Reminiscent Revelations

"In My Craft or Sullen Art" - Dylan Thomas

"In my craft or sullen art
Exercised in the still night
When only the moon rages
And the lovers lie abed
With all their griefs in their arms,
I labour by singing light
Not for ambition or bread
Or the strut and trade of charms
On the ivory stages
But for the common wages
Of their most secret heart.

Not for the proud man apart
From the raging moon I write
On these spindrift pages
Nor for the towering dead
With their nightingales and psalms
But for the lovers, their arms
Round the griefs of the ages,
Who pay no praise or wages
Nor heed my craft or art."

The method and meaning of any work are directly correlative. One does not occur without the other, and the comprehension of one will obviously illuminate the other. In order to understand the techniques an author employs, you first must read the work, a difficult and daunting task, I know. However, I think the best way to discern both the meaning and the method behind a work of literature, or otherwise, is to ask unceasing questions and make unrelenting observations. Many times the same questions that clarify the symbolism and themes of a piece will also help to elucidate the means by which the author created the work. Inquiries such as “why?” and “how?” can always help the audience to apprehend a piece more fully. This level of engagement with a text will vastly improve not only your awareness and knowledge of the piece, but also your connection to it, which will make the experience more intimate, as well as more enjoyable. Once personally invested, it will not be hard to want to interact with the text. Outside research can also enlighten certain aspects of a composition. Knowledge of the author or the era of the work will ultimately enhance the reader's understanding. As the audience begins to realize why the author wrote what (s)he did in the manner that (s)he did, a richer meaning behind the text will subsequently follow.

The All American

"Homage to Phillip K. Dick" - Norman Dubie

"The illegal ditch riders of the previous night
Will deliver ice today.
The barbers up in the trees are Chinese.
They climb with bright cleats, bearing machetes—
It’s a season
Of low self-esteem for date palms on the street.

My visitor was at the door yesterday.
In a blue sere of a sucker suit.
An I Like Ike button
On the lapel. Holding a cup of sawdust.
He breathed through his eyes, crusted
With pollen.

I was not confused. It was God
Come to straighten my thoughts.
Whole celestial vacuums
In the trunk of his pink Studebaker.
We would smoke and cough.
I sat very still, almost at peace with myself.

He had shot a deer in the mountains. He thought
Last year’s winterkill was worse than usual.
I told him I didn’t know about guns.
Something forming on his forehead—a gloriole
Of splattered sun over snow.
We drank our lemonade in silence.

He asked if he could go. He joked
About his wife’s tuna casserole. As a gift
I signed for him my last paperback.
He left the book of matches. I’ll not enroll
In the correspondence course it offers
For commercial artists. What a relief

That the barbers in the trees are Chinese.
Green fronds are dropping in twos and threes
Around the bungalow, lessons
In the etiquette of diseased parrots. Bill Cody
Said it first, “If there is no God, then I am
His prophet.” Stop it. Please stop it."

Amidst the extensive research and discussion, the only thing I found out for sure about Philip K. Dick was that a myriad of people were sure quick to label the man as insane. For me, however, Philip K. Dick does not conjure up an image of illicit drug use and vivid hallucination, but rather represents the quintessential American. I see a man who suffered immensely in his lifetime, a man who endured great hardship, just like his country. Philip K. Dick witnessed the pain of three major wars, felt the commingling of fear and fascination as the atom bomb fell, and sensed the urgency of civil rights. Dick's life is synonymous to American life, and not just through the events that all Americans share through a strained and collective memory, but through the more personal encounters that Philip K. Dick endured as well. Philip K. Dick's only sibling and twin sister died six weeks after their birth where both of their names were inscribed on the same tombstone; a morbid reminder of the fate that awaited the one who survived. At the age of five his parents had divorced; an event that would set an example for his future love life, as he would marry and divorce five wives throughout his lifetime. As a writer, Dick would be incredibly prolific, but only marginally successful. Philip K. Dick would be diagnosed both as a schizophrenic and as a sane man, depending on the psychiatrist. Eventually Philip K. Dick would die at the young age of 53, not from a stroke, as many believe, but rather the arbitrary decision to turn off his life support system after a series of strokes. All of these events that occurred in his life helped to characterize him as a person, but not necessarily an atypical person. American society and history is wrought with mental illness and social woes. Dick's parents certainly were not the first to divorce each other. Philip's sister Jane, was not the first of a pair of twins to die, while the other survived. No one event in Philip's life was unusual or uncharacteristic of American life. In fact, one of the first purely American religious sects, Mormonism, came about as a result of hallucinations that were, in some respect, similar to those Philip K. Dick experienced. Ultimately, America was founded on the strange and the weird, the Kafkaesque and the obscene. From the Puritans to the Boston Tea Party to The Three-Fifths Compromise to the Civil War, Philip K. Dick is certainly no more unusual than the United States of America, or the rest of the world for that matter. Classic Americana consists of the moon landing, and the Twilight Zone, Coney Island, and the 49ers. So why are people so quick to judge and undermine the genius of this man? Like other American attributes, Philip K. Dick also showed a great talent for imagination and ingenuity. In many ways, Philip K. Dick was a prophet and a doctor of the modern world. He envisioned where society was headed, and identified contemporary problems that would need to be addressed. Through his writing he confronted the issues that faced America and the ideologies of the modern world. He asked confounding questions, and sometimes the illusive answers would wear his mind to the boundaries of sanity. Perhaps, people cannot come to terms with his inescapable inquiries or his unparalleled intellect, perhaps, his familiar lifestyle seems disquieting to those who seek the semblance of normalcy, or maybe they forget what it means to be American; which is a little surreal, a little odd, a little dysfunctional, and certainly imaginative.

Systematic Sampling

Very like a Whale by Brook Emery : The Poetry Foundation

Many of the dualistic tensions present in Dick's work are present here. This brings to light how very human these tensions are. Not only does Philip K. Dick struggle with constant, unending debates on the fate and nature of humanity, but so too does the rest of the world. Brook Emery is but one more example on the infinite list of humans who were dissatisfied and disconcerted by their own discoveries, observations, and inquiries. Emery brilliantly plays off the ideas of the centuries. He merges all the conflicting and disjointed ideologies of the past two centuries into a balanced portrayal of existence. The speaker of the poem encapsulates the human experience. The verses are wrought with the doubt and uncertainty of perception. Words like “seem,” “ambiguously,” “misconceive,” “unlikelihood,” “belief,” “imagined,” and “illusions,” set this tone of obscurity and confusion. Reality becomes fluid like the speaker's perception, within the context of the poem. This contrasts starkly with the theories and themes of Darwin and Dawkins, as Emery incorporates the resoluteness of science into the mix of human emotionality. The “peptides/ spelling out the phrase/ very like a whale” allude to a complex theory and practice invented and implemented by Richard Dawkins in order to prove and illuminate the nature of evolution in biological mechanisms, also known as Dawkin's weasel. The fact that Richard Dawkins chose to use Shakespeare in his experiments is mirrored throughout Emery's poem. The “clouds,” “camels,” “weasels,” and “whale[s],” of Hamlet's sky are all present within the text, and enrich its meaning. The idea that Hamlet was a character who could be both sane and insane within the context of the plot, and the fact that Richard Dawkins chose to use Hamlet to prove a wildly complex series of patterns, adds to this tone of surrealism and delusion. Emery uses these scientific discoveries to play off the notion that his words, the events that surround him, and his life have been naturally selected in a reality that is both wondrously illusive and positively concrete at the same time.

Oh, the Semblance of Sanity

Dictionary.com defines “reality” as “the state or quality of being real.” The site then goes on to define “real” as “something that actually exists.” In truth, there aren't many things on this earth that are objectively, positively, materialistically, singularly, real or in a state of verifiable existence. Ultimately, what people generally perceive as reality has been, to some extent, demolished. A state of existence, any state of existence, remains purely subjective and relative. One person's reality can completely differ from another person's reality. The reality of a young Somalian boy does not in any way resemble that of a middle-aged white man from Boston. So we must accept that reality takes many forms at the same time, or that reality does not exist in the previously established context. Einstein proved, or appeared to prove, all this through his research and discovery of relativity. Soon things that were always considered materialistic and verifiable were dismissed as toys of perception, such as space and time. This now applies to the entirety of the universe. By disproving, or putting into question, this one aspect of so-called reality, we must now learn to deny or question anything that was implicitly acknowledged as reality. If existence is based on the principle of experience and all that can be measured by the senses, then reality cannot exist. How do we know we are experiencing what we are experiencing? Descartes' age-old aphorism “I think, therefore I am” holds little to no validity. According to the principles of science, observation, and rational thinking, descended from the Enlightenment, it should be “I think, therefore I think.” Despite it's Yogi Berra-like appearance, I still believe this sentiment holds value. The only proof in thinking is that you thought you had a thought at one point in time that may or may not have existed in reality. Measuring the present enters the realm of the absurd and the impossible. All we can do is attempt to measure the past, which is a figment of perception, and lacks verification. This is why humans have dedicated their lives to history and have documented their lives with the greatest care, because of an existential need to prove that they exist and have existed in reality. However, whatever anyone has documented or written or done has been in the past, which is not in the realm of reality because it is not existing at that moment in time. As soon as a thought or feeling or reaction enters your brain the experience has already passed. Another outlook to this paradox of the human condition is expressed by Buddha, “All that we are is the result of what we have thought. The mind is everything. What we think, we become.” While similar to Descartes' inference, I find Buddha's quote much more realistic in terms of the relationship he cites between the nature of existence, reality, and perception. Buddha places emphasis on the past tense; “[what] we are is... what we have thought.” The present condition and perception of all things is a result of what we have already thought, and what has been placed in the past. Since the past does not exist as something that can be experienced or measured in terms of the present, and the present is dependent on the past, there is neither past nor present. Just as Herskovits wrote regarding cultural relativism, one person may swear on his life that he was possessed by God, whereas another person would attribute the experience to hallucinatory pathology. Both perceptions are mute because both the experience and the diagnosis occurred in the past, and are therefore beyond the field of objectivity, but rather subjectivity. As I said before reality is dependent on the realm of measurable experiences and data, which are all fluid, intangible, and subject to manipulation through the means of personal perception. All of humanity is an abstraction, created on the assumption that what I may or may not have felt or experienced a few milliseconds ago actually occurred. This is an absurd and naïve assumption that simply cannot be proved, because as soon as you measure the synapses in the brain firing, which alludes to a possible reaction to something in the environment, the data has elapsed into the intangible former world of experience. The events that comprise our daily lives, the assumptions, the complacency is a ruse to make existence conceivable to the human mind, and is brought about by an inherent need for placement, meaning, and emotional security in a confusing and complex state. Furthermore, I completely realize the insanity and illogic present in all of these statements, because they were all conceived in the past and all constructed on past assumptions and evidence. In many ways, however, this just reaffirms my argument on the absurdity of trying to define reality, because nothing actually exists in a measurable, present form. Perhaps this is just my way of being contrarian for the sheer fun of it. However, whether verifiable or not, I still maintain that consciousness, experience, existence and reality could be illusory. So maybe it would be more appropriate to consider the second definition of “reality” that www.dictionary.com lists after all this confusion; “resemblance to what is real.”

Oral Traditions and The Colloquial Man

Oral communication and presentation constitute an immensely large portion of human existence, as well as academic endeavor. However, I feel scholars, and people in general, spend little time analyzing the way humans speak, or appreciating the art of storytelling, which, after all, catalyzed the formation and practice of the written word. Harry Smith, similar to Professor Higgins, could tell what county of the United States a man or woman originated after hearing them sing but a few bars of music. The oral tradition is so vital to our way of life, yet so depreciated. The progression and proliferation of technology has helped to alienate people from actually speaking on a day to day basis. So, I would like to spend some time honoring a person whom I feel embodies this slowly dying art form: Louis CK. In my opinion, Louis CK represents the perfect communion of the spoken and written language. I'm sure many would disagree with this statement, considering the high volume of profanity Louis CK uses in his routines, however, he is one of the few comedians who really considers the role of linguistics in everyday life, and the impact our lack of verbal skills has on the quality of society as a whole.



Louis CK even expands on the definitions and placement of specific diction within our culture. By writing out vulgar language and expanding upon the connotations of certain words, he attempts to understand and define these words with rationality, as opposed to placing common vocabulary among the taboo. In addition, Louis frequently says these words during his performances and in public, thus confronting the idea that a word in and of itself can be abusive, and removing these words from a context of fear and obscenity. I believe Louis CK would be a strong advocate of Cervantes' words, “The pen is the tongue of the mind." The idea that we all must own up to the words we use, hone our narrative skills, and portray an image with the honesty of a newly conceived thought, would certainly resonate with his bizarre sense of integrity.



Considering Louis has been in stand-up since he was nineteen, avid listeners can see his progression as an artist. More importantly his body of work materializes Joan Didion's thoughts on writing; she once wrote,“I write entirely to find out what I’m thinking, what I’m looking at, what I see and what it means. What I want and what I fear.” Louis hasn't always possessed this sense of aestheticism and sincerity. As a younger, less enlightened man, he felt that he could get by with a hollow Vaudeville-style act. As the years went by, he got married and had children, faced economic difficulties, and the same domestic troubles that nearly every family faces. He could no longer relate the product he was selling, the product being himself. He felt that the man on stage did not reflect the man in the mirror. So he changed his style and content to match how he felt. This emotional element makes his work viable. By using a frame of reference, recognizable to every dysfunctional family on the face of the earth, he was not only able to create a satisfactory profession on a personal level, but connect with the audience in a profoundly cathartic way. If the laughing in the background were to be cut from the audio of his work, and another man were to read his material dry, the effect would be tragic. Fortunately, Louis doesn't intend to make people cry or feel sympathetic toward him, but rather, allows the audience to relate to and laugh with him over the traumatic experiences in their own life. The audience doesn't simply laugh at a bunch of inane babble, but rather can identify with the experiences and observations Louis has on a daily basis. Brutally honest, brave, unashamed, candid, and at the same time therapeutic, Louis provides a service unmatched in the literary and performing world.

versus

Unafraid and unhindered by the prospect of judgment and persecution, Louis uses comedy and the art of oral communication to invite opportunities for analysis and objective, critical thinking. Whether it's an existential examination of modern society, an exposé on the perversity of mankind, or just a wildly embarrassing confession, Louis, in some cases, uses the stage as a soapbox or pulpit. This enhances the thematic quality of his work above mere entertainment. Whether deliberately didactic, Louis' work always manages to inspire empathy, tolerance, inquiry, and greater comprehension of this complex world, along with a few liberating laughs. Louis CK, quite frankly, epitomizes the words of T.S. Eliot “Only those who risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go.”

Mr. Renard Sends His Warm Regards

Everything. Simply everything. Everything comes to mind when I read Philip's work. And I feel like I can call him Philip too. His writing makes him so vulnerable and transparent, so familiar and, yet, so fallible, he makes intimate friends of us all. We know his follies, his lack of self-esteem, his immense intelligence, his heartbreaking hardships. When an author can make me break into tears on the twenty-first page of a two hundred and forty-four page novel, I know not only that this man has skill as a writer, but that the emotions of this novel come from a genuine and sincere place, Philip K. Dick to be exact. More than the brutal honesty and inquiry that makes any novel successful, he managed to encapsulate the entirety of existence, and even non-existence, into only a couple hundred pages. What rare and afflicting gift possessed Philip to allow him to complete such a task? The same thought flows through my head when I read Ulysses or Waiting for Godot? And I believe that, one day, Philip K. Dick will be held in the same regard as Joyce and Beckett. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, I, too, see The Odyssey. The long, exhaustive journey played out in full by Rick Deckard. The Sirens leading the protagonist astray. The imagery of forgotten quests and conquests, a horse and a fake sheep. The horse reminiscent of the Trojan Horse and the sheep evocative of that sheep's hide Odysseus wore to escape from certain death. Rick Deckard easily embodies Odysseus, as he is an imperfect character. He fought a battle for survival in his past, but nothing prepared him for the war going home. All of his values and ideals were challenged, he accomplished some dubious tasks, and he is certainly imperfect. The audience is unsure whether he likes Rick Deckard by the novel's end, the same with Odysseus. He cheated on his waiting wife, and his age is apparent by the end of the day. Perhaps, even, infertile due to the groin injury he obtained, which is certainly a symbol of age. By the last chapters of Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, Iran exemplifies the ever patient and maternal Penelope. While these parallels make a great case for certain elements in the story, I see much, much more. These symbols overlap one another to create a grand and all-encompassing vision of simply everything. Wilbur Mercer, who, in the context of The Odyssey, could be related to Calypso; a guiding force that leads Rick Deckard home, could also be interpreted as any number of historical figures, namely Jesus Christ and Buddha. Mercer most definitely shows signs of being a Christ figure. The idea of a man who can perform miracles at a very young age and then suffers persecution, also seems like Jesus. The imagery of making the grueling hike up a hillside to rejuvenate mankind and all life, while others torture him, absolutely sounds like Christ to me. The idea of rebirth and resurrection should always remind audiences of this famous man. The long period in which Mercer stays at the bottom of the hill, tormented by demonic visions of death, should remind all those who are even vaguely familiar with the New Testament of the Garden of Gethsemane. Also donkeys, sheep, and crows which appear in the novel several times are representative of three significant phases in Jesus' life. But these features don't only apply to Jesus Christ. The fact that Mercer was an orphan (see page 23, a small, but true detail) resembles the life history of Muhammad, another vitally important religious leader. The fact that Muhammad would walk the face of Mount Hira for religious meditation, also resembles Mercer's journey. It is said, according to Islamic scripture that Muhammad, after being visited by an angel, thought about committing suicide and thought that no one would believe him. This is similar to how Rick Deckard feels after experiencing life in Mercer's shoes. The affinity for animals, belief in rebirth, empathy, and unity of Mercerism mirrors many of the beliefs of Buddhists and Hindus. Hindus hold animals in high esteem, are often vegetarian, and believe in reincarnation. The same goes for Buddhists. Buddha emphasized, however, the importance of empathy, unity with fellow living things, and suffering, which are all apparent throughout the course of the novel. The Four Noble Truths can be found throughout Rick Deckard and John Isidore's ventures as both suffer tremendously in their own ways, and learn empathy and unity through common ideas of empathy and rebirth. The idea of a false reality is also present within Buddhism. The most emotional moment of Rick Deckard's venture comes when he finds a frog, a species supposed to be extinct. After learning the frog is simply an android, we can still derive great meaning from it's existence in the plot line. One: Rick Deckard suffers a supreme emotional loss because of this discovery, and, two: reality is an illusion, something that Buddha highly endorsed. Buddha felt that the only real and permanent form of existence came with Nirvana and the idea of evolved emotional capacities that could perfectly empathize and love others in the face of this illusion of reality and demoralizing desires and selfishness. However, one fact about Indian life Buddha did not advocate was the Pariah State, in which classes were strictly divided into those who were worthy of living and those who were not. This dichotomy is present in the form of “humans” versus “androids” in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? As Rick Deckard ventures out of his comfort zone, and embarks on this mission, his ideas of the value of life and what constitutes life vastly differ when he returns home the next day. This transformation is similar to, yes, Odysseus, but also Gautama Buddha's journey from luxury and ignorance to enlightenment. By the end of the day, Rick isn't entirely sure that he has done the right thing, and this is important for the reader to understand, especially that he feels guilt on behalf of and empathy for these androids, the supposed pariahs of Earth. Philip K. Dick also looks to all these religions, and many more, when picking out the specific animals present in the story, for the most saturated amount of meaning and symbolism in the context, of which I could go on forever. Ultimately each religious allusion points to the idea of the martyr, love, and a strong sense of spirituality, in this sense, Earth's society is divided in yet another way, those who believe in religion and those who identify with science and rationality. This demonstrates a tumultuous period in human history, a period that is still going on today, the ideological war between atheists and religious thinkers. Philip is clearly adroit when he brings up this topic. He recognizes the fact that many of the people who claim to advocate love and empathy perpetrate the most violence, such as the case with Rick Deckard. However, Philip also recognizes the devastation many atheist caused in being so disrespectful with regard to human faith and hope for the future, such is the case with John Isidore versus the Batys and Pris Stratton. Philip accentuates the imperfection on both sides, which really is the basis for all humanity, a poignant theme to keep in mind.

In conclusion, I thought I would leave you with some words by Walt Whitman, which I found appropriate. It is a segment from "I Sing the Body Electric" from Leaves of Grass.

"A man’s Body at auction;
I help the auctioneer—the sloven does not half know his business.

Gentlemen, look on this wonder!
Whatever the bids of the bidders, they cannot be high enough for
it;
For it the globe lay preparing quintillions of years, without one
animal or plant;
For it the revolving cycles truly and steadily roll’d.

In this head the all-baffling brain;
In it and below it, the makings of heroes."