Thursday, November 20. 2008Alone in Hostile Territories: House of Leaves and the Science Fiction of Iain Banks
To anyone who finds the time until Christmas passing with unbearable slowness and has enough free time on their hands to get some reading done, or who plans to occupy their Christmas holidays with a few good books, I offer the following suggestions.
House of Leaves, by Mark Z. Danielewski is one of those books, like One Hundred Years of Solitude or Ulysses whose reputation precedes it, and for good reasons of its remarkability, if not solely literary merit. In point of fact, it was recommended to me one evening as I sat at Cafe Coco, and although its basic description intrigued me, and I resolved to find a copy as soon as I could, I did not put my hands on it until last week, when as I walked out of Hodges Figgis with another Iain M. Banks novel in hand, I spied a copy by the door. So I bought it. The premise of the book is simple enough; it is a layered narrative at whose core is the story of Will Navidson, Pulitzer-Prize winning photographer, and his longtime partner, Karen Green, who, along with their two children, move into a new house on Ash Tree Lane, seeking to begin a new chapter in their respective lives; Navidson himself, at Karen's behest, is attempting to settle down after a long, exciting career jaunting across the globe that has, unfortunately, often kept him away from home. Unable to entirely surrender old habits, he decides to make a kind of documentary about his family, seeking to explore how one settles into a new house and adjusts to those small but all-important transitions in life; in other words, what promises to be an interesting, if not terribly exciting, explication of the nature of home. Everything goes well for a time; despite hints that their relationship has had a little trouble in the recent past, it is clear that Green and Navidson are very much in love, and their new life on Ash Tree Lane (somewhere in the vicinity of Charlottesville, Virginia) seems idyllic. But like any good horror story, one day things start to get weird. First a room appears out of nowhere; then a hallway. And as time passes, and the stranger dimensions of the house (which it is quickly obvious is larger on the inside than on the outside) are explored, the hallway expands and lengthens, and more and deeper cavernous rooms are discovered, whose plan seems to shift as one moves about inside them. Echoing this is the structure of Danielewski's narrative; it is not a simple narration of the events of the Navidson Record (as the film Navidson creates comes to be called); these events are the kernel of a far bigger and stranger book. Navidson's story comes to us filtered through the Navidson Record; the principle part of the book comprises a long discourse on the Record by the blind old Zampano, in whose papers this discourse was discovered by the other major protagonist of the novel, Johnny Truant. Truant's narrative is made up of long autobiographical digressions scattered around the footnotes of Zampano's strange critical exploration of the Navidson Record, which, as Truant notes early on, relies on quotes from famous people who deny having said such things, scholarly and popular articles and works that do not exist (by writers and publishing houses who are only usually fictional, like the fairly obvious Lacuna Press), and most of all, on a film of which Truant fails to find a single copy. The labyrinthine narrative further twists itself up, as the book progresses, into a stylistic maze, with footnotes that travel through pages, are mirrored, refer back to each other across the book, or to appendices that do not exist. All the while, the mystery of the house grows deeper, and Truant, in an effort to organize Zampano's scattered notes and papers, descends further into madness. House of Leaves is not a true haunted house, or even horror story, and I don't think it's (as one reviewer described) "a love story by a semiotician" either. Whether it even constitutes a novel might be debated by the more pedantic reader, but it is a fascinating and often gripping book. It's not for the faint of heart; the voice of Zampano often falls into long digressions on not immediately relevant topics: labyrinths, echoes, architecture, Heidigger's interpretation of the word 'unheimlich'; and much of the book reads like what it is--a synthesis of (fictional) critical writing on a weird film (that does not exist). If you don't want a couple of pages of fictional critics discussing minor plot details for every page of real advancement, you might have difficulty getting through Danielewski's book. Certainly, despite the obvious advantages of this style that repeatedly, artificially divides the subject of the story from the reader (for one, giving the reader an impression of a series of events that actually took place but were strangely and unnaturally excised from recent history--the book is set in the early '90s, and according to Zampano, the Navidson Record itself was "hugely popular"; articles are cited from The New York Times, the US News and World Report, and The New Yorker, to name a few), the book sometimes drags; yet this sort of academic banality is counterpointed by moments of sheer, well, unheimlich fascination. An exegesis doing justice to House of Leaves would occupy far more space and patience than I have here, but Danielewski's work, though its success at what it sets out to do is negotiably incomplete, excels in other respects. It is a critically self-conscious work, aware of not only its own intertexuality and false versimilitude, but commenting upon it (and the nature of the critical endeavor itself, in its particularly pedantic and not very useful modern form), as well as exploring the limits (but not seeking to destroy) of narrative construction, even as it weaves its labyrinthine passages and all their attendant minotaurs through the minds and houses of its characters. It's worth noting that in its original form, House of Leaves circulated online, which no doubt contributed to its exploration of form and its stylistic eccentricities. Nevertheless, in the same spirit one might tackle Joyce, Borges, or a dark and dusty passage, it is well worth your time, if you feel so inclined, to pick up a copy. Pencil for notes and nearby access to Google optional. (A note on the book; there are a couple of editions of House of Leaves available. I recommend the full-color Pantheon edition: the first edition lacks Chapter 21 and one of the appendices; in this one, the word "house" always appears in blue [wherever in the book it is, even on the cover], and "minotaur" and struck passages in red; it also has the check mark on page 97 missing from UK editions [although oddly enough I got my very much American edition at a bookstore in Ireland? so maybe Pantheon ships to certain Northeast-Atlantic Archipelago bookstores) Far less perplexing and way more fun is the science fiction of Iain M. Banks. I speak mainly of his Culture novels (the ones I've read, in other words), which all take place against the backdrop of a vast, Galaxy-spanning trans-human[ish] post-scarcity anarchist semi-Utopia--but, since that would make for terribly dull stories, usually take place at the fringes of that eponymous Culture. Banks is what science fiction readers have been waiting for for years, probably since it was clear there would never be another Dune. He writes scintillating, fast-paced prose--aside from his other fine points, he's the single best writer of rapid action I've come across--and with a deft humor that makes his stories deeply inviting (no-one will ever be able to name spaceships the same way again). Best of all, Banks is completely fluent in the modes of space opera and pedal-to-the-warp-engine sci-fi without his stories devolving into inanity, and while treating hard science with the same scorn as most good SF writers, does it neither excruciatingly (coughstartrekcough) or pedantically (cf. Larry Niven). In other words, his science is bullshit, but it's really good bullshit. Nor is he afraid to to be as adventurous in his stories about tentacled aliens as he is in his more mundane and literary pursuits (yes, this is the same Iain Banks as The Wasp Factory and The Steep Approach to Garbadale. For extra fun, imagine all his ships and characters talking with Scottish accents). His stories and aliens can be ethically challenging, morally ambiguous, and delightfully vivid. I cannot think of another SF writer whose corpus I have enjoyed both as much and as consistently. On the novels themselves: The best introduction to the Culture novels is probably Player of Games; it's not the first, but the books don't by any means relate very much to one another, aside from their setting, and it's a good example of Banks' style without being too difficult for the unfamiliar. Consider Phlebas is one of the best of the lot--rollicking good shootouts and such, but be forewarned, Banks isn't too concerned with getting all his characters to the end of the book in one piece. Also has one of the best protagonists of the lot, second probably only to Cheradine Zakalwe in Use of Weapons. Look to Windward is a follow up, in only the most tangential way, to Consider Phlebas; it's less space opera, and more character drama, but still excellent. Matter is the latest Culture novel, and is as good as any of the others--ridiculously exciting and fast-paced I might add--but by the end, bloodier than Hamlet in sheer number of dead people you were rooting for. Use of Weapons is, in terms of craft, structural daring, and plot, probably the best of them all, but it has a mind-bending plot (and be warned, half the chapters are going backward in time, not forward). Also the ending left me staring at it, inert on my desk, for a good five minutes. It was slightly unexpected. Excession isn't really worth it--if you finish the others and are really jonesin' for some more, you might get it from your library, but don't bother buying it. Uncharacteristically for Banks, its structure is a bit sloppy, its characters uninteresting or actively unappealing (the only one I actually liked served no purpose to the story, except to annoy a few of the other ones), and the plot is frankly dull--well, as far as it goes, this guy basically has a dead-on appraisal of it. So to those who like science fiction--get thee to a bookstore! And to those who don't--well, to paraphrase Danielewski, you have TV dinners where your heart should be. Wednesday, November 19. 2008Found my firstborn's name.....Tuesday, November 18. 2008I AMMonday, November 17. 2008Boxer or...
...Alligator? I've changed my mind recently and I want to hear about PUBLIC OPINION.
Thursday, November 13. 2008RANDOM CHINESE FACT NO ONE CARES ABOUT NUMBER SIX
Part of what makes me a good Chinese student is that I adore studying vocabulary. Each new character is like a little picture blah blah art history blah blah etymology blah blah blah blah blah...
Anyway, the character for "to annihilate" fills me with unspeakable dread. Check it out: 殲 We'll all go to Alaska when we die.
Amanda Palmer played the Mercy Lounge last night and she put on a spectacular show both musically and theatrically.
She toured with an Australian acting group called the Danger Ensemble who acted out every other song on stage and it was INCREDIBLE. The concert began with the Danger Ensemble summoning Amanda from beyond the grave (Amanda Palmer was killed) and then she did this: Astronaut Blake Says Bad Habit Mrs. O (some yiddish sounding cover) Strength Through Music (in which a member of the Danger Ensemble read the names and wounds of the victims of Columbine Guitar Hero "Look Mommy No Hands" Coin Operated Boy (Ask Amanda game) Runs in the Family Have To Drive Half Jack Umbrella (ella) encore Dear Old House That I Grew Up In (then she started a rave with a remix of coin operated boy that was... quite something) and finally, Radiohead's Creep on a ukulele. (on the bar) Quite a show. Also, check out Vermillion Lies, who opened for her. Peace Saturday, November 8. 2008Can I just say
that Deus Ex is a destroyer of lives. I am currently attempting to play through without killing anyone, and it is a proper challenge.
Thursday, November 6. 2008The Heretofore and the Hereafter: An Editorial
or, "In Which James Uses a Lot of Space to Say: I Told You So"
Apologies for not splitting the post, but the extended feature isn't working. I have to begin this editorial with a disclaimer of sorts. Partly because a great deal of this election passed while I was overseas, and partly out of the idiosyncrasies of my own media-consumption habits, a vast quantity of my news came directly from the giant podcasted head of Keith Olbermann on my iPod or computer screen; almost everything else came from the New York Times web site, and occasionally CNN’s. I filled in the gaps with the Economist and the New Yorker. I mention this, not in the way of fairness or balance (because, let us face it: those of us who hold strong, distant-from-center political opinions are foremost inclined to think news sources representing our opinions are, by their nature, more truthful, and more balanced), but to mention that, as an American living overseas, the political process--in this internet age, not so much viewed from abroad as viewed from within America while abroad--takes on a more important dimension, because of the primary representation the government provides to the rest of the world, as they see its actions every night on the news or in their morning papers; and I think in no small part when one is no longer a Nashvillian, a Tennessean, a New Yorker, or a Californian, but merely an American, one is made acutely aware of a connection to a nation as a whole, of a common kinship of culture and hope for the future. Political awareness is not just a kind of participation; it is a signifier of care and love for those places left behind, or to be returned to again. And despite my comments in the rest of this essay, the sense that has been with me all along, since 2004, through the primary season, and through the general election, is one of the historical inevitability of this moment. Maybe it was foolish optimism on my part, but I could never picture a “President McCain” or another “President Clinton” or a “President Romney;” but I could see cleary in my mind’s eye, looking back on the day President Obama was elected. Call it what you like. Call it folly. Call it naivete. Call it wishful thinking. Or just call it hope. “The work begins anew.” --Senator Kennedy As of today, nothing has changed. Votes have been cast, and they will be verified in the coming weeks; a winner has been declared, but what has he done? He has given us words, plans, ideas in volume; but the problems of America are the same. Our reputation abroad is in tatters; we are in the midst of a desperate economic crisis; we are occupied in two wars, where thousands of soldiers have died, and no end is in sight; the abuse of civil liberties, both those of citizens and non-citizens, has not ended, and the consequences of Bush’s failure to abide by the rule of law while in the executive branch, and the failure of any other arm of the government to hold him accountable, may never be undone, for the old tyranny the Framers feared has begun to come to pass. And yet. And yet the first person of African ancestry to be nominated as a serious contender for the Presidency has, to all appearances, been established as the successor to that office. And his campaign was won, not by the Issues, or not the Issues alone, but by rhetoric--unique rhetoric. Rhetoric of ideals, rhetoric of theory, positing the possibility that we might repair all of the above ills, and yet achieve something better afterward; rhetoric as far from the hot-button-issue politics bitter as gall and digestible as shoe leather that this nation has consumed, with gusto, since Nixon, Reagan, and before. Nothing has changed--but something is about to. History is not, for most people, an immediate or tangible thing. It is for me, and I remember when it became so. I was standing on a street in central Berlin, looking at a section of the old Wall, while being conducted on a tour of its remains, and something in the back of my mind clicked: history was made real, incarnate before me, not as facts in a book and abstract reasons for the present arrangement of things, but as something as immediate as the present, as my own memory: merely what has gone before in the story in which we are all caught up, the interweaving chains of cause and effect that, to greater or lesser extent, are immediately relevant to all of us. History of a different sort was made as immediately real to me my senior year of high school, when I took Dr. Fuller’s 60’s Seminar. We studied the Civil Rights Movement (as everyone reading this has, in some class or other), but in a way that was profoundly affecting. Often, in my American History classes and in my reading, I had learned about this bit of history, but it seemed incomprehensibly alien to me--a set of facts no longer relevant to the current, modern, and utterly different world. That I ever thought this way is now deeply embarassing, and about that time, in studying particularly Nashville’s experience of the Civil Rights Movement, and meeting people directly involved in it, that perception was amended; and I could see the common threads of history, weaving their way from the distant past to the past to the present, all around me. So reflect on history for a moment. Reflect on the fact a black man has just been elected President, despite history. Despite slavery, despite post-Reconstruction reactionism, despite Jim Crow laws, despite segregation, despite three hundred years of hatred and apathy, and think that there are still men and women in this country--men and women who voted in this election--who hate that man for the color of his skin. Reflect, and think about what this means for history. It is not, of itself, a change; you could probably count on one hand the number of people in this country whose thoughts on race were truly changed in the course of this election and campaign season, but the event isn’t important in isolation. It’s important because it gives us hope for the future: it is proof, measurable, empirical, and quantifiable, that we our on our way to living up to the ideas of social justice alluded to in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, not as they were narrowly expressed then, but as we have come to think of them in the intervening years; it is proof we have not stood still in these last forty years, but we are one step closer along that long, long road to the vision of heroes like Martin Luther King, when so much terrible history will be like a bad dream. “In every age and every generation, men have envisioned a promised land.” --Martin Luther King, Jr. I am, according to the greater part of my nature, an idealist. This idealism is a stubborn one, and it must be; it has survived atheism and cynicism; it persists, while acknowledging the tendency of people to fall into ignorance, in a belief that they will eventually stumble upon wisdom; it holds, despite a chronic dearth of supporting evidence, to trust that the direction of society, of any collection of wills bent toward a common purpose, will most often tend to be forward, rather than backward. This is an idealism that, being divested of a religious faith, has latched onto another kind of faith: a faith of possibility. After eight years in which I began to carefully observe and take an interest in the world around me, especially in politics and government, eight long years in which men older and far more experienced than I administered the nation in ways obviously contrary to common sense and reason, seeking to rule by dint of belief of how the world ought to work, rather than how it did, eight years at the conclusion of which I find myself utterly unsurprised--angered, perhaps; frustrated, certainly, but never shocked--in each new report of how the President and his governors have failed and transgressed the humanist ideals of this nation as I learned them in grade school--ideals, if given presence in name only at the time of our nation’s founding, subtly transubstantiated into true presence by the collective belief and trust of a people in the course of centuries--after those eight years, it seems some kind of vision has appeared before me; something dreamlike. Here we have before us a figure who, too, trusts in those same ideal principles that we know subconsciously ought to underlie government, even when they do not; we have a figure practical in his ability to see the world as it is, and to know that it functions according to what the nature of its elements are, not what their nature ought to be, yet possessed of that same idealistic nature I find in myself sufficiently to imagine a future in which those elements are of a different nature; to argue that it is possible and right to imagine a world--a nation--that is as it should be, not as it is now, and to argue, convincingly and forcefully, that it is possible to work toward this world, not in folly, but knowing that we can make something approach it appear around us; and while the path of progress may never know perfection, it is asymptotic to it, and that we can make the difference between perfection and reality vanishingly small. Rather, as Godwin would have it, we can achieve perfection as a process, rather than an end: we may set ourselves on that most natural and correct trajectory for humanity, and do our best to bring everyone else along. Many months ago, when Hillary Clinton was still seeking the nomination, and it was still theoretically possible for John Edwards to win it, Christopher told me I had the “Obama spirals in my eyes.” I was smug in my reaction then; I am even more smug now. In fact, I distinctly recall watching a recording of Obama’s speech at the 2004 Democratic Nation Convention, and immediately thinking to myself, This man needs to run for president. What was to the forefront of my mind then was my frustration at division in the political process, and Obama spoke of unity--not the potential but unachievable unity of some Hyperborean America past that never really existed, but of the real common ground that exists between citizens of every philosophical and religious order, downplayed, camouflaged, and buried by the issues politicians rhetoricized in order to split the electorate into the Us and the Them, to hoard meager majorities of votes to get elected to office: abortion, gay marriage, flag-burning--real issues, some dire, but still masking those issues on which all agree yet no-one attends to: education, wise energy policies, the desire for economic prosperity. One might have once come to the conclusion, and not without reason, that idealism was merely an excellent way to get one’s opponent elected in American politics. Today, one would be wrong. Tuesday, November 4. 2008What a strange feeling...ELECTION CALLED FOR BARACK OBAMA
After eight years of being constantly and consistently disappointed and angry with American politics, it is striking to be able to be this happy about the same subject.
The official, final tallies are, of course, not in; I assume, however, that they will concur. I think we get to celebrate now. Dissent Poetry Corner: Election Day Special
[Transcribed as delivered on April 3, 1968]
Thank you very kindly, my friends. As I listened to Ralph Abernathy and his eloquent and generous introduction and then thought about myself, I wondered who he was talking about. It's always good to have your closest friend and associate to say something good about you. And Ralph Abernathy is the best friend that I have in the world. I'm delighted to see each of you here tonight in spite of a storm warning. You reveal that you are determined to go on anyhow. Something is happening in Memphis; something is happening in our world. And you know, if I were standing at the beginning of time, with the possibility of taking a kind of general and panoramic view of the whole of human history up to now, and the Almighty said to me, "Martin Luther King, which age would you like to live in?" I would take my mental flight by Egypt and I would watch God's children in their magnificent trek from the dark dungeons of Egypt through, or rather across the Red Sea, through the wilderness on toward the promised land. And in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn't stop there. I would move on by Greece and take my mind to Mount Olympus. And I would see Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Euripides and Aristophanes assembled around the Parthenon. And I would watch them around the Parthenon as they discussed the great and eternal issues of reality. But I wouldn't stop there. I would go on, even to the great heyday of the Roman Empire. And I would see developments around there, through various emperors and leaders. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the day of the Renaissance, and get a quick picture of all that the Renaissance did for the cultural and aesthetic life of man. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even go by the way that the man for whom I am named had his habitat. And I would watch Martin Luther as he tacked his ninety-five theses on the door at the church of Wittenberg. But I wouldn't stop there. I would come on up even to 1863, and watch a vacillating President by the name of Abraham Lincoln finally come to the conclusion that he had to sign the Emancipation Proclamation. But I wouldn't stop there. I would even come up to the early thirties, and see a man grappling with the problems of the bankruptcy of his nation. And come with an eloquent cry that we have nothing to fear but "fear itself." But I wouldn't stop there. Strangely enough, I would turn to the Almighty, and say, "If you allow me to live just a few years in the second half of the 20th century, I will be happy." Now that's a strange statement to make, because the world is all messed up. The nation is sick. Trouble is in the land; confusion all around. That's a strange statement. But I know, somehow, that only when it is dark enough can you see the stars. And I see God working in this period of the twentieth century in a way that men, in some strange way, are responding. Something is happening in our world. The masses of people are rising up. And wherever they are assembled today, whether they are in Johannesburg, South Africa; Nairobi, Kenya; Accra, Ghana; New York City; Atlanta, Georgia; Jackson, Mississippi; or Memphis, Tennessee -- the cry is always the same: "We want to be free." And another reason that I'm happy to live in this period is that we have been forced to a point where we are going to have to grapple with the problems that men have been trying to grapple with through history, but the demands didn't force them to do it. Survival demands that we grapple with them. Men, for years now, have been talking about war and peace. But now, no longer can they just talk about it. It is no longer a choice between violence and nonviolence in this world; it's nonviolence or nonexistence. That is where we are today. And also in the human rights revolution, if something isn't done, and done in a hurry, to bring the colored peoples of the world out of their long years of poverty, their long years of hurt and neglect, the whole world is doomed. Now, I'm just happy that God has allowed me to live in this period to see what is unfolding. And I'm happy that He's allowed me to be in Memphis. I can remember -- I can remember when Negroes were just going around as Ralph has said, so often, scratching where they didn't itch, and laughing when they were not tickled. But that day is all over. We mean business now, and we are determined to gain our rightful place in God's world. And that's all this whole thing is about. We aren't engaged in any negative protest and in any negative arguments with anybody. We are saying that we are determined to be men. We are determined to be people. We are saying -- We are saying that we are God's children. And that we are God's children, we don't have to live like we are forced to live. Now, what does all of this mean in this great period of history? It means that we've got to stay together. We've got to stay together and maintain unity. You know, whenever Pharaoh wanted to prolong the period of slavery in Egypt, he had a favorite, favorite formula for doing it. What was that? He kept the slaves fighting among themselves. But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh's court, and he cannot hold the slaves in slavery. When the slaves get together, that's the beginning of getting out of slavery. Now let us maintain unity. Secondly, let us keep the issues where they are. The issue is injustice. The issue is the refusal of Memphis to be fair and honest in its dealings with its public servants, who happen to be sanitation workers. Now, we've got to keep attention on that. That's always the problem with a little violence. You know what happened the other day, and the press dealt only with the window-breaking. I read the articles. They very seldom got around to mentioning the fact that one thousand, three hundred sanitation workers are on strike, and that Memphis is not being fair to them, and that Mayor Loeb is in dire need of a doctor. They didn't get around to that. Now we're going to march again, and we've got to march again, in order to put the issue where it is supposed to be -- and force everybody to see that there are thirteen hundred of God's children here suffering, sometimes going hungry, going through dark and dreary nights wondering how this thing is going to come out. That's the issue. And we've got to say to the nation: We know how it's coming out. For when people get caught up with that which is right and they are willing to sacrifice for it, there is no stopping point short of victory. We aren't going to let any mace stop us. We are masters in our nonviolent movement in disarming police forces; they don't know what to do. I've seen them so often. I remember in Birmingham, Alabama, when we were in that majestic struggle there, we would move out of the 16th Street Baptist Church day after day; by the hundreds we would move out. And Bull Connor would tell them to send the dogs forth, and they did come; but we just went before the dogs singing, "Ain't gonna let nobody turn me around." Bull Connor next would say, "Turn the fire hoses on." And as I said to you the other night, Bull Connor didn't know history. He knew a kind of physics that somehow didn't relate to the transphysics that we knew about. And that was the fact that there was a certain kind of fire that no water could put out. And we went before the fire hoses; we had known water. If we were Baptist or some other denominations, we had been immersed. If we were Methodist, and some others, we had been sprinkled, but we knew water. That couldn't stop us. And we just went on before the dogs and we would look at them; and we'd go on before the water hoses and we would look at it, and we'd just go on singing "Over my head I see freedom in the air." And then we would be thrown in the paddy wagons, and sometimes we were stacked in there like sardines in a can. And they would throw us in, and old Bull would say, "Take 'em off," and they did; and we would just go in the paddy wagon singing, "We Shall Overcome." And every now and then we'd get in jail, and we'd see the jailers looking through the windows being moved by our prayers, and being moved by our words and our songs. And there was a power there which Bull Connor couldn't adjust to; and so we ended up transforming Bull into a steer, and we won our struggle in Birmingham. Now we've got to go on in Memphis just like that. I call upon you to be with us when we go out Monday. Now about injunctions: We have an injunction and we're going into court tomorrow morning to fight this illegal, unconstitutional injunction. All we say to America is, "Be true to what you said on paper." If I lived in China or even Russia, or any totalitarian country, maybe I could understand some of these illegal injunctions. Maybe I could understand the denial of certain basic First Amendment privileges, because they hadn't committed themselves to that over there. But somewhere I read of the freedom of assembly. Somewhere I read of the freedom of speech. Somewhere I read of the freedom of press. Somewhere I read that the greatness of America is the right to protest for right. And so just as I say, we aren't going to let dogs or water hoses turn us around, we aren't going to let any injunction turn us around. We are going on. We need all of you. And you know what's beautiful to me is to see all of these ministers of the Gospel. It's a marvelous picture. Who is it that is supposed to articulate the longings and aspirations of the people more than the preacher? Somehow the preacher must have a kind of fire shut up in his bones. And whenever injustice is around he tell it. Somehow the preacher must be an Amos, and saith, "When God speaks who can but prophesy?" Again with Amos, "Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream." Somehow the preacher must say with Jesus, "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me," and he's anointed me to deal with the problems of the poor." And I want to commend the preachers, under the leadership of these noble men: James Lawson, one who has been in this struggle for many years; he's been to jail for struggling; he's been kicked out of Vanderbilt University for this struggle, but he's still going on, fighting for the rights of his people. Reverend Ralph Jackson, Billy Kiles; I could just go right on down the list, but time will not permit. But I want to thank all of them. And I want you to thank them, because so often, preachers aren't concerned about anything but themselves. And I'm always happy to see a relevant ministry. It's all right to talk about "long white robes over yonder," in all of its symbolism. But ultimately people want some suits and dresses and shoes to wear down here! It's all right to talk about "streets flowing with milk and honey," but God has commanded us to be concerned about the slums down here, and his children who can't eat three square meals a day. It's all right to talk about the new Jerusalem, but one day, God's preacher must talk about the new New York, the new Atlanta, the new Philadelphia, the new Los Angeles, the new Memphis, Tennessee. This is what we have to do. Now the other thing we'll have to do is this: Always anchor our external direct action with the power of economic withdrawal. Now, we are poor people. Individually, we are poor when you compare us with white society in America. We are poor. Never stop and forget that collectively -- that means all of us together -- collectively we are richer than all the nations in the world, with the exception of nine. Did you ever think about that? After you leave the United States, Soviet Russia, Great Britain, West Germany, France, and I could name the others, the American Negro collectively is richer than most nations of the world. We have an annual income of more than thirty billion dollars a year, which is more than all of the exports of the United States, and more than the national budget of Canada. Did you know that? That's power right there, if we know how to pool it. We don't have to argue with anybody. We don't have to curse and go around acting bad with our words. We don't need any bricks and bottles. We don't need any Molotov cocktails. We just need to go around to these stores, and to these massive industries in our country, and say, "God sent us by here, to say to you that you're not treating his children right. And we've come by here to ask you to make the first item on your agenda fair treatment, where God's children are concerned. Now, if you are not prepared to do that, we do have an agenda that we must follow. And our agenda calls for withdrawing economic support from you." And so, as a result of this, we are asking you tonight, to go out and tell your neighbors not to buy Coca-Cola in Memphis. Go by and tell them not to buy Sealtest milk. Tell them not to buy -- what is the other bread? -- Wonder Bread. And what is the other bread company, Jesse? Tell them not to buy Hart's bread. As Jesse Jackson has said, up to now, only the garbage men have been feeling pain; now we must kind of redistribute the pain. We are choosing these companies because they haven't been fair in their hiring policies; and we are choosing them because they can begin the process of saying they are going to support the needs and the rights of these men who are on strike. And then they can move on town -- downtown and tell Mayor Loeb to do what is right. But not only that, we've got to strengthen black institutions. I call upon you to take your money out of the banks downtown and deposit your money in Tri-State Bank. We want a "bank-in" movement in Memphis. Go by the savings and loan association. I'm not asking you something that we don't do ourselves at SCLC. Judge Hooks and others will tell you that we have an account here in the savings and loan association from the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. We are telling you to follow what we are doing. Put your money there. You have six or seven black insurance companies here in the city of Memphis. Take out your insurance there. We want to have an "insurance-in." Now these are some practical things that we can do. We begin the process of building a greater economic base. And at the same time, we are putting pressure where it really hurts. I ask you to follow through here. Now, let me say as I move to my conclusion that we've got to give ourselves to this struggle until the end. Nothing would be more tragic than to stop at this point in Memphis. We've got to see it through. And when we have our march, you need to be there. If it means leaving work, if it means leaving school -- be there. Be concerned about your brother. You may not be on strike. But either we go up together, or we go down together. Let us develop a kind of dangerous unselfishness. One day a man came to Jesus, and he wanted to raise some questions about some vital matters of life. At points he wanted to trick Jesus, and show him that he knew a little more than Jesus knew and throw him off base.... Now that question could have easily ended up in a philosophical and theological debate. But Jesus immediately pulled that question from mid-air, and placed it on a dangerous curve between Jerusalem and Jericho. And he talked about a certain man, who fell among thieves. You remember that a Levite and a priest passed by on the other side. They didn't stop to help him. And finally a man of another race came by. He got down from his beast, decided not to be compassionate by proxy. But he got down with him, administered first aid, and helped the man in need. Jesus ended up saying, this was the good man, this was the great man, because he had the capacity to project the "I" into the "thou," and to be concerned about his brother. Now you know, we use our imagination a great deal to try to determine why the priest and the Levite didn't stop. At times we say they were busy going to a church meeting, an ecclesiastical gathering, and they had to get on down to Jerusalem so they wouldn't be late for their meeting. At other times we would speculate that there was a religious law that "One who was engaged in religious ceremonials was not to touch a human body twenty-four hours before the ceremony." And every now and then we begin to wonder whether maybe they were not going down to Jerusalem -- or down to Jericho, rather to organize a "Jericho Road Improvement Association." That's a possibility. Maybe they felt that it was better to deal with the problem from the causal root, rather than to get bogged down with an individual effect. But I'm going to tell you what my imagination tells me. It's possible that those men were afraid. You see, the Jericho road is a dangerous road. I remember when Mrs. King and I were first in Jerusalem. We rented a car and drove from Jerusalem down to Jericho. And as soon as we got on that road, I said to my wife, "I can see why Jesus used this as the setting for his parable." It's a winding, meandering road. It's really conducive for ambushing. You start out in Jerusalem, which is about 1200 miles -- or rather 1200 feet above sea level. And by the time you get down to Jericho, fifteen or twenty minutes later, you're about 2200 feet below sea level. That's a dangerous road. In the days of Jesus it came to be known as the "Bloody Pass." And you know, it's possible that the priest and the Levite looked over that man on the ground and wondered if the robbers were still around. Or it's possible that they felt that the man on the ground was merely faking. And he was acting like he had been robbed and hurt, in order to seize them over there, lure them there for quick and easy seizure. And so the first question that the priest asked -- the first question that the Levite asked was, "If I stop to help this man, what will happen to me?" But then the Good Samaritan came by. And he reversed the question: "If I do not stop to help this man, what will happen to him?" That's the question before you tonight. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to my job. Not, "If I stop to help the sanitation workers what will happen to all of the hours that I usually spend in my office every day and every week as a pastor?" The question is not, "If I stop to help this man in need, what will happen to me?" The question is, "If I do not stop to help the sanitation workers, what will happen to them?" That's the question. Let us rise up tonight with a greater readiness. Let us stand with a greater determination. And let us move on in these powerful days, these days of challenge to make America what it ought to be. We have an opportunity to make America a better nation. And I want to thank God, once more, for allowing me to be here with you. You know, several years ago, I was in New York City autographing the first book that I had written. And while sitting there autographing books, a demented black woman came up. The only question I heard from her was, "Are you Martin Luther King?" And I was looking down writing, and I said, "Yes." And the next minute I felt something beating on my chest. Before I knew it I had been stabbed by this demented woman. I was rushed to Harlem Hospital. It was a dark Saturday afternoon. And that blade had gone through, and the X-rays revealed that the tip of the blade was on the edge of my aorta, the main artery. And once that's punctured, your drowned in your own blood -- that's the end of you. It came out in the New York Times the next morning, that if I had merely sneezed, I would have died. Well, about four days later, they allowed me, after the operation, after my chest had been opened, and the blade had been taken out, to move around in the wheel chair in the hospital. They allowed me to read some of the mail that came in, and from all over the states and the world, kind letters came in. I read a few, but one of them I will never forget. I had received one from the President and the Vice-President. I've forgotten what those telegrams said. I'd received a visit and a letter from the Governor of New York, but I've forgotten what that letter said. But there was another letter that came from a little girl, a young girl who was a student at the White Plains High School. And I looked at that letter, and I'll never forget it. It said simply, Dear Dr. King, I am a ninth-grade student at the White Plains High School." And she said, "While it should not matter, I would like to mention that I'm a white girl. I read in the paper of your misfortune, and of your suffering. And I read that if you had sneezed, you would have died. And I'm simply writing you to say that I'm so happy that you didn't sneeze." And I want to say tonight -- I want to say tonight that I too am happy that I didn't sneeze. Because if I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1960, when students all over the South started sitting-in at lunch counters. And I knew that as they were sitting in, they were really standing up for the best in the American dream, and taking the whole nation back to those great wells of democracy which were dug deep by the Founding Fathers in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1961, when we decided to take a ride for freedom and ended segregation in inter-state travel. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been around here in 1962, when Negroes in Albany, Georgia, decided to straighten their backs up. And whenever men and women straighten their backs up, they are going somewhere, because a man can't ride your back unless it is bent. If I had sneezed -- If I had sneezed I wouldn't have been here in 1963, when the black people of Birmingham, Alabama, aroused the conscience of this nation, and brought into being the Civil Rights Bill. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have had a chance later that year, in August, to try to tell America about a dream that I had had. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been down in Selma, Alabama, to see the great Movement there. If I had sneezed, I wouldn't have been in Memphis to see a community rally around those brothers and sisters who are suffering. I'm so happy that I didn't sneeze. And they were telling me --. Now, it doesn't matter, now. It really doesn't matter what happens now. I left Atlanta this morning, and as we got started on the plane, there were six of us. The pilot said over the public address system, "We are sorry for the delay, but we have Dr. Martin Luther King on the plane. And to be sure that all of the bags were checked, and to be sure that nothing would be wrong with on the plane, we had to check out everything carefully. And we've had the plane protected and guarded all night." And then I got into Memphis. And some began to say the threats, or talk about the threats that were out. What would happen to me from some of our sick white brothers? Well, I don't know what will happen now. We've got some difficult days ahead. But it really doesn't matter with me now, because I've been to the mountaintop. And I don't mind. Like anybody, I would like to live a long life. Longevity has its place. But I'm not concerned about that now. I just want to do God's will. And He's allowed me to go up to the mountain. And I've looked over. And I've seen the Promised Land. I may not get there with you. But I want you to know tonight, that we, as a people, will get to the promised land! And so I'm happy, tonight. I'm not worried about anything. I'm not fearing any man! Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord! Election UpdateSaturday, November 1. 2008I would just like to point out
that over at Taylor Shope's hotnakedpixofgeorgewbush.com, their RSS feed and their CSS stylesheets work. This is why Democrats always lose elections.
Also, never, ever, ever, ever begin playing Deus Ex at 1am if you have something to do the next day. Also also, I have a new TV. MarioKart Wii is going to be siiiiick. |
![]() [blog|users| map] dissent chat other parts of the internet dissent [at] last.fm dissent [on] facebook ![]() CalendarTagged Entries2008 election
2008 presidential election a history of dissent admin all your base are belong to us amanda palmer Amerika animal collective animation Arcade Fire art art history astronomy barack obama blog bonnaroo boston brawl bush casiotone for the painfully alone chinese cingmot Cingmot on Sisko comics Concert concerts covers Crazy Ass-Conservatives dan flavin dissent current affairs dissent poetry corner dresden dolls election explosions in the sky fiery furnaces film flash games Gabriel Garcia Marquez games german germany go godspeed you! black emperor harry potter haterade i am not making this up Iceland idiots internet humor interwebz iraq Jackson Pollock Joanna Newsom kurt vonnegut Laugh/Cry/Puke News Roulette lawl links lolcats london mars mathematics mcsweeneys Modest Mouse movies Music N64 nashville neutral milk hotel new york nice nigeria nintendo obama of montreal pelican people Philip Larkin photography photos picross poetry Politics politics and news post rock presidency president bush presidents pretty pretty & nice puppetmaster puzzles Robert Browning ryman science fiction Sex Changes shakespeare shins short story sonnets star trek DownloadsWhat we've been listening toQuicksearch |



