LETHEM ON KIRBY & LEE.

London Review of Books | Vol. 26 No. 8 dated 15 April 2004 |

My Marvel Years

Jonathan Lethem

In the mid-1970s I had two friends who were into Marvel comics. Karl,

whose parents were divorced, and Luke, whose parents were among the most

stable I knew. My parents were something between: separated, or separating,

sometimes living together and sometimes apart, and each of them with lovers.

    Luke had an older brother, Peter, whom both Luke and I

idealised in absentia. Peter had left behind a collection of 1960s Marvel

comics in sacrosanct box files. These included a nearly complete run of

The Fantastic Four, the famous 102 issues drawn by Jack Kirby and scripted

by Stan Lee, a defining artefact (I now know) of the Silver Age of comics.

     Luke was precocious, worldly, full of a satirical

brilliance I didn’t always understand but pretended to, as I pretended

to understand his frequent references to ‘Aunt Petunia’ and ‘The Negative

Zone’ and ‘The Baxter Building’. He was disdainful of childish pursuits

and disdainful of my early curiosity about sex (I didn’t catch the contradiction

in this until later). Luke didn’t buy new comics so much as read and reread

old ones. Luke’s favourite comic-book artist was Jack Kirby.

      Karl was precocious, secretive and rebellious,

full of intimations of fireworks and drugs and petty thievery that frightened

and thrilled me. He was curious about sex, and unaware of or uninterested

in the early history of Marvel superheroes. For him, Marvel began with the

hip, outsiderish loner heroes of the 1970s – Ghost Rider, Luke Cage, Warlock,

Iron Fist. His favourite comic-book artist was John Byrne.

     Karl got in trouble a lot. Luke didn’t.

     Though all three of us lived in rough parts of Brooklyn,

Karl and I went to a terrifying public school in an impoverished neighbourhood,

while Luke went to St Ann’s School, safe in moneyed Brooklyn Heights. Karl

and I were forced to adopt a stance of endurance and shame together, a kabuki

of cringing postures in response to a world of systematic bullying. That

was a situation I could no more have explained to Luke than to my parents.

Karl and I never discussed it either, but we knew it was shared.

    In 1976 Marvel announced, with what seemed to Karl and

me great fanfare, the return of Jack Kirby, the king of comics, as an artist-writer

– a full ‘auteur’ – on a series of Marvel titles. The announcement wasn’t

a question of press conferences or advertisements in other media, only sensational

reports on the ‘Bullpen Bulletins’ pages of Marvel comics themselves, the

CNN of our little befogged minds at the time. Kirby was the famed creator

or co-creator of a vast collection of classic Marvel characters: the Fantastic

Four, the Hulk, Thor, Silver Surfer, Doctor Doom, the Inhumans. In a shadowy

earlier career he had also created Captain America. His career reached into

prehistory: the notion that he was about to reclaim his territory was rich

and disturbing. In fact, what he would turn out to bring to Marvel was

a paradoxical combination: clunkily old-fashioned virtues that had been outmoded,

if not surpassed, by subsequent Marvel artists, together with a baroque

futuristic sensibility that would leave most readers chilled, largely alienated

from what he was trying to do. Later, I’d learn, Kirby’s return created

rifts in the ranks of the younger Marvel writers and artists, who resented

the creative autonomy he’d been granted and found the results laughable.

At the time, all I knew was that Kirby’s return created a rift between myself

and Karl.

     Kirby hadn’t been inactive in the interlude between

his classic 1960s work for Marvel and his mid-1970s return. He’d been in

exile at DC, Marvel’s older, more august and squarer rival. In his DC work

and the return to Marvel, where he unveiled two new venues, The Eternals

and 2001, Kirby gradually turned into an autistic primitivist genius, disdained

as incompetent by much of his audience, but revered by a cult of aficionados

in the manner of an ‘outsider artist’. As his work spun off into abstraction,

his human bodies becoming more and more machine-like, his machines more

and more molecular and atomic (when they didn’t resemble vast sculptures

of mouse-gnawed cheese), Kirby became great/awful, a kind of disastrous genius

uncontainable in the form he himself had innovated. It’s as though Picasso

had, after 1950, become Adolf Wölfli, or John Ford had ended up as

John Cassavetes. Or if Robert Crumb had turned into his obsessive mad-genius

brother, Charles Crumb.

As a child, I suffered a nerdish fever for authenticity and origins

of all kinds, one which led me into some very strange cultural places.

Any time I heard that, say, David Bowie was only really imitating Anthony

Newley, I immediately lost interest in David Bowie and went looking for the

source, sometimes with the pitiable results that this example suggests.

So I was always moving backwards through time, and though I was born in

1964 and came to cultural consciousness some time around 1970, I adored

the culture of the 1950s and early 1960s: Ernie Kovacs, The Twilight Zone,

the British Invasion, Lenny Bruce, the Beat writers, film noir. I tended

to identify with my parents’ taste in things, and with the tastes of my

parents’ friends, more than with the cultural tokens of my own generation.

With Luke, I went to see a Ralph Bakshi film called Heavy Traffic, in which

an unforgettable animated sequence accompanies and illustrates, with crude

(and rude) drawings, the Chuck Berry song ‘Maybelline’. Thanks to that

film I fell in love with Chuck Berry, and while every kid in freshman year

of high school was defining their identity according to whether they liked

a) Jimi Hendrix and Pink Floyd and The Doors or b) The Clash and The Specials

and Bad Brains or c) Cheap Trick and The Cars and Blondie, I was looking

into z) Chuck Berry and Bo Diddley. It’s a commonplace that we 1970s kids

were doomed to glance backwards, out of our impoverished world of Paul McCartney

and Wings, to the era of the Beatles, but I was the only 12-year-old I’ve

ever known who got into an extended argument with his own mother about whether

the Beatles were better before or after Sergeant Pepper – my mother on the

side of ‘I Am the Walrus’, me on the side of ‘Drive My Car’.

    At the moment in my childhood I’m describing, bodies were

beginning to change, and the exact degree and nature of their changes created

some psychological opportunities and thwarted others. Karl at 13 grew tall,

handsome and dangerously good at looking adult; Luke and I were still small

and childlike. Karl identified, as I’ve said, with Marvel’s existential

loners: the Vision, Warlock, Ghost Rider. By becoming tall and rebellious

– he’d begun to write graffiti, smoke pot, fail in school, pursuits I only

barely flirted with – he’d eluded childishness by a bodily rejection of it

and by rejecting obedience. The cost was exile from continuity with what

was attractive in our parents’ worlds. That cost didn’t bother Karl, not

at that moment anyway.

     So here was how, for a time, I tilted back to Luke:

he and I were partners in a strategy of rejecting childishness by identifying

with our parents and sneering at rebellion. As paltry new teenagers, we

adopted a ‘you can’t fire me, I quit’ position.

     Marvel was complicit in my muddled yearning backwards;

ours, I should say – mine, Luke’s, even Karl’s. By the time of Kirby’s return,

talk of Marvel’s ‘greatness’ was explicitly nostalgic. Any argument, based

on a typically American myth of progress, that our contemporary comics might

be even more wonderful, was everywhere undermined by a pining for the heyday

of the 1960s. This was accomplished most prominently in Stan Lee’s two

books: Origins and Son of Origins, which reproduced and burnished the creation

myths of the great 1960s characters. Nostalgia was further propagated in

Marvel’s reprint titles: Marvel Tales, which offered rewarmed Spider-Man,

and the too-aptly-titled Marvel’s Greatest Comics, which put forward the

Kirby-Lee run of The Fantastic Four. This was a bit like Paul McCartney and

Wings playing Beatles songs on Wings over America. We 1970s kids couldn’t

have been issued a clearer message: we’d missed the party.

    In the Origins books, Lee notoriously undersold the contributions

of his artist collaborators – mostly Kirby, but also Steve Ditko, the penciller

of Spider-Man and Doctor Strange. Later, in a dispute over the ownership

of original drawings, Kirby was given extensive chances to play a grouchy

old David against Marvel’s corporate Goliath, and the comics world rallied

around him. He also made public claim to being the sole author of the great

characters that had made the Kirby-Lee partnership famous: the Fantastic

Four and all their sublime villains and supporting cast, Hulk, Thor, Silver

Surfer (he even once threw in Spider-Man for good measure).

    In Marvel’s greatest comics, Lee and Kirby were full collaborators

who, like Lennon and McCartney, really were more than the sum of their parts,

and who derived their greatness from the push and pull of incompatible visions.

Kirby always wanted to drag the Four into the Negative Zone – deeper into

psychedelic science fiction and existential alienation – while Lee resolutely

pulled them back into the morass of human lives, hormonal alienation, teenage

dating problems, pregnancy, and unfulfilled longings to be human and normal

and loved and not to have the Baxter Building repossessed by the City of

New York. Kirby threw at the Four an endless series of ponderous fallen

gods or whole tribes and races of alienated antiheroes with problems no

mortal could credibly contemplate. Lee made certain the Four were always

answerable to the female priorities of Sue Storm – the Invisible Girl, Reed

Richards’s wife and famously ‘the weakest member of the Fantastic Four’.

She wanted a home for their boy Franklin, she wanted Reed to stay out of the

Negative Zone, and she was willing to quit the Four and quit the marriage

to stand up for what she believed.

     I seriously doubt whether any 1970s Marvel-loving

boy ever had a sexual fantasy about Sue Storm. We had Valkyrie, Red Sonja,

the Cat, Ms Marvel, Jean Grey, Mantis and innumerable others available

for that. We (I mean, I) especially liked the Cat. Sue Storm was truly

invisible. She was a parent, a mom calling you home from where you played

in the street, telling you it was time to brush your teeth. Not that she

wasn’t a hottie, but Kirby exalted her beauty in family-album style headshots,

and glimpses of her, nobly pregnant, in a housedress that covered her clavicle.

The writers and artists who took over The Fantastic Four after Kirby and,

later, Lee departed the series, seemed impatient with the squareness of

Sue and Reed’s domestic situations. Surely, these weren’t the hippest of

the Kirby/Lee creations. Nevertheless, if you (I mean, I) accept my premise

that the mid-to-late 1960s Fantastic Four were the exemplary specimens,

the Revolver and Rubber Soul and White Album of comics, and if you further

grant that pulling against the tide of all of Kirby’s inhuman galactacism,

that whole army of aliens and gods, was one single character, our squeaky

little Sue, then I wonder: Invisible Girl, the most important superhero

of the Silver Age of comics?

     I’m breaking down here. The royal we and the presumptive

you aren’t going to cut it. This is a closed circuit, me and the comics

which I read and which read me. Stan Lee’s rhetoric of community was a weird,

vibrant lie: every single true believer, every single member of the Make

Mine Marvel society or whatever the fuck we were meant to be called, received

the comics as a private communion with our own obscure and shameful yearnings,

and it was miraculous and pornographic to so much as breathe of it to another

boy, let alone be initiated by one more knowing. We and you don’t know a

thing about what I felt back then, any more than I know a thing about what

you felt.

     I’d be kidding if I claimed anyone much cherishes

the comics of Kirby’s ‘return to Marvel’ period. Even for souls who take

these things all too seriously, those comics have no real place in the

history: they define only a clumsy mis-step in a dull era at Marvel, before

the brief renaissance signalled by the ascent of the Chris Claremont X-Men.

Here, joining the chorus of the indifferent, is Kirby himself, from an interview

in Comics Journal which ranged over his whole glorious career:

Interviewer: ‘It always seemed like your last stint at Marvel was a

little half-hearted.’

Kirby: ‘Yeah.’

There’s something else I’ve sensed about the Kirby/Lee partnership:

Kirby must have been a kind of ambivalent father figure to Lee. He was

only five years older, but they were crucial years – crucial in defining

two different types of American manhood. Kirby came of age in the 1930s,

was toughened by his Depression boyhood and perhaps scarred by his frontline

experiences in World War Two. Lee was more like the coddled 1950s striver

who lived in the world his parents had fought for and earned. This difference

perhaps underlies the extremes of The Fantastic Four: Kirby concerned himself

with a clash of dark and light powers, and passionately identified with alien

warrior-freaks who, like John Wayne in The Searchers, were sworn to protect

the vulnerable civilian (or human) societies they were incapable of living

among. His vision was darkly paternal. Lee’s was the voice of the teenage

nonconformist, looking for kicks in a boring suburb, diffident at best about

the family structures by which he was nevertheless completely defined.

     Now, when I consider the steady alienation from

humankind of Kirby’s bands of outsiders, I wonder if he might be one of

those who could never completely come home again. But he did try to come

home in 1976, to Marvel. Karl and I bought the hype, and bought the comics.

And Karl didn’t like them, and I did. Or anyway I defended them, pretended

to like them. Karl immediately took up a view, one I’ve now learned was

typical of a young 1970s Marvel fan: he said Kirby sucked because he didn’t

draw the human body right. Karl was embarrassed by the clunkiness, the raw

and ragged dynamism, the lack of fingernails or other fine detail. Artists

since Kirby had set new standards for anatomical and proportional ‘realism’:

superhero comics weren’t supposed to look cartoonish anymore. I, schooled

both in the love my father, an expressionist painter, had of exaggeration

and fantasy, and in Luke’s scholarly and tendentious devotion to his older

brother’s comics, decided I saw what Karl couldn’t.

    In my defence of Kirby, I was conflating comic art and

comic writing. I need to quit conflating them here. That is to say, it’s

possible to argue about the moment Kirby’s pencilling began to go south.

He was good; he got worse. What’s undebatable is the execrable, insufferable

pomposities of Kirby’s dialogue in the Marvel work without Lee. Or the deprivations

involved in trying to love his galactically distant and rather depressed

storylines. As a writer, he always stank.

    I did try to love the storylines. It mattered to me. With

Luke’s help I’d understood that Kirby represented our parents’ values,

the Chuck Berry values. In Kirby resided the higher morality of the Original

Creator, that which I’d sworn to uphold against the shallow killing-the-father

imperatives of youth. Luke, it should be said, never cared about Kirby’s

return. He was a classicist, and didn’t buy new comics. I was on my own,

hung out to dry by The Eternals.

     Karl and I were drawing comics in those days. Well,

not really comics; we were drawing superheroes – we’d design a character,

detail his costume and powers and affect, then speculate on his adventures.

I was profligate, quickly generating a large stack of characters, whose

names, apart from ‘Poison Ivy’ and ‘The Hurler’, I can no longer recall.

Karl drew fewer characters, more carefully, and imparted to them more substantial

personalities and histories. One day in Karl’s room, he and I were arguing

about Kirby and I formulated a rhetorical question, meant to shock Karl into

recognising Kirby’s awesome gifts. Who else, I asked, had ever shown the

ability to generate so many characters, so many distinctive costumes, so

many different archetypal personas? Karl said: You.

     At the time my ego chose to be buoyed by Karl’s

remark. But really he’d identified an increasing childishness in Kirby.

None of the army of new characters at Marvel was ever going to mean much

to anyone. They were only empty costumes, like my own drawings. There was

something regressive about Kirby now – he’d become self-referential, the

outsider artist decorating the walls of private rooms.

     The comics Karl and I actually relished in 1976

and 1977, if we were honest (and Karl was more honest than me), were The

Defenders, Omega the Unknown and Howard the Duck, all written by a mad genius called Steve Gerber, and Captain Marvel and Warlock, both written and drawn by another auteur

briefly in fashion, Jim Starlin. As far as the art went, Gerber liked

to collaborate with plodding but inoffensive pencillers such as Jim Mooney

and Sal (‘The Lesser’) Buscema. Those guys moved the story along well enough.

Starlin’s were drawn in a slickly hip and mildly psychedelic style, but with

the ‘realistic’ musculature that the moment (and Karl) demanded, rather than

the Franz Kline kneecaps and biceps of Jack Kirby. Gerber’s tales were wordy,

satirical and self-questioning, and stuffed full of homely human characters

dealing with day-to-day situations: bag ladies, disc jockeys, superheroines’

jealous husbands, kids who faced bullying at their local public schools.

His attitude to the superhero mythos was explicitly deflationary. Starlin

was more into wish-fulfilment fantasies of cosmic power, but he was droll

and readable, and the scrupulous way he drew his psychedelia was actually

(I see now, paging through the stuff) indebted to Steve Ditko’s early version

of Doctor Strange. Enough. The point is, Gerber and Starlin were the two

creators whose (commercially non-viable) work was pitted in the day to day

contest against the return of the king, and they were winning, hands down,

even in my muddled and ideological heart.

Karl and I were in intermediate school in Brooklyn together until the

summer of 1977. Though our friendship was strained towards the end of that

time, both by Karl’s physical maturation and by the increasing distance

between his rebellious nonconformity with the adult world and my parent-identifying

nonconformity with the teenage world, we continued sporadically to buy and

evaluate Marvel comics together until the end of eighth grade.

It was high school which severed our connection, for what would become

years. I went off to Music and Art, in Manhattan, a place much populated

by dreamy nerds like me and perfectly formulated to indulge my yearning

to skip past teenagerhood straight to an adult life; many of my best friends

in high school were my teachers. Karl was destined for Stuyvesant High,

where he drifted into failure and truancy. Later he’d land at one of our

local public high schools, John Jay, where he was forced to continue battling

a world of bullying I’d left behind.

Luke, meanwhile, was still safe in the preserve of private school, where

he might be subject to the push and pull of peer pressure, but was better

isolated from the starkness of the bankrupt city around us. Our friendship,

mine and Luke’s, was restored somewhat during those high school years, though

my public school experiences had made me worldly in ways that Luke’s stubborn

cognition, and the advantage of his older brother’s influence, couldn’t

quite match. As for physical maturation, I now shot ahead, catching up with

Karl (though he wasn’t around for me to make the comparison), while Luke

still lagged slightly. Now, I think, I was to Luke as Karl had been to me.

No rebel, I had nonetheless begun to smoke pot, which Luke still distrusted.

No whizz with girls, I was at least comfortable with my puppyish interest,

while Luke remained, for the time being, gnarled up.

Between me and Luke, Jack Kirby was still a tacit god, but only on the

strength of his canonical 1960s work. Luke and I, righteous in our reverence

for origins, didn’t between us acknowledge Kirby’s continued existence.

It would have been unseemly, like dwelling on the fact that Chuck Berry had

had a 1970s novelty hit called ‘My Ding-a-Ling’. Whether Karl continued to

buy comics I couldn’t know. Our argument about Kirby was lost, along with

much else, in the denial surrounding the state of our friendship, which had

attenuated to an occasional ‘hello’ on the streets of the neighbourhood.

In the last year of high school, before college changed everything,

Luke and I still drifted together occasionally. Now it was he and I who

drew comics – not innocently wishful superheroes, but what we imagined were

stark satires, modelled on Robert Crumb and other heroes of the ‘underground’.

Luke had by then begun dating girls, too, and one of our last collaborative

productions was a Kirby parody called ‘Girlfriends from the Earth’s Core’.

A two-page strip, it reworked the material of a failed double date of a month

before, when Luke and I had taken two girls, soon to be our first bitter

exes, to a fleabag movie theatre at the Fulton Mall. Luke ‘pencilled’ the

pages, and I was the ‘inker’ – I specialised in Kirbyesque polka-dots of

energy, which we showed rising from the volcanic bodies of the two primordial

girlfriends.

I know them both, Luke and Karl. Luke’s parents are still married, and

Luke and his wife live in a New England town. The oldest of their children

is called Harpo – more of the reverence for early 20th-century culture that

always drew us together. Luke works (as Kirby once did, when he was demoralised

by the failed return to Marvel) making animated films. His conversation still

features Fantastic Four-derived phrases such as ‘Aunt Petunia’ and ‘Clobberin’

Time’. I see Kirby flashing in his eyes; I know for him it’s more real

than it ever was for me.

Me, I’m a fake, my Kirby-love cobbled from Luke’s certainty, Karl’s

resistance and Stan Lee’s cheerleading. My version of an older brother

was Karl, and Karl wasn’t reverent about Kirby. Kirby was merely on the

menu of the possible, alongside Starlin and Gerber, alongside Ghost Rider

and Warlock, alongside forgetting about comics and getting into girls or

music or drugs instead. Karl never had that kind of crush on his own or

other kids’ parents – a crush on the books on their shelves, on the records

in their collections.

Karl still lives in the Brooklyn neighbourhood to which I’ve returned

and which he never left. He lives down the street, and we’re both only

a few blocks from the once treacherous precinct of our shared school. Last

week I had him over, and we dug out a box of Marvel comics. These were the

same copies we’d cherished together in 1976 and 1977 – for, in an act surely

loaded with unexamined rage, I’d bought Karl’s comic collection from him

in the middle of our high-school years, when his interest drifted, when our

friendship was at its lowest ebb. He wasn’t desperate to contemplate our

old comics, but he was willing. While we were browsing the Kirbys of the

return era, he corrected my memory in a few specifics. He raised the possibility

that the argument about Kirby, which had seemed to me loaded with the direst

intimations of the choices we were about to make, the failures of good faith

with our childhood selves we were about to suffer, had mostly been conducted

in my own head. It happened when I put a stack of Kirby’s 2001’s in his hands.

‘I really got into some of these issues,’ he said. I could see his features

animate with recollection as he browsed Kirby’s panels, something impossible

to fake even if he had a reason to do so. ‘I remember this comic book really

blew my mind.’

‘I thought you never liked Kirby,’ I said feebly, still stuck on my thesis.

I explained what I thought I remembered.

‘No, I remember when he first came back I was a little slow to get it,’

Karl replied. ‘But you had me convinced pretty quickly. I remember thinking

these were really trippy. I’d like to read them again, actually.’

‘Oh,’ I said.

‘I just never liked the way he drew knees.’

Jonathan Lethem’s novels include Motherless Brooklyn and The Fortress

 


 

THE CEO'S SECRET FEAR.

22 APRIL 2004: THE CEO’S SECRET FEAR.

Will
Skilling’s night out cost him?

Prosecutors eye changes to release terms, say former Enron CEO lied
to staff about being drunk.
April 22, 2004: 2:32 PM EDT

HOUSTON (Reuters)
– Prosecutors charged Wednesday that former Enron Chief Executive Jeff
Skilling broke the terms of his $5 million bond during a bizarre alcohol-fueled
fracas in New York earlier this month.
   The court filing says Skilling’s blood alcohol level
was 0.19 — more than twice the legal limit for driving in most U.S. states
— when police sent him to the hospital at 4 a.m. on April 9. The case
against Skilling does not involve driving, however.
     Officers described Skilling as “uncooperative
and intoxicated” and deemed him “an emotionally disturbed person” because
he was accusing bar patrons of being undercover agents for the
Federal Bureau of Investigation.

     “At one point, Skilling
went to the middle of the street, put his hands behind his back and began
talking to the sky, asking if FBI cameras were capturing what was happening,”
the motion says
.

     The motion stops short of asking U.S. District
Court Judge Sim Lake to revoke Skilling’s bond, and instead asks for a
hearing to discuss changes to his terms of release.
       He was freed Feb. 19 after pleading not
guilty to 35 counts of fraud, insider trading and lying about Enron’s finances.

      Skilling’s attorney, Daniel Petrocelli, said
his client regrets the incident.

      “But it certainly did not happen in the way the
government said it did in their motion,” he said, declining to answer specific
questions about the government’s account.
       He said the motion was unnecessary because
the pretrial services officers monitoring Skilling’s release have already
provided information to the court.
       “This only reinforces the view that the
government is more committed to prejudicing Mr. Skilling than ensuring
his right to a fair trial in court,” Petrocelli said.

      The motion says Skilling lied to pretrial services
staff about being drunk.
      According to the motion, Skilling and his wife,
former Enron corporate secretary Rebecca Carter, met and began drinking
with two men at the Four Seasons Hotel bar.
     The party moved to a cigar bar, Bar & Books,
around midnight, and the foursome began drinking with a married couple
and their male friend.

     Skilling picked up a $171 bar tab and kept drinking,
promising his new friends he would “fly them down to Houston and provide
them with their own maid” at his mansion.
      But Skilling soon became belligerent, and accused
his new friends of being undercover FBI agents. When his wife tried to
get him to leave, he responded with obscene language, the motion says.

      The bar’s manager kicked the group out, and
once outside, Skilling began trying to remove the
front license plate from the married couple’s car.

    “The defendant did so apparently to gather ‘proof’ of
the true identity,” of the couple, the motion says.
     Then Skilling tried to lift
the woman’s blouse to see if she was wearing a hidden microphone,
which
led to a scuffle with the other two men, it says.

      One of them hit Skilling, who then grabbed his
wife and accidentally caused her to fall to the ground. Skilling admitted
this later at the hospital, the motion says.

      At the time of the incident, Skilling’s lawyers
said “two aggressive men” began questioning Skilling about Enron and his
wife was “thrown to the ground.”
      Philip Hilder, a Houston attorney and former
federal prosecutor, said the motion is likely an effort to put more restrictions
on Skilling.
     “Had the violations been egregious enough, there
would have been a motion for revocation,” Hilder said
.


"I'VE NO INTEREST IN LIVING ON THE BEACH."

21 APRIL 2004: “I’VE NO INTEREST IN LIVING ON THE BEACH.”

Vivienne
Westwood reflects in the New York Times:

Now, more than two decades later, she wonders what her punk past was
all about.
   “I don’t agree with anything I said in those days,” she
said. “Nothing. Completely opposite. I don’t believe any of it. I think
it’s madness. Malcolm wrote these texts about Dickensian urchins creating
havoc, you know, very poetic, but nonsense. One of our slogans was, `Under
the paving stones lies the beach.’ And at one point, I thought to myself,
`I’ve no interest in living on the beach.'”
     “At the time I felt very rebellious,” she went
on, “but I now realize there’s no point in it. The urban guerrilla
was essentially what we were after, but I don’t believe there is a crusade
to be waged by wearing clothes. You just become the token rebel who persuades
everyone they are living in a free society. Society
tolerates its rebels because it absorbs them into its consumer society.

You become part of the marketing. Everything comes with a label.”


GRANT MORRISON ON UNIVERSES INSIDE  COMICS.

17 APRIL 2004: GRANT MORRISON ON UNIVERSES INSIDE
COMICS.

From Barbelith:

BY: I like that whole idea of ripping open space within the environment
whether it’s solid or virtual and y’know the whole paperverse interface
that you explored, or have explored countless times, but you’ve really
started to look at the technology of it in “The Filth” and I’m fascinated
by it. What’s the idea behind it?

GM: That idea was me making sense of when I’d taken mushrooms and
read “Doom Patrol” — I was aware that I was holding a continuum, that’s
when I started to
develop ideas of comics as magic, comics as sigils, because I got
to page 22 then I turned back to page 8; I thought, “I’m in this story
which I don’t understand, I’ve read this bit, I can go back to the point
where the characters don’t know what’s about to happen to them and I
can experience it out of sequence and I saw that this comic was this entire
little universe/ continuum in
it’s own right and also the wider implications; that the DC Universe
and the Marvel Universe were also continuums in their own way created
by people when I was a kid or before I was born. Maintained by people,
who like these Demonic Corporations, maintained and kept these characters
which were sustained by people who would come in and look after them; people
who would come in and look after Scott Summers – it was that notion of
the universe in your hands and the possibilities in that.

BY: Do you think that informed your experience of Space-Time?

GM: Yeah – because it was a metaphor for that. I mean “Zoids”-

BY: I’ve not read it but I know of it.

GM: It winds up that the prime movers of the story are five-dimensional
being aliens who manipulate them all because the Zoids are toys-

BY: That’s hilarious – in “Zoids”!

GM: I thought, ‘What if I treat them literally as toys?’ When I was a kid I’d try and draw the fourth dimension. To me it’s something that’s always been there – it’s a refinement of ideas.
As you grow older you bring backup and other people’s ideas to scaffold
things you’ve thought yourself and you begin to assemble some kind of structure
from it and make some kind of sense of it.

BY: It’s always very comforting when you find someone in the pubic
realm who’s producing work that matches what you’re thinking and articulates
it when I couldn’t articulate it myself. I think comics lends itself to-

GM: Comics is like poetry. It’s a miracle that it has the circulation
that it does

BY: The chord it strikes in people who are attracted to it is so
strong it can be impossible to explain to someone who doesn’t experience
that.

GM: It’s the virtual world aspect of them. You’re actually inside
it. When you’re really enjoying a comic you’re inside the space like
nothing else. The way you have control over the time it takes to read
it. You’ve got control over this continuum. I just wanted to do that
with “Animal Man.” It was an experiment with those characters – I wasn’t
happy with that continuum. I wanted to do more of that with DC – I might
still do it with the HyperCrisis idea to explore that emotion of the comic
talking to you, developing it’s own language, to control how you read the
comic and how you would have certain kind of experiences while you read
the comic. So those are ideas ready to be played with: the actual thing
in your hand and how the characters react with it. The Challengers
of the Unknown standing on the boundaries of the comic saying ‘There’s
something massive…a massive lifeform out there. The entire continuum
is trembling.’

We’re all drawn on the same paper. Even in a physical way
– our bodies are exchanging atoms with the environment all the time –
there is no solid boundary. In seven years you’ll have a completely different
atomic structure from the one you have now. So we’re constantly exchanging
with the environment. Our molecules are composed
of bits of stars, there really is not much distinction between us and the
environment apart from the ones we make in order to function as individual
selves.


THE ARTHUR MAILING LIST BULLETIN No. 0002

April 15, 2004

COMMAND PERFORMANCE

THE ARTHUR MAILING LIST BULLETIN No. 0002

“Text beyond the presses.”

(((1))) NEW ISSUE OF ARTHUR OUT APRIL 27.

It’s at the printer now, and soon, if you are a subscriber or are one of the lucky 40,000, it will be in your hands too. It’s Arthur No. 10. It’s the May issue of Arthur. It’s Arthur with rising weirdbeard folkstar Devendra Banhart on the cover, as photographed by Melanie Pullen. It’s Arthur featuring interviews with the saddest filmmaker in the world,  Guy Maddin, and Godzilla, the aging “King of Monsters.” It’s Arthur with a two-page spread of Marc Bell’s neuron-damaging comics. It’s… It’s… It’s.. Well see it for yourself. The cover is up on the website now, and we are now taking pre-orders. Just go to

http://www.arthurmag.com

(((2))) ARTHUR DISCUSSION FORUM NOW FULLY FUNCTIONAL.

Have you ever wanted to discuss an article you read in Arthur with someone you don’t know? Well, your prayers have been answered: the new Arthur Discussion Forum is now online and is fully functional and is just basically wide-open and barely moderated. Come on in and share. We need feedback, we need recipes, we need hot tips, we need constructive criticism, we need a nice pat on the back, and some of us even need a pinch on the ass. Be nice, play fair, and if you can’t say anything nice, sit by me. You can get to the Arthur discussion forum via the link at

http://www.arthurmag.com

or you can go directly to it at:

http://www1.martnet.com/%7Elaris/arthur/_htdocs/forum/phpBB2/

(((3))) PLEASE HELP US.

If you haven’t done so already, please take a few minutes to do our 15-question Arthur Reader Survey.  It’s right here:

http://www.keysurvey.com/survey/24574/144b/

Reader Surveys let us know more about you. We then compile that information to allow us to solicit advertising in Arthur. Ads make Arthur go. Therefore, by filling out the survey, you have contributed in a small but significant way in making Arthur work. We thank you kindly.

****AND NOW TO THE REALLY GOOD STUFF…

(((4))) WE’RE MAKIN’ REALLY GOOD CDS AND SELLING THEM AT A REASONABLE PRICE.

Sometimes people ask us, What are you listening to right now? And then we answer with a long list of artists they don’t recognize. That makes us feel like snobs, which is a terrible thing to feel like, cuz we want to share. The music we like, we think everyone would like, *if they only got a chance to hear it.* In the pages of Arthur we rap about music all the time in ways that we hope will turn on the curious listener and cause them to get up and seek out the stuff. With Bastet, Arthur’s new imprint, we’re trying to shorten that process by making directly available to you some of the music we are digging that we think you might dig too.

The first Bastet CD is “The Golden Apples of the Sun,” a veritable “who’s who of underground folk” compilation curated by Devendra Banhart, who really knows his way around that place. He selected the tracks, drew the cover, solicited testimonials from all the artists about all the other artists and then HANDLETTERED the sleeve, decorating everything with his wonderful pen-and-ink art. You may buy this for the artwork, you may buy this cuz we’re only making 1,000 and it’ll be worth something on Ebay someday soon, you may buy this cuz you love us…but you will keep it near you because of the fantastic music on the CD. Which is as follows:

1. Vetiver (with Hope Sandoval) – “Angel’s Share” (from the “Vetiver” LP)

2. Joanna Newsom – “Bridges and Balloons” (from “The Milk-Eyed Mender” LP)

3. Six Organs of Admittance – “Hazy SF” (previously unreleased)

4. Viking Moses – “Crosses” (from “Crosses”)

5. Josephine Foster – “Little Life” (prev. unreleased home recording)

6. ESPers – “Byss & Abyss” (from “ESPers” LP)

7. Vashti Bunyan & Devendra Banhart – “Rejoicing in the Hands” (from the forthcoming “Rejoicing in the Hands of the Golden Empress” LP)

8. Jana Hunter – “Farm, CA” (prev. unreleased)

9. Currituck Co. – “The Tropics of Cancer” (from “Ghost Man on First”)

10. White Magic – “Don’t Need” (from forthcoming EP)

11. Iron and Wine – “Fever Dream” (from “Our Endless Numbered Days” LP)

12. Diane Cluck – ” Heat From Every Corner” (from “Macy’s Day Bird”)

13. Matt Valentine – “Mountains of Yaffa” (prev. unreleased)

14. Entrance – “You Must Turn” (prev. unreleased home recording)

15. Jack Rose – “White Mule” (from “Red Horse, White Mule” originally released thru Eclipse, forthcoming on VHF)

16. Little Wings – “Look at What the Light Did Now” (from “Light Green Leaves”)

17. Scout Niblett – “Wet Road” (from “Sweet Heart Fever”)

18. Troll – “Mexicana” (from “Pathless Lord”)

19. CocoRosie – “Good Friday” (from “La Maison de Mon Reve”)

20. Antony – “The Lake” (from “Live at Saint Olaye’s With Current 93”)

This CD is now being manufactured and will be shipping before May 1. You cannot buy it at a store or from that guy down the street. You have to buy it directly from us. It’s $12 postpaid US, $14 Canada, $17 world, or, get this, FREE if you buy a new subscription. Go here to order one, or just to see the pretty artwork:

http://www.arthurmag.com/bastet.html

The second Bastet CD is, as they say, completely different. “The Libations of Samhain: SUNN 0))) live at London’s Subcamden Underground, Hallo’ween 2003” is a single live power-drone ambient metal track by the mighty SUNN 0))) measuring just under 49 minutes. It’s loud and wonderful and all-enveloping and gives your speakers and your inner organs a fine meditative workout. Plus, you get a bonus interview with the SUNN O))) principals by Edwin Pouncey and Sharon Gal, originally broadcast on London’s Resonance FM 104. Would you believe this CD features cover artwork by the legendrary Savage Pencil, and letterpress printing by Thumbprint Press? Oh yes. Edition of 500, and they’re going VERY fast.

This CD is now being manufactured and will be shipping before May 1. Again, if you want it, you gotta buy it directly from us. It’s $12 postpaid US, $14 Canada, $17 world, or, get this, FREE if you buy a new subscription. Go here to order one, or just to see the brilliant SP artwork:

http://www.arthurmag.com/bastet.html

(((5))) CAN’T FIND ARTHUR? PERHAPS SIR/MADAM WOULD CONSIDER A SUBSCRIPTION.

ARTHUR comes out, and then it’s gone. You snooze, you lose. But no one should be punished for being unlucky, which is why ARTHUR offers SUBSCRIPTIONS. Now, you need never fear the empty stack again. Do you live in the USA? We are sorry. But, you can get six issues of Arthur for $30, plus (while supplies last) a free BASTET CD or ARTHUR t-shirt of your choosing. Do you live in Canada? Right on. That’ll cost you $39. Do you live somewhere else on the big blue cloudy marble?

Wow, that’s awesome. That’ll be $60. Order via PayPal at

http://www.arthurmag.com/backissues.html

And that’s it fer now.

Til next time–

So long, it’s good to know ya,

The Arthur Gang

April 15, 2004

na

15 APRIL 2004


NOT IN MY NAME

A PROTEST PLAY AGAINST THE DEATH PENALTY

Two-Day Performance Workshop

Ms. Judith Malina with other Living Theatre members
will lead a free two-day workshop for activists, actors
and all persons opposed to state killing, to learn and perform
the anti-death penalty protest play “Not in My Name.”

The next workshop will be held:

May 15 & 16, 2004
11am to 6pm
at
Actors Movement Studio
302 West 37th Street, 6th Floor

New York City

To recognize the play’s tenth anniversary, the weekend will culminate
with a performance in Times Square on Sunday, May 16th at 6pm.

We encourage persons of all backgrounds and experience levels
to participate.

To find out more and to pre-register, please call 212 969-8905

or send email to workshop@livingtheatre.org


na

14
APRIL 2004


The Coconut Revolution

(Film/Video, Stampede, Nov 2001)

This is the modern-day story of a native peoples’ remarkable victory
over Western Colonial power. A Pacific island rose up in arms against
giant mining corporation Rio Tinto Zinc (RTZ) – and won despite a military
occupation and blockade. When RTZ decided to step up production at the Panguna
Mine on the island of Bougainville, they got more than they bargained for.
The island’s people had enough of seeing their environment ruined and being
treated as pawns by RTZ.
    RTZ refused to compensate them, so the people decided
it was time to put an end to outside interference in the island’s affairs.
To do this they forcibly closed down the mine.
     The Papua New Guinea Army (PNGDF) were mobilised
in an attempt to put down the rebellion. The newly formed Bougainville
Revolutionary Army (BRA) began the fight with bows & arrows, and sticks
& stones. Against a heavily armed adversary they still managed to retain
control of most of their island. Realising they were beaten on the ground,
the PNGDF imposed a gunboat blockade around Bougainville, in an attempt
to strangle the BRA into submission. But the blockade seemed to of had
little or no effect.

     With no shipments getting in or out of the
island, how did new electricity networks spring up in BRA held territory?
How were BRA troops able to drive around the island without any source
of petrol or diesel?
     What was happening within the blockade was an
environmental and spiritual revolution. The ruins of the old Panguna
mine where being recycled to supply the raw materials for the world’s first eco-revolution.

    A David and Goliath story of the 21st century, The
Coconut Revolution will appeal to people of all backgrounds

Winner:
FICA Festival of Environmental Film, Brazil
BEMA Richard Keefe Memorial Award – WWF
Golden Kite, Best Documentary, Mar del Plata, Argentina
Silver Kite, Best Film for Young People, Argentina

Runner up:
BEMA (British Environmental Media Awards) Best Documentary
Amnesty International Awards, Best Documentary
One World Media Awards 2001, TV Documentary

Director: Dom Rotheroe

Sound: Carlos Soto
Funding: Soros Documentary Fund
Producer: Mike Chaimberlain

50 minutes

na

08 APRIL 2004

When the Edge Moved to the Middle
By THURSTON MOORE

Published: April 8, 2004
New York Times

The boy looked just like Kurt Cobain. He was no more than 19. Same
yellow hanging hair, fallow blue eyes, the sad square jaw, innocent
and adult.

    We were in a Brooklyn basement full of artists and
sound-poets gathered to watch musicians throw down extreme noise improvisation.
One performer played records with two customized tone arms on his turntable;
the discs broke and scratched, creating shards of hyperfractured beat
play. He was followed by a quartet of young women scraping metal files
across amplified coils mixed through junk electronics. I was to perform
a spontaneous guitar/amp feedback piece with a stand-up bass player on
loan from his teaching post at Berklee College of Music and a free jazz
percussionist who had traversed through New York’s downtown underground
in the 60’s. Not your typical night of alternative rock.
   And I had a feeling this kid was looking for alternative
rock. It was the year 2000. Kurt had died six years earlier, and through
whatever fleeting friendship I had with him, this ethereal look-alike
saw me as some connection.
   Before being labeled alternative rock, Sonic Youth,
the band I started in 1980 (and continue in still!), was called “post-punk.”
By the early 90’s, we existed as a sort of big brother (and big sister)
group to Kurt’s generation of underground America. When Nirvana became
popular, we were all called alternative rock — a less threatening term
than anything with punk in the title (though with Green Day and Blink 182
in the late 90’s, punk ultimately became accessible and extremely profitable
— at least for the new MTV punks). The original alternative rock bands
— Nirvana and Sonic Youth included — never had any allegiance to alternative
rock. We all had come too far and through too much for any professional
advice toward stylistic adjustment.

    Kurt was not enamored with new traditionalism. He
was more attached to the avant-garde rock of his hometown pals, the Melvins,
who continue to stretch the parameters of what rock music can be. The traditional
aspects of Nirvana’s music — aspects that lent it accessibility — were
expressed through Kurt as if they were experimental gestures. (The Beatles,
also grand pop experimentalists, were loudly whispered by Nirvana as a
primary influence, something unusual for punk devotees.) These elements
were an important part of Nirvana’s appeal. But what is transcendent about
Kurt’s art — what today, 10 years after his death, gives him rock immortality
— was his voice and performance ability, both of which exuded otherworldly
soulful beauty.
    The initial popularity of alternative rock was in
conflict with punk culture, which has a history of denouncing commercial
success. Nirvana’s second album, “Nevermind,” along with the success of
the Lollapalooza tours, changed the game. Both announced the discovery
of an unaccounted-for demographic, cynical and amused by the pop rebellion
displayed by new wave (Duran Duran) and hair-metal (Guns N’ Roses). This
newly discovered audience, one that surged well beyond the punk elite to
the greater population of alienated and dislocated youth, was all at once
represented by Kurt.

    Kurt was aware of his sudden high profile and how
it could be perceived as uncool in the punk scene. He made snotty comments
about the fresh-minted alternative rock acts being touted by MTV. We
all did. At the request of The New York Times, Nirvana’s first record
label, Seattle’s Sub Pop, created a mock lexicon of “grunge” culture.
Remarkably, the news media ran with it — to our disbelief and delight.

     In the face of success, Kurt seemed to feel
the need to maintain this stump position of punk rock credibility. Save
the mainstream acceptance of the relatively straight-ahead pop of R.E.M.
— which Kurt loved as much as hard-core thrash — there really was no model
for such success from our community. He told Flipside, the iconic Los Angeles
punk rock fanzine, that he hoped the next Nirvana album would vanquish
their affiliation with the “lamestream.” He recounted being taken aback
by an audience member who grabbed him and advised him to, “Just go for
it, man.” I remember smiling at this, as it was how most of us felt. We
didn’t perceive Nirvana’s status as lame. It was cool.
    After all, the kids chose “Nevermind.” Geffen Records,
the band’s label at the time, had no real plans for it, hoping for modest
sales. Rolling Stone gave it a lukewarm review. Its subsequent off-the-map
success was wonderful, fantastic and completely genuine. What was disingenuous
and annoyingly misrepresentative was the reaction of the corporate music
industry. The alternative rock phenomenon was a youth culture hit and
it made stars out of select artists but, for the most part, it was a
bunch of corn to the creative scene where Kurt came from.

    Nrvana made a point of touring with challenging groups
like the Boredoms, the Butthole Surfers and the Meat Puppets and presenting
them to a huge audience — one that was largely unaware of those bands’
influence. But only the Meat Puppets would click a little bit. Without
MTV or radio support, no one was likely to reach Nirvana’s peak.
     When Kurt died, a lot of the capitalized froth
of alternative rock fizzled. Mainstream rock lost its kingpin group,
an unlikely one imbued with avant-garde genius, and contemporary rock
became harder and meaner, more aggressive and dumbed down and sexist. Rage
and aggression were elements for Kurt to play with as an artist, but he
was profoundly gentle and intelligent. He was sincere in his distaste
for bullyboy music — always pronouncing his love for queer culture, feminism
and the punk rock do-it-yourself ideal. Most people who adapt punk as a
lifestyle represent these ideals, but with one of the finest rock voices
ever heard, Kurt got to represent them to an attentive world. Whatever contact
he made was really his most valued success.
     You wouldn’t know it now by looking at MTV,
with its scorn-metal buffoons and Disney-damaged pop idols, but the underground
scene Kurt came from is more creative and exciting than it’s ever been.
From radical pop to sensorial noise-action to the subterranean forays
in drone-folk-psyche-improv, all the music Kurt adored is very much alive
and being played by amazing artists he didn’t live to see, artists who
recognize Kurt as a significant and honorable muse.

     The kid who looked like him sat next to me
in the basement where we were playing and I knew he was going to ask
me about Kurt. This happens a lot. What was Kurt like? Was he a good guy?
Simple things. He asked me if I thought Kurt would’ve liked this total outsider
music we were hearing. I laughed, realizing the kid was slightly bewildered
by it all, and I answered emphatically, “Yeah, Kurt would have loved this.”

Thurston Moore is a member of the band Sonic Youth. 


na

02 APRIL 2004

The Long Now

Transcript of a talk given by Brian Eno as part of the Long Now
Foundation’s series of Seminars About Long Term Thinking.

Fort Mason, San Francisco
14th November, 2003

By the mid 1970s I’d started to imagine a different kind of music
that I wanted to hear. This music really grew out of three separate threads
of interest. One of them is African music – I was listening to a lot
– particularly Fela Kuti the Nigerian bandleader. The second was the Velvet
Underground and the scene that constituted. The third was composers like
Steve Reich and Terry Riley. What I think interested me about all those
sorts of music was that they flattened out the shape of the music, the
hierarchical structure of the music was flatter. So the pop music I had
been listening to mostly had a voice sitting at the top then some rhythm
instruments, and then some drums. And the focus of the music, the shape
of the music was very pyramidal. What I found I was preferring to listen
to was music where that pyramid was squashed down, where no particular
instrument was featured as the lead instrument and instead you had a network
of interactions between lots of different sounds. In my own work this manifested
in an emphasis on making what would have been called the background more
interesting, and what would have been called the foreground, less and less
central, thus sinking foreground elements into the background.

    The other thing that I was interested in was in
losing the obvious boundaries of music, I wanted to make something that
didn’t sound like it had edges, sonic edges, or that it had a beginning
and an end. I wanted to make something that belonged to a big space and
you as the listener could hear some of that but not necessarily all of it,
and I wanted to make something that felt like it had always been going on
and would always be going on and you just happened to catch a part of it.
I guess the first piece I made which had a feeling of being a kind of eternal
present tense was a record called Discreet Music in 1975, which was a very
long record for a vinyl album. It was the longest I could possibly get on
to one side of a vinyl album – thirty minutes and thirty one seconds – and
I wanted to give the implication that this was not a piece of music in the
ordinary sense of something that had been composed with a beginning, a
middle and an end, but instead was a continuous endless place in time.
So I was developing this idea of place of music being not so much a sonic
narrative but more a sonic landscape – again with the feeling that this
was a landscape that was always in the present tense, a landscape that
was an extended present tense.
    So sometime in the late 70s a couple of things
happened to me that made a big difference to the way I thought about
music. One of them was in Germany, I was sitting in an airport, and listening
to the music that they play in airports the message of which is ‘don’t
worry you’re not going to die’ – music that is deliberately very lightweight,
with no threat, where everything’s got a nice smile and usually the most
disconcerting thing about it is that the tape player doesn’t work properly
and you think ‘if they can’t get that to work’…..

    But anyway I was listening to this music and I
thought this was exactly the wrong kind of music to play in an airport,
because it makes you really nervous, it makes you think ‘all they’re
saying to you is ‘Death? Don’t mention it! Don’t even think about it’.
So I started thinking ‘What would make you not think about death so much?’
and I started to think that what you really needed in airports was the
kind of music that would make you care less about your own life, that would
make you not be so concerned about the prospect of dying.
    So I wanted to make a kind of music that would
actually reduce your focus on this particular moment in time that you
happened to be in and make you settle into time a little bit better;
and I came up with the record Music for Airports – a record that was very
deliberately aimed at changing one’s sense of time. This was the point
where I realised that a lot of what I was thinking about musically was
to do with the experience of time.

    Shortly after making that record, I moved to New
York, I was living on 8th St and 5th Avenue. I was invited to a party
one evening, by a friend of mine, a singer, and she gave me the address.
I didn’t know New York very well, so I hailed a cab, and the cab driver
started driving south and the street lights got darker and darker and
the pot holes got bigger and bigger. The steam was coming out of the streets
and finally we ended up in a very dark gloomy medieval street at what
appeared to be the address on the card, and I thought it’s very strange
that she should live down here: this must be a joke of some kind. I rang
the bell and was buzzed in and got in the elevator and went up the stairs
to see a glitteringly expensive loft. This was in itself a surprise –
that someone had spent so much money in such a bad neighbourhood, so
I asked the hostess during the evening whether she liked living there,
and she said “oh yeah this is the best place I’ve ever lived” and I realised
that what she meant was within these four walls.
    So this was very New York to describe the ‘here’

that you live in as the place within the walls, and not to include the
neighbourhood as part of the experience. So I had this idea then that
she lived in what I called a very small ‘here’ and I felt fairly confident
that I wanted to live in a big ‘here’. I wanted to live somewhere that
not only the part I controlled was mine, but also the neighbourhood was
mine and I felt that I had some degree of involvement or responsibility
after I had shut my door.  MORE…