April 2nd, 2013 § Comments Off on Slomped § permalink
Driving the bus. 4 minutes down on my third trip of the day. The 4th trip at 8:30 can be crazy on a Tuesday. All the kids go to their Tuesday classes, I guess. I say to myself, “I better pick up these 4 minutes or I’m going to get slomped.”
“Slomped.” Where did that come from? I thought about it for a few seconds and figured it must have been some kind of a synthesizing double elision between “slammed” and “stomped”. I thought about John Lennon’s advice to George Harrison about finding the right word for a lyric – “you just keep saying the line over and over and saying whatever comes to mind in the empty place.”
Something in the way she moves
Attracts me like a rutabega
I thought of Pete Maravich’s game when no one, least of all Pistol Pete, knew what physical genius was about to instantiate.
Stevie Wonder’s melisma. Charlie Parker’s phrasing.
And then I thought, “hey, I bet my elision was actually between ‘slammed’ and ‘swamped’.” I hadn’t even had immediate access to my own thought processes in retrospect.
Take a flyer.
Trust the universes to provide for the completion of the gesture.
Embark upon the worthy gesture at a moments notice.
Time to weigh in on this one. What do we want on the “library lot” here in Ann Arbor. It seems self-evident that we need a public social space for Ann Arbor residents. OK. Let’s think about it. How do we get there? » Read the rest of this entry «
The Beatles were a theatrical presentation. Yes, they were a pop or rock and roll band, but when they went on stage, it was as The Beatles, and the conceit was sufficiently fanciful to promote and/or require an essentially theatrical suspension of disbelief. Once the ball was rolling, even their records were part of the essentially theatrical act.
(The preceding is an example of a post where I am sleepily torquing a provocative idea onto theWheel. Little editing, no critical thinking. Lots of room to be corrected, contradicted, extended, discussed or ignored.) It’s OK to be wrong, though it helps to be wrong about something interesting…
Ahh yes, it has been some time since I posted regularly at theWheel – how could that be…? Truth be told, I’ve been swamped, and theWheel was also at a transition point, so it just seemed best to let it go for a bit. And how was I swamped?
In a word, Gravity. This winter I’ve had the good fortune to write music for the world premier of David MacGregor’s play Gravity at the Purple Rose Theatre in Chelsea Michigan. It’s been a great experience, and sufficiently consuming that I just didn’t want to be distracted by theWheel or anything else. The play is about the great Natural Philosopher Isaac Newton at a critical point of his life in 1693, when he was 50 years old. If you live in the South Eastern Michigan region, or even anywhere close, you will be well rewarded if you come to the show. Being involved with the play myself, I hesitate to say much more than that I believe that David MacGregor has written a Masterpiece – it is really really good – and that a very talented Purple Rose team, led by Artistic Director Guy Sanville, has delivered a loving production. Here are a couple of reviews. Do come if you can.
Per theWheel, I’ll have more to say later in the week. I’ll be posting again, and you are invited to join me. Till then…
Today, just an observation. Natural Science – what I hesitate to call Physics because in my opinion that which is most essential about the subject matter of what is usually referred to as Physics is not physical – has led me to Theater.
How very interesting that Physics and Theater resonate with each other.
Why Theater? The live audience is the key. From my post Night Flight:
It recently occurred to me that what was truly special to me about live theater was the way in which a group of people, including – especially including – a live reactive audience as an indispensable component of the magical dynamic – a group of people “self consciously” agree to surrender to a theatrical dream within the dominant shared “reality” dream. Within the magic circle of a suspension of disbelief (or is it rather an affirmation of belief?) all are creating together, all are aware of and swept up into the common alternate reality that all are purposely – I won’t say mindfully – dreaming up together.
In fairness, Science has indeed generated a concept, the Anthropic Principle, which explains the conveniently life-friendly physical constants and attributes of our universe by noting that only universes that have laws that facilitate the generation of observers will ever be observed. But I don’t think even the Anthropic Principle can have anything to say about why the discs of the Sun and Moon appear to be the same size as seen from Earth.
I say this because this synchronicity of observed disc size plays out in a realm of aesthetic rather than physical necessity. There is no physical necessity for the discs to be the same size. For instance, the moon could be farther away and a bit denser and achieve the same gravitational and tidal effects on Earth with a smaller apparent disc size.
There are, however, aesthetic reasons for the discs to be the same size. As currently constituted, solar eclipses look strikingly cool. Furthermore, the current arrangement of Earth, Sun, and Moon is also balanced and symmetrical. We have two lights of the same apparent size, one for the day and one for the night…
It seems that the audience in a theatrical system plays a role analogous to the role of observers in a physical system. Hmmm….
I’ve had a lifelong fascination with dreams. I can remember some very vivid BIG dreams from very early in my childhood – two in particular from a time when my family lived in a house in Ohio from which we moved when I was 4 years old. My early intrepid experiments in expanding consciousness, my interest in and identification with Native American cultures, my love at first sight when I was finally exposed to Carl Jung (Man and His Symbols was my first contact), my full speed ahead obsession with lucid dreaming at a time when science, before Stephen LaBerge at Stanford, still insisted we lucid dreamers were self-delusional or just plain nuts, my later embrace of Joseph Campbell’s work identifying Myth as Public Dream (and Dream as Private Myth) – all this has been an ongoing central theme throughout my life.