Today's Topics:
the Queen quotes Blake
Adult Joy
QE2's Auguries
Re: "Infant Joy"
BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Re: BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Re: BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Re: "Infant Joy"
Re: QE2's Auguries
Missed, and Different, Perceptions
The Fox looks after himself
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 5 Jan 1998 15:15:56 -0600 (CST)
From: jmichael@sewanee.edu (J. Michael)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: the Queen quotes Blake
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I no longer have the paper handy, but around Christmas the New York Times
reported Queen Elizabeth II's annual year-end address to her subjects, in
which she quoted rather extensively from Blake's "Auguries of Innocence,"
especially the lines in which "joy and woe are woven fine...."
Jennifer Michael
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 98 23:29:49 GMT
From: Paul Tarry
To: Blake Group
Subject: Adult Joy
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
I have no name
I am but two days old. -
What shall I call thee ?
I happy am
Joy is my name, -
Sweet joy befall thee !
Pretty joy !
Sweet joy but two days old.
Sweet joy I call thee :
Thou dost smile,
I sing the while
Sweet joy befall thee.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 12:37:27 -0500
From: albright@world.std.com (R.H. Albright)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: QE2's Auguries
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Jennifer Michael:
I'm glad that Queen Elizabeth had the good taste to quote Blake recently.
But certainly there must be either a conscious or subconscious subtext to
her usage, don't you think? I mean, the country and world are still
recovering from "The People's Princess" loss. (God the books that flood the
bookstores--!) And then, Blake himself was a Republican. Could she perhaps
be seeing a continuing Fall of the House of Windsor, as Rupert Murdoch
would like? Or is she willing to respect Diana's legacy, and let William be
the future King who will, in effect, by riding on DisneyWorld rides just
like any other bourgeois bloke and use his position of privilege to do Good
Samaritan deeds? I'm sure there is more to this than meets the eye. And
Blake said that the eye knows more than the heart, so... there's more to
that, too.
Ralph Dumain:
I too am amused and saddenned when people allow other people define them as
X, Y, or Z, instead of internally creating themselves and accepting that
they move through a rainbow of states, despite the color of their skin or
geographical or class into which they happen to be born. (Mill's "On
Liberty" is particularly inspiring, isn't it?) And yet, sadly, some people
get comforted by these definitions that people create for them, don't they?
"You're a tyger." Or, perhaps just as dangerous, a self definition such as:
"I'm a lamb." In the poem from which you quote, the blindness to me is in
not realizing that both kids need to be free of their respective "clouds"
(black AND white), and the person to whom both children seem to be getting
solace, at the end, is a figure of compassion: Jesus.
---Randall Albright
"Can you see the real me, Mother?
Can you see the real me, Father?
Can you see the real me... me... me?"
---Pete Townshend, The Who, _Quadrophenia_
"The Perfectability of Man! Ah, heaven, what a dreary theme! The
perfectability of the Ford car! The perfectability of which man? I am many
men. Which of them are you going to perfect? I am not a mechanical
contrivance."
---D.H. Lawrence, beginning of the "Benjamin Franklin" essay,
_Studies in Classic American Literature_
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 13:42:42 -0500
From: albright@world.std.com (R.H. Albright)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: "Infant Joy"
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>I have no name
That sounds good.
>I am but two days old. -
But your parents aren't.
>What shall I call thee ?
The "I" has changed from child to parent, here, hasn't it?
>I happy am
Yes, both the parent and child, although kids can cry a lot at times...
>Joy is my name, -
Sounds like you really wanted this child!
>Sweet joy befall thee !
And, as much as we try to pretend that we aren't defined by others, the sad
truth is that much of us IS. So you're lucky, little kid, that your parent
wants joy, not sorrow, for you. Hopefully, they'll provide a loving,
nurturing environment for you instead of a frustrated,
push-you-to-become-what-I-never-was, Turn-of-the-Screw mind-tripper.
>Pretty joy !
>Sweet joy but two days old.
It IS amazing, isn't it? To see the ten digits on the hands and feet, to
think that all the DNA is THERE for this little one to BECOME...
>Sweet joy I call thee :
>Thou dost smile,
>I sing the while
>Sweet joy befall thee.
And some are born to sweet delight.
Thanks, Paul Tarry.
---Randall Albright
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 14:10:43 -0800 (PST)
From: Ralph Dumain
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Message-Id: <2.2.16.19980107170534.3637c98e@pop.igc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
I knew it would be too much to hope for to be free of Randall Albright, but
not only is he back, he's even addressing me.
Of course the Queen quoting Blake is an obscenity, but the ruling class will
use anybody it can. I can't understand why the English don't chop up the
aristocracy for lunch meat and feed them to the poor. They're all sitting
around on the dole crying about Princess Die. Whereas my reaction is (ditto
for Sonny Bono) that of the red butler in THE RULING CLASS when he found an
aristocratess stabbed to death in the mansion: "One less, praise the Lord!"
Too bad Randall in his severe mental illness hasn't yet grokked that my sole
purpose in posting Blake sightings is documentary, as Blake scholars are
interested in Blake's cultural influence, and Blake sightings do end up in
BLAKE: AN ILLUSTRATED QUARTERLY from time to time. Personally I thought the
Fanon quote was mostly crap. It was somewhat heartening though to see "The
Little Black Boy" quoted favorably. It's a strange poem and it's hard to
decipher Blake's view, given that the speaker is the boy, not Blake, and his
thought is a contradictory melange reflecting both the brainwashing of
slavery and the hope for emancipation. Other people in today's world would
be offended prima facie by phrases such as "but o my soul is white", "I am
black as if bereft of light", and "I will be like him and he will then love
me", without a deeper determination of what this poem really means, not an
easy thing to come by. But Raving Randall doesn't care, because he thinks
open-mindedness means being completely random and spontaneous and incoherent
and persisting in the solipsistic illusion that he is free of determinations
when in fact he is completely determined and his childish mentality and
illusions are completely transparent to others.
At 12:37 PM 1/7/98 -0500, R.H. Albright wrote:
>Ralph Dumain:
>
>I too am amused and saddenned when people allow other people define them as
>X, Y, or Z, instead of internally creating themselves and accepting that
>they move through a rainbow of states, despite the color of their skin or
>geographical or class into which they happen to be born. (Mill's "On
>Liberty" is particularly inspiring, isn't it?) And yet, sadly, some people
>get comforted by these definitions that people create for them, don't they?
>"You're a tyger." Or, perhaps just as dangerous, a self definition such as:
>"I'm a lamb." In the poem from which you quote, the blindness to me is in
>not realizing that both kids need to be free of their respective "clouds"
>(black AND white), and the person to whom both children seem to be getting
>solace, at the end, is a figure of compassion: Jesus.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 18:42:26 -0500
From: Bill & Ingrid Wagner
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Obviously Randall Albright struck a cord with you. As there is no
progress without contraries is this not a reasonable good thing? Please Mr
Dumain
(Whose name bespeaks authority) continue. But if your world is only here move
your body!
Bill
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 1998 19:34:33 -0600
From: tomdill@wc.stephens.edu (TOM DILLINGHAM)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: BLACK BOY AND RAVING RANDALL
Message-Id: <98010719343361@wc.stephens.edu>
So the utterly repulsive and obsessively ignorant Albright is
back again, sliming a perfectly good list with his compulsive
misreadings and hogwash. Time to check out again. What a damn
shame. Even his acolytes begin to sound as obnoxious as he.
Tom Dillingham
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 1998 00:56:23 -0900
From: ndeeter
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: "Infant Joy"
Message-Id: <34B4A2C7.2E36@concentric.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
R.H. Albright wrote:
>
> >I have no name
>
> That sounds good.
>
> >I am but two days old. -
>
> But your parents aren't.
>
> >What shall I call thee ?
>
> The "I" has changed from child to parent, here, hasn't it?
I always read this as a child trying to name his or her emotion...He or
she has come across an emotion and is personifying it.
I found this poem increasingly delightful today. I have a new niece.
A smiling uncle,
Nathan Deeter
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 09:32:38 -0600 (CST)
From: jmichael@sewanee.edu (J. Michael)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Re: QE2's Auguries
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>Jennifer Michael:
>
>I'm glad that Queen Elizabeth had the good taste to quote Blake recently.
>But certainly there must be either a conscious or subconscious subtext to
>her usage, don't you think? I mean, the country and world are still
>recovering from "The People's Princess" loss.
Randall, I don't know if it's a subtext so much as context, which of course
I omitted from my post. The "woe" she mentioned specifically was, of
course, Diana's death, while the "joy" was the celebration of her and
Prince Philip's 50th anniversary. Certainly Blake would find it highly
ironic that he's been quoted by the head of a decaying monarchy, but I
doubt he would find joy in the tragedy itself. Maybe Hugh can ask him next
time they talk on the phone.
Jennifer Michael
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 1998 14:54:58 -0500
From: albright@world.std.com (R.H. Albright)
To: blake@albion.com
Subject: Missed, and Different, Perceptions
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Ralph Dumain writes:
>Of course the Queen quoting Blake is an obscenity, but the ruling class will
>use anybody it can.
Although some may be "born to sweet delight", this is a gross
simplification of who a person is, in my view. It may be that all are born
sinners, and must continually be redeemed by asking forgiveness of their
friends. Or it may be that those in position of power, such as the Queen,
should use that position to further the condition of her people, or go out
amongst mine fields, or touch AIDS victims before it is deemed socially
acceptable.
The irony of Dumain's bombast against me (as well as the Queen) is that you
continue to not see "other" in "self", or how we can all be friends, as
Blake believed. At the very least, "pity your enemy". In fact, I was trying
to give some sort of agreement with your view. Since you accused me of
"raving", however, I will become more contrarian in this post.
Your distinctions of "ruling" versus "working" classes are dangerously
limited, and for now I will cite this by Blake:
"Aristotle says Characters are either Good or Bad: now Goodness or
Badness has nothing to do with Character."
In fact, it's by moving through "states", by continually *becoming* even as
our habits may be working against this, toward mere stasis, that strife
becomes useful to try to make the world a better place.
I believe you have framed the Queen has "bad" because she is of the "ruling
classes". She is more than just one "born to sweet delight", as anyone with
empathy would know. As Shylock knew in _The Merchant of Venice_, she
bleeds. She has had some suffering and terrible embarrassments in her
little life.
Perhaps Dumain would also frame John Quincy Adams as "bad" for the same
reason, that he was born of privilege, despite the portrayal by Steven
Spielberg in _Amistad_ that he *redeemed* himself as the abolitionist that
he was, at heart, in that trial before the Supreme Court on that case. Or
John Stuart Mill and his wife, who was brave enough to both call himself a
socialist and yet realize the shortcomings of socialism. Or, getting back
to _Amistad_, that Blake might cry in assent with the African who saw the
story of Jesus merely through pictures, and found solace. Or, again getting
back to Blake, that he would be disgusted with the white man who suggested
that maybe the case be made one of martyrdom, instead of fought with every
ounce of blood, black and white TOGETHER, instead.
People who have power are neither "good" nor "bad" in and of that mere
position. In fact, wherever you are born-- it is what you DO with your own
actions that matter. If the Queen inspired some people with that address--
fine. If she exposed herself as a hypocrite-- fine. At least she DID
something which Jennifer Michael used as catalyst for discussion in this
rather sleepy group.
>I can't understand why the English don't chop up the
>aristocracy for lunch meat and feed them to the poor.
This speaks for itself, doesn't it, Mr. Dumain? There's no "other" in self.
You frame "aristocrats" just as you blame someone else for saying
generalized things about what it means to be "black". It's great contrarian
opinion to Blake, I'll say that much for it. But I won't be a clod to your
pebble and just let it ride.
= + = + =+ = + = + = + = + =
Nathan Deeter writes:
>I always read this as a child trying to name his or her emotion...He or
>she has come across an emotion and is personifying it.
I don't read this poem always the same way, but I liked your
interpretation. Blake himself colors the poems with ambiguity and
open-endedness, in a way that I believe Sister Wendy would call it sacred
art.
"Some are born to sweet delight.
Some are born to endless night..."
And more often than the above, some are born in between. Some may be born
into good circumstances, and then lose their parent whom they dearly loved,
and who can never be replaced. Some may be born into good circumstances,
and merely squander their time with it. Some may be born into bad
circumstances, "Society's Child" as Janis Ian once sung, and then later
realize that much of what they perceived as problems were self-inflicted.
Perhaps there are members of this group who live in Indonesia, where I hear
supermarkets are being emptied in a financial panic. What would hold people
together, in circumstances as dire as those? I would suggest this: FAITH.
Belief that you are going to make it, or that in sacrificing yourself, you
are going to help someone else make it.
= + = + =+ = + = + = + = + =
And then Tom Dillingham writes-- well, so eloquently. I will answer him
with this:
I see no reason why you simply cannot state your views, and let me state
mine? Perhaps through "opposition", we can BOTH progress. Or at least allow
the group to see us as simply that: contraries. Tim Linnell, for one, has
said to the group that he is an admirer of your contributions. Jim Watt
hoped that you wouldn't let a few... people... with contrarian views...
perhaps less or greater advanced on an evolutionary scale, as both you and
they perceive them, continue to offer theirs. And Gloudina Bouwer also once
wished for your return. So why don't you stick around, for THEIR sakes? And
maybe you should just delete my posts without opening them, since they're
so... beneath you, Sir. I often quickly dispose of yours, rest assured.
But exhausting your energies on knowledgeable astrologers, spewing venom
and Druids when in fact Blake admired them until he thought they had become
decadent, and then seeing Stonehenge ending up, redeemed, on the last plate
of _Jerusalem_.... is that merely why you stay around? To pick and pick at
Peter Ackroyd's rather fine biography while Peter Breslin was merely asking
about it as a first key into Blake's real life?
I DO feel pity for your students. But that is just one man's opinion. I
have had the good fortune of working with what I perceive as more
enlightenned people, both in and after college. The Internet has been an
amazing device for me, and I think Blake would appreciate the leveling
effect that it has between "teachers" and "students". In fact, when I was
in college, one of my least loved teachers and I at least considered
ourselves equal enough to DISCUSS things, not release... what you did! And
since college, the professors I have met in both real life and through the
Internet-- I have had a wide range of responses, generally favorable. At
worst, they simply don't respond to me anymore. And that is my Doctor's
suggestion to you today.
= + = + =+ = + = + = + = + =
On another subject...
Are any of you are familiar with D.H. Lawrence's essay on Benjamin
Franklin? If so, does it seem to you that some of Lawrence's complaints
against Franklin are similar to those that Blake had against Bacon? And, as
in the case of Blake against Bacon, don't some of Franklin's original
statements stand up well at least as contraries for DHL to work off of?
I know that David Erdman's *publishers* merely put Freud, Nietzsche, and
DHL as people who were inspired by Blake on the back cover of my paperback
edition of _Prophet Against Empire_. But I happen to know through
Lawrence's biography that he admired the _Songs_ very greatly in life, felt
a kindred spirit to Heraclitus although he was already thinking in terms of
"opposition is true friendship", and... other matters that I think are fair
to place him as a kindred spirit of Blake's, this essay being one.
Did anyone else like William Richey's _Blake's Altering Aesthetic_ (1996,
Missouri), by the way? I loved the use of the word "ruptures". It reminded
me of Nietzsche's imaginative Dionysian definition in "The Birth of
Tragedy".
---Randall Albright
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 98 23:52:13 GMT
From: Paul Tarry
To: Blake Group
Subject: The Fox looks after himself
Message-Id:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; X-MAPIextension=".TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
God looks after the Lion.
It's one of my favourites,
--------------------------------
End of blake-d Digest V1998 Issue #1
************************************