The Satyr And My Muse

November 26, 2014 Joe AuBuchon

The Satyr And My Muse

An aged satyr sought
Around my Muse to pass,
Attempting to pay court,
And eyed her fondly through his glass.

By Phoebus’ golden torch,
By Luna’s pallid light,
Around her temple’s porch
Crept the unhappy sharp-eared wight;

And warbled many a lay,
Her beauty’s praise to sing,
And fiercely scraped away
On his discordant fiddle-string.

With tears, too, swelled his eyes,
As large as nuts, or larger;
He gasped forth heavy sighs,
Like music from Silenus’ charger.

The Muse sat still, and played
Within her grotto fair,
And peevishly surveyed
Signor Adonis Goatsfoot there.

“Who ever would kiss thee,
Thou ugly, dirty dunce?
Wouldst thou a gallant be,
As Midas was Apollo once?

“Speak out, old horned boor
What charms canst thou display?
Thou’rt swarthy as a Moor,
And shaggy as a beast of prey.

“I’m by a bard adored
In far Teutonia’s land;
To him, who strikes the chord,
I’m linked in firm and loving band.”

She spoke, and straightway fled
The spoiler, he pursued her,
And, by his passion led,
Soon caught her, shouted, and thus wooed her:

“Thou prudish one, stay, stay!
And hearken unto me!
Thy poet, I dare say,
Repents the pledge he gave thee.

“Behold this pretty thing,
No merit would I claim,
Its weight I often fling
On many a clown’s back, to his shame.

“His sharpness it increases,
And spices his discourse,
Instilling learned theses,
When mounted on his hobby-horse

“The best of songs are known,
Thanks to this heavy whip
Yet fool’s blood ’tis alone
We see beneath its lashes drip.

“This lash, then, shall be his,
If thou’lt give me a smack;
Then thou mayest hasten, miss,
Upon thy German sweetheart’s track.”

The Muse, with purpose sly,
Ere long agreed to yield
The satyr said good-by,
And now the lash I wield!

And I won’t drop it here,
Believe in what I say!
The kisses of one’s dear
One does not lightly throw away.

They kindle raptures sweet,
But fools ne’er know their flame!
The gentle Muse will kneel at honor’s feet,
But cudgels those who mar her fame.

The Sea Faery

November 25, 2014November 25, 2014 Joe AuBuchon

The Sea Faery

By Madison Julius Cawein
1865 – 1914

She was strange as the orchids that blossom
And glimmer and shower their balm
And bloom on the tropical ocean,
That crystals round islands of palm:
And she sang to and beckoned and bound me
With beauty immortal and calm.

She was wild as the spirits that banner,
Auroral, the ends of the Earth,
With polar processions, that battle
With Darkness; or, breathing, give birth
To Silence; and herd from the mountains
The icebergs, gigantic of girth.

She was silver as sylphids who blend with
The morning the pearl of their cheeks:
And rosy as spirits whose tresses
Trail golden the sunset with streaks:
An opaline presence that beckoned
And spake as the sea-rapture speaks:

“Come with me! come down in the ocean!
Yea, leave this dark region with me!
Come! leave it! forget it in thunder
And roll of the infinite sea!
Come with me! No mortal bliss equals
The bliss I shall give unto thee.” . . .

And so it was then that she bound me
With witchcraft no mortal divines,
While softly with kisses she drew me,
As the moon draws a dream from the pines,
Down, down to her cavern of coral,
Where ever the sea-serpent twines.

And ever the creatures, whose shadows
Bulk huge as an isle on the sight,
Swim cloud-like and vast, without number,
Around her who leans, like a light,
And smiles at me sleeping, pale-sleeping,
Wrapped deep in her mermaiden might.

Storytelling – J.R.R. Tolkien and Peter Jackson

September 28, 2014 Joe AuBuchon

Storytelling

Goodreads has a discussion strand with some 400+ comments addressing the following question: What do you think about Peter Jackson adding a new character in The Desolation of Smaug movie?

Peter Jackson is just continuing a storyteller’s tradition.

Oral storytelling predates the telling of stories by writing them in books and filming them in movies by millennia.

The Iliad, The Odyssey, Beowulf and The Epic of Gilgamesh all began their lives orally. And none of them sprang into being whole cloth, that is, complete in their modern form.

One can easily envision someone (Homer?) telling about a love affair. The lovers are given names, Paris and Helen. The following evening he tells of her husband’s revenge. On another evening, in front of another family’s fire, the author makes the characters royalty, one from a kingdom across the sea. And on still another, he adds a story he heard from someone else, a jealous competition among goddesses. Over a period of years, and maybe generations, you eventually get the version we read today.

The thing about oral storytelling is that the storyteller alters his/her story depending on the reaction of the audience. You embellish the parts the audience likes and dispense with, or alter, the parts they don’t like.

Neither writers nor filmmakers go from start to finished product without editing their work. J. R. R. Tolkien didn’t do so and neither did Jackson.

I would imagine that Tolkien added in and edited out a number of characters while writing his saga of Middle Earth. (Aside from creating it in the first place.) Peter Jackson is continuing the tradition—telling a story according to his personal vision to reach those he considers his audience using his chosen medium as he sees fit.

Should the tales of Middle Earth be re-made into movies again in another generation or two, the director will change interpretations of characters according to his, or her, personal vision. That director will also add or subtract characters and change emphasis according to the audience.

And, when Frodo returns to the Shire after his adventures, will it be the Shire of Jackson or Tolkien?

We may or may not like what he did, or how he did it, but by “voicing” our opinions we are continuing the age-old practice of criticism.

If you don’t like Peter Jackson’s interpretation of Tolkien, aren’t you still happy he made the film rather than not? Would we be better off having no film version of Middle Earth, other than the animated tales? Or, think about it this way, if not Jackson then who? Woody Allen? Martin Scorsese? Oliver Stone? Kevin Costner? Ridley Scott? David Lynch? Quentin Tarantino? Lynne Ramsay? Ang Lee? Who?

Personally, I like the addition. A bright, good-looking, kick-ass redhead is an asset to any action movie.

History

June 6, 2013June 16, 2013 Joe AuBuchon

The Future becomes the Present;

The Present becomes the Past;

The Past becomes History;

History becomes Legend;

Legend becomes Myth.

So much of what we know about the Past has become lost in Legend and Myth. And much of it is a mixture of relics, oral histories and should have beens.

Was there a Great Flood such as that survived by Noah? Or was there a memory of a great flood among the peoples of the eastern Mediterranean area that was used by a writer of the Bible to teach a lesson?

Did the story of Atlantis have an actual historical basis, such as, the destruction of the Minoan culture owing in part to the volcanic eruption at Thera/Santorini?

Was there really a Trojan War as told by Homer? There is physical evidence for the destruction of a city at the site where Calvert and Schliemann believed Troy to be.

In The Rise of Rome Anthony Everitt divides his history into three parts: Legend, Story and History. I am finding the Story section to be quite interesting as it is a blend of fact, as we currently understand it, and fiction. How does one decide what is factual and what is not?

Physical evidence does not tell us the whys of things and the voices of those who lived two thousand years ago are long gone. Some of their writings survive, but what writer, including myself does not bring his own preconceptions, biases and desires to his writing? Ferretting out the “truth” is a fascinating adventure.

How will Future treat our heroes and villains, our stories and legends?

What will it make of George Washington and the Cherry Tree as told by Mason Weems? And, how about, tossing a coin across the Potomac? What will people believe about Washington if the Washington Monument and his head on Mount Rushmore survive into the far future but there are no writings or electronic media?

How do you write an accurate history of the 20^th century if the only evidence you have are the writings of A. Hitler, J. Goebbels and, maybe, W. Churchill?

How do you explain the United States in the second half of that century if you have no knowledge of Joe McCarthy, Lester Maddox, Rosa Parks and the Vietnam War?

What will people several thousand years from now make of the 2000 election and its “hanging chads” – I think they’ll have a great chuckle.

Future – Present – Past – History – Legend – Myth. Will the story of the human race continue until it passes the point where we become Myth and that Myth becomes Forgotten?

11.27.2012