Showing posts with label Hamburg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hamburg. Show all posts

07 April 2016

Philosophischer Salon mit Henry Holland in der Galerie Sarafand, Schleswig-Holstein. Monatlich, ab dem 1. Mittwoch im Mai (04.05.2016).




Nur glücklich? 
Über eine mögliche Überbewertung des glücklichen Seins.
Monatlich ab dem 1. Mittwoch im Mai, wird es in der GALERIE SARAFAND, Schultwiete 2, 24558 Henstedt-Ulzburg (30 Min. von Hamburg), zwischen 19-21 Uhr, vieles zum Besprechen und zum Nachdenken geben. Kommen Sie hin, diskutieren Sie mit: Moderation von Henry Holland. Für alle TeilnehmerInnen, ganz gleich ob ohne oder mit philosophischen Vorkenntnissen. 
Die Glücksforschung boomt. Tagespresse bzw. unsere Newsfeeds berichten ständig über die neuesten Ergebnisse. Es gibt sogar ein Happiness Economics, also eine Wirtschaftsforschung der Glücks-Problematik, die, wenn wir beispielsweise nach der Empfehlung des britischen Ökonoms Richard Layard handeln wollten, der steuerpolitischen Lösungen vorsieht, um mehr Glück in die Welt zu schaffen. Gilt es aber nicht zuerst die Frage zu untersuchen, wo diese andauernde Jagd nach persönlichem Glück überhaupt herkommt? Dieses Glück, das oft nah erscheint, wenn wir die Ratschläge des neusten Selbsthilfe-Ratgebers nur umsetzten, oder wenn wir die Disziplin fänden, um bei der langersehnten Ernährungsumstellung zu bleiben.
Dabei ist die Gewichtung der heutigen Glückssuche geschichtlich gesehen eine Neuerscheinung. Welcher unsere Ahnen,  ob aus der Mittelschicht, ob aus ärmlichen oder reichen Verhältnissen, ob aus Asien, Afrika oder hier aus Norddeutschland, hätte soviel Zeit mit Gedanken zu seinem eigenen Glück verbracht? Damals stand das Ziel ein „gutes“ oder „sinnvolles“ Leben zu führen im Mittelpunkt: Das persönliche Glück wurde weitgehend dieser Priorität untergeordnet. Und was ist die Beziehung zwischen unserer intensiven Beschäftigung mit Fragen des Glücks, im Verhältnis zu unserer aktuellen gesellschaftlichen Situation? Von unseren Regierungen verlangen wir Stabilität und das Einhalten gewisser Lebensstandards. Als mitgestaltende Akteure gesellschaftlicher Prozesse möchten aber die meisten von uns sich nicht mehr sehen.
Um abzuschließen lohnt es sich unbedingt, auf die Philosophen der Antike zu diesem Thema zu hören. Und warum dann nicht gleich mit kritischen Gedanken zum Glücksbegriff des Aristoteles (384–322 v. Chr.?) beginnen? Glück sei das, was der Mensch um seiner selbst willen anstrebt, und nicht, um etwas Anderes damit zu erreichen.”
Eintritt: 15.- Euro. Karten: zu reservieren unter    info@galerie-sarafand.com
Tel 04193 - 6343, oder an der Abendkasse.

24 June 2012

Poetry workshops continue: screening of Keats film in the autumn


The workshop I ran a week ago here in Hamburg about writing Renga - ancient Japanese group poems - produced wonderful results, which I hope to be able to publish here soon in the next few days. My heartfelt thanks to all of you who took part - you made it special!

Meanwhile, my poetry education work continues on Saturday, 15th September, 2.30 pm, with a public screening of Jane Campion's film about Fanny Brawne and John Keats at the Naturschutzhaus, Fischbeker Heideweg 43, 21149 Hamburg. After the film there should be the possibility to participate in a poetry writing workshop (writing in German & English), using Keats' poetry as a starting point. Here, below, is a piece that I wrote for the London Review of Books blog in spring 2010 about the film, which they didn't take. (Occasional fascinating stuff on that blog, but the set-up appears to be rather a carve-up. They won't take a post on what maybe the first decent English language bio-pic of a poet, but they will post a LRB writer superfically plugging his latest novel.) Anyway,
I still stick by what I wrote about the film, LRB publication or no .....

Jane Campion's film Bright Star (view trailer)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/video/2009/nov/20/bright-stark-film-trailer,
the love story of Fanny Brawne and John Keats, has been in UK
cinemas since the autumn, and is still running in London.
So far, no one from the LRB has wanted to write about it
 either in the print edition or on the blog. That surprised me.
A good film about a great world poet comes
along every 50 years or so if we're lucky. It's been no
box office hit - you can work out from the box office
takings http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2009/BRSTR.php that
c. 300,000 people have seen the film world-wide. Yet even
that should make it the biggest event in the
popularisation of Keats since the intense wave of
editions of his poems published between the 1850s and the
1880s.

 So who is Campion's Keats? He's humorous and good at
playing with Fanny's younger brother - a young teenager -
and sister - aged 7 or 8. He's a hundred times more
likeable than the romantic poet stereotype, lone and
palely loitering, that colours how we have read him. And
yet Campion still foregrounds his death - and one
particular conception of his death - too strongly.

 After the point in the film when the news is brought to
London that Keats is dead, Campion puts this simple
message across the screen: "Keats died believing he was a
failure." Campion wants to give us closure. Andrew
Motion, Keats' biographer, acted as advisor to the film.
His chapter on Keats' death confirms Campion's message on
the one hand - and on the other shows it to be
negligently misleading. The depressive even suicidal
thoughts are obviously there - how could they not be? - a
young man dying under a painful and terminal illness,
knowing that his life's work has received next to no
positive critical resonance. Yet in the midst of that he works on an inscription for his tombstone, choosing a
metaphor of water to describe himself, a metaphor of
unceasing movement and transformation. This doesn't match
with Campion's Keats, just thinking himself a failure:

 "Here lies one whose name was writ in water."

 That's the line that Keats wanted on his headstone. Has
anyone else noticed how uncannily close Keats' lines are
to Rilke's final lines of "Sonnets to Orpheus", which,
coming close before his death, can also well be
understood as the poet's final words of self-conception? - 

 "And should the world itself forget your name
 say this to the still earth: I flow.
 Say this to the quick stream: I am."

(Taken from Don Paterson's Orpheus: A version of Rilke, 2006)

 And can we do anything with this water? I did something.
Inspired by Campion, I re-read "To a Nightingale" - and
aged 34, and despite the handicap of having an English
degree - I got it for the first time. Thankfully, I'll
not detail this process. But I got it.

16 January 2012

Seditious: A three part series on poems at The Story Boat

Angus Calder’s “Ye are na Mary Morrison!” (pub. 2003) is one of the poems I’ll be reciting at The Story Boat  at the Alter Schlachthof in Hamburg on Fri., 27th January. First the poem; then I’ll be discussing why it matters –
  
         “Ye are na Mary Morrison!”                                                not

There wis a kinda plainness                                                                           was
(and, tae be frank, plookiness) tae Mary.                                                      to, spottiness
She stood short and square
like the dream of a nation
in which truths wid happen – not scary,                                                      would
not altogether ruled by vainness –
and very definitely there.
I appreciated the whiff of her knickers
wafting towards me above the heather
eftir we’d done the business thegither.                                                         after, together
Her fingernails were strong, but nae vicious.                                               no
There wis a tang of parsley in her hair.                                                         was
When she peed and flushed it wis like an avalanche,                                   was
and somehow her every utterance was seditious.

(Published in Chapman Magazine, Nr. 102-3, Edinburgh: 2003.)

Who’s this Mary & which seditious things may she be saying to us? And why should a reader in Germany – or, tae be frank, anywhere outside Scotland – bother with a poem that they may mistakenly take to be written in dialect?
A mistake, because this here isn’t a dialect, but rather a text written in Scottish English, with some Scots included. A lexis accessible to any reader who’s familiar with Standard English and who’s ready to stretch out a little into the pleasurable unknown;  I’ve attached a gloss down the right-hand margin in any case.
            Calder wrote in Scottish English and in Scots for two vital reasons. Firstly it was the language he went on hearing throughout his life (c. 1948 – 2008), particularly when back home in Edinbra, on the buses, on the streets and in the pubs. Secondly he had an acute historical awareness – exemplified in his book length studies on colonialism & his work as the co-editor of the Journal of Commonwealth Literature in the 80s – that writing in minority, endangered languages was a welcome duty, an act of sedition in itself.
            Which the poem is full of, from the hissing, sibilant “ss” sound in “plainness” in the first line, right through to the susurrus  in “seditious”. In the susurration – the whispering & rustling “s” sounds running through the poem – plainness / plookiness / short /scary / viscious / utterance / seditious – to name but a few words in which these sound occur – we hear the voice of the poem consistently enjoying saying that which is not meant to be said, just like the snake talking to Eve in the Garden of Eden. You’re not meant to start a love poem by talking with unsentimental honesty about the beloved’s limitations – about her “plainness, and, to be frank, plookiness”. If those who new Calder can be sure that the poem is partly about an actual lover that Calder had, I wonder how this lover took to being described as plain & plooky in public. Yet if this poem is about one of Calder’s actual lovers, it’s also about another real man’s relationship perception of another real woman, and here again, Calder is enjoying the transgression in his unique take on this relationship.
 The clue to this other couple comes from the title, Ye are na Mary Morrison! On first reading, this title sticks out like a sore plook; the “na” in it is anachronistic, not recognisable as part of the late 20th C. Scots and Scottish English that Calder uses in the poem itself, or at least not from the limited Edinbra / east of Scotland context as I knew it. I first thought it could only be a scrap of language picked up in a school playground, two girls fighting as part of a game, one girl claiming the right to pretend to be an older girl of some reputation, Mary Morrison, the other girl refuting that right with scorn: “Ye are na Mary Morrison!” Sadly, the facts that the internet offer so nakedly dismiss this fancy: “Ye are na Mary Morrison.” is a line taken from the song Mary Morison written by Robert Burns in 1784-85. (The full text of which plus decent critique is available here. Joann Gilmartin’s singing of the song makes me want to hear more Burns sung live, & to facilitate in this happening.)
So Calder’s poem takes the key line from Burns’ song as it’s starting point. In this line of the song the poem’s narrator is sat at a fine dance, the fiddle’s “trembling string” stirring up gaiety amongst the fair looking-guests assembled, but he’s looking at all these bonnie ladies & thinking of his true love, saying inwardly to all of them, “ye are na Mary Morison.” In writing a poem with this title which goes on to give Calder’s imagination of how Mary actually could be, he’s subverting the cult of good-looking, sexual physicality that all Robert Burns’ work is steeped in. No writer’s portraits – aside, perhaps, from the portraits of Goethe – have been so fetishised as Burns’ have been, with always the same image or two to be found on ten-thousand tea towels & pieces of kitsch, pseudo-modern art in ten-thousand Scottish tourist traps. There can be no doubt from the evidence of the portraits that Burns was a handsome man. But to derive from that – as Scots do – that the sex Burns had was a frivolous, light-hearted thing with women whose beauty matched his own is to suppress the sexual desperation that comes through Burns’ work: that of a man intensly into “doing the business” and ideologically committed to it, living in a society where rigid class division & the iron-hand of a calvanistic church prevented him enacting many of his sexual-romantic visions. Burns’ sex must often have been a matter of taking what he could get, a matter of plainness, plookiness even, lice, gonorrhoea, damp & diry bedclothes.
            Calder gives us the Mary Morison beyond where Burns’ song stops, filling in the naturalistic, novelistic detail which is utterly absent in the song. His major sedition – agitating against the Scottish residing elements of the UK state, who, for almost two hundred years were happy to see Burns kept wearing the strait-jacket of a depoliticised romantic – is built on a number of minor seditions, of breaches of public order. Which other public intellectual - & that’s who Calder was in Edinbra, albeit in quite small circles – will write a poem in which it’s ambiguous whether it is he, or Burns, or both, who, “appreciated the whiff of her knickers” after scratchy, itchy, open-air sex on the heather? A tad embarrassing, isn’t it? – Where’s the cleverness, the get-out clause, the irony? Where else is the closeness in sound & sense between “sedition” and “seduction”, between “seditious” and “seductive”, more evident than in this poem? Despite, or maybe even because, of this Mary’s plainness & plookiness, she manages to seduce the reader, taking them into her fantastic, revolutionary world, where every thing she says – her every utterance – was seditious. What, every one?  Pass the milk. Are you taking that book back to Davie. I’m off out. All said in a seditious fashion? Glorious. Makes me want to meet Mary & makes me regret that I never experienced Angus Calder live. Who knew that knowledge of your cultural tradition is essential, in order to agitate against authorities who house themselves, parasitical, on the backs of traditions. 

15 October 2011

Catching Rilke’s Autumn

Because Rainer Maria Rilke’s most famous autumn poems evoke the season so strongly, it becomes hard, after years of living with these lines, to distinguish between your own recurring autumn experience - & Rilke’s framing of that experience. Harder, still, in days of climate change, to catch those “two final southerly days” that Rilke refers to in “Autumn Day”, which was published in his 1902 volume “The Book of Images.” Yet while our Hamburgian grapes rot on the vine – sweeter & bigger than last year but still too sour to eat many of – I feel it’s my last chance for this year to post my translations of ‘Autumn Day’ & of ‘Autumn’.

Autumn Day


Lord – it is time. The summer was so big.
Lay your shadows down upon the sundials,
and down the dales let the winds fly loose.

Order fullness from the last few fruits;
give them two final southerly days,
push them into ripeness – and hunt
the last sweetness in the heavy grape.

If you’ve no house yet, you’ll not build one now.
If you’re alone now, you’ll stay that way for long,
you’ll wake, read, write long letters,
and wander here and there through the avenues,
restlessly, as the leaves tumble down.

Autumn


The leaves are falling, falling from afar,
as if withered in the heavens’ furthest gardens;
they’re falling with a gesture of negation.

And in the nights the heavy earth is falling
out of all stars into loneliness.

We’re all falling. That hand, there, falls.
And take a look around you: it is in everything.

And yet there’s One, who holds this Falling
infinitely gently in his two hands.