Brain Sand is known scientifically as corpora arenacea--crystal structures in the pineal gland, a small pine cone-shaped thing, middle of our brains. Mystic religions see the pineal gland as transmitter/receiver of all things psychic, i.e. the Third Eye. However one looks at it, the older you get the more Brain Sand you have so that it becomes visible on X-rays and is sometimes used as anatomical landmark for X-Rays. Brain Sand is made up of phosphate salts and calcite minerals. Calcite is of the trigonal crystal system, i.e. crystal the shape of quartz. I like that human beings have Brain Sand, in the grand scheme of things, somehow it makes sense. Salts and minerals, the lens between the real and the dreams. I’ve been thinking over this stuff for most of this year. Now it’s a new year.
The solstice occurs when the North Pole is tilted 23.5 degrees away from the Sun; the Arctic Circle is now in darkness, and the Antarctic Circle is now 24 hours daylight (66.5 degrees above/below latitude: 23.5 + 66.5 = 90 [90% angle to the Sun]). As a human being, sometimes you forget you’re walking around, laying down and sleeping, and then walking around again on a planet. The solstice is a great reminder. I so love the Sun’s light when Earth is tilted back.
I’ve always loved the colors the Sun creates, but over the years I’ve come to love the Sun itself as much as its affects and effects. This year I’m coming out as a Sun-Taoist--a new religion I invented. I treat the Sun like Christians treat their god. I thank it, talk to it, marvel at it. When I was Christian I would have considered it absurd--to worship the sun? God created the Sun! Why worship what was created when you could worship the creator? But since the Sun sustains life, and humanity is part of life and has gods, then isn’t it that the Sun created all gods? Humanity started talking about Jesus long after the Sun had been sustaining life. The Sun wins, at least that’s the way I see it. If you’re going to formulate a way to perceive creation and existence, why not with that entity that makes life possible at its center? The Sun--something so never-endingly magnificent and beautiful.
This year really has been another amazing year. I feel blessed to have had so many amazing years now. True, not all things have turned out, but I’m quite cognizant of how fortunate a life I’ve lived and am still living. I wouldn’t mind financial success with the Shakespeare book, so I could focus on new books and art, but now it’s 2012. Can you believe it? It’s really NOW when supposedly something--many things--everything--is going to change somehow. I hope it will be in line with the Maya and Hopi, the idea that it’s the end of one world and the beginning of another. I’m hoping it has to do with consciousness alone. If indeed it must be physical, then I hope it is the idea where Earth’s core flips, leaving the surface in its same positioning, as opposed to an entire pole-shift of Earth. Whether or not such things or anything else happens, I feel excited to live in this year, like each day is a heaven unto itself. That's how I’m going to view and live this year, each day a special day, a new day to thank the creator.
Wednesday, December 21, 2011
Monday, December 19, 2011
Late Notes, Just Before Christmas, 2011
“It looks like it really, really might come true.” I found myself thinking it again. A whole life of going on like that. Interesting. Time will tell.
Latest text I might send to the NYCGA:
The Constitutional Convention Sub Group:
PAER is all about how to get money out of politics and arguably the biggest reform of all, removing private source code from tallying votes in public elections. Political/electoral reform needs to happen first, it’s the problem once fixed makes a bunch of others go away. And it’s non-partisan, which is nice. No rocket science.
With everything we know to be true today (such as members of Congress practicing insider trading in the People’s house), then of course, objectively, nothing short of the Article V Convention is a chance in hell of placing government back in the hands of the people.
Those who go vertigo in fear that a convention would produce social amendments, i.e. amendments to ban marriages, etc., are absurd. All history shows those fears irrational/illogical. You want 100% assurance that if we have a convention you’ll like/approve everything? Guess what asshole, you’re an asshole. We all have an idea what would be best right now. Until we gather in a convention we’ll never know what 75% of Americans actually approve of. If you’re American and afraid of finding out, you should shoot yourself in the head. Get it? It’s time for a convention. The time for half-measures and patches are over. Be a fascist if you want, evidence is the universe is against it.
If the administrators/moderators of PAER don’t fast-track Article V to a working group status to start work to bring about a convention, they have become the very thing all in solidarity with the movement are against.
Latest text I might send to the NYCGA:
The Constitutional Convention Sub Group:
PAER is all about how to get money out of politics and arguably the biggest reform of all, removing private source code from tallying votes in public elections. Political/electoral reform needs to happen first, it’s the problem once fixed makes a bunch of others go away. And it’s non-partisan, which is nice. No rocket science.
With everything we know to be true today (such as members of Congress practicing insider trading in the People’s house), then of course, objectively, nothing short of the Article V Convention is a chance in hell of placing government back in the hands of the people.
Those who go vertigo in fear that a convention would produce social amendments, i.e. amendments to ban marriages, etc., are absurd. All history shows those fears irrational/illogical. You want 100% assurance that if we have a convention you’ll like/approve everything? Guess what asshole, you’re an asshole. We all have an idea what would be best right now. Until we gather in a convention we’ll never know what 75% of Americans actually approve of. If you’re American and afraid of finding out, you should shoot yourself in the head. Get it? It’s time for a convention. The time for half-measures and patches are over. Be a fascist if you want, evidence is the universe is against it.
If the administrators/moderators of PAER don’t fast-track Article V to a working group status to start work to bring about a convention, they have become the very thing all in solidarity with the movement are against.
Monday, November 28, 2011
Life Lately
So, last summer I found out my landlord had stopped paying the mortgage and the title was swooped up by someone else. Suddenly, after living in Montecito for almost ten years I was adrift. I really did love where I was living. I could walk to the beach or get on my bike and ride up into the Santa Ynez Mountains. After a court battle and settlement with the company that bought the place (2.5 million property for 560 grand), I then had to find a new place. It’s always dicey finding a new place, but I found out today I was once again lucky. Turns out the new place is right up the street from where I live now. Also built in the 1920s, and with really cool people.
The political science appears to be evolving. Time will tell.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Open Letter To Occupy
Dear Occupy, I’m an educator in an average-sized American city. I’ve been a political activist for a quarter-century and have come to learn how the two-party system destroys political movements for change. The two parties differ on social/economic issues but are united in preventing alteration to their system, so that it’s become a form of institutionalized corruption. The two-party system is the graveyard of movements for change. No one elected to it, and no amount of legislation issued from it, is going to reform it. This is nothing new under the sun, humans have faced various forms of tyranny before, but in our case today this means America
Before considering the language of such an amendment, consider that there are only two ways to propose one: Congress or Convention. Although Congress may occasionally put lipstick on a pig, so to speak, it’s not going to propose an amendment to effectively reform the two-party system. Therefore we’re meant to utilize the only alternative, a convention for proposing amendments.
For many decades both Democrat and Republican politicians have told Americans that if a convention were ever held it might runaway into a national catastrophe which removes rights and/or destroys the Constitution itself. Yet, the two-party system, in practicing politics as usual, providing cover for institutionalized corruption, already has become a national catastrophe, already has removed rights, and already ignores the Constitution. Occupy is a political movement in response to this national catastrophe.
In my years as an activist I’ve been involved in one federal lawsuit and one federal criminal case, both concerned with the convention clause of Article V, and I’ve come to know things about a convention which most citizens do not. First and foremost, while a convention does debate and draft amendments, it does not and cannot make those amendments law. For an amendment to become law it must win approval of the states--not a simple majority of states (50%+), but a supermajority (75%+). This requirement of a supermajority demands a healthy mix of different groups and political persuasions. It demands that an idea must have overwhelming and broad support or it will be discarded. This is a principle based on common sense, not the self-destruct button politicians have told us about. In other words, because supermajorities are required for ratification--a special mix of different constituencies--we can trust in that. We can let go and trust the people and the constitutional process as to what amendment would win approval--and if we don’t trust in that, guess who we’re back to trusting?
Groups diverse as Occupy and Tea Party Patriots and others are displeased with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we’re meant to do that by convoking a convention of state delegates. Occupy could and should lead the way with the idea that amendments need to be discussed on the authority of the Constitution rather than in parks or on the internet; that a convention is a national discussion which the two-party system does not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes, in and of itself alters the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
Occupy is composed of many groups and many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be given top priority. What Occupy as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states without a convention on the authority of the Constitution. Occupy currently has the opportunity to leadAmerica
There are two things now required of us--talent and guts. Talent is not a problem, talent is the pride of the nation--we have the talent to hold a convention, we have the talent to construct amendments which can win the approval of supermajorities. The other part is the guts--do we have the guts to make our government address our demands?
The convention clause of Article V has been satisfied, there are hundreds of state applications on record and one session of Congress after the next simply ignores its constitutional obligation to issue the call. All reformations the world over since history began all come down to one thing: a tipping-point. All we need is roughly 15-20 million Americans cognizant of what a convention is, why the two-party system has done everything within its power to prevent one, and how it will deliver us from the institutionalized corruption of today.
If OccupyWallSt put out the call to all other Occupy cities, and they in turn redirected focus in calling for a convention, we will have one, and in a natural progression of events our high law will deliver us from the two-party system.
Before considering the language of such an amendment, consider that there are only two ways to propose one: Congress or Convention. Although Congress may occasionally put lipstick on a pig, so to speak, it’s not going to propose an amendment to effectively reform the two-party system. Therefore we’re meant to utilize the only alternative, a convention for proposing amendments.
For many decades both Democrat and Republican politicians have told Americans that if a convention were ever held it might runaway into a national catastrophe which removes rights and/or destroys the Constitution itself. Yet, the two-party system, in practicing politics as usual, providing cover for institutionalized corruption, already has become a national catastrophe, already has removed rights, and already ignores the Constitution. Occupy is a political movement in response to this national catastrophe.
In my years as an activist I’ve been involved in one federal lawsuit and one federal criminal case, both concerned with the convention clause of Article V, and I’ve come to know things about a convention which most citizens do not. First and foremost, while a convention does debate and draft amendments, it does not and cannot make those amendments law. For an amendment to become law it must win approval of the states--not a simple majority of states (50%+), but a supermajority (75%+). This requirement of a supermajority demands a healthy mix of different groups and political persuasions. It demands that an idea must have overwhelming and broad support or it will be discarded. This is a principle based on common sense, not the self-destruct button politicians have told us about. In other words, because supermajorities are required for ratification--a special mix of different constituencies--we can trust in that. We can let go and trust the people and the constitutional process as to what amendment would win approval--and if we don’t trust in that, guess who we’re back to trusting?
Groups diverse as Occupy and Tea Party Patriots and others are displeased with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we’re meant to do that by convoking a convention of state delegates. Occupy could and should lead the way with the idea that amendments need to be discussed on the authority of the Constitution rather than in parks or on the internet; that a convention is a national discussion which the two-party system does not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes, in and of itself alters the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
Occupy is composed of many groups and many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be given top priority. What Occupy as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states without a convention on the authority of the Constitution. Occupy currently has the opportunity to lead
There are two things now required of us--talent and guts. Talent is not a problem, talent is the pride of the nation--we have the talent to hold a convention, we have the talent to construct amendments which can win the approval of supermajorities. The other part is the guts--do we have the guts to make our government address our demands?
The convention clause of Article V has been satisfied, there are hundreds of state applications on record and one session of Congress after the next simply ignores its constitutional obligation to issue the call. All reformations the world over since history began all come down to one thing: a tipping-point. All we need is roughly 15-20 million Americans cognizant of what a convention is, why the two-party system has done everything within its power to prevent one, and how it will deliver us from the institutionalized corruption of today.
If OccupyWallSt put out the call to all other Occupy cities, and they in turn redirected focus in calling for a convention, we will have one, and in a natural progression of events our high law will deliver us from the two-party system.
Saturday, November 19, 2011
News From The Front
We finally approved a mission statement. And then as it turned out, right after it was approved, a meeting was called by another working group of the NYC general assembly. Of course I wanted as many people from our group to attend, to get a hand-bill out--a single sheet with the mission statement and rationale/basis for it:
Mission Statement:
Whereas recent court decisions and federal laws enable corporate and special interests to drown out the voices of United States citizens; whereas elected representatives are dependent on corporate and special interests to fund political campaigns; whereas two entrenched political parties have rigged the electoral system to insulate themselves against challenge from other parties; whereas our voting rights are under attack; whereas Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse these trends fatal to self government by the people. We resolve to work with all like-minded individuals and organizations, setting aside those debates which traditionally divide us and undermine our strength in numbers, to unite the voices of the 99% in calling for the Article V Convention so that such amendments may be proposed, debated, and ratified to secure and strengthen democracy for the people of this nation.
Rationale/Basis:
As our mission statement articulates, we as a group within the larger NYCGA, do not believe systemic problems of the electoral process will be reformed by legislation or amendment arising out of Congress--the body actively perpetuating the status quo of politics as usual, the two-party duopoly, and all symptoms which follow. We believe OWS currently has the opportunity to leadAmerica
Groups such as OWS and Tea Party Patriots and others are displaying displeasure with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we are meant to alter and abolish by convoking a convention of state delegates.
As it's Politics As Usual which provides cover for institutional corruption and the two-party system, a convention will stop PAU dead in its tracks as it's a three-part national discussion which politicians and media do not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes it necessitates, in and of itself will alter the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
OWS is composed of many groups, and beyond it, many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be the top priority of the nation. What OWS as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states for ratification without first holding a non-binding deliberative assembly on the authority of the Constitution.
We invite you to join us Saturday, December 3rd, to launch OWS into the next phase in its goal to break the status quo, that fundamental electoral reform may be debated in order to be ratified.
Then we had some e-mail discussion, which led to my reply:
Our group has the solution--not for us alone, but the nation. Millions of Americans are unaware of what OWS means, millions could give [beep] what we think. OWS is now being demonized. The solution our sub-group of NYCGA has identified is a non-partisan idea, indeed the founding principle of our high law--we're meant to alter untenable status quo via convention. If so, it seems common sense the task is to sell that principle to Americans who are either 1) unaware of it, or 2) unaware how it works. I worked with Occupy Santa Barbara for over two weeks, I know first-hand not everyone's opinion holds the same weight. By this I mean some have extensive knowledge which can and will aid the larger group if given the chance.
It seems plot-points of events are fortuitous: our group drafted/agreed to language and then a meeting emerged via Ed Brady. Why would we be shy about what our group's been working on? Why not print a page of our mission statement and its basis?
I do not see this having to do with unilateralism, it's about being a good dog and barking on point. Our dog has identified the solution, right there in our high law. I spoke with Ed Brady today and he inspired me to say what is true: we all have better things to do with our lives than fighting against a tyrannical government. If so, let's cause a convention, trust in the people and the process, so we can all go back to pursuing happiness. And if we don't trust the people, the principle of a convention and its three-part process, guess who we're back to trusting? We need a convention, we needed it 1960s, and here we are today half a century later. Let's put the problem to rest for another hundred years or more. We can do it.
Just hoping things will come together sooner than later....
I have been out there selling the Translations, and really, really want to get to the next book--Othello/Romeo & Juliet. And I also want to get to the sequel to the novel. And I want to write some original plays. And I want to create some sculptures. Sometimes the way I feel is that I'm a sculptor trapped in a crazy poet's body. Oh--and then there's the documentary--trying to get funds together to edit. So much to do, so little time. And last but not least, it sure would be nice to take a walk with someone special--on the beach, a hike in the mountains--maybe a special kiss? That really would be nice. I wonder if that will ever happen. Time will tell--for now, work.
Whereas recent court decisions and federal laws enable corporate and special interests to drown out the voices of United States citizens; whereas elected representatives are dependent on corporate and special interests to fund political campaigns; whereas two entrenched political parties have rigged the electoral system to insulate themselves against challenge from other parties; whereas our voting rights are under attack; whereas Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse these trends fatal to self government by the people. We resolve to work with all like-minded individuals and organizations, setting aside those debates which traditionally divide us and undermine our strength in numbers, to unite the voices of the 99% in calling for the Article V Convention so that such amendments may be proposed, debated, and ratified to secure and strengthen democracy for the people of this nation.
Rationale/Basis:
As our mission statement articulates, we as a group within the larger NYCGA, do not believe systemic problems of the electoral process will be reformed by legislation or amendment arising out of Congress--the body actively perpetuating the status quo of politics as usual, the two-party duopoly, and all symptoms which follow. We believe OWS currently has the opportunity to lead
Groups such as OWS and Tea Party Patriots and others are displaying displeasure with the status quo. While these groups may perceive problems differently, the overall level of dissent is sufficient, making the time ripe for fundamental change. Americans from across the political spectrum are ready to exercise the ultimate right--that of Alter and Abolish. In our constitutional republic we are meant to alter and abolish by convoking a convention of state delegates.
As it's Politics As Usual which provides cover for institutional corruption and the two-party system, a convention will stop PAU dead in its tracks as it's a three-part national discussion which politicians and media do not currently have to address and/or react to. Therefore, logically, simply holding convention, and going through the processes it necessitates, in and of itself will alter the current state of affairs while at the same time putting the entire nation through a grand lesson in civics.
OWS is composed of many groups, and beyond it, many cities. Throughout all these groups/cities are individuals who profess to have amendment language which should be the top priority of the nation. What OWS as a movement must become collectively conscious of now, is that there is no chance any one of these ideas will be proposed to the states for ratification without first holding a non-binding deliberative assembly on the authority of the Constitution.
We invite you to join us Saturday, December 3rd, to launch OWS into the next phase in its goal to break the status quo, that fundamental electoral reform may be debated in order to be ratified.
Then we had some e-mail discussion, which led to my reply:
Our group has the solution--not for us alone, but the nation. Millions of Americans are unaware of what OWS means, millions could give [beep] what we think. OWS is now being demonized. The solution our sub-group of NYCGA has identified is a non-partisan idea, indeed the founding principle of our high law--we're meant to alter untenable status quo via convention. If so, it seems common sense the task is to sell that principle to Americans who are either 1) unaware of it, or 2) unaware how it works. I worked with Occupy Santa Barbara for over two weeks, I know first-hand not everyone's opinion holds the same weight. By this I mean some have extensive knowledge which can and will aid the larger group if given the chance.
It seems plot-points of events are fortuitous: our group drafted/agreed to language and then a meeting emerged via Ed Brady. Why would we be shy about what our group's been working on? Why not print a page of our mission statement and its basis?
I do not see this having to do with unilateralism, it's about being a good dog and barking on point. Our dog has identified the solution, right there in our high law. I spoke with Ed Brady today and he inspired me to say what is true: we all have better things to do with our lives than fighting against a tyrannical government. If so, let's cause a convention, trust in the people and the process, so we can all go back to pursuing happiness. And if we don't trust the people, the principle of a convention and its three-part process, guess who we're back to trusting? We need a convention, we needed it 1960s, and here we are today half a century later. Let's put the problem to rest for another hundred years or more. We can do it.
Just hoping things will come together sooner than later....
I have been out there selling the Translations, and really, really want to get to the next book--Othello/Romeo & Juliet. And I also want to get to the sequel to the novel. And I want to write some original plays. And I want to create some sculptures. Sometimes the way I feel is that I'm a sculptor trapped in a crazy poet's body. Oh--and then there's the documentary--trying to get funds together to edit. So much to do, so little time. And last but not least, it sure would be nice to take a walk with someone special--on the beach, a hike in the mountains--maybe a special kiss? That really would be nice. I wonder if that will ever happen. Time will tell--for now, work.
Monday, November 7, 2011
Time Will Tell--Nice To Throw Stuff At Walls
"Whereas, the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of corporate and special interests over the interests of United States citizens. Whereas, unlimited private financial contributions within public elections have corrupted the electoral system. Whereas the Congress is unlikely to propose amendments to reverse trends fatal to representative government, it is now self-evident that we, the people of the United States
Latest language of mission statement--shaped by what others in the group said. I lifted “self-evident” from the DOI, trends/fatal/rep/gov phrase from a President Eisenhower speech.
Latest language of mission statement--shaped by what others in the group said. I lifted “self-evident” from the DOI, trends/fatal/rep/gov phrase from a President Eisenhower speech.
“Why disregard the Declaration of Independence as the foundational statement for establishing government or fomenting revolution? Corrupt government should be 'altered or abolished.' What more could a non-violent revolutionary hope for? The DOI sanctions orderly revolution--institutionalized by Article V."
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Dear Planet Earth I Love You
God’s blood this storm passing cross California
Took a job today on the set of a commercial--make a whole month’s rent in a day. That’s a relief. Yes I have had help recently and certainly at points in the past, but it’s true I really do make colorfield art, and I’ve written a novel, a book of translations, good amount of poems, photography--and I’d be a sculptor if I could--which is really what I am, a sculptor; and a sculptor who fails to make it in the world in terms of being able to have access to a yard with metal and tanks for wielding, and blocks of stone and hardened-metal instruments and hammers, is a very, very strange individual--plain and simple. The people who have helped me over the years really are patrons of the arts. We’d all like to be patron of the arts, right? We all want to be comfortable enough we start scholarship programs we wanted. If you’re human being that’s the coolest thing to be, one who made it out there in the world, then funds the arts.
Anyway, running low at present because all the political science: takes time to answer/make/calls/e-mails--as opposed to out selling books. Time-wise--the time it takes to fight to live another day. It’s funny how selling books and writing time are same in that if you put in an eight hour effort you’re guaranteed profits.
It’s touch and go with the NYC general assembly Article V group. I hope they adopt the latest language. I remembered some language from back in 2005, the “reverse trends fatal to representative government…” language. Love that--from President Eisenhower at commencement, a college inDefiance , Ohio
Took a job today on the set of a commercial--make a whole month’s rent in a day. That’s a relief. Yes I have had help recently and certainly at points in the past, but it’s true I really do make colorfield art, and I’ve written a novel, a book of translations, good amount of poems, photography--and I’d be a sculptor if I could--which is really what I am, a sculptor; and a sculptor who fails to make it in the world in terms of being able to have access to a yard with metal and tanks for wielding, and blocks of stone and hardened-metal instruments and hammers, is a very, very strange individual--plain and simple. The people who have helped me over the years really are patrons of the arts. We’d all like to be patron of the arts, right? We all want to be comfortable enough we start scholarship programs we wanted. If you’re human being that’s the coolest thing to be, one who made it out there in the world, then funds the arts.
Anyway, running low at present because all the political science: takes time to answer/make/calls/e-mails--as opposed to out selling books. Time-wise--the time it takes to fight to live another day. It’s funny how selling books and writing time are same in that if you put in an eight hour effort you’re guaranteed profits.
It’s touch and go with the NYC general assembly Article V group. I hope they adopt the latest language. I remembered some language from back in 2005, the “reverse trends fatal to representative government…” language. Love that--from President Eisenhower at commencement, a college in
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Late News From The Front
I’m an active member in the subgroup of a subgroup of the NYC General Assembly of OccupyWallSt. Each Occupy city has a General Assembly (GA) once a night round six or seven, where everyone there at that time votes things up or down. Our group is addressing the convention clause. We’ve all been e-mailing and decided to create a working document. Almost impossible to follow on a cold reading, but if you want to see it: http://piratenpad.de/4zz0uxb4tQ
The following are today’s e-mails/replies after getting back from political activity at De La Guerra Plaza, most beautiful Santa Barbara....
First reply is to someone asking if I was at the Harvard conference:
"Yes Ben, was lucky enough to have attended. More content from more attendees and hope to make a comprehensive documentary piece soon. I came away with the impression that the Tea Party Patriots on the one hand and progressives on the other, both perceive something is terribly wrong about current affairs but would articulate it differently. Both sides want to express our ultimate right as Americans--that of Alter and Abolish. Convoking and convening a federal convention is in essence a three-part national discussion which in and of itself alters and abolishes the status quo. I have complete faith in We The People, that we have the talent to carry off a convention, which with time and ratified amendments, will set humanity on a course different than the one we are currently on."
The next e-mail I responded to was from another newcomer, talking about the ERA:
http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/era.htm
My reply:
"Anne, thanks for the link. One thought that has occurred to me is that although the ten year struggle to get the ERA ratified did not succeed then, I believeAmerica
The next e-mail asked: “What exactly is the proposal for starting a convention? And what would the concept be and goals of any amendment?”
To which I replied:
"The proposal, based on what we're talking about, would be that this group formulates the salespitch to the NYCGA of why we should redirect all focus to calling for a federal convention; it dawns on NYCGA that in fact it is the right thing to do, and they put the call out to all other occupy cities to begin calling for the Article V Convention. Congress and media will pick it up and the call would be issued shortly thereafter. Once issued the concept and goal of most Americans would be an amendment which prohibits proprietary source code in voting machines, and removes corporate funds from public elections."
The following are today’s e-mails/replies after getting back from political activity at De La Guerra Plaza, most beautiful Santa Barbara....
First reply is to someone asking if I was at the Harvard conference:
"Yes Ben, was lucky enough to have attended. More content from more attendees and hope to make a comprehensive documentary piece soon. I came away with the impression that the Tea Party Patriots on the one hand and progressives on the other, both perceive something is terribly wrong about current affairs but would articulate it differently. Both sides want to express our ultimate right as Americans--that of Alter and Abolish. Convoking and convening a federal convention is in essence a three-part national discussion which in and of itself alters and abolishes the status quo. I have complete faith in We The People, that we have the talent to carry off a convention, which with time and ratified amendments, will set humanity on a course different than the one we are currently on."
The next e-mail I responded to was from another newcomer, talking about the ERA:
http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/era.htm
My reply:
"Anne, thanks for the link. One thought that has occurred to me is that although the ten year struggle to get the ERA ratified did not succeed then, I believe
The next e-mail asked: “What exactly is the proposal for starting a convention? And what would the concept be and goals of any amendment?”
To which I replied:
"The proposal, based on what we're talking about, would be that this group formulates the salespitch to the NYCGA of why we should redirect all focus to calling for a federal convention; it dawns on NYCGA that in fact it is the right thing to do, and they put the call out to all other occupy cities to begin calling for the Article V Convention. Congress and media will pick it up and the call would be issued shortly thereafter. Once issued the concept and goal of most Americans would be an amendment which prohibits proprietary source code in voting machines, and removes corporate funds from public elections."
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Sunday, October 23, 2011
News From The Front
I’m here at a Denny’s in one of the nicest places, hoping my compatriot has the hacking savvy to break into my own forum on my own website. What happened is, back in 2009 I had joined a group pushing for a convention and wound up with a domain and forum. Someone from the group, who I talked with over the phone, and who helped set it up, is now nowhere to be found and the passwords are messed up.
This last month was intense. Is OWS going to morph into a convention? That would be great. I’m on the subgroup of a subgroup of the general assembly. Their thread is to discuss the convention clause.
Tea Party Patriots or OccupyWallSt or something else, 80-90% of us are ready for change, to exercise the ultimate right--Alter and Abolish. We want to change the status quo, and a convention on authority of the Constitution is designed to do just that. If we want to leave where we are now, and Article V is the vehicle to get us out of here, why would we not lay down whatever else we were working on and begin working for the Constitution? The state applications on record have satisfied the call, it’s now just a matter of us wanting it enough.
This last month was intense. Is OWS going to morph into a convention? That would be great. I’m on the subgroup of a subgroup of the general assembly. Their thread is to discuss the convention clause.
Tea Party Patriots or OccupyWallSt or something else, 80-90% of us are ready for change, to exercise the ultimate right--Alter and Abolish. We want to change the status quo, and a convention on authority of the Constitution is designed to do just that. If we want to leave where we are now, and Article V is the vehicle to get us out of here, why would we not lay down whatever else we were working on and begin working for the Constitution? The state applications on record have satisfied the call, it’s now just a matter of us wanting it enough.
A convention is dangerous to the status quo because discussion is opened up, and delegates backed by corporations will be exposed for who they are by what they say--nothing significant--because the whole show is about how to shift power and they currently control it all. A convention is unicameral, not bi-cameral, and all proposals are voted 2/3 up or down.
How much altering and abolishing would the country do? The ratification process will tell us. What proposals will achieve seventy-five percent approval? Already 90%+ desire removing private money from public elections, so we know we can count on electoral reform coming out of a convention.
However you characterize the status quo, based on information you’ve processed in amount of time lived, the overwhelming majority want to leave where we currently are--where multinational corporations write their own legislation with unlimited funding of elections.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
Late Notes Post 9/11-plus-10
I said on facebook I'd just take footage I got in Boston, make something, and be done with it--just writing/visual art from here on out. But no, may as well ride it out into 2012. I really expect something fundamental in all our lives to change by then--if not, then the universe sure fooled me. What that shift will be I don’t know, but certainly something. With all the corruption, if I was a visitor to this small planet, checking in, I’d expect to find that if you’re an American poet, you’d be foaming at the mouth. I’m an American poet I suppose, if only in that I’m American and have been attempting poetry since before I was a teenager--and writing poetry is always attempt, whether or not it rings true is hit or miss. But I drink espresso and beer, and smoke cigarettes and cannabis like a chimney. Now I do what my assistant principle at middle school used to do (who I met with often at the time). His name was Mr. Simone, Italian or Persian or something, I never knew--something dark-eyed/hair--to the point and always on point. And he’d get to talking, then yelling, and this foam would build up, and before you knew it you were getting sprayed. I’m not like that exactly, I’m conscious like a woman in knowing if I need a drink of water, or to wipe my mouth while talking. I have had stuff fly out though. I always immediately touch my finger to my lips, to kind of try and let the person who just saw it know I know spit just flew out of my mouth. What’s maybe even more embarrassing than a ding of spit flying out of your mouth is an actual teeny bubble. Ever seen a teeny bubble fly out? Anyway, there’s this saying about being wary of battling monsters, that you might become one yourself. I’m not sure if I’ve become a monster, or if I’m just a poet mad for the truth. Probably both at this point. I really do need to stop smoking and drinking as much as I do. Whatever happens, I know I still love creating art and watching late sunlight on Earth.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
I taped a segment for a local cable channel tonight, talking about Shakespeare and the book. It went well, even the techs were saying afterwards how much they enjoyed it. I thought I was going to be nervous, but wasn’t. Reading the famous “To be or not to be…” soliloquy I did stumble over a word. Ugh. Anyway, glad it’s in the can.
So--Boston--the conference at Harvard. I really hope to get a nice documentary out of it. I’m trying to think of how to make it like a bolt of lightning. It’s not surprising in this day and age where we’ve all become so disneyified, a bunch of balloon-heads, that discussion of a convention is somehow a yawn-fest. I mean, as human beings what other subject is more exciting than peaceful revolution? We’re all Hamlet, we’re all players on a stage of corruption--although many don’t know it--and rightly so with half a century or more of purposeful dumbing-down. What better slave than one which thinks it’s free?
We’ll see what unfolds, I have my little Leica camera and tri-pod, so we'll see how it holds up sound-wise. A couple of loose ends to tie up tomorrow, then on a jet plane Thursday. And I know I haven’t posted photos here like I promised I would, but maybe this trip I’ll figure it out and get it done--time permitting--wish me luck.
P.S. Note the new photo for the blog. Typed "Rider, horse dog" into a Google search of images and found it. So cool!
So--Boston--the conference at Harvard. I really hope to get a nice documentary out of it. I’m trying to think of how to make it like a bolt of lightning. It’s not surprising in this day and age where we’ve all become so disneyified, a bunch of balloon-heads, that discussion of a convention is somehow a yawn-fest. I mean, as human beings what other subject is more exciting than peaceful revolution? We’re all Hamlet, we’re all players on a stage of corruption--although many don’t know it--and rightly so with half a century or more of purposeful dumbing-down. What better slave than one which thinks it’s free?
We’ll see what unfolds, I have my little Leica camera and tri-pod, so we'll see how it holds up sound-wise. A couple of loose ends to tie up tomorrow, then on a jet plane Thursday. And I know I haven’t posted photos here like I promised I would, but maybe this trip I’ll figure it out and get it done--time permitting--wish me luck.
P.S. Note the new photo for the blog. Typed "Rider, horse dog" into a Google search of images and found it. So cool!
Sunday, September 18, 2011
I’m really excited to attend the conference at Harvard: http://www.conconcon.org/
What’s that lyric by the Talking Heads? “Well--how did I get here?”
In 1981 I was sixteen, taking the tenth grade of high school over because of being down at Zuma too many days the previous year, and I was so troubled by what I learned in a social studies class, I figured there had to be a solution, and further reasoned that because the USA was the most powerful country on the planet, it would have to start here. Next thought was where to go if you wanted to change America and the world, the following thought was the Constitution. I walked directly to the library, ignoring my next class, attendance and all that, got a copy of the Constitution and began reading it. As soon as I saw the word convention I recognized that as the answer--"We just need to have a convention...." Then went off to become a stereotypical surfer, all the while reading far and wide.
In 1997 I read an article about the 1947 National Security Act: ever since the Department of Defense was created and the Pentagon built, the American citizen has been under a cap of disinformation: question the government or individuals who populate it--Sorry, it's a matter of “national security” you need not question further--move along…. As a poet and artist I began ruminating and digging, from history, to politics, conspiracy theory, social theory, and political science.
Then came the horrors: 1/12/01 and the betrayal by the Supreme Court by ruling a state must stop counting votes in a critical national election. Then 9/11. Knowing 9/11 would create a vacuum of power where certain forces would seep in, and the inevitable conclusion of that, a couple of days later I dedicated my life to causing a convention.
The 2002 Winter Olympics were held in Salt Lake City, and in December of 2001, the Olympic Torch began its journey around the country. I followed the torch, selling caps, banners, and pins, and discussed a “constitutional convention” with Americans day and night for two months, gathering data.
Then came the 2002 Help America Vote Act and the betrayal by Congress, flooding the country with 3.5 billion dollars of voting machines. If you don’t have transparent elections, you don’t have a free society, the two are one and the same. That’s the line in the sand.
I went to 501c3 groups set to combat private E-Voting and tried to reason that if they really wanted to secure The Vote from corporate interests and proprietary source code, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. No luck.
Then I went to 501c3 groups set to combat the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the Military/Industrial complex. I attended the 2004 national assembly of United For Peace And Justice and other local gatherings/meetings trying to reason with Pro-Peace activists that if they really wanted to bring the troops home and all that, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. No luck.
Then came the 2004 Presidential Election and I followed both the Bush/Kerry campaigns around the country, selling caps/t-shirts/buttons, attending a dozen rallies each, speaking with Americans day and night for two months about the Constitution, Article V, and whether or not we ought to convoke a federal convention. After the last campaign rally, I drove home from the Midwest to California, listening to news of Kerry conceding Ohio, voting machine irregularities, and flipped exit polls.
Days passed and a website I'd set up advocating for the convention clause http://www.cc2.org/ gotless and less hits. By then I was fried, just wanted to get back to work on poetry, plays, and a novel, and salvage whatever time I had left to make a mark.
Then more bad news, maybe it was the Cheney/Scalia duck hunting trip or something else abominable, but I was looking around the internet, and found a website dedicated to a federal lawsuit. It was before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court and concerned with the convention clause. I got in touch with Bill Walker the plaintiff, helped write text for the site, and began to get word out. I even put together a documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg&search=walker%20%2Bcc2
By then, the 9/11 Truth movement had picked up steam and I attended a national conference to reason with organizers, that if they really wanted truth from their government, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. I was also there looking for funding to get the suit to the Supreme Court--because the suit was addressed to members of Congress there were thousands in printing fees as a hurdle.
With a few days left to find the funds, someone from the 9/11 conference sent word asking how the suit was. I told the problem of funding, that it was about to die on appeal, and they suggested we put it into a form of Writ of Certiorari. By doing this, it enabled us to get it to the Supreme Court so the issue would be decided whether or not the Supreme Court and its workers put it in the pipeline--by denying it, it was decided.
The writ went to conference October 27th, 2006. My poet self back then really hoped a miracle would happen. The day we got news, Bill put up what I call the Black Page on his website, declaring the Constitution officially dead--which was true based on the rule of law. He thanked me for efforts and wished all luck in life. Then a week or so after that I remembered what Abe Lincoln said: it doesn’t matter what the Congress/Executive/Court say the Constitution means, only what We The People say. Some people are afraid of the idea We The People, but if you ever think about it deeply, if you’re a loving human being, you reach the conclusion it’s better to be human than robot. It’s obvious.
Since political science is floating the right idea at the right time, I redoubled efforts, posting on popular progressive blogs--“progressive”--meaning in favor of advancement of human civilization in terms of scientific advance and how best to apply it to our approach to existence.
Sometime then Harvard Professor Lani Guiner came to Santa Barbara to speak, I talked with her about the convention clause, and sometime after that the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy commissioned former Michigan State Supreme Court Justice Tom Brennan to revisit an article he had written back in the 1980s about the convention clause. In his research he discovered the lawsuit. The three of us began a round of e-mails and founded FOAVC.
We had a period where membership was flooding in, then there was a sudden change of the website, and we had our first blow-out as a group. Then I attempted to persuade that in this audio/visual day and age, you can’t tell people, you have to show them--the old theatre adage--we needed a documentary. Then there was another falling out, and I was voted out. That’s the history of how we’ve gone from discussing this as a “constitutional convention” to “the Article V Convention.” The former is still used, and variations, the latter is used frequently.
The summer of 2009, I loaded my Volvo wagon with copies of the novel (I recommend the Volvo to anyone), as a way to get down the road to talk with folks about the convention clause; drove from Santa Barbara CA to Montauk NY and back, talking about it day and night for almost three months; handing out the FOAVC website along the way. I've called into C-SPAN multiple times, numerous local and national radio shows, and have maintained e-mail relationships with various leading intellectuals--Professors Sanford Levinson, Lawrence Lessig, Noam Chomsky, and others. I've paid $250 to attend fundraisers to speak directly with my Senators and Rep. I've sent letters on more than one occasion.
Then I was fried again--scrambling to write stuff, already on to the Shakespeare book--when a Professor Emeritus of Sociology, Tom Scheff found a website put up: http://www.articlev.org and sent an e-mail. Then, I was still in touch with Sandy Levinson and asked him to sent a positive note:
May 26, 2010
Dean Bruce Tiffney, College of Creative Studies
University of California at Santa Barbara
Dear Dean Tiffney:
I am taking the liberty of writing you with regard to conversations I have had over the past year with John De Herrera about the possibility of staging a mock constitutional convention at the University of California at Santa Barbara. I am very excited about this possibility and would certainly volunteer whatever services I might provide to make it happen. I am the author of Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (and How We the People Can Correct It)(Oxford University Press, 2006), which offers a critique of the political system established by the 1787 Constitution and proposes, among other things, a new constitutional convention to engage in systematic reflection both of the adequacy of our present Constitution and of possible changes that might give us a better constitution for the 21st century. University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato, in his recent A More Perfect Constitution, also proposes a new constitutional convention. I am pleased to say that my book (though certainly not all of my particular ideas) was endorsed by, among others, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, who was then Dean of the Harvard Law School, where I have been teaching courses over the past six years while on leave from the University of Texas Law School.
I will not surprise anyone when I say that I receive far more agreement concerning many of my specific criticisms of the Constitution than with regard to the proposal for a new convention. Because it has not been done (at the national level) since 1787, most people, I think, believe it is simply off the table. One reason is that they cannot imagine a truly productive convention, given the differences among present-day Americans. One important purpose of holding a mock convention is to test that perception and, I hope, to demonstrate that one can bring together a group of young Americans who can in fact respectfully discuss (and often disagree) with one another about vital issues and, perhaps, come to what might be surprising agreement on potentially desirable changes to our political system. John’s idea to produce a film of the convention, which could, obviously, be shown across the country, represents, to my mind, a very imaginative and potentially important way of helping to jump-start a vitally needed, and long overdue, national conversation.
Perhaps it is worth mentioning that over the past three years, I have driven from Boston, where my wife and I spend the fall semester, to Medfield, Massachusetts, to speak to an honors social studies class at Medfield High School that has read my book and spent some significant time engaging in a mock convention. These 17- and 18-year olds have consistently gotten involved in discussing basic issues of constitutional design, and I know that the teacher (who has won the Massachusetts Teacher of the Year award) believes that it is time well spent. My visits have come in December, after the students have spent several weeks discussing various aspects of American constitutionalism. In the best of all worlds, a mock convention would be part of a systematic course, but it would also be extremely valuable to see and hear the responses of less primed students, for a central question is whether ordinary Americans, without the goad of taking a course and receiving credit, can be persuaded to think of potential imperfections in the existing Constitution and the possibility of fundamental change. Such questions are especially important in California, of course, given the widespread dissatisfaction with the current California constitution and the proposals by a number of very respectable people for a state constitutional convention.
I would be delighted to communicate further with any of you regarding a mock convention or any specific role that I might play. In any event, I have been delighted to discover Mr. De Herrera’s interest in such a project, and I hope even in these financially straitened times it will be possible to bring it to fruition.
Sincerely,
Sanford Levinson
W. St. John Garwood and W. St. John Garwood Jr.
Centennial Chair in Law, University of Texas Law School,
Professor of Government, University of Texas at Austin
Cc: Chancellor Henry Yang
Dean Mel Oliver
Dean David Marshall
Dean Pierre Wiltzius
Professor Karen Poirier
Professor Leroy Laverman
Professor Henry Reese
Professor Tom Scheff
Professor Apostolos Athanassakis
Professor Adrian Wenner
Then Bruce Tiffney put me in touch with the Associated Students President, I pitched the idea to him and he was giddy, and rightly so, about the idea of holding a convention. “I know so many on campus who would love to participate!”
Then there was the voicemail: “John, I’m sorry I misspoke, we’re not ready to meet with you Wednesday....”
Besides that, I also committed an act of civil disobedience, tampering with federal property, in a necessity defense--breaking a law to prevent a greater harm--which got the issue into the federal courts once again, even having a federal magistrate say in open court they were unaware all fifty states had cast applications.
So now somehow I’m going to Boston. I hope to make a decent documentary.
What’s that lyric by the Talking Heads? “Well--how did I get here?”
In 1981 I was sixteen, taking the tenth grade of high school over because of being down at Zuma too many days the previous year, and I was so troubled by what I learned in a social studies class, I figured there had to be a solution, and further reasoned that because the USA was the most powerful country on the planet, it would have to start here. Next thought was where to go if you wanted to change America and the world, the following thought was the Constitution. I walked directly to the library, ignoring my next class, attendance and all that, got a copy of the Constitution and began reading it. As soon as I saw the word convention I recognized that as the answer--"We just need to have a convention...." Then went off to become a stereotypical surfer, all the while reading far and wide.
In 1997 I read an article about the 1947 National Security Act: ever since the Department of Defense was created and the Pentagon built, the American citizen has been under a cap of disinformation: question the government or individuals who populate it--Sorry, it's a matter of “national security” you need not question further--move along…. As a poet and artist I began ruminating and digging, from history, to politics, conspiracy theory, social theory, and political science.
Then came the horrors: 1/12/01 and the betrayal by the Supreme Court by ruling a state must stop counting votes in a critical national election. Then 9/11. Knowing 9/11 would create a vacuum of power where certain forces would seep in, and the inevitable conclusion of that, a couple of days later I dedicated my life to causing a convention.
The 2002 Winter Olympics were held in Salt Lake City, and in December of 2001, the Olympic Torch began its journey around the country. I followed the torch, selling caps, banners, and pins, and discussed a “constitutional convention” with Americans day and night for two months, gathering data.
Then came the 2002 Help America Vote Act and the betrayal by Congress, flooding the country with 3.5 billion dollars of voting machines. If you don’t have transparent elections, you don’t have a free society, the two are one and the same. That’s the line in the sand.
I went to 501c3 groups set to combat private E-Voting and tried to reason that if they really wanted to secure The Vote from corporate interests and proprietary source code, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. No luck.
Then I went to 501c3 groups set to combat the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the Military/Industrial complex. I attended the 2004 national assembly of United For Peace And Justice and other local gatherings/meetings trying to reason with Pro-Peace activists that if they really wanted to bring the troops home and all that, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. No luck.
Then came the 2004 Presidential Election and I followed both the Bush/Kerry campaigns around the country, selling caps/t-shirts/buttons, attending a dozen rallies each, speaking with Americans day and night for two months about the Constitution, Article V, and whether or not we ought to convoke a federal convention. After the last campaign rally, I drove home from the Midwest to California, listening to news of Kerry conceding Ohio, voting machine irregularities, and flipped exit polls.
Days passed and a website I'd set up advocating for the convention clause http://www.cc2.org/ gotless and less hits. By then I was fried, just wanted to get back to work on poetry, plays, and a novel, and salvage whatever time I had left to make a mark.
Then more bad news, maybe it was the Cheney/Scalia duck hunting trip or something else abominable, but I was looking around the internet, and found a website dedicated to a federal lawsuit. It was before the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court and concerned with the convention clause. I got in touch with Bill Walker the plaintiff, helped write text for the site, and began to get word out. I even put together a documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg&search=walker%20%2Bcc2
By then, the 9/11 Truth movement had picked up steam and I attended a national conference to reason with organizers, that if they really wanted truth from their government, they should beat the drum for a federal convention. I was also there looking for funding to get the suit to the Supreme Court--because the suit was addressed to members of Congress there were thousands in printing fees as a hurdle.
With a few days left to find the funds, someone from the 9/11 conference sent word asking how the suit was. I told the problem of funding, that it was about to die on appeal, and they suggested we put it into a form of Writ of Certiorari. By doing this, it enabled us to get it to the Supreme Court so the issue would be decided whether or not the Supreme Court and its workers put it in the pipeline--by denying it, it was decided.
The writ went to conference October 27th, 2006. My poet self back then really hoped a miracle would happen. The day we got news, Bill put up what I call the Black Page on his website, declaring the Constitution officially dead--which was true based on the rule of law. He thanked me for efforts and wished all luck in life. Then a week or so after that I remembered what Abe Lincoln said: it doesn’t matter what the Congress/Executive/Court say the Constitution means, only what We The People say. Some people are afraid of the idea We The People, but if you ever think about it deeply, if you’re a loving human being, you reach the conclusion it’s better to be human than robot. It’s obvious.
Since political science is floating the right idea at the right time, I redoubled efforts, posting on popular progressive blogs--“progressive”--meaning in favor of advancement of human civilization in terms of scientific advance and how best to apply it to our approach to existence.
Sometime then Harvard Professor Lani Guiner came to Santa Barbara to speak, I talked with her about the convention clause, and sometime after that the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy commissioned former Michigan State Supreme Court Justice Tom Brennan to revisit an article he had written back in the 1980s about the convention clause. In his research he discovered the lawsuit. The three of us began a round of e-mails and founded FOAVC.
We had a period where membership was flooding in, then there was a sudden change of the website, and we had our first blow-out as a group. Then I attempted to persuade that in this audio/visual day and age, you can’t tell people, you have to show them--the old theatre adage--we needed a documentary. Then there was another falling out, and I was voted out. That’s the history of how we’ve gone from discussing this as a “constitutional convention” to “the Article V Convention.” The former is still used, and variations, the latter is used frequently.
The summer of 2009, I loaded my Volvo wagon with copies of the novel (I recommend the Volvo to anyone), as a way to get down the road to talk with folks about the convention clause; drove from Santa Barbara CA to Montauk NY and back, talking about it day and night for almost three months; handing out the FOAVC website along the way. I've called into C-SPAN multiple times, numerous local and national radio shows, and have maintained e-mail relationships with various leading intellectuals--Professors Sanford Levinson, Lawrence Lessig, Noam Chomsky, and others. I've paid $250 to attend fundraisers to speak directly with my Senators and Rep. I've sent letters on more than one occasion.
Then I was fried again--scrambling to write stuff, already on to the Shakespeare book--when a Professor Emeritus of Sociology, Tom Scheff found a website put up: http://www.articlev.org and sent an e-mail. Then, I was still in touch with Sandy Levinson and asked him to sent a positive note:
May 26, 2010
Dean Bruce Tiffney, College of Creative Studies
University of California at Santa Barbara
Dear Dean Tiffney:
I am taking the liberty of writing you with regard to conversations I have had over the past year with John De Herrera about the possibility of staging a mock constitutional convention at the University of California at Santa Barbara. I am very excited about this possibility and would certainly volunteer whatever services I might provide to make it happen. I am the author of Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong (and How We the People Can Correct It)(Oxford University Press, 2006), which offers a critique of the political system established by the 1787 Constitution and proposes, among other things, a new constitutional convention to engage in systematic reflection both of the adequacy of our present Constitution and of possible changes that might give us a better constitution for the 21st century. University of Virginia political scientist Larry Sabato, in his recent A More Perfect Constitution, also proposes a new constitutional convention. I am pleased to say that my book (though certainly not all of my particular ideas) was endorsed by, among others, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, who was then Dean of the Harvard Law School, where I have been teaching courses over the past six years while on leave from the University of Texas Law School.
I will not surprise anyone when I say that I receive far more agreement concerning many of my specific criticisms of the Constitution than with regard to the proposal for a new convention. Because it has not been done (at the national level) since 1787, most people, I think, believe it is simply off the table. One reason is that they cannot imagine a truly productive convention, given the differences among present-day Americans. One important purpose of holding a mock convention is to test that perception and, I hope, to demonstrate that one can bring together a group of young Americans who can in fact respectfully discuss (and often disagree) with one another about vital issues and, perhaps, come to what might be surprising agreement on potentially desirable changes to our political system. John’s idea to produce a film of the convention, which could, obviously, be shown across the country, represents, to my mind, a very imaginative and potentially important way of helping to jump-start a vitally needed, and long overdue, national conversation.
Perhaps it is worth mentioning that over the past three years, I have driven from Boston, where my wife and I spend the fall semester, to Medfield, Massachusetts, to speak to an honors social studies class at Medfield High School that has read my book and spent some significant time engaging in a mock convention. These 17- and 18-year olds have consistently gotten involved in discussing basic issues of constitutional design, and I know that the teacher (who has won the Massachusetts Teacher of the Year award) believes that it is time well spent. My visits have come in December, after the students have spent several weeks discussing various aspects of American constitutionalism. In the best of all worlds, a mock convention would be part of a systematic course, but it would also be extremely valuable to see and hear the responses of less primed students, for a central question is whether ordinary Americans, without the goad of taking a course and receiving credit, can be persuaded to think of potential imperfections in the existing Constitution and the possibility of fundamental change. Such questions are especially important in California, of course, given the widespread dissatisfaction with the current California constitution and the proposals by a number of very respectable people for a state constitutional convention.
I would be delighted to communicate further with any of you regarding a mock convention or any specific role that I might play. In any event, I have been delighted to discover Mr. De Herrera’s interest in such a project, and I hope even in these financially straitened times it will be possible to bring it to fruition.
Sincerely,
Sanford Levinson
W. St. John Garwood and W. St. John Garwood Jr.
Centennial Chair in Law, University of Texas Law School,
Professor of Government, University of Texas at Austin
Cc: Chancellor Henry Yang
Dean Mel Oliver
Dean David Marshall
Dean Pierre Wiltzius
Professor Karen Poirier
Professor Leroy Laverman
Professor Henry Reese
Professor Tom Scheff
Professor Apostolos Athanassakis
Professor Adrian Wenner
Then Bruce Tiffney put me in touch with the Associated Students President, I pitched the idea to him and he was giddy, and rightly so, about the idea of holding a convention. “I know so many on campus who would love to participate!”
Then there was the voicemail: “John, I’m sorry I misspoke, we’re not ready to meet with you Wednesday....”
Besides that, I also committed an act of civil disobedience, tampering with federal property, in a necessity defense--breaking a law to prevent a greater harm--which got the issue into the federal courts once again, even having a federal magistrate say in open court they were unaware all fifty states had cast applications.
So now somehow I’m going to Boston. I hope to make a decent documentary.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
Late Notes
The pitch for the book is tight--goes something like this: “Hi, how are you? My name’s John, I’m a writer and I’m on a tour for my latest book--just making my way down the coast from Santa Barbara. [Hold book up--get it in their hands] Everyone’s heard of Hamlet and Macbeth, but barely anyone actually knows their stories. I was substitute teaching for the city and had a couple classes this one week--the kids were having problems with the language--I was having problems teaching it--so I said--somebody’s gotta translate these things. [Open book run finger down along text] So what I did, I left as much as possible unaltered--left as many words from the original--so you feel like you’re reading Shakespeare, but you'll actually understand it. But because these two stories are so foundational to western civilization, we’re all gonna run into references to them for the rest of our lives whether we like it or not. But if you take a little time, read this, for the rest of your life, it’ll never again be a question mark. Like most people--myself included--we tried to read it in high school, it was a headache, but when I got into the work of it, I saw how amazing these stories are--and all the timeless ideas--I mean people have been discussing these things for hundreds of years….” If they haven’t bought it at that point I ask if they have anyone in the family who reads--“Makes a great gift for the holidays….” Or I show them the novel. Lots of times they go ahead and get the novel instead.
It’s neat to be able to engage people out there in the world. I mean how many times have you seen someone walking down the street, or in a bar or somewhere, and they look interesting, and you wonder what they’re like? I talk with interesting folks all day--and a lot of the times they walk away with a new book and a smile. It’s fun, plus I get to talk about the convention clause of Article V occasionally--in fact check this out: So I’m walking around Encinitas making sales, and I go upstairs to the offices above the commercial stores. This door is propped open, I look in and this lanky, bald guy with a thick beard is behind a desk--the whole place filled with books, stacks of papers, degrees all over the wall behind him. So he buys a novel and a translation, and we get to talking politically. He’s pretty well aware--certainly concerned--mentions his kids--worries for their future. We talk some conspiracy stuff--9/11, the Federal Reserve--all that. Then we get down to the convention clause, we ring up a couple websites there on his computer, and he’s blown away he had never heard of it. We watch the short documentary I made five/six years ago, and I tell him Harvard is having a conference about the Article V Convention later this month. He asks if I’m going, and I say I had hoped to but lack funds at present. We talk about how cool it would be to make another documentary--get some of the panelists for comments--the people attending, etc., and he goes: “You need to be there. I’ll get you ticket and a room if you still want to go.” So the 21st I’m flying back east to go to this: http://www.conconcon.org/
It’s neat to be able to engage people out there in the world. I mean how many times have you seen someone walking down the street, or in a bar or somewhere, and they look interesting, and you wonder what they’re like? I talk with interesting folks all day--and a lot of the times they walk away with a new book and a smile. It’s fun, plus I get to talk about the convention clause of Article V occasionally--in fact check this out: So I’m walking around Encinitas making sales, and I go upstairs to the offices above the commercial stores. This door is propped open, I look in and this lanky, bald guy with a thick beard is behind a desk--the whole place filled with books, stacks of papers, degrees all over the wall behind him. So he buys a novel and a translation, and we get to talking politically. He’s pretty well aware--certainly concerned--mentions his kids--worries for their future. We talk some conspiracy stuff--9/11, the Federal Reserve--all that. Then we get down to the convention clause, we ring up a couple websites there on his computer, and he’s blown away he had never heard of it. We watch the short documentary I made five/six years ago, and I tell him Harvard is having a conference about the Article V Convention later this month. He asks if I’m going, and I say I had hoped to but lack funds at present. We talk about how cool it would be to make another documentary--get some of the panelists for comments--the people attending, etc., and he goes: “You need to be there. I’ll get you ticket and a room if you still want to go.” So the 21st I’m flying back east to go to this: http://www.conconcon.org/
Saturday, September 3, 2011
Oh Sun, what has happened? I’m off on a fourth leg of the book tour--Tour de Hamlet--as one mermaid called it. I have some domestic issues I’m dealing with, fellow tenants and all that. No fun, but making for great material. Can’t get on the road again till next Tuesday night/Wednesday morn. But really stoked on the book: sometimes beach town cougar moms buy translations and novels and leave tips on checks. I really do need to sell harder--meaning put in extra hours, and not be lazy--but you know that. Some who buy it are really excited to find out what Hamlet and Macbeth are about. I wish the eBook for the novel would come along sooner. Hopefully the Hamlet/Macbeth eBook is good to go. Other than that, I don’t know. Oh wait, someone read the Shakespeare book--someone who had bought it passed it on to a famliy member--an older Shakespeare knower--and this morning he told me the story of Anthony and Cleopatra. One of the generals to Alexander, Ptolomey, was given Egypt to rule. Many years later a great grandchild was Cleopatra. She was not Egyptian, but Greek. What happened, and what still happens today, influences where humanity will be years from now. You knew that. The universe willing, see you in the morning. Or maybe later if the marine layer is feeling feisty.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Poem
Hamlet
The clown shall make laugh
those whose lungs are tickled by the ear,
and the lady shall speak her mind freely
or all verse shall halt for it.
The clown shall make laugh
those whose lungs are tickled by the ear,
and the lady shall speak her mind freely
or all verse shall halt for it.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Fragment:
I saw the face of what I’m up against. It was in the form of an artistic director of a “Shakespeare in the Park” for a small city in central California. The play was set for the evening in a park on the edge of town, and after I had already sold books in the downtown area during the day--all the cool old buildings--I was just killing time. I drove out past the airport and found an old adobe that was historical--Estrella Adobe I remember, because I know estrella in Spanish means star.
So I check out the adobe and the old American graves from the late 1800s, and I get back in the car, and it’s all vineyards on rolling hills the color of lions, dotted with oaks. I turn down this one road into fields of grapes. As I’m driving, I look to my left and see an old dusty ranch house with a corral out front, I notice a camel set down in it, and I’m like “Whoa, a camel.” As I drive past I see it’s some type of wildlife waystation, where they take in animals that have no business being in captivity. I was still kind of hung-over from the night before, which is a whole other story, and I’ll tell it later, but right then I wasn’t really interested in checking out the waystation. I had to crap. A little further I saw a portable outhouse the wine people used. It was a weekend, the gate was open, so I drove right up and had a visit with nature. As I’m headed back down the road, a fox runs out of the vineyard, stops to look at me, and runs back in. I knew I’d pass whatever row it ran into, and sure enough there it was. I stopped, said Hi and drove on. Feeling better, I decided to pull into the waystation on the way back to the park.
So I check out the adobe and the old American graves from the late 1800s, and I get back in the car, and it’s all vineyards on rolling hills the color of lions, dotted with oaks. I turn down this one road into fields of grapes. As I’m driving, I look to my left and see an old dusty ranch house with a corral out front, I notice a camel set down in it, and I’m like “Whoa, a camel.” As I drive past I see it’s some type of wildlife waystation, where they take in animals that have no business being in captivity. I was still kind of hung-over from the night before, which is a whole other story, and I’ll tell it later, but right then I wasn’t really interested in checking out the waystation. I had to crap. A little further I saw a portable outhouse the wine people used. It was a weekend, the gate was open, so I drove right up and had a visit with nature. As I’m headed back down the road, a fox runs out of the vineyard, stops to look at me, and runs back in. I knew I’d pass whatever row it ran into, and sure enough there it was. I stopped, said Hi and drove on. Feeling better, I decided to pull into the waystation on the way back to the park.
Thursday, June 23, 2011
Late Notes
I live in an old house and in the back yard it’s overgrown in places, and covered a bit was an old Bar-B-Q. Over the years I had thought it was a propane grill, and just left it overgrown while I used a charcoal grill. But then I found out it was a gas grill, that a pipe came out of the ground, and if I fixed it, I’d never have to bother with charcoal, propane tanks--nada--just turn the dial and go. I spent Monday and Tuesday looking for parts I needed. None of the new grills at the hardware stores had the same parts so I thought to buy a propane grill and hook it to the gas but the guy at Home Depot said converting propane to gas was a huge hassle. Plus the part that distributed the flame in the old one was all rusted and I couldn’t find another in the same configuration. I almost bought a new propane grill but checked the aisle one more time and found parts I could make work. Last night and tonight I grilled outside. What’s embarrassing is that I almost gave up trying to make it happen, buying a propane grill--one more piece of stuff blocking chi, filling up propane tanks. Ugh. That’s what really made me make that final push, to work through to the solution, knowing if I did, so much time and energy saved. Maybe that will be part of a novel, there’s way more detail to the overall story. And of course I’d end on how I grilled Ahi tuna with olive oil and slices of lemon.
I’m excited this late book is going to print. Leading up to publishing a book is like being forced to fly into a tunnel, set in the side of a cliff, hoping you make it out the other side in one piece. In some ways I can’t believe the way the last three years of life have turned out. If America is not meant to hold a federal convention, then thousands of people will know Hamlet and Macbeth. I will have kept and made true what I said when I was a kid. That I was going to change the world. I had wanted it to be with my art, maybe making films even, then I got caught up in the political stuff--not because it appealed to me, but because I knew that in the grand scheme of things, here on Earth, there should be at least one person like me every generation--someone running around trying to help cause a convention. If I had known Hamlet/Macbeth in my twenties it would have made a difference. It made a difference when I finally understood them in my thirties. So I don’t feel like a total failure, even though the political science project appears to have been defeated. People just don’t want a convention. In fact I can make arguments why we shouldn’t have one. At least I’ll be able to say I got Shakespeare out there. If life goes on like it is now, and 2012 comes and goes without any fundamental change, I’ll still read, write, and make art. And it would be really cool if the book is accepted, or catches on by word of mouth. 100,000 sales or more a year would be nice. We’ll see what happens, the third week of July I’ll finally have copies in my hot little hands.
I’m excited this late book is going to print. Leading up to publishing a book is like being forced to fly into a tunnel, set in the side of a cliff, hoping you make it out the other side in one piece. In some ways I can’t believe the way the last three years of life have turned out. If America is not meant to hold a federal convention, then thousands of people will know Hamlet and Macbeth. I will have kept and made true what I said when I was a kid. That I was going to change the world. I had wanted it to be with my art, maybe making films even, then I got caught up in the political stuff--not because it appealed to me, but because I knew that in the grand scheme of things, here on Earth, there should be at least one person like me every generation--someone running around trying to help cause a convention. If I had known Hamlet/Macbeth in my twenties it would have made a difference. It made a difference when I finally understood them in my thirties. So I don’t feel like a total failure, even though the political science project appears to have been defeated. People just don’t want a convention. In fact I can make arguments why we shouldn’t have one. At least I’ll be able to say I got Shakespeare out there. If life goes on like it is now, and 2012 comes and goes without any fundamental change, I’ll still read, write, and make art. And it would be really cool if the book is accepted, or catches on by word of mouth. 100,000 sales or more a year would be nice. We’ll see what happens, the third week of July I’ll finally have copies in my hot little hands.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
15 Minute Play
SCENE:
(PLAYER 1 seals ENVELOPES with
MOISTENER, enter PLAYER 2.)
PLAYER 2
Did you get the tuna melt too?
PLAYER 1
Yeah.
PLAYER 2
Did you like it?
PLAYER 1
It was OK, maybe toasted a bit more.
PLAYER 2
Yeah. What about the pickles?
(Player 1 bursts out a laugh.)
PLAYER 1
I was like, sliced pickles--what the? I left 'em on--I
didn't know if that's the way you guys liked 'em or what.
PLAYER 2
That place opened a couple weeks before you got here, that
was only the second time we've ordered from them. I left the
pickles on too--jalapenos would've been better though.
(Player 1 bursts out another laugh.)
PLAYER 1
Swear to god, not kidding you, thought the same thing--in
fact I've put jalapenos on a tuna melt!
PLAYER 2
Me too. I'm part Latin, I like hot and spicy. I put hot on
pretty much everything, actually.
PLAYER 1
Horseradish?
PLAYER 2
Love it.
PLAYER 1
Horseradish on a turkey sandwich
PLAYER 2
Nice!
(Beat, nodding in agreement.)
PLAYER 1
Oh--on the truck, made the appointment, it goes in Monday.
PLAYER 2
It hasn't been in for years. People say American cars are
junk but some models go and go.
PLAYER 1
You and my uncle should have a beer, he can talk American
cars like you wouldn't believe.
PLAYER 2
Invite him to the Bar-B-Q this summer!
PLAYER 1
OK. He's really good at the grill too I might add.
PLAYER 2
Excellent!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 2 (CONT'D)
You're happy right? I mean we're all so glad with the way
things are working, you've been great.
PLAYER 1
Are you kidding? I'm so happy. This is my dream job! I
want to make a difference in poetry. That's all I've ever
wanted. Some of the essays are a little over my head, but I
love finding good poems to publish. That's all I've ever
hoped for. I'm learning so much, I've had all kinds of ideas
-I'm so inspired!
PLAYER 2
Excellent--let's see who and how many like this next issue!
And look, you haven't been here long--
PLAYER 1
13 days.
PLAYER 2
Right. Look, a last minute change was made, we left one
piece out, and there might be some yelling.
PLAYER 1
Yelling?
(Enter PLAYER 3. Spots Player 2,
glares.)
PLAYER 2
What?
PLAYER 3
You know what!
PLAYER 2
Listen--
PLAYER 3
No! No--no--no! This is it!
(Player 3 calls NAME loudly [if Player
4 is male, name is PHIL, if female,
SUE]. Enter PLAYER 4.)
PLAYER 4
What?
PLAYER 3
We're having a meeting.
PLAYER 2
Wait.
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
No! They don't know what's going on and I'm not sure you do
either! Let's bring this forth and get it out of the way, or
I swear, it might as well be over!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 2)
We've been publishing for several years now. (To Players 1 &
4.) We made vows when we started.
PLAYER 2
Wait--
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
No! (To Player 4.) When we first got backing we made a
promise. We'd never shy from the truth, no matter how ugly.
(To Player 2.) To delight in truth as much as life itself!
PLAYERS 2 & 3
2: Stop! 3: Remember?!
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
There's only the four of us.
(Motioning to Player 1.) He/She just started, they're good,
they're perfect, so unless one of us gets hit by a bus
tomorrow, it looks like we're set for the long haul. If this
isn't addressed now there's no point going on--you understand
that don't you?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
We promised if we ever stopped loving truth as much as life
itself--if we ever started loving life more than truth--we'd
walk away. This printing is the first time we've ever failed
to take the truest pieces and pass them on to readers.
PLAYER 2
What do you mean?!
PLAYER 3
I mean a piece is missing and we've gone to print!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 4
I know why it was pulled and I agree.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Oh yeah?
(Beat, as enmity between Players 3 and
4 is outed.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Yeah, I figured.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Here's what we're gonna do, (motioning to Player 1) since
He/She's been here a week--
PLAYER 1
Almost two.
PLAYER 3
Almost two weeks. We're going to plead our cases to see what
the judgment is.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Players 2 and 4)
You two want to go first? Whoever goes first gets rebuttal.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 2
Go ahead.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to players 2 and 4)
You want to sit down? I'm not a corporation, I'm not gonna
make the case in a sound bite.
(Players 2 and 4 either sit or
shift/place weight on table/chair.)
PLAYER 3
We all know these are troubled times--
PLAYER 2
Oh god!
PLAYER 3
Hey! Excuse me! I have the floor! You'll have your say!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 1))
We published a story a couple years back about the Fifth
Amendment. About how if anyone wanted, they could go to a
grand jury and get corporate suits brought against citizens
thrown out. It's this obscure clause in the Constitution, no
one really knows about it, but it can be done, and has been
done on the fringes for years. So we published a piece about
it. It rankled some, some turned up their noses, played
dumb, whatever, but it came across our desk, and we put it
out there. Of course we're so pickled by corporate power
now, we don't go rootin' around in the Constitution anymore,
we just hope we don't get in the way of anything nasty.
McLuhan said it thirty years ago, once TV happens it's snake
eyes--the ultimate means of control. (Motioning to Player
2.) And so here we are today, we've been watching this
bullshit evolve a couple decades ourselves now, but just
within the time we've been publishing we've watched
abominable stuff--torture--illegal surveillance--
PLAYER 1
I know that, that bothers me!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
Torture.
PLAYER 3
OK, good, but hold on. I'm making a presentation, then
another presentation (motioning to Players 2 and 4), and then
you tell us what you think--
PLAYER 1
Got it--sorry.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
It's an unusual situation.
PLAYER 3
It is--it is. But just.... Where was I, just a sec.... Oh
yeah--that we don't torture.
PLAYERS 2 & 4
4: What?! 2: Suddenly this about torture?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Uh, as a matter of fact it is, in an oblique way. Won't you
let me proceed?
PLAYER 4
Jesus Christ, maybe it should be over.
PLAYER 3
Excuse me.... (Motioning to Player 2.) He/She and I founded
this press, not you.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to Player 1)
At parties, the whole town--least the part that mattered--we
were up in arms when all the torture crap came out. And then
the argument that there's always been torture, even after the
Geneva Conventions, and to just get over it. And we did, and
we have pretty much--I mean no one likes it, it's been a few
years.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
But this late piece turns all that stuff on its head. It's
by the same writer we published years ago, some kook who
lives on the west coast, he's sent other stuff we didn't
publish, but this piece is as good as that first one.
And it's also about something in the Constitution, but
different than the grand jury stuff--it's the idea the
country could hold an national assembly, states send
delegates to hold a convention--
PLAYER 4
You're fucking nuts!
PLAYER 3
Fuck you! You're arguing against all we know true about the
human condition you ass!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
But it's predictable. You don't know what's going on. You
don't even know what a real poem is. You love imagery, word
choice--we all do, like we all enjoy interesting photos. But
you don't even know what poetry with a capital P is.
PLAYER 4
Oh, OK.
PLAYER 3
A poet examines existence--to say something true--to inspire-
changing how we live. Shakespeare's sonnets say true things
about life--that's true poetry. Aficionados like you get hot
and bothered over nonsense!
PLAYER 4
Yeah, fuck you.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
Like any establishment involved in the arts, we present
what's true, and if there's entertainment along the way-
great. This was an important piece, saying something true,
and it was deleted, and that's not--
PLAYER 2
It wasn't deleted.
PLAYER 3
I saw the proofs, it's not there.
PLAYERS 2 & 4
2: It's too soon! 4: It's too raw!
PLAYERS 3 & 2
3: When is the truth too soon or too raw?! 2: It was
postponed!
PLAYER 3
We made vows! We'd never allow circumstance to dictate
choice! Malcolm's line in Macbeth--delight in truth as much
as life itself! Remember?! And because you know who is
visiting the university you "postponed" publication you ass!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
And so now we have a choice! Cancel publication or let it
go!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 4
Let it go.
PLAYER 3
Why?
PLAYER 4
Because it's over. You're the one who doesn't get it. And
now you're playing high and mighty idealist--
PLAYER 3
I've been a high and mighty idealist my whole goddam life--
PLAYER 4
Yeah?! Well you're going to destroy what you've worked for!
A press where known and good writers want to publish work!
PLAYER 3
What if canceling publication becomes part of our lore, that
we had a problem this time around and we decided to eat our
hat?
PLAYER 2
What about the other writers?! This is a huge issue!
PLAYER 4
Do you realize how many people are looking forward--
PLAYER 3
You don't get it!
PLAYER 2
We said we'd delight in truth as much as life itself! We
never said!.... What about when delighting in truth eats
away at life?
PLAYER 3
Oh bullshit!
(Beat.)
PLAYERS 2 & 4
2: It's not. 4: It's not bullshit, that's what you don't
get.
PLAYER 2
That's another idea from Shakespeare--if you let something
eat away at life itself? What happens?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Are you fucking kidding me? You're going to use Shakespeare
out of context to validate your position? It's Claudius
complaining about Hamlet running around free-footed. The
sense of that scene properly applied here, we would've
headlined the piece you removed! If setting ideas free harms
us, then so be it. What's the point otherwise? So we have
enough subscriptions to sleep and feed as we please? What is
wrong with you?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 4)
You're almost incapable of understanding what's goin' on, (to
Player 2) but you know better. (To Player 1.) In case you
don't get it, we have a dilemma.
PLAYER 2
It's postponed for chrissakes!
PLAYERS 3
You allowed circumstance to dictate choice!
PLAYER 4
Why does that have to be a bad thing?!
PLAYER 3
Because in this case it is! We've built what we have on
being true! Now we flip all that because circulation is
blooming?! Because some jackass is showing up at the
university?!
PLAYER 1
Why was the one about the convention too hot?! Why was it
postponed?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Because it's something some people don't want to talk about.
(To Player 2.) I can't believe you couldn't at least just
grit your teeth and bear it. You used to be righteous. You
used to be a righteous person, you know that? If the person
you were back then walked in now they'd kick your ass all
over the place, or shoot themselves in the head.
PLAYER 2
Maybe not if they were told what we've all been through the
past several years. For chrissakes airplanes flew into the
goddam Trade Center! I can make a case based on what's
happened since!
PLAYER 3
A case for what?!
PLAYER 2
That we don't need to puke up each and every piece the minute
it shows up in the mail!
PLAYER 3
I can't believe this.
PLAYER 4
(to Player 3)
Maybe they'd kick your ass if they showed up. The changes
have been coming for decades--you say it yourself all the
time--oh, no difference between the two parties--been going
on decades! What's the point?!
PLAYER 3
The point is life unfolds and we the living can change how it
unfolds! You don't believe that?! And here was something so
true, and so out of the blue, it was uncanny! Real! And you
two killed it! Notice I didn't involve myself too much as we
got to the deadline? Notice that? Because I wanted to see
what you'd do.
(Players 2 & 4 shift uncomfortably.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 2)
Remember when you cut yourself a few months ago? Is that
rubbing alcohol still under the sink?
(Player 2 confusedly confirms it is.)
PLAYER 3
(to Players 2 & 4)
OK then. You two have ten seconds to exit this building or
I'm gonna get that bottle, pour it over something, and light
it.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Ten, nine, eight--
(Players 2 & 4 realize situation,
hurriedly begin to exit. Player 2
stops, looks back to Player 3.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Seven, six, five!
(Exit Player 2.)
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Look, there's some things you don't understand.
PLAYER 1
What? Tell me.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
I don't even know where to begin.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3
Last year we had this visiting poet, they were awesome.
Stayed for our annual Bar-B-Q, we all cut loose--argued,
laughed, it was just the best. A real artist, just amazing.
PLAYER 1
You mean Richardson?
PLAYER 3
Yeah.
PLAYER 1
Loved that issue.
PLAYER 3
A real poet, saying something true about life, living--here,
now. Not puffs of imagery, not just new/exciting language.
PLAYER 1
Evil is selfishness and nothing else.
PLAYER 3
What?
PLAYER 1
Evil is selfishness and nothing else. That's one of the
lines I remember. Chiaroscuro--one of the poems in that
issue--
PLAYER 3
Oh right, right--right--which goes to exactly what this is
about. Are we going to look out for our own ass, or take the
risks that have always needed taking? Look at what that
playwright--I'm forgetting their name--remember the interview
-remember where they said all the artistic directors in
theatre today should be fired?
PLAYER 1
Yeah. That was Myers.
PLAYER 3
Right. What they meant is, theatre's dead. It's just butter
and sugar, fat and syrup. They won't take chances anymore.
All the really cool theatres are all but gone. I mean really
cool. Really saying something, not just asking an endless
parade of questions or lovers and kisses.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
I remember I read.... I think it was Vonnegut, he said the
skies can be darkening with enemy bombers, and you can't get
an audience to leave their seats if parted lovers are about
to finally kiss.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
Maybe it's true what they're saying. It's just not the same
anymore when it comes to getting the truth out.
PLAYER 3
No, there's nothing new under the sun. Human beings are
human beings. We may not want to face it if confronted, but
deep down we all wanna know the truth. At least the real
people do. Not the cartoon people. The Stepford people.
They don't even go to theatre--they don't think. And cartoon
people don't read our publication. Which is why we're flat
lame if we don't put real stuff out there, not just all
butter and sugar.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Isn't that funny though? That you can't get an audience out
of their seat if a kiss is in the offing?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
It's pretty much true though, right?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
It is. And for poetry too. Title a poem Long Lost Lovers
and people will zero right in.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
I think we should cancel the issue. And not because you've
been yelling and threatening to burn the place down.
(Player 3 chuckles.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
It's actually really cool what you said, to let the
cancellation be part of our lore.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
You're awesome.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
We'll let it go. I think I just wanted to rock their world,
keep them on their toes, more than anything. Those fucking
idiots!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
I do want to mark this occasion.
(Player 3 throws something or breaks
something, causes loud crash.)
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Do me a favor, wouldya?
PLAYER 1
Sure.
PLAYER 3
I'm gonna go. After I do, call 'em up, tell 'em I left, and
that I said I'd be back Thursday or Friday.
PLAYER 1
OK.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
It's just so hard to tell these days.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
Ya know--and gain, I'm not just sayin' this--I really mean
it, based on everything that just happened, honestly, I have
more respect for you. I don't dislike them or anything, I'm
not saying that--
PLAYER 3
Well, thanks, I appreciate that, but when they come back,
just play dumb. Act like the wide-eyed upstart, don't get
into it.... I mean, do whatever you want of course.
PLAYER 1
I hear ya, I will, I'll stay neutral. It's what I would've
done anyway.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
OK.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
OK. (Moving to door.) I'll be back by Friday.
PLAYER 1
OK.
PLAYER 3
See ya.
PLAYER 1
See ya later.
(Exit Player 3.)
(Player 1 surveys office a few beats,
sits down, resumes sealing envelopes.)
END
(PLAYER 1 seals ENVELOPES with
MOISTENER, enter PLAYER 2.)
PLAYER 2
Did you get the tuna melt too?
PLAYER 1
Yeah.
PLAYER 2
Did you like it?
PLAYER 1
It was OK, maybe toasted a bit more.
PLAYER 2
Yeah. What about the pickles?
(Player 1 bursts out a laugh.)
PLAYER 1
I was like, sliced pickles--what the? I left 'em on--I
didn't know if that's the way you guys liked 'em or what.
PLAYER 2
That place opened a couple weeks before you got here, that
was only the second time we've ordered from them. I left the
pickles on too--jalapenos would've been better though.
(Player 1 bursts out another laugh.)
PLAYER 1
Swear to god, not kidding you, thought the same thing--in
fact I've put jalapenos on a tuna melt!
PLAYER 2
Me too. I'm part Latin, I like hot and spicy. I put hot on
pretty much everything, actually.
PLAYER 1
Horseradish?
PLAYER 2
Love it.
PLAYER 1
Horseradish on a turkey sandwich
PLAYER 2
Nice!
(Beat, nodding in agreement.)
PLAYER 1
Oh--on the truck, made the appointment, it goes in Monday.
PLAYER 2
It hasn't been in for years. People say American cars are
junk but some models go and go.
PLAYER 1
You and my uncle should have a beer, he can talk American
cars like you wouldn't believe.
PLAYER 2
Invite him to the Bar-B-Q this summer!
PLAYER 1
OK. He's really good at the grill too I might add.
PLAYER 2
Excellent!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 2 (CONT'D)
You're happy right? I mean we're all so glad with the way
things are working, you've been great.
PLAYER 1
Are you kidding? I'm so happy. This is my dream job! I
want to make a difference in poetry. That's all I've ever
wanted. Some of the essays are a little over my head, but I
love finding good poems to publish. That's all I've ever
hoped for. I'm learning so much, I've had all kinds of ideas
-I'm so inspired!
PLAYER 2
Excellent--let's see who and how many like this next issue!
And look, you haven't been here long--
PLAYER 1
13 days.
PLAYER 2
Right. Look, a last minute change was made, we left one
piece out, and there might be some yelling.
PLAYER 1
Yelling?
(Enter PLAYER 3. Spots Player 2,
glares.)
PLAYER 2
What?
PLAYER 3
You know what!
PLAYER 2
Listen--
PLAYER 3
No! No--no--no! This is it!
(Player 3 calls NAME loudly [if Player
4 is male, name is PHIL, if female,
SUE]. Enter PLAYER 4.)
PLAYER 4
What?
PLAYER 3
We're having a meeting.
PLAYER 2
Wait.
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
No! They don't know what's going on and I'm not sure you do
either! Let's bring this forth and get it out of the way, or
I swear, it might as well be over!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 2)
We've been publishing for several years now. (To Players 1 &
4.) We made vows when we started.
PLAYER 2
Wait--
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
No! (To Player 4.) When we first got backing we made a
promise. We'd never shy from the truth, no matter how ugly.
(To Player 2.) To delight in truth as much as life itself!
PLAYERS 2 & 3
2: Stop! 3: Remember?!
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
There's only the four of us.
(Motioning to Player 1.) He/She just started, they're good,
they're perfect, so unless one of us gets hit by a bus
tomorrow, it looks like we're set for the long haul. If this
isn't addressed now there's no point going on--you understand
that don't you?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
We promised if we ever stopped loving truth as much as life
itself--if we ever started loving life more than truth--we'd
walk away. This printing is the first time we've ever failed
to take the truest pieces and pass them on to readers.
PLAYER 2
What do you mean?!
PLAYER 3
I mean a piece is missing and we've gone to print!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 4
I know why it was pulled and I agree.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Oh yeah?
(Beat, as enmity between Players 3 and
4 is outed.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Yeah, I figured.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Here's what we're gonna do, (motioning to Player 1) since
He/She's been here a week--
PLAYER 1
Almost two.
PLAYER 3
Almost two weeks. We're going to plead our cases to see what
the judgment is.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Players 2 and 4)
You two want to go first? Whoever goes first gets rebuttal.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 2
Go ahead.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to players 2 and 4)
You want to sit down? I'm not a corporation, I'm not gonna
make the case in a sound bite.
(Players 2 and 4 either sit or
shift/place weight on table/chair.)
PLAYER 3
We all know these are troubled times--
PLAYER 2
Oh god!
PLAYER 3
Hey! Excuse me! I have the floor! You'll have your say!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 1))
We published a story a couple years back about the Fifth
Amendment. About how if anyone wanted, they could go to a
grand jury and get corporate suits brought against citizens
thrown out. It's this obscure clause in the Constitution, no
one really knows about it, but it can be done, and has been
done on the fringes for years. So we published a piece about
it. It rankled some, some turned up their noses, played
dumb, whatever, but it came across our desk, and we put it
out there. Of course we're so pickled by corporate power
now, we don't go rootin' around in the Constitution anymore,
we just hope we don't get in the way of anything nasty.
McLuhan said it thirty years ago, once TV happens it's snake
eyes--the ultimate means of control. (Motioning to Player
2.) And so here we are today, we've been watching this
bullshit evolve a couple decades ourselves now, but just
within the time we've been publishing we've watched
abominable stuff--torture--illegal surveillance--
PLAYER 1
I know that, that bothers me!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
Torture.
PLAYER 3
OK, good, but hold on. I'm making a presentation, then
another presentation (motioning to Players 2 and 4), and then
you tell us what you think--
PLAYER 1
Got it--sorry.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
It's an unusual situation.
PLAYER 3
It is--it is. But just.... Where was I, just a sec.... Oh
yeah--that we don't torture.
PLAYERS 2 & 4
4: What?! 2: Suddenly this about torture?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Uh, as a matter of fact it is, in an oblique way. Won't you
let me proceed?
PLAYER 4
Jesus Christ, maybe it should be over.
PLAYER 3
Excuse me.... (Motioning to Player 2.) He/She and I founded
this press, not you.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to Player 1)
At parties, the whole town--least the part that mattered--we
were up in arms when all the torture crap came out. And then
the argument that there's always been torture, even after the
Geneva Conventions, and to just get over it. And we did, and
we have pretty much--I mean no one likes it, it's been a few
years.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
But this late piece turns all that stuff on its head. It's
by the same writer we published years ago, some kook who
lives on the west coast, he's sent other stuff we didn't
publish, but this piece is as good as that first one.
And it's also about something in the Constitution, but
different than the grand jury stuff--it's the idea the
country could hold an national assembly, states send
delegates to hold a convention--
PLAYER 4
You're fucking nuts!
PLAYER 3
Fuck you! You're arguing against all we know true about the
human condition you ass!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
But it's predictable. You don't know what's going on. You
don't even know what a real poem is. You love imagery, word
choice--we all do, like we all enjoy interesting photos. But
you don't even know what poetry with a capital P is.
PLAYER 4
Oh, OK.
PLAYER 3
A poet examines existence--to say something true--to inspire-
changing how we live. Shakespeare's sonnets say true things
about life--that's true poetry. Aficionados like you get hot
and bothered over nonsense!
PLAYER 4
Yeah, fuck you.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
(to Player 2)
Like any establishment involved in the arts, we present
what's true, and if there's entertainment along the way-
great. This was an important piece, saying something true,
and it was deleted, and that's not--
PLAYER 2
It wasn't deleted.
PLAYER 3
I saw the proofs, it's not there.
PLAYERS 2 & 4
2: It's too soon! 4: It's too raw!
PLAYERS 3 & 2
3: When is the truth too soon or too raw?! 2: It was
postponed!
PLAYER 3
We made vows! We'd never allow circumstance to dictate
choice! Malcolm's line in Macbeth--delight in truth as much
as life itself! Remember?! And because you know who is
visiting the university you "postponed" publication you ass!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
And so now we have a choice! Cancel publication or let it
go!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 4
Let it go.
PLAYER 3
Why?
PLAYER 4
Because it's over. You're the one who doesn't get it. And
now you're playing high and mighty idealist--
PLAYER 3
I've been a high and mighty idealist my whole goddam life--
PLAYER 4
Yeah?! Well you're going to destroy what you've worked for!
A press where known and good writers want to publish work!
PLAYER 3
What if canceling publication becomes part of our lore, that
we had a problem this time around and we decided to eat our
hat?
PLAYER 2
What about the other writers?! This is a huge issue!
PLAYER 4
Do you realize how many people are looking forward--
PLAYER 3
You don't get it!
PLAYER 2
We said we'd delight in truth as much as life itself! We
never said!.... What about when delighting in truth eats
away at life?
PLAYER 3
Oh bullshit!
(Beat.)
PLAYERS 2 & 4
2: It's not. 4: It's not bullshit, that's what you don't
get.
PLAYER 2
That's another idea from Shakespeare--if you let something
eat away at life itself? What happens?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Are you fucking kidding me? You're going to use Shakespeare
out of context to validate your position? It's Claudius
complaining about Hamlet running around free-footed. The
sense of that scene properly applied here, we would've
headlined the piece you removed! If setting ideas free harms
us, then so be it. What's the point otherwise? So we have
enough subscriptions to sleep and feed as we please? What is
wrong with you?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 4)
You're almost incapable of understanding what's goin' on, (to
Player 2) but you know better. (To Player 1.) In case you
don't get it, we have a dilemma.
PLAYER 2
It's postponed for chrissakes!
PLAYERS 3
You allowed circumstance to dictate choice!
PLAYER 4
Why does that have to be a bad thing?!
PLAYER 3
Because in this case it is! We've built what we have on
being true! Now we flip all that because circulation is
blooming?! Because some jackass is showing up at the
university?!
PLAYER 1
Why was the one about the convention too hot?! Why was it
postponed?!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
Because it's something some people don't want to talk about.
(To Player 2.) I can't believe you couldn't at least just
grit your teeth and bear it. You used to be righteous. You
used to be a righteous person, you know that? If the person
you were back then walked in now they'd kick your ass all
over the place, or shoot themselves in the head.
PLAYER 2
Maybe not if they were told what we've all been through the
past several years. For chrissakes airplanes flew into the
goddam Trade Center! I can make a case based on what's
happened since!
PLAYER 3
A case for what?!
PLAYER 2
That we don't need to puke up each and every piece the minute
it shows up in the mail!
PLAYER 3
I can't believe this.
PLAYER 4
(to Player 3)
Maybe they'd kick your ass if they showed up. The changes
have been coming for decades--you say it yourself all the
time--oh, no difference between the two parties--been going
on decades! What's the point?!
PLAYER 3
The point is life unfolds and we the living can change how it
unfolds! You don't believe that?! And here was something so
true, and so out of the blue, it was uncanny! Real! And you
two killed it! Notice I didn't involve myself too much as we
got to the deadline? Notice that? Because I wanted to see
what you'd do.
(Players 2 & 4 shift uncomfortably.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
(to Player 2)
Remember when you cut yourself a few months ago? Is that
rubbing alcohol still under the sink?
(Player 2 confusedly confirms it is.)
PLAYER 3
(to Players 2 & 4)
OK then. You two have ten seconds to exit this building or
I'm gonna get that bottle, pour it over something, and light
it.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Ten, nine, eight--
(Players 2 & 4 realize situation,
hurriedly begin to exit. Player 2
stops, looks back to Player 3.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Seven, six, five!
(Exit Player 2.)
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Look, there's some things you don't understand.
PLAYER 1
What? Tell me.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
I don't even know where to begin.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3
Last year we had this visiting poet, they were awesome.
Stayed for our annual Bar-B-Q, we all cut loose--argued,
laughed, it was just the best. A real artist, just amazing.
PLAYER 1
You mean Richardson?
PLAYER 3
Yeah.
PLAYER 1
Loved that issue.
PLAYER 3
A real poet, saying something true about life, living--here,
now. Not puffs of imagery, not just new/exciting language.
PLAYER 1
Evil is selfishness and nothing else.
PLAYER 3
What?
PLAYER 1
Evil is selfishness and nothing else. That's one of the
lines I remember. Chiaroscuro--one of the poems in that
issue--
PLAYER 3
Oh right, right--right--which goes to exactly what this is
about. Are we going to look out for our own ass, or take the
risks that have always needed taking? Look at what that
playwright--I'm forgetting their name--remember the interview
-remember where they said all the artistic directors in
theatre today should be fired?
PLAYER 1
Yeah. That was Myers.
PLAYER 3
Right. What they meant is, theatre's dead. It's just butter
and sugar, fat and syrup. They won't take chances anymore.
All the really cool theatres are all but gone. I mean really
cool. Really saying something, not just asking an endless
parade of questions or lovers and kisses.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
I remember I read.... I think it was Vonnegut, he said the
skies can be darkening with enemy bombers, and you can't get
an audience to leave their seats if parted lovers are about
to finally kiss.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
Maybe it's true what they're saying. It's just not the same
anymore when it comes to getting the truth out.
PLAYER 3
No, there's nothing new under the sun. Human beings are
human beings. We may not want to face it if confronted, but
deep down we all wanna know the truth. At least the real
people do. Not the cartoon people. The Stepford people.
They don't even go to theatre--they don't think. And cartoon
people don't read our publication. Which is why we're flat
lame if we don't put real stuff out there, not just all
butter and sugar.
(Double beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Isn't that funny though? That you can't get an audience out
of their seat if a kiss is in the offing?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
It's pretty much true though, right?
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
It is. And for poetry too. Title a poem Long Lost Lovers
and people will zero right in.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
I think we should cancel the issue. And not because you've
been yelling and threatening to burn the place down.
(Player 3 chuckles.)
PLAYER 1 (CONT'D)
It's actually really cool what you said, to let the
cancellation be part of our lore.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
You're awesome.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
We'll let it go. I think I just wanted to rock their world,
keep them on their toes, more than anything. Those fucking
idiots!
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
I do want to mark this occasion.
(Player 3 throws something or breaks
something, causes loud crash.)
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
Do me a favor, wouldya?
PLAYER 1
Sure.
PLAYER 3
I'm gonna go. After I do, call 'em up, tell 'em I left, and
that I said I'd be back Thursday or Friday.
PLAYER 1
OK.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
It's just so hard to tell these days.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 1
Ya know--and gain, I'm not just sayin' this--I really mean
it, based on everything that just happened, honestly, I have
more respect for you. I don't dislike them or anything, I'm
not saying that--
PLAYER 3
Well, thanks, I appreciate that, but when they come back,
just play dumb. Act like the wide-eyed upstart, don't get
into it.... I mean, do whatever you want of course.
PLAYER 1
I hear ya, I will, I'll stay neutral. It's what I would've
done anyway.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3
OK.
(Beat.)
PLAYER 3 (CONT'D)
OK. (Moving to door.) I'll be back by Friday.
PLAYER 1
OK.
PLAYER 3
See ya.
PLAYER 1
See ya later.
(Exit Player 3.)
(Player 1 surveys office a few beats,
sits down, resumes sealing envelopes.)
END
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
Late Note
Here’s the deal. Life is crazy. All the land, all the people, all the buildings, and the transportation, all tumbled into this thing unfolding this very moment--existence.
There are these things called books, and there are these things called plays. Books are words that make sense, or attempt to, about this and that. Plays are like books, but instead of reading the idea, you watch it. Since certain situations occur again and again and again in life, some plays have nailed them, and displayed them for an audience watching, to help raise consciousness and make life more romantic (because knowing things about life is romantic). Shakespeare is known and loved because he figured out some of these archetypal things which occur in life and nailed them down with characters and lines.
Of the Hamlet/Macbeth translation I’ve tried to make it so that whether you’re reading it or watching it, you won’t know where the changes were made. When you’re finished, you’ll feel like you just experienced Shakespeare. I’m still making some minor edits, hope to get the back and forth with the printer squared by next week, and then print.
I’m kind of scared about Othello and Romeo & Juliet. I hope it goes quick, I really want to get to other projects. The only reason I’m doing it first is because if I get hit by a bus the translation is more important than plays or another novel.
And then there’s the Leica camera. I really, really want to use it more. I have this photography thing burning. It took me a while to get used to the feel of it, so different from the Nikon shape I had. But I feel it now, it’s no longer foreign to my hand. I can retrieve it and one-hand it in the way I did with the other. I hope to be posting photos here soon.
There are these things called books, and there are these things called plays. Books are words that make sense, or attempt to, about this and that. Plays are like books, but instead of reading the idea, you watch it. Since certain situations occur again and again and again in life, some plays have nailed them, and displayed them for an audience watching, to help raise consciousness and make life more romantic (because knowing things about life is romantic). Shakespeare is known and loved because he figured out some of these archetypal things which occur in life and nailed them down with characters and lines.
Of the Hamlet/Macbeth translation I’ve tried to make it so that whether you’re reading it or watching it, you won’t know where the changes were made. When you’re finished, you’ll feel like you just experienced Shakespeare. I’m still making some minor edits, hope to get the back and forth with the printer squared by next week, and then print.
I’m kind of scared about Othello and Romeo & Juliet. I hope it goes quick, I really want to get to other projects. The only reason I’m doing it first is because if I get hit by a bus the translation is more important than plays or another novel.
And then there’s the Leica camera. I really, really want to use it more. I have this photography thing burning. It took me a while to get used to the feel of it, so different from the Nikon shape I had. But I feel it now, it’s no longer foreign to my hand. I can retrieve it and one-hand it in the way I did with the other. I hope to be posting photos here soon.
Saturday, May 21, 2011
(untitled)
I am a human being.
I am a human being,
and I really, really love trees.
I see each one as a sculpture of nature,
capturing space,
and I get high on the abstract balance.
The tree I love most is the Sycamore,
the sexiest tree on the planet.
Whenever I see one....
Whenever I see one,
I exhalt in it like I would witnessing
an amazing animal,
or a woman of pulchritude.
I am a human being.
I am a human being.
Today I thought I was going to begin work on the Othello/R&J translation, but a political phone call as I enjoyed my espresso, down on the steps at Miramar this morning, threw me off, and I decided to go on a photo safari instead. I have this thing for trees, especially sycamores. It was a good safari, got some good shots.
It's so perplexing that the solution to all our problems is attainable, and those who could really make a difference, somehow, for some reason, balk or shy away from it. We'll see what unfolds this next Saturday. I have to admit, just as poetry and literature has transformed in every respect over the past several decades, that what I thought I was going to do with this life, may be a thing of the past. A life caught between the wheels of change, or a life left at a shore where the ship sails on.... It's happened before, in so many ways--things are left behind. I do have a lot of poems I should publish. First the Othello/R&J translation.
I am a human being.
I am a human being,
and I really, really love trees.
I see each one as a sculpture of nature,
capturing space,
and I get high on the abstract balance.
The tree I love most is the Sycamore,
the sexiest tree on the planet.
Whenever I see one....
Whenever I see one,
I exhalt in it like I would witnessing
an amazing animal,
or a woman of pulchritude.
I am a human being.
I am a human being.
Today I thought I was going to begin work on the Othello/R&J translation, but a political phone call as I enjoyed my espresso, down on the steps at Miramar this morning, threw me off, and I decided to go on a photo safari instead. I have this thing for trees, especially sycamores. It was a good safari, got some good shots.
It's so perplexing that the solution to all our problems is attainable, and those who could really make a difference, somehow, for some reason, balk or shy away from it. We'll see what unfolds this next Saturday. I have to admit, just as poetry and literature has transformed in every respect over the past several decades, that what I thought I was going to do with this life, may be a thing of the past. A life caught between the wheels of change, or a life left at a shore where the ship sails on.... It's happened before, in so many ways--things are left behind. I do have a lot of poems I should publish. First the Othello/R&J translation.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Note On An Unseasonably Cool Day
Now that the Hamlet/Macbeth book is done, I wanted to get back to a new novel. Working on it the past couple days, but just realized today, smarter to translate Othello and Romeo and Juliet first. Then the new novel.
I wonder if I can write a novel and plays at the same time. I think it's possible.
The political science project may be at an end. It’s unbelievable that OathKeepers, the group which gets military/police officers to affirm their oath to protect/defend the Constitution--that they can’t see the irony in them saying a convention is dangerous. A person professing to want the Constitution obeyed, and somehow a constitutionally mandated convention is dangerous? How does that happen in someone's brain?
Some guy who ran a populist website five/six years ago published some political pieces I wrote. Then a couple weekends ago I was asked to speak to a Tea Party group in Orange County, and that same guy from years before was there. He runs the Tenth Amendment Center now. He’s leading a group that call themselves Tenthers. They want the states to nullify federal laws (which got me thinking, what if you could find a state to nullify federal cannabis laws? Any state that did would become wealthy--a cannabis industry suddenly emerging would be a good strike against the corporate status quo, maybe a fatal one). Of course you know what I think--we need a federal convention.
Anyway, the guy from the past is holding a big political gathering in downtown LA. How did he have money back then? How does he have money now? The Tenthers and OathKeepers will be there. I'm going to have fun seeing what the response is while getting signatures for the initiative.
I wonder if I can write a novel and plays at the same time. I think it's possible.
The political science project may be at an end. It’s unbelievable that OathKeepers, the group which gets military/police officers to affirm their oath to protect/defend the Constitution--that they can’t see the irony in them saying a convention is dangerous. A person professing to want the Constitution obeyed, and somehow a constitutionally mandated convention is dangerous? How does that happen in someone's brain?
Some guy who ran a populist website five/six years ago published some political pieces I wrote. Then a couple weekends ago I was asked to speak to a Tea Party group in Orange County, and that same guy from years before was there. He runs the Tenth Amendment Center now. He’s leading a group that call themselves Tenthers. They want the states to nullify federal laws (which got me thinking, what if you could find a state to nullify federal cannabis laws? Any state that did would become wealthy--a cannabis industry suddenly emerging would be a good strike against the corporate status quo, maybe a fatal one). Of course you know what I think--we need a federal convention.
Anyway, the guy from the past is holding a big political gathering in downtown LA. How did he have money back then? How does he have money now? The Tenthers and OathKeepers will be there. I'm going to have fun seeing what the response is while getting signatures for the initiative.
Saturday, May 7, 2011
Late Note
Today I woke up in a motel and drove to a ranch in Menifee, California. It’s out there, inland Orange County. Some Tea Party folks had gotten together to hear speakers and discuss late news. I was invited to speak because I had become known as an advocate for the Article V Convention.
There was a Harvard graduate/New York Times best-selling political author as main draw, then a couple conservatives with various speaking rights--meaning they had published a book, or were active in some way in conservative political spheres.
One of the speakers was there to talk about how a convention is dangerous and how we should do all we could to make sure one never happens. He gave a really good speech in that he had the crowd vocally agreeing with him, big applause at the end. I spoke and was told afterward by various folks I had been persuasive and that they wanted links to more information. One guy told me I had changed his mind about whether or not a federal convention were dangerous, he said he realized it’s exactly what runaway government doesn’t want.
Driving back to Santa Barbara, I was struck by the question and had to remind myself how I got here. When I was in my twenties, the stereo-typical surfer, drinking beer, smoking cannabis, and chasing tail, I had no idea what I was going to do, I just had a strong desire to do something good. So I went on as a poet, writing and reading far and wide. Then 9/11 hit, and knowing what I did, I knew the event would create a vacuum of power and the bad guys were going to start dismantling human rights and protections in various ways. I knew of the convention clause, knew what it would do if it ever happened, and dedicated my life to doing what I could to make it happen. This September will have been ten years of various legal actions, writing, attending conferences, and talking with folks on the street. Of all those years, it’s only within the last year that blogposts are starting to go up across the internet about it.
People who say they’re not political or they don’t get involved in politics aren’t really as bright as they think they are. In blunt terms, every breath anyone takes is political. Why? Because every thought is political, and if you aren’t breathing, you aren’t thinking. Every action is either for common good or against. Why? Because everything is connected. And people who say they have their issue which they focus on, which addresses a symptom? Do you want hobby-horse politics, or do you want real politics?
Are we going to get out of this mess? Are we going to derail the corporatization of the planet? I don’t know. I do understand well enough how the idea of a convention, or asking someone to think of it, is tantamount to asking them to bite the hand that feeds. I understand all that well, but there’s something about thought and action that makes a mark on how things unfold. Ever going south and inland, use the 71.
There was a Harvard graduate/New York Times best-selling political author as main draw, then a couple conservatives with various speaking rights--meaning they had published a book, or were active in some way in conservative political spheres.
One of the speakers was there to talk about how a convention is dangerous and how we should do all we could to make sure one never happens. He gave a really good speech in that he had the crowd vocally agreeing with him, big applause at the end. I spoke and was told afterward by various folks I had been persuasive and that they wanted links to more information. One guy told me I had changed his mind about whether or not a federal convention were dangerous, he said he realized it’s exactly what runaway government doesn’t want.
Driving back to Santa Barbara, I was struck by the question and had to remind myself how I got here. When I was in my twenties, the stereo-typical surfer, drinking beer, smoking cannabis, and chasing tail, I had no idea what I was going to do, I just had a strong desire to do something good. So I went on as a poet, writing and reading far and wide. Then 9/11 hit, and knowing what I did, I knew the event would create a vacuum of power and the bad guys were going to start dismantling human rights and protections in various ways. I knew of the convention clause, knew what it would do if it ever happened, and dedicated my life to doing what I could to make it happen. This September will have been ten years of various legal actions, writing, attending conferences, and talking with folks on the street. Of all those years, it’s only within the last year that blogposts are starting to go up across the internet about it.
People who say they’re not political or they don’t get involved in politics aren’t really as bright as they think they are. In blunt terms, every breath anyone takes is political. Why? Because every thought is political, and if you aren’t breathing, you aren’t thinking. Every action is either for common good or against. Why? Because everything is connected. And people who say they have their issue which they focus on, which addresses a symptom? Do you want hobby-horse politics, or do you want real politics?
Are we going to get out of this mess? Are we going to derail the corporatization of the planet? I don’t know. I do understand well enough how the idea of a convention, or asking someone to think of it, is tantamount to asking them to bite the hand that feeds. I understand all that well, but there’s something about thought and action that makes a mark on how things unfold. Ever going south and inland, use the 71.
Sunday, April 10, 2011
The Dragons of Shakespeare
Today I worked all day on a book of translations of Hamlet and Macbeth. I feel dizzy, a strange feeling one gets after poring over thick text all day, attempting to make just the right choices. I had thought, and I have thought, numerous times now, that I was finished--that I was ready to send it off to the printers. But then, the choices are innumerable, and looking through the text again, things were found which were not just right. Although I am tired, and wishing it will all be finished soon, I am gratified that some very important errors were caught and corrected. Are the dragons of Shakespeare finally slain this day? Time will tell....
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Oh My God
Yesterday I got off work early, the off-shore winds where going and there was a little swell. I haven’t surfed in over a year. I’ve been really focused on a book and at times in the past, when I’m focused on literary work, I smoke cigarettes. This last stint, the three years on this book, near the end of it I was almost chain-smoking.
Smoking, my history: smoked Marlborough Reds for a couple years in my twenties, and remember once from back then, paddling out in big surf, that smoking affected my stamina, and I got out of the water thinking, “Dude, either quit or lose surfing top notch.”
I remember the year or so of quitting, breaking down, quitting, and the real struggle that smokers go through in quitting. Finally I lifted off and didn’t smoke or think about it for ten years or so. Then somewhere in my thirties I smoked at a wedding or something, and really enjoyed it, but the next day didn’t feel the urge to buy a pack. I went along like that for a handful of years, and then somewhere near the completion of my first novel, I actually tried to become a smoker. For some reason I couldn’t take to smoking--tried different brands for the one that delivered the nicotine best, but couldn’t find it. Then several more years, and I’m into my latest book, and again I tried to be a smoker, and I found a brand I liked--an organic blend, hit the spot, I was able to enjoy all the great things there are to enjoy in smoking: the one after a movie, the one after a meal, the one after a lot of work, and of course, the best cigarette.
And so this late book was so intense that I was smoking like I never had before. I was actually waking up in the morning with a cigarette, and smoking a pack a day (I’ve never been able to smoke more than a pack in a day). But I'd made a deal with myself, soon as I finished the book, I’d flip the leaf, and get back out in the water.
So I did, and yesterday was the first day I’d been back out in a while. It was great. It was awesome. The offshore winds had glassed off, and there were these sweet, bowly, rights that came in along Miramar. The reason I titled this Oh My God is based on what I said today when feeling my surfing muscles--my shoulders/upper-back are worked.
But I’m really glad I finished this book. It’s taken three years, and part of that is because last February, when I was ready to publish the book as it was, I’d read an essay then, and realized I had to totally dive back into it and rewrite and add a lot of stuff. In fact today when I was looking at the ISBN/Library of Congress info, that back then it was listed as being 254 pages, where published sometime in the next few weeks it will be 288 pages.
But because of the nature of it, there was a period last year where I really wondered if I had gotten myself in over my head. It was pretty intense for about two weeks, so fraught between believing in it or if it had fatal flaws and was therefore not worth publishing.
I recently turned in the final edits I could find (it was a list of ten on the back of a page, which just thinking about it now, I think I threw away in past couple days, and am wondering if I might be able to retrieve it tomorrow--it would be a cool thing to frame if the book does find its mark). The cover is looking really neat.
The political science project you would not believe. Lately I’ve taken to describing it as a three-part national discussion. First I ask the person what they think is killing America. If they’re Republican they fire off it’s the Democrats; or if it’s Democrats they fire Republican--but I interject and say--“Politics as Usual.” That’s what’s killing America, Politics as Usual. And I explain how the convention clause in actuality is a three-part national discussion (the part about electing delegates [who are they, what they think a good amendment], the part about the actual deliberative assembly [what the delegates vote up or down as amendment proposal], the part of ratification [what the people lobby to have ratified]).
Smoking, my history: smoked Marlborough Reds for a couple years in my twenties, and remember once from back then, paddling out in big surf, that smoking affected my stamina, and I got out of the water thinking, “Dude, either quit or lose surfing top notch.”
I remember the year or so of quitting, breaking down, quitting, and the real struggle that smokers go through in quitting. Finally I lifted off and didn’t smoke or think about it for ten years or so. Then somewhere in my thirties I smoked at a wedding or something, and really enjoyed it, but the next day didn’t feel the urge to buy a pack. I went along like that for a handful of years, and then somewhere near the completion of my first novel, I actually tried to become a smoker. For some reason I couldn’t take to smoking--tried different brands for the one that delivered the nicotine best, but couldn’t find it. Then several more years, and I’m into my latest book, and again I tried to be a smoker, and I found a brand I liked--an organic blend, hit the spot, I was able to enjoy all the great things there are to enjoy in smoking: the one after a movie, the one after a meal, the one after a lot of work, and of course, the best cigarette.
And so this late book was so intense that I was smoking like I never had before. I was actually waking up in the morning with a cigarette, and smoking a pack a day (I’ve never been able to smoke more than a pack in a day). But I'd made a deal with myself, soon as I finished the book, I’d flip the leaf, and get back out in the water.
So I did, and yesterday was the first day I’d been back out in a while. It was great. It was awesome. The offshore winds had glassed off, and there were these sweet, bowly, rights that came in along Miramar. The reason I titled this Oh My God is based on what I said today when feeling my surfing muscles--my shoulders/upper-back are worked.
But I’m really glad I finished this book. It’s taken three years, and part of that is because last February, when I was ready to publish the book as it was, I’d read an essay then, and realized I had to totally dive back into it and rewrite and add a lot of stuff. In fact today when I was looking at the ISBN/Library of Congress info, that back then it was listed as being 254 pages, where published sometime in the next few weeks it will be 288 pages.
But because of the nature of it, there was a period last year where I really wondered if I had gotten myself in over my head. It was pretty intense for about two weeks, so fraught between believing in it or if it had fatal flaws and was therefore not worth publishing.
I recently turned in the final edits I could find (it was a list of ten on the back of a page, which just thinking about it now, I think I threw away in past couple days, and am wondering if I might be able to retrieve it tomorrow--it would be a cool thing to frame if the book does find its mark). The cover is looking really neat.
The political science project you would not believe. Lately I’ve taken to describing it as a three-part national discussion. First I ask the person what they think is killing America. If they’re Republican they fire off it’s the Democrats; or if it’s Democrats they fire Republican--but I interject and say--“Politics as Usual.” That’s what’s killing America, Politics as Usual. And I explain how the convention clause in actuality is a three-part national discussion (the part about electing delegates [who are they, what they think a good amendment], the part about the actual deliberative assembly [what the delegates vote up or down as amendment proposal], the part of ratification [what the people lobby to have ratified]).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
