tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8734950473572563387.post6820769448166446044..comments2024-03-26T20:19:38.941+11:00Comments on Bytes: Parsley, Sage, Rosemary & Thyme, Part 2BytesMasterhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07718030608633754512noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8734950473572563387.post-33858282764756890532020-12-16T15:22:41.703+11:002020-12-16T15:22:41.703+11:00Nobody wanted, and probably it was for the better ...Nobody wanted, and probably it was for the better not, to admit that the second line after "yes, we talk of things that matter" was in its kernel, neither "is the theatre..." nor "is the church" but rather "is God..." since at that time, this particular question was the stuff of TIME and LIFE and was bouncing around an hundred other media organs and even the pulpit of the unitarian-universalist congregation i was a teeny little part of.... In fact, Nobody, but NO-fucking-BODY, questioned then if the theatre was really dead, and in fact if you lived through those times you would know that theatre was more alive than ever before or since, and breaking new ground all over the place in its conflict with mass media. So you can see where Paul Simon was coy, or acting in self-defense, or being facetious (what, Paul Simon being facetious?) when / if he insisted that Joan Baez include the little disclaimer. For my part, I think he was looking out for his own a--, which is what I would have done (especially given all the sh-- they had at the time of Dangling Conversation recently given John Lennon for his badly misconstrued comment on Beatallic popularity. But Paul Simon always possessed a better sense of humor than I ever dreamed of having, as well. Or, possibly he was writing out of cynicism by comparing God to the theatre, using the theatre as a metaphor for God/church, and while that could be supported, I rather doubt that was the main intention by any stretch. (The underlying angst at that time was how could a loving God permit the Viet Nam war, and Paul Simon was not all that far from having penned "Blessed".) ...On another tack, as much as I would like to construe the adverb "really" as important in asking the question, "Is ____ REALLY dead?" I ponder more that the word "really" is a smudge of sorts, since no one questioned whether either theatre or church was dead much less really dead. By smudge, of course, I mean that the choice of wording including "really" seems akin to formulaic disyllabic insertion, which Paul Simon rarely if ever resorts to, [in order to fill out a line of verse]. It's hard enough to find extraneous words in his work, but in so significant a context, "really" sticks out as glumpy--so I would conclude it is a smudge over whatever thought was originally there expressed, now entirely lost to us, rather than a metrical insertion. ...another note (on the diction) is that the variant "couched in our indifference" as I remember hearing it on the original vinyl, was an alternative to "CAST" and an inferior one. Any feeling human being sees that "cast" is by far the more poetic of the two, and without knowing anything for sure from my distant vantage point, it seems to me as though the choice of "Couched" was eventually re-thought and ultimately discarded in favor of the more natural and probably original verb appearing within the poet's otherwise brilliant imagery. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07182705998965150270noreply@blogger.com