While e-book shopping the other morning I couldn’t help but notice this image. Why in the world does Bezos & Co. think it necessary to provide a size-comparison of a friggin book as part of their tech-enormity galore? Then again, considering that this corpo-giant is what it is because, well, at this state (iteration) of capitalism run-amok, the day of the scavengers has arrived. So. I guess. Sizing up books seems as good a tech-idear as any.
Rant on.
-T
Actually I’m not done with it yet. In fact, after about half-way through it, I put it down last week and have been reluctant to return to it. Reason? I know most of the history already. What I was hoping for, though, was that Tom Holland would consolidate a bit. You know, cliff-note the history but then go crazy with some interesting narrative. For it is, dear worst-reader, a narrative non fiction book. Boy, were my hopes misgiven. That worst-said, Holland is not a bad writer, but he does write a lot–where perhaps a little less would be just as good. Does he have to fill pages? Is there a publisher out there wanting to print more? It doesn’t matter. History is history. With that in mind, I enjoyed reading Caesar’s Civil War more. And so…
Currently reading the book Rubicon. It’s a celebrated narrative non-fiction of the rise and fall of the Roman Republic and the Roman Empire. That’s right, dear worst-reader. They were two different things. But, as previously mentioned, I’m not as tickled with the book as I had hoped to be. Holland’s writing does not pull me in. Does it push me away? I’ll hold off on that question for now. Of course, this book did make my reading list a few years back after reading about it. And now I’m battling through it. So let me just worst-write a few thoughts based on what I’ve read so far–in case it joins my list of I give up books.
Even though the author is British, I get the sense that through his “narration” he is chronicling the fall of today’s Western empire–with my beloved & missed #Americant in mind. Considering that one of the reasons I chose this book from my to-read list now is the fact that #Trumpism and his lust for authoritarianism is running amok, I’ve always wanted to know why it is that so many many many people can fall for something as stupid as, well, believing and then electing… a President Stupid. I mean, I get it that there is a faux-newz channel in the united mistakes of #Americant. I also get it that Rush Limbaugh has played a major role in corrupting already vulnerable half-baked minds. In fact, the whole right-wing narrative that has corrupted practically everything in #Americant, has never been more obvious. Yet, even after Ronald Reagan, after what one side of politics in the US has done (I am NOT a both-siderist!), I’ve always believed that more than a few people by now should wake up to reality and do the simple task of not voting for the shit side all the time. As usual, I am wrong and I am probably off subject.
The only thing that stands out after reading half of Rubicon is the relationship between the ruling elites and the willing slaves that supported those elites through both the Republic and the Empire of Ancient Rome. But then again, if you’ll allow this tangent, I am obsessed with hating not just President Stupid (the perfect imbecilic example of a 20th century wannabe emperor) but the minions (modern slaves?) that put him there–just like those idiots of Rome that ransacked the world in the name of greed, lust, hoarding, spite and bigotry, etc. Yeah, history sounds familiar, don’t it?
I guess there’s no point in reading a book that tells me neither anything new or anything original about ancient Rome. But for those who know nothing of it, this book might be a great place to start. Who knows, I might finish it eventually out of sheer boredom and that unwillingness to put Caesar’s dagger through my left temple.
Rant on.
T
Subtitle: Enamoured after reading Schiller’s Die Jungfrau von Orleans… In German!
Note about book cover above. This is my first read of a Reclam e-book. I bought this on iBooks (2,49€) and am very pleased with how the publisher has taken the time to produce it, align it, make a joy to read on a screen. I have to admit, dear worst-reader, there’s probably no turning back for me. Although I’ll enjoy my physical book collection for the rest of my life, by slowly and surely re-reading from it, here, it doesn’t look like I’m gonna miss buying real books anytime soon.
Onward worst-ho.
It’s been a long time, dear worst-reader. Probably waaaay too long. So I finally broke down the other day after reading this quote from The Hitch (Christopher Hitchens) and jumped on the good foot and bought me the Reclam e-book version of (one of) Schiller’s Meisterwerks. The English title of this book is: The Maid of Orleans. Although I recall dabbling in it (for quotes) years ago in its original German, I was never able to get through much of Schiller’s writing. What a shame, eh? So let me just put this out there, dear worst-reader.
Now that I’ve finally read it in its original German, I’m totally enamoured with this play. In fact, the other night it almost had me in tears. But it wasn’t what I was reading that caused the tears. It was the fact that I was reading Schiller’s German. Yeah, baby. I was getting it. I was understanding it. I was, in fact, enjoying it so much, emotion began to over-take me. Every sentence, every stage direction, every scene and every act put me in fifteenth century France–while reading poetic German. Yeah, baby. This story became a piece of work that I didn’t want to finish. That is, I didn’t want it to end. And so. I skipped the last sentence of the final scene. That’s how I do it, don’t you know. That’s how I stay in a piece work that I never want to end. Also, since I’m getting the hang of reading these ebooks, especially on my ageing iPad Air, I’m really loving how I can so easily access my notes or highlighted text. Wait. Did I mention how flabbergasted I am with this play?
Joan of Arc according to worst-writer.
I’ve always been fascinated with story of Joan of Arc. Reason? Of all the things the Universal (Catholic) Church can do, it’s really, really good at twisting ancient stories, sewing mystery into historic events, and just flat out making $hit up in order to propagate an agenda. The story of Joan of Arc, which I believe to have been a real person, was one of its best über-lies. The only problem is, if the Church is so good at lying or making $hit up, what should one believe if one is interested in the truth? The wiki link above does provide a great deal of info regarding the story of Joan of Arc, including links to revisionist theories. But for worst-moi, something is missing.
Here a short list of what I consider acceptable worst-writer story-lines that could contain the truth about Joan of Arc:
The thing that really threw me for a loop in Schiller’s Virgin of Orleans (literal translation of the German title), is its feminism. Not well read in literature of the era, I’m curious if there is any other work from that era where females play such a prominent role–especially when it’s all about war. And not just any war but a war that French men couldn’t win. Indeed. Bring on the Feminines, baby.
The three feminists in the story are Joan, Isabeau (mother of the king) and Sorel (the kings wife). These chicks do some serious conniving. And that’s kinda cool. Also. Unlike the canonised version of the story, where Joan is arrested and tried for witchcraft, cross-dressing, and/or back-talking stupid, ugly white men–all perfect accusations by church authoritarian patriarchal mongers–Schiller instead focuses on her abilities as a warrior and a leader of men. He also makes it pretty clear how men either follow her or fear her. She is also a stedfast believer in God that in no way contradicts the dogma of the time. This leads to her fighting off charges of heresy (by cross-dressing?) but then she dies in battle thereby freeing France from the Engelländer. (Ain’t that a cool way to write it? Schiller, you da man!)
But here’s the real question that Schiller has got me asking: why would he write/create this version of an already established, canonised story at the beginning of the nineteenth century? Would it not have been more dramatic to have Joan burned at the stake? Would it not have been more titillating to portray her as a cross-dresser? Yet in Schiller’s life-time, this was his most popular play. Did his audience like this version better than the Church’s version?
Yeah. The greatest creator/perpetrator of reality distortion fields has to be religion. So much truth is out there and so much of it distorted. Why is that? Nomatter. Schiller definitely helped me sift through it (distortion) a bit more.
-Rant on
T
Subtitle: Thoughts on re-read of Milan Kundera’s The Joke (the 1982 English translation)
“Optimism is the opium of the people! A healthy atmosphere stinks of stupidity! Long live Trotsky!” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
According to Ludvik the quote above is from a postcard he sent to woman of interest as a joke. I suppose when written to a person while in the midst of love-lust confusion and during the striving days of the Soviet Unions’ new-beginnings in early 1960s Czechoslovakia, Milan Kundera considers the twisting of Marx’s Religion is the opium of the people more than just a joke. But what can one do if/when the thing you are really joking about is a system that depends on the control of not just words written but also of words thought?
As I ride it gayly and march ambiguously into the twilight of western democracy’s funny-train (the #Trump-era), I’m often wondering if I’ll see the day when the same type of total control (totalitarianism) that Kundera deals with, I’ll also have to deal with. Considering how things have turned out since 1991 and the fall of the Soviet Union, I also wonder if the whole socialist experiment was just one big joke played on humanity by some dirtbag she-goddess with a grudge–that stems back tens of thousands of years because of how males grabbed females by the HAIR and dragged them into caves. You know, as in, grab ’em by the… But I digress.
“You used to say that socialism sprouted from the soil of European rationalism and skepticism, a soil both nonreligious and anti-religious, and that it is otherwise inconceivable. But can you seriously maintain that it is impossible to build a socialist society without faith in the supremacy of matter? Do you really think that people who believe in God are incapable of nationalising factories?” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
Then again, of the political and economic systems alive & kicking in the world today, there really is only one that has past the test of (recent) time. If you’re thinking Capitalism is that system, dear worst-reader, you’d better think again. Socialism is kicking butt right now. From both sides of China’s Great Wall to Vladimir Putin’s total ownership of Red Square to the various interpretations of Socialism in the vastness of #Eurowasteland’s epic confusion, Socialism is way ahead of #Americant… Sorry. Way ahead of Capitalism.
“‘As Communists we are responsible for everything that is going on here.’ I nearly laughed in his face. Responsibility was unthinkable without freedom, I told him. He said he felt free enough to act like a Communist and that he had to prove, would prove himself a Communist. His jaw trembled as he spoke. Today, years later, I can still remember it clearly, but now I realise that Alexej was not much more than twenty at the time, a child, an adolescent, and his destiny hung on him like the clothes of a giant on a little boy.” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
In worst-short, Capitalism in its current iteration is nothing but a reimagining of Feudalism. Feudalism was a system of lords and serfs, including inbred monarchs. What lead to Feudalism was Slavery. Slavery had the longest run of the three. Slavery goes back to Egypt, don’t you know. It was also used in Ancient Greece, Rome and, of course, it was used to build my beloved & missed #Americant. But then $hit started to hit the fan as that whole Enlightenment thing took hold after the 16th century. Btw, I will always admire the French for one-upping the US when it comes to social and political revolutions derived out of human oppression. Indeed. The French nailed it. (Well, they nailed it in the revolution but fcuked it up in the counter-revolution.)
“Rationalist skepticism has been eating away at Christianity for two millennia now. Eating away at it without destroying it. But Communist theory, its own creation, it will destroy within a few decades.” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
The thing to keep in mind when worst-writer says that Socialism is currently outlasting, winning, kicking the a$$ of capitalism, is the state of things in the strongest Capitalist strongholds, the US and the UK. Is it any concern to anyone how small these remaining Capitalist nation-states are? Or should one consider how large China is? So even if my claim here is kinda out of whack, the fact remains, China is on the verge of over taking #Americant as the largest economy in the world–and it is far from being a Capitalist nation. Will we someday soon consider Capitalist nations and their extreme isolation a joke? Think about that worst-thought.
“Nobody liked people who relied on pull.” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
It’s all a joke. Seriously. The state of things in the Capitalist West is a fcuking joke and it can only be comparable to the fcuking joke of the former Soviet Union (and its failure) and to the success of China along with a few places in #Eurowasteland. (I’ve always said that Germany is the last Communist State in the West.) And the thing about a joke is sometimes you’re in on it and other times it’s in on you. I mean, come on. Crooked, lock-her-up #Hillary won something like four million more votes than #Trump and she wouldn’t have done much to counter the chilling effects of the post FDR years where Capitalism has pretty much run amok. Is that not a joke? The Capitalist democracy joke? Is the manipulation of #Americant’s electoral college combined with bailing out banks that act like loan sharks the joke teller? Jokes galore, dear worst-reader. An audience of joke lovers.
Milan Kundera’s idear of the perfect joke: Helena, one of Ludvik’s lovers, attempts suicide by stealing pills from a young man. It turns out the pills are laxatives hidden in a prescription jar of pain killers. While in a panic and trying to save her, she is found hysterical sitting on toilet.
The Joke was Kundera’s first book. Although I started reading it years ago, I never got around to finishing it. Having read three others (Laughable Loves, The Unbearable Lightness of Being, Immortality), I knew that I would eventually get around to this one again as it waited patiently for me in my Kundera collection. After picking it up the other day and having a first sitting with it, I realised that I had actually read more than I initially remembered. All the markings, underlines, etc., that I had made so many years ago woke my memory of having read through it one night while gloriously penetrating a bimbo I met in Amsterdam. Yeah, Dankyavel was her name. I would fcuk her for a bit and while in my refractory period I’d read from this book. We’d then fcuk some more and with each subsequent fcuk I’d need a longer refractory period where I could read more. Hence I feel safe considering this a re-read. Btw, the only thing I miss from youth is cumming in or on or around a woman smarter than me ten times a day.
“Pray tell, dear friend, Why doth this honest groom desire to take this honest maid to wife? Is’t for the flower or the fruit?” -from The Joke by Milan Kundera
Most of The Joke is a joy to read. But I can understand why some might consider Kundera’s narrative style a bit cumbersome. (At least that’s what my wife says.) To me, Kundera is an author that has unlimited creative prowess, he maintains a thread that permeates all his work (which I really dig), and his word sculpting never ceases to amaze. But the thing that always brings me back to Kundera–let’s say as a reference source, especially in times of trouble where Mother Mary doesn’t come to me–is the fact that I have always been touched by his exasperations regarding Stalinism. Along with Vaclav Havel, Kundera introduced me to a new reality of political thought. The fact that Kundera is able to combine (his) musings about love, passion and desire from the POV of political oppression, makes his work even more interesting. (Btw, that’s the thread that permeates.)
When I first started reading Kundera, back in the early 90s, capitalist and/or economic oppression hadn’t shown its #Trump face yet. In other words, Reaganomics hadn’t made the full turn to ugly (Deplorables) yet. The Soviet Union was in free-fall but the former oppressed were suddenly free to buy jeans, Marlboro reds, travel, etc. Yet the whole time I couldn’t help but feel that the oppression of the Soviet Union wasn’t isolated nor was it bound by politics. Oppression is oppression, eh. As we all now know, the only thing the peoples of the Soviet Union really wanted was jeans, Marlboro reds and…. blah, blah, blah. What was once authoritarian oppression has now become economic oppression–the difference between the two being jeans, Marlboro reds, blah, blah, blah.
My first read of Kundera was The Unbearable Lightness of Being and it was like being struck by lightening. From the get-go, Tomas became my secret hero. His heroism, btw, has nothing to do with his fight against the Soviet-Man. No. Tomas was about love and the conquest of love and then eventually losing yourself in love. Tomas, to me, was the kind of lover I sincerely wanted to be. Was I ever able to find my Tereza or my Sabina? Of course not–although I did enjoy trying (to find her.) But until the power, the anger and the need to fcuk finally subsided (resulting in the true cute ugliness of feminine payback aka marriage), all I ever wanted was to fcuk like Tomas. The real beauty of Kundera’s The Joke is that Ludvik is Tomas’ predecessor, if not Tomas’ character in spirit. It’s almost like reading Tomas in a beta version.
“Yes, suddenly I saw it all clearly: most people willingly deceive themselves with a doubly false faith; they believe in eternal memory (of men, things, deeds, peoples) and in rectification (of deeds, errors, sins, injustice). Both are sham. The truth lies at the opposite end of the scale: everything will be forgotten and nothing will be rectified. All rectification (both vengeance and forgiveness) will be taken over by oblivion. No one will rectify wrongs; all wrongs will be forgotten.” -from The Joke, Milan Kundera
Kundera’s The Joke is really one big joke. It’s brilliant!
-Rant on
T
Links that motivated this post:
– Opium of the people | Wiki
Yeah, having an Eco morning.
-Rant on
T
Update: Pseudo Review – 2 is here.
Afeared yet, dear worst-reader? Well, if you ain’t afeared yet, it might be time to get your bloomers in an uproar. Or is it get your bloomers in a gander? Wait. How ’bout gettin’ things up in a pickle? Nomatter. I’ve been reading the book Democracy in Chains by the historian Nancy MacLean. In fact, I’m not even done reading it while I worst-write this pseudo-review. And let me tell you, dear worst-reader, two things have gotten to me since starting this book–that I’m about half-way through so far.
The first thing, as just mentioned, is that this book once again reminds me of why people–normal people, people that aren’t born rich and of privilege, people who have earned their “keep” and/or still owe but can pay their bills–including but not limited to people that vote for #Trumpism because they are incapable of dealing with the reality they’ve ALL gotten themselves into by falling for republicanism from the past thirty (sixty?) years…. All these people should be scared (afeared) out of their fcuking bat$hit minds.
Second, and I don’t mean to be overly spiteful, presumptuous, and giggly here, but even though Nancy MacLean probably nails it in this calling-out book about the fcuked-up right-wing of my beloved & missed #Americant, I am snickering my a$$ off at the fact that I knew all of this already–just not as empirically and academically as MacLean details it in her book. Indeed. Ever since I was a young man and tried to make it among the mindless greed herders so long ago, what MacLean writes about is definitely part of my #Americant, worst-writer, failed-artist be-speckled being. With that in mind, let me put this out there:
I am a proud Unützer Esser. Come on, dear worst-reader. Give those old Germanic words a go. Unützer Esser. Unützer Esser. Unützer Esser. Unützer Esser. Say it a few more times. Enjoy the mouth watering acrobatics of the umlaut. Let the double Germanic ‘S’ role over lip and gum and provide that gracious tickle that only comes from subjective oral pleasure you conjured out of any of the many sexual conquests that made HER mouth more appealing.
But enough about worst-moi.
In translation, of course, Unützer Esser means: Useless Eater. Sound familiar to you if you’re one of the minions mentioned above who can’t see through the demise of your own making? I mean, come on. These are two easy words that are pretty easy to grasp, even in the original German. Right? You know. Call up your prejudice. Yeah. There it is. You got it. For you and the conservative-bent that has ruled your life, a Useless Eater is a burden to you because you think and believe that such a person gets by in life and you’re the one that pays for it because you have to pay things like… wait for it: income tax. Of course, does it matter that I use the original German for this term–and not the one most greed mongers, especially those from the infamous #Americant middle-class, use? You know, using the original is cool on account Germans, at a certain point in their near past–which a lot of #Americant white people are obsessed with–kinda invented it? But do you really know what a Unützer Esser is?
For the Germans, Usless Eater wasn’t a term used to describe fully functional people who made choices in life that lead to suckling on the government teat. You know, the marginalised, the drop-outs, those not quite good enough in the realm of corporate behaviourism, etc. I mean, come on. Have you worked in a cubicle lately? Oh, really. You still do? Or are you collecting rent from smart-ass real-estate investments enabled by urban gentrification and artificially low/fake interest rates? Oh wait. Or are you one of them stock-market cocksuckers that actually believes the numbers you see are real–and not fiction/fake that can only be derived from the willing and able über-gullible? If so, good for you. But before we get too off the beaten worst-path.
A Useless Eater, for the Germans, was someone that was physically incapable of being productive and therefore was a cost, a burden to… wait for it: National Socialism. It was a term used to describe the physically and mentally dysfunctional (disabled)–not people that simply didn’t agree with the bullshit of greed-mongers or the ignorant-moronic middle-classes or those who never wanted to be part of a rentier-system that mis-associates a livelihood with actual, real achievement, i.e. a meritless society. Indeed. The Nazis had a different fate for those folk. Usless Eater, for the Nazis, was a term in conjunction with the systematic use of gas chambers, concentration camps, Final Solutions, etc. And as we can see, it’s quite a versatile term, don’t you know.
So here’s a question for you: Would the Germans have eventually used the term Unützer Esser–you know, after they gassed everybody–for the mass of people that would eventually be forced into similar, costly societal dysfunction because capitalism would once again (post 1929) turn into a $hitshow of greed?
Wow. Talk about a mute question, eh!
And now for a little on this book that I’ve only read half of so far.
The thing that motivated me to read Democracy In Chains was Bill Maher’s interview with the author on last week’s show (which I listen to via audio podcast; see link below). In the interview MacLean mentioned how the current #SCOTUS pick from President Stupid was very, very dangerous. In fact, the whole #SCOTUS thing has preoccupied me since right-wingers stole Barry-O’s pick after the death of Antonin Scalia in early 2016. Keep in mind, I’m not worried about this pick because of the reasons many liberals espouse, i.e. he’s a religious $hitbag–which is bad enough. Instead, MacLean mentioned that his judicial record indicates he is a follower of an even more extreme political and economic ideology than the one that’s gotten #Americant into the mess it’s now in. MacLean mentioned in the interview that Brett Kavanaugh is a right-winger that wants to change the US Constitution so that it will better favour property and liberty–for the rich. To do that, according to MacLean, this guy wants to change the 17th Amendment back to what it was originally, i.e. state legislators pick National Senators. He also wants to change the 25th Amendment, which deals with how to get rid of a corrupt President. And now you know why President Stupid picked him. And of course, let’s not forget he will most certainly over-turn Roe v. Wade thereby resetting political and social gains of women in the past… Gee, I don’t know: hundred or so fcuking years!
Wow.
The second thing to motivate me to read this book was the mention of Charles Koch and, someone I had never heard of: James M. Buchanan. Half way through the book I can easily tell you that you should be scared out of your wits–especially if you’re one of them both-siderists that enabled President Stupid. Or you’re a libertarian that will spend your life dreaming the dream of dreams thinking you’ll be safe when it all crashes–you know, with your Ayan Rand gold collection. Or, and here’s the doozy, you should be biggly, huuuuuugely afeard if you voted for Trump and you actually work/worked for a living. Yeah. What’s going on in the halls and cess-whirl-pools of the United Mistakes of #Americant right now should make you run for the fcuking hills! But then again, don’t you’all deserve this?
Golly-gee! The dystopia-ists who chronicled all this a century ago–because they already lived through it–Orwell, Huxley, etc.–are probably laughing their a$$es off just like me right now.
“But why are you laughing, worst-writer? You’re a f’n failure through and through!”
I’m laughing because, well, it’s hi-larry-us that I jumped ship because I knew as far back as the mid to late 1980s how that ship was sinking, the train-wreck was underway, and since then, in all my travels, I’ve never had the pleasure of meeting one American that actually made it beyond being a pawn in this the grand shit$how of greed.
Anywho.
I’ll be posting a follow-up pseudo-review of this book once I finish it.
Good night and good luck, suckers.
-Rant on
T
Links:
– NPR review 1 – https://www.npr.org/2017/06/18/531929217/democracy-in-chains-traces-the-rise-of-american-libertarianism
– NPR review 2 – https://www.npr.org/sections/ombudsman/2017/08/14/542634650/readers-rankled-by-democracy-in-chains-review
– NYT review – https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/15/books/review/democracy-in-chains-nancy-maclean.html
– Glossary of Nazi Germany ‘U’ – https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_Nazi_Germany#U
– Ep. #467: Malcolm Nance, Nancy MacLean – Released Aug 04, 2018 Bill’s guests are Malcolm Nance, Nancy MacLean, Kristen Soltis Anderson, Charles Blow, and Steve Schmidt (Originally aired 08/03/18) | This show is available as audio podcast on iTunes | https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/ep-467-malcolm-nance-nancy-maclean/id98746009?i=1000417184062&mt=2
There are two things I always think about when I think about the tale of Beowulf. The first is the connection the story has to religion, specifically monotheistic religion. At the time the story was written polytheism was still relatively common in Northern Europe. Even though it is a very minor part of the original text, I believe the slight mention of Christianity is a significant one because the story stems out of a time period where northern Europeans were determining their fate and considering carefully what was going on to their geographical south. Indeed. Odin and Thor and Loki were obviously not enough as the roar of the Roman + Christian empire(s) just below them glowed large and all-powerful.
In the original Beowulf text the Christian religion is mentioned during a debate with the King of the Danes that maybe they should hire the Romans–as in the Christ believers–instead of Beowulf to help them fight Grendel. It is because of that question I’ve always believed that Grendel is not an individual but instead a group or a tribe. Btw, the same applies to Beowulf. In other words, although the story can be about an individual or a few individuals and the heroism that entails–as it’s been interpreted through out the centuries–I believe that the story is actually about tribes that were in a perpetual state of war not only about power and possessions but also beliefs, dogma and Gods. So what were they fighting over?
The second thing I think about is the role of matriarchy in society (tribes) and how rule by the feminine has pretty much been annihilated–even to this day. That is, Grendel and Grendel’s mother represented a tribe(s) where matriarchy ruled. Such rule was unacceptable to the King of the Danes and Beowulf–i.e. two macho-tribes that teamed up. Hence, the Roman Christ God, its patriarchy, its dogma, its weapons and techniques of war, was an acceptable alternative for the macho-pigs in their quest to take over (everything). At the least, this other form of religion put the women-folk in their place. Ultimately, the macho-pigs, embodied in the macho Beowulf, fulfilled this fledgling dogmatic image and, at least in the short term, saved the King of the Danes by defeating–annihilating–not only rival tribes but the rivalry of matriarchy itself. This, in-turn, was the final straw that lead to the Christianisation of Northern Europe that The Universal Church (that would eventually become The Catholic Church) up to that point had been unable to tame. So was Beowulf the north’s first sacrificed saviour? But on that note, I digress.
So much for worst-writer’s interpretation of the Poem of Everything. Instead, dear worst-reader, let’s focus on someone else’s interpretation of Beowulf. Someone who I think has nailed it. I just finished The Mere Wife by Maria Dahvana Headley. Talk about interpretation, baby! And not only can this chick fcuking write–she has created a glorious text to read–and she’s even come up with a pretty good interpretation of Beowulf. But only pretty good!
Set in the modern suburban-hell of my beloved & missed & war-torn #Americant, Headley has kinda done a reverse and inverse of Beowulf. Her interpretation is not hero centric but instead heroine centric. By turning the story inside-out and telling it through the point of view of the feminine, who must cope with the fcuked-up world created and facilitated by male driven war, if not penis-driven suburbia, she has masterfully concocted a story of the trials, pains and tribulations of a once great nation run amok–and what that’s done to the chicks. Even though I don’t actually like her feminising my favourite man-cave text–and I’m especially not sure if I would like it if I wasn’t already familiar with the original–she writes with such lyrical precision and word-beauty that I’m ready to give one of her other books a go. Yeah, baby. Queen of Kings is next?
The Mere Wife deserves every bit of praise it gets. In fact, I’m gonna have to search the #interwebnets for whether or not anyone doesn’t like what Headley has done with Beowulf. And if/when I find someone who doesn’t like it, I’m gonna hunt them down and stick a big fcuking knife in their neck and drink their blood till the roar of Beowulf booms out of me. Argh!
-Rant (and read) on.
T
