Clinton, who is just normal.
Normal is OK. If we are honest with ourselves, we actually crave normalcy. To get up in the morning, and make it to the evening, that is what we all crave and want to happen. Trump hates that. If he can throw in a wrench at a machinery part, so it will break down - that makes him happy. The fact that the Democratic Party likes to dig a deep hole in the ground, and put their heads inside that hole - with respect to the ills of the world, Trump doesn't care to do that route. He adores destruction. Trump sensually embraces chaos. Call him names, make fun of him, it's all a sense of beauty and entitlement for Trump. The highest of the high is to get a piece of property, build something on it, and then stamp it with your name on the top floor. So everyone can marvel that building, as it is. Which is a self-portrait of Donald Trump. And of course, there is nothing but interior rot and decay within that structure, but who will notice that?
He doesn't have an ounce of deepness and or a sense of irony (or perhaps he does, we will never know). But like Shakespeare's work, we can look into the world that these characters' make, and see perhaps a vision of who we are. So in a nutty way, I'm grateful for Trump destroying one-by-one the other contestants in the Republican race, because one, he exposed their hypocrisy. These others, think exactly like him, but Trump's genius was to expose his thoughts without any filtering. So, what we have is a monster of sorts, but one that is clearly visible. The danger is, not him specifically, but the fact that there are other monsters lurking in the shadows.
I have gone on and on about the drone issue. But think about it. We have a presidency that uses the drone on a regular basis. He himself has shown fears of future presidents misusing the drone system. And he, himself has killed many. One can argue he killed the bad guys, or even perhaps people who deserve to die - but that is a form of judge, jury, and executioner. If you like Obama's approach, and if that is fine with you, then great. But if the drone system under the eyes and heart of someone like Clinton or Trump - will you be OK with that as well? And not to be a buzz-kill, if we can operate drones, then we have to presume others can as well. I walk around my neighborhood, and I often see amateur drones in the air. Annoying things, to hear and see when you walk among a beautiful landscape. Then one starts to think what can be attached to these machines. Cameras, and the unthinkable.
It seems that we are quite pleased with a well-intended speech. The beauty of a velvet voice embracing our battered emotions, is not a bad thing at all. It's a seductive device, because that is basically what a speech is supposed to do - especially in the public space - which is not really a pubic space, but we are allowed to enter, mingle, and listen, and then leave and wander into the evening. If it's a really good speech, we can forget all the bad things, except fear. Because we do need the fear to motivate ourselves. It is a sexual instinct of sorts. We desire things that we can't have, but we can fantasize and almost taste its fruit. To taste fear, is like eating Trump alive. If we can munch on him quickly, we hope that will feed the fear, or at least, contain it for awhile. On the other hand, Trump still doesn't care. Win or lose, it's the ride that is important to him.
The Democratic Party, and I have to imagine the Republican Party, it's the win that is the goal and the great importance. For the first time in my existence, we are facing a gentleman (ha) who cares not at all what we think of him, just as long as we have Trump coming out of our collective mouths. If the political parties lose, they will consistently find blame somewhere else, beyond their mistakes or lack of vision. The rotten thing, is that now the pandora's box is opened, there will be more Trumps on the horizon.
- Tosh Berman
July 27, 2016
Lun*na Menoh and "Bolero" on KCRW
Lun*na Menoh discusses Maurice Ravel and Bolero and her upcoming performance of performing Ravel's Bolero this coming Saturday. Hear it here:
http://blogs.kcrw.com/dna/ravels-bolero-performed-with-sewing-machines
July 26, 2016
July 25, 2016
"The Undiscoverable Reading" an essay by Tony Duvert
ISBN 978-1-58435-135-1 Semiotext[e]"The Undiscoverable Reading" an essay by Tony Duvert (Translated by Bruce Benderson) with drawings by Eli Langer (Semiotext[e])
Tony Duvert is a very hard sale. Due to the fact that he has an interest in pedophilia and criticized modern child-rearing. In the 70s, due to the sexual moral times of that era, he could get his work published, but since the 1980s he was pretty much ignored by the mainstream press and even from the Underground. Which is a shame, because Duvert is a very interesting writer and thinker. Semiotext[e] the brilliant press are the only one's that are publishing his work, and the booklet I have just read, "The Undisoverable Reading" is hard-to-find. It's a 40 page chapbook, with no bind, but I read it twice, because I found it to be difficult and enticing at the same time. In this essay, Duvert writes about the nature of literature and how reader's perceive literature - both as someone who may write books, as well as its readers. The reader in a sense, meets the author. He starts off writing about an ad selling classic literature to a normal family, and gives a funny picture of that type of ad- and then he goes into the advertisement of a company selling a service in 'how to write,' and gives a picture there of a young girl about to start her novel or some sort of creative writing. From there, he digs into the deeper world of why people read, but also the nature of avant-garde literature when it mixes with the mainstream world of books. The writing is very dense and one has to concentrate - but as I said, I was compelled to read it twice in a row - and each read was enjoyable experience. This work was part of the Semiotext[e] box set that was sold at the Whitney. I think the whole collection is sold out, but I think for sure, worth the trouble to locate this box of chapbooks. As a brand, you can pretty much trust the Semiotext[e] publishing house to always, or at the very least, put out interesting titles.
- Tosh Berman
