The 2,000+ Films Watched by Presidents Nixon, Carter & Reagan in the White House

family-theater-reagan

Many of us keep a record of the movies we watch. Few of us, how­ev­er, lead the free world. As the reli­able sales num­bers of pres­i­den­tial biogra­phies (no mat­ter how thick) attest, the actions of the Pres­i­dent of the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca, no mat­ter who that Pres­i­dent may be and no mat­ter what sort of actions that Pres­i­dent takes, always draw inter­est. For instance, you may have seen that Pale­o­fu­ture’s Matt Novak recent­ly went through Jim­my Carter’s diaries to draw up a list of every sin­gle movie Carter watched dur­ing his Pres­i­den­cy.

“Part of my fas­ci­na­tion with the movies that pres­i­dents watch is just cheap voyeurism,” Novak writes. “But the oth­er part is an earnest belief that pop­u­lar cul­ture influ­ences things in the real world. Pres­i­dent Nixon was obsessed with the film Pat­ton dur­ing the Viet­nam War. Pres­i­dent Rea­gan urged Con­gress to take com­put­er secu­ri­ty seri­ous­ly after see­ing War Games in 1983.” And you can learn what else they watched by pulling up What Nixon Saw and When He Saw It by Nixon at the Movies author Mark Feeney, and the list of films Mr. and Mrs. Rea­gan viewed from the Ronald Rea­gan Pres­i­den­tial Library.

Nixon watched sev­er­al depic­tions of hard-bit­ten heroes (and anti­heroes) tough­ing out their trou­bles: not just Pat­ton, but Bul­littTrue GritIce Sta­tion ZebraOur Man in Havana, The Trea­sure of the Sier­ra MadreSpar­ta­cus, and Lawrence of Ara­bia — with the occa­sion­al Paint Your Wag­on or Aun­tie Mame thrown in there as well. Carter hewed a bit clos­er to the over­all Amer­i­can cin­e­mat­ic zeit­geist, watch­ing such era-defin­ing films as RockyNet­workStar WarsAir­port ’77Annie HallAni­mal HouseThe Last Pic­ture ShowApoc­a­lypse Now, Alien, and 10. 

Rea­gan, famous­ly a film actor him­self, watched all sorts movies, though his list shows a cer­tain pref­er­ence for mil­i­tary-themed spec­ta­cles like Gal­lipoliInchonDas BootFire­foxRed DawnIron Eagle, and Top Gun, as well as sports pic­tures like Break­ing AwayThe Win­ning Team, and even Knute Rockne, All Amer­i­can, in which he him­self por­trayed foot­ball play­er George Gipp, a role that anoint­ed him with the nick­name that would stick until the end.

The Free­dom of Infor­ma­tion act assures us that we’ll have the chance to study the in-office view­ing habits of many pres­i­dents to come. Novak, in fact, has already put in a request for the lists from George H.W. Bush, Bill Clin­ton, and George W. Bush: “They said I can expect the list in 46 months.” Well, the wheels of gov­ern­ment do grind slow­ly, after all — we’ve learned that from the movies.

Below you can find a list of the first 10 films each pres­i­dent watched upon tak­ing office. The dif­fer­ence in their cul­tur­al sen­si­bil­i­ties imme­di­ate­ly leaps out.

Nixon (list of 528 films here):

  • The Shoes of the Fish­er­man 
  • The Sound of Music 
  • The Sand Peb­bles
  • Play Dirty 
  • Doc­tor Zhiva­go 
  • Where Eagles Dare 
  • Camelot 
  • A Man for All Sea­sons
  • May­er­ling 
  • Twist­ed Nerve

Carter (list 403 films here):

  • All the President’s Men
  • One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest 
  • Net­work
  • Rocky 
  • The God­fa­ther 
  • The Mag­ic Chris­t­ian 
  • Buf­fa­lo Bill and the Indi­ans 
  • The Bad News Bears
  • The Shoo­tist 
  • Butch Cas­sidy and the Sun­dance Kid 

Rea­gan (list of 363 films here)

  • Trib­ute
  • Nine to Five
  • Black Stal­lion
  • Break­ing Away
  • Oh God, Book II
  • Tess
  • Being There
  • The Com­pe­ti­tion
  • Blood­line
  • The Mir­ror Crack­’d

via Pale­o­Fu­ture

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Por­traits of Vice Pres­i­dents with Octo­pus­es on Their Heads — the Ones You’ve Always Want­ed To See

Watch a Wit­ty, Grit­ty, Hard­boiled Retelling of the Famous Aaron Burr-Alexan­der Hamil­ton Duel

Pres. Oba­ma Releas­es a Free Playlist of 40 Songs for a Sum­mer Day (Plus 6 Books on His Sum­mer Read­ing List)

Lyn­don John­son Orders New Pants on the Phone and Requests More Room for His … John­son (1964)

Col­in Mar­shall writes else­where on cities, lan­guage, Asia, and men’s style. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­maand the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future? Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

A Great Compilation of “The Lick” Found in Music Everywhere: From Coltrane & Stravinsky, to Christina Aguilera

A cou­ple years ago, we brought you a post on the his­to­ry of the “Amen Break,” six sec­onds of sam­pled drums from a gospel instru­men­tal that—since sam­pling began in the 80s—has became a ubiq­ui­tous rhyth­mic ele­ment in vir­tu­al­ly every pop­u­lar genre of rhythm-based music, from hip-hop, to drum and bass, to EDM. While the tech­nol­o­gy that enabled the “Amen Break” may be unique to the dig­i­tal era, the sam­ple’s end­less iter­a­tions show us some­thing time­less about how music evolves.

Pick­ing up on Richard Dawkins’ 1976 coin­ing of the term “meme,” Susan Black­more argued in The Meme Machine that “what makes us dif­fer­ent” from oth­er ani­mals “is our abil­i­ty to imi­tate…. When you imi­tate ssome­one else, some­thing is passed on. This ‘some­thing’ can then be passed on again, and again, and so take on a life of its own.” In this the­o­ret­i­cal schema, the meme is a fun­da­men­tal unit of cul­ture, and the “Amen Break” is indeed a per­fect exam­ple of how such units guide cul­tur­al evo­lu­tion. So is anoth­er very wide­ly imi­tat­ed melod­ic ele­ment in jazz and rock and roll. Var­i­ous­ly tran­scribed as “Doo Ba Doo Pee Dwee Doo Ahh” or “Doo ba dih bee dWee doo daah” or oth­er non­sense syl­lab­ic sequences, it is just as often referred to sim­ply as “The Lick.”

Licks are, in gen­er­al, part of the stan­dard vocab­u­lary of every musi­cian. They come in all forms, writes sax­o­phon­ist, com­pos­er, and music the­o­rist Joe San­ta Maria—“Cool, Skanky, Soft, Crunchy, Salty, Dirty, Screamin’, Sul­try, Tasty”—and they get repeat­ed again and again. But there is one lick in par­tic­u­lar, as you can see and hear in the super­cut above, that—like the “Amen Break”—has man­aged to seed itself every­where. “The Lick,” it seems, “per­vades music his­to­ry.” It shows up in Stravinsky’s “Fire­bird,” Player’s “Baby Come Back,” Christi­na Aguilera’s “Get Mine, Get Yours.” Writes San­ta Maria, “Every­one from Coltrane to Ken­ny G has put this hot lick to the test.” It even has its own Face­book page, where users sub­mit exam­ple after exam­ple of appear­ances of “The Lick.”

Unlike the “Amen Break,” which can be defin­i­tive­ly traced to a sin­gle source (the B‑side of a 1969 sin­gle called “Col­or Him Father”), no one seems to know where exact­ly “The Lick” came from. At some point, its ori­gin ceased to mat­ter. While cer­tain licks are played very self-con­scious­ly, San­ta Maria admits, “to wow and mys­ti­fy,” or “entrance groupies like the pied piper,” the arche­typ­al, defin­i­tive­ly named “The Lick” seems to have worked itself so deeply into our musi­cal uncon­scious that many play­ers and com­posers like­ly have no idea they’re repro­duc­ing a musi­cal quo­ta­tion. For what­ev­er rea­son, and your guess is as good as mine, “The Lick” has become a gen­uine musi­cal meme, a “unit of imi­ta­tion” that prop­a­gates musi­cal cul­ture wher­ev­er it lands.

via Twist­ed Sifter

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The “Amen Break”: The Most Famous 6‑Second Drum Loop & How It Spawned a Sam­pling Rev­o­lu­tion

A His­to­ry of Rock ‘n’ Roll in 100 Riffs

Cab Calloway’s “Hep­ster Dic­tio­nary,” A 1939 Glos­sary of the Lin­go (the “Jive”) of the Harlem Renais­sance

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

18-Year-Old James Joyce Writes a Fan Letter to His Hero Henrik Ibsen (1901)

JamesJoyce1902

When it comes to the­o­ries of artis­tic lin­eage, few have been as influ­en­tial as Harold Bloom’s The Anx­i­ety of Influ­ence, in which the august lit­er­ary crit­ic argues, “Poet­ic Influence—when it involves two strong, authen­tic poets—always pro­ceeds by a mis­read­ing of the pri­or poet, an act of cre­ative cor­rec­tion that is actu­al­ly and nec­es­sar­i­ly a mis­in­ter­pre­ta­tion.” This kind of misreading—what Bloom calls “mis­pri­sion”—often takes place between two artists sep­a­rat­ed by vast gulfs of time and space: the influ­ence of Dante on T.S. Eliot, for exam­ple, or of Shake­speare on Her­man Melville.

When we come to a study of James Joyce (1882–1941), how­ev­er, we find the ground­break­ing mod­ernist cor­re­spond­ing direct­ly with one of his fore­most lit­er­ary heroes, Nor­we­gian play­wright Hen­rik Ibsen (1828–1906), whom Maria Popo­va calls Joyce’s “spir­i­tu­al and men­tal ances­tor.” As Bloom points out, Joyce described Ibsen’s work as being “of uni­ver­sal import.” He  extolled and defend­ed Ibsen’s then-con­tro­ver­sial work in his stu­dent days, both in a 1900 lec­ture he deliv­ered at Uni­ver­si­ty Col­lege, Dublin, and in an essay he pub­lished that same year in the Lon­don jour­nal Fort­night­ly Review. (See the young Joyce above in 1902, at 20 years of age.)

Joyce’s arti­cle, “Ibsen’s New Dra­ma,” focused on the play­wright’s lat­est, When We Dead Awak­en, and was warm­ly received by Ibsen him­self, who—through his Eng­lish trans­la­tor William Archer—described the essay as “velvil­lig,” or “benev­o­lent.” Archer con­veyed Ibsen’s sen­ti­ments in a let­ter soon after the essay’s pub­li­ca­tion, and there­after, Joyce’s essay—writes the James Joyce Cen­tre—was “no longer just a review but a review that Ibsen had read and praised.”

Thus began a three-year cor­re­spon­dence between Joyce and Archer, and a friend­ly relationship—at some remove—between Joyce and Ibsen. In 1901, on the play­wright’s 73rd birth­day, Joyce wrote a let­ter to Ibsen direct­ly. He men­tions the cir­cum­stances of the review and express­es much youth­ful admi­ra­tion, self-con­fi­dence, and grat­i­tude for Ibsen’s response. The young Joyce laments that his “imma­ture and hasty arti­cle” came to Ibsen’s atten­tion first, “rather than some­thing bet­ter,” and boasts, “I have claimed for you your right­ful place in the his­to­ry of dra­ma.”

Read the let­ter in full below, in all its exu­ber­ant ego­tism. Accord­ing to James Joyce A to Z: The Essen­tial Ref­er­ence to the Life and Work, as he matured, the nov­el­ist “drew upon Ibsen less for cre­ative encour­age­ment than for psy­cho­log­i­cal inspi­ra­tion. In Joyce’s mind, Ibsen remained the mod­el of the artist who defies con­ven­tion­al cre­ative approach­es and who remains true to the demands of an indi­vid­ual aes­thet­ic.” Whether Joyce “mis­read” and “cre­ative­ly cor­rect­ed” Ibsen is a ques­tion I leave for oth­ers. You can read many more “fan let­ters” writ­ten by oth­er famous authors to their lit­er­ary heroes—including George R.R. Mar­tin to Stan Lee, Charles Dick­ens to George Eliot, and Ray Brad­bury to Robert Heinlein—at Fla­vor­wire.

Hon­oured Sir,

I write to you to give you greet­ing on your sev­en­ty-third birth­day and to join my voice to those of your well-wish­ers in all lands. You may remem­ber that short­ly after the pub­li­ca­tion of your lat­est play ‘When We Dead Awak­en’, an appre­ci­a­tion of it appeared in one of the Eng­lish reviews — The Fort­night­ly Review — over my name. I know that you have seen it because some short time after­wards Mr. William Archer wrote to me and told me that in a let­ter he had from you some days before, you had writ­ten, ‘I have read or rather spelled out a review in the Fort­night­ly Review by Mr. James Joyce which is very benev­o­lent and for which I should great­ly like to thank the author if only I had suf­fi­cient knowl­edge of the lan­guage.’ (My own knowl­edge of your lan­guage is not, as you see, great but I trust you will be able to deci­pher my mean­ing.) I can hard­ly tell you how moved I was by your mes­sage. I am a young, a very young man, and per­haps the telling of such tricks of the nerves will make you smile. But I am sure if you go back along your own life to the time when you were an under­grad­u­ate at the Uni­ver­si­ty as I am, and if you think what it would have meant to you to have earned a word from one who held so high a place in your esteem as you hold in mine, you will under­stand my feel­ing. One thing only I regret, name­ly, that an imma­ture and hasty arti­cle should have met your eye, rather than some­thing bet­ter and wor­thi­er of your praise. There may not have been any will­ful stu­pid­i­ty in it, but tru­ly I can say no more. It may annoy you to have your work at the mer­cy of striplings but I am sure you would pre­fer even hot­head­ed­ness to nerve­less and ‘cul­tured’ para­dox­es.

What shall I say more? I have sound­ed your name defi­ant­ly through a col­lege where it was either unknown or known faint­ly and dark­ly. I have claimed for you your right­ful place in the his­to­ry of the dra­ma. I have shown what, as it seemed to me, was your high­est excel­lence — your lofty imper­son­al pow­er. Your minor claims — your satire, your tech­nique and orches­tral har­mo­ny — these, too, I advanced. Do not think me a hero-wor­ship­per. I am not so. And when I spoke of you, in debat­ing-soci­eties, and so forth, I enforced atten­tion by no futile rant­i­ng.

But we always keep the dear­est things to our­selves. I did not tell them what bound me clos­est to you. I did not say how what I could dis­cern dim­ly of your life was my pride to see, how your bat­tles inspired me — not the obvi­ous mate­r­i­al bat­tles but those that were fought and won behind your fore­head — how your will­ful res­o­lu­tion to wrest the secret from life gave me heart, and how in your absolute indif­fer­ence to pub­lic canons of art, friends and shib­bo­leths you walked in the light of inward hero­ism. And this is what I write to you of now.

Your work on earth draws to a close and you are near the silence. It is grow­ing dark for you. Many write of such things, but they do not know. You have only opened the way — though you have gone as far as you could upon it — to the end of ‘John Gabriel Bork­man’ and its spir­i­tu­al truth — for your last play stands, I take it, apart. But I am sure that high­er and holi­er enlight­en­ment lies — onward.

As one of the young gen­er­a­tion for whom you have spo­ken I give you greet­ing — not humbly, because I am obscure and you in the glare, not sad­ly because you are an old man and I a young man, not pre­sump­tu­ous­ly, nor sen­ti­men­tal­ly — but joy­ful­ly, with hope and with love, I give you greet­ing.

Faith­ful­ly yours,

James A. Joyce

via Fla­vor­wire

Relat­ed Con­tent:

James Joyce Reads From Ulysses and Finnegans Wake In His Only Two Record­ings (1924/1929)

James Joyce’s “Dirty Let­ters” to His Wife (1909)

The Very First Reviews of James Joyce’s Ulysses: “A Work of High Genius” (1922)

Vir­ginia Woolf Writes About Joyce’s Ulysses, “Nev­er Did Any Book So Bore Me,” and Quits at Page 200

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Columbia U. Launches a Free Multimedia Glossary for Studying Cinema & Filmmaking

Columbia Film Language Glossary

You can find no short­age of clas­sic films to watch on Open Cul­ture. (See our col­lec­tion: 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More.) But what we haven’t giv­en you is a toolk­it for engag­ing in a more for­mal study of these films. Enter The Colum­bia Film Lan­guage Glos­sary, devel­oped at the Cen­ter for New Media Teach­ing and Learn­ing at Colum­bia Uni­ver­si­ty.

The free/open resource uses a com­bi­na­tion of text, film clips, and audio com­men­tary to explain terms essen­tial to the study of film — words like Cin­e­ma Ver­itéMon­tage, and Mise-en-Scène. And it also defines a lot of nuts-and-bolts con­cepts like Aspect RatioHigh-Angle Shot and Long Take.

The Colum­bia Film Lan­guage Glos­sary “is avail­able to any stu­dent of film. Def­i­n­i­tions and audio com­men­tary are writ­ten and nar­rat­ed by fac­ul­ty at Colum­bia Uni­ver­si­ty.” You can dive in right now, right here.

h/t Peter Kauf­man

If you would like to sign up for Open Culture’s free email newslet­ter, please find it here. Or fol­low our posts on Threads, Face­book, BlueSky or Mastodon.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

A Visu­al Intro­duc­tion to Sovi­et Mon­tage The­o­ry: A Rev­o­lu­tion in Film­mak­ing

Hitch­cock on the Filmmaker’s Essen­tial Tool: The Kuleshov Effect

Alfred Hitchcock’s Sev­en-Minute Edit­ing Mas­ter Class

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 1 ) |

The Solar System Drawn Amazingly to Scale Across 7 Miles of Nevada’s Black Rock Desert


Wylie Over­street and Alex Gorosh set out to cre­ate some­thing you’ve nev­er seen before — our solar sys­tem drawn to actu­al scale. For­get what you’ve seen in books, or on web sites. To depict things accu­rate­ly, you need a big­ger sur­face. A real­ly large can­vas. Like a sev­en-mile expanse in Nevada’s Black Rock Desert (which oth­er­wise hosts The Burn­ing Man Fes­ti­val). It’s on this dry lakebed that Over­street and Gorosh built “the first scale mod­el of the solar sys­tem with com­plete plan­e­tary orbits” and it’s a sight to behold. Cre­ative, indus­tri­ous, and hum­bling. Enjoy.

Fol­low us on Face­book, Twit­ter, Google Plus and LinkedIn and share intel­li­gent media with your friends. Or bet­ter yet, sign up for our dai­ly emailAnd if you want to make sure that our posts def­i­nite­ly appear in your Face­book news­feed, just fol­low these sim­ple steps.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Free Online Astron­o­my Cours­es

Mag­ni­fy­ing the Uni­verse: Move From Atoms to Galax­ies in HD

Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawk­ing & Arthur C. Clarke Dis­cuss God, the Uni­verse, and Every­thing Else

Lawrence Krauss Explains How You Get ‘A Uni­verse From Noth­ing’

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 4 ) |

A Film Festival of Kick Ass Kung Fu/Martial Arts Films in the Public Domain

Every­one remem­bers their first kung-fu movie — or every­one remem­bers their first wave of kung-fu movies, any­way. For some, they came late at night on the less-explored fre­quen­cies of the tele­vi­sion broad­cast­ing spec­trum; for oth­ers, they came on sparse­ly attend­ed dou­ble- and triple-bills at the local dis­count the­ater. They looked fad­ed and mud­dy, but some­how still vivid; they felt cheap­ly pro­duced, yet full of life and ener­gy; and as for how they sound­ed, time has turned their both hol­low and the­atri­cal Eng­lish-lan­guage dub­bing into an art form with con­nois­seurs of its own. They came from far­away lands, which ren­dered them exot­ic, but we expe­ri­enced them almost as dreams, prod­ucts of anoth­er real­i­ty alto­geth­er. And some of them you can expe­ri­ence again as pub­lic domain films.

We still call them “kung fu movies” even though, hav­ing grown old­er and wis­er — or at least more cul­tur­al­ly aware — we now know their heroes did­n’t always defeat their ene­mies with the Chi­nese mar­tial arts cov­ered by that umbrel­la term. But the label applies well enough to 1977’s Leg­end of Shaolin, the Hong Kong-made epic at the top of the post set in the 13th-cen­tu­ry Yuan Dynasty and deal­ing with that most kung-fu of all themes, revenge. But such his­tor­i­cal “kung fu” pic­tures could also come from coun­tries like Japan, an exam­ple of which you can thrill to just above: 1983’s Leg­end of the Eight Samu­rai fea­tures Son­ny Chi­ba, liv­ing embod­i­ment of the 1970s mar­tial-arts film, under the direc­tion of the pro­lif­ic and respect­ed provo­ca­teur Kin­ji Fukasaku, best known today as the mak­er of the con­tro­ver­sial Bat­tle Royale.

Next in this pub­lic-domain mar­tial-arts marathon, we have anoth­er Hong Kong movie, Guy with the Secret Kung Fu from 1981, whose title alone strikes me as rec­om­men­da­tion enough. And for our final selec­tion, we move to a more con­tem­po­rary set­ting with 1987’s Four Rob­bers, where­in the tit­u­lar quartet—pursued by both the police and a malev­o­lent crime syn­di­cate that at first wants to recruit them and lat­er wants revenge against them—have to flee from Hong Kong to Thai­land with­out gam­bling away the fruits of their labor or com­pro­mis­ing their prin­ci­ples. This movie, and many oth­ers of its kind, give the lie to the notion that there’s no hon­or among thieves. Most all of the wan­der­ers, samu­rai, rebels, aris­to­crats, cops, and rob­bers you see in them have one kind of hon­or or anoth­er — but when they come into con­flict, it tends to take some old-fash­ioned kung-fu fight­ing to set­tle things. You can find these films added to our col­lec­tion, 4,000+ Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, Doc­u­men­taries & More, which includes more 23 Free Kung Fu and Mar­tial Arts Movies Online.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

700 Free Movies Online: Great Clas­sics, Indies, Noir, West­erns, etc.

Rad­i­cal French Phi­los­o­phy Meets Kung-Fu Cin­e­ma in Can Dialec­tics Break Bricks? (1973)

The Five Best North Kore­an Movies: Watch Them Free Online

The 5 Best Noir Films in the Pub­lic Domain: From Fritz Lang’s Scar­let Street to Ida Lupino’s The Hitch-Hik­er

Col­in Mar­shall writes else­where on cities, lan­guage, Asia, and men’s style. He’s at work on a book about Los Ange­les, A Los Ange­les Primer, the video series The City in Cin­e­maand the crowd­fund­ed jour­nal­ism project Where Is the City of the Future? Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall or on Face­book.

William S. Burroughs Reads Edgar Allan Poe Tales in the Vintage 1995 Video Game, “The Dark Eye”

William S. Bur­roughs, like Christo­pher Walken, has one of those voic­es that casts any­thing he reads in a new light. No mat­ter who the author, if Bur­roughs reads it, the text sounds like one more mis­sive from the Inter­zone. In 1995, Bur­roughs took on the mas­ter of the macabre, Edgar Allan Poe, read­ing “The Masque of the Red Death” and the poem Annabel Lee for a lit­tle known PC game called The Dark Eye.

Ignored dur­ing its release, the game has since gained cult sta­tus, and playthroughs can be found on YouTube (see below). Sim­i­lar in style to Myst, play­ers point and clicked their way through three nar­ra­tives based on Poe sto­ries, with lit­tle inter­ac­tion. In the end it was more about mood and design, and the creep of Bur­roughs’ drawl. (He also voiced the old man char­ac­ter in the game.)

Accom­pa­ny­ing Bur­roughs’ read­ing was a slideshow that popped up in the mid­dle of the game, with art direct­ed (and pos­si­bly drawn) by Bruce Heav­in, best known these days as the co-founder of Lynda.com. Thomas Dol­by com­posed the gloomy sound­track. The Dark Eye was the sec­ond game from Inscape, which debuted with the equal­ly ambi­tious Bad Day on the Mid­way, a game fea­tur­ing weird music giants The Res­i­dents. Two years after The Dark Eye, the sort of CD-ROM games the com­pa­ny made fell behind due to advances in tech­nol­o­gy, and the fall of the house of Inscape came inevitably in 1997.

The Inter­net con­tin­ues to exca­vate what’s left of these bound­ary push­ing games, and for those who want an audio ver­sion of “Masque”, an mp3 can be enjoyed here.

via WFMU blog

Relat­ed Con­tent:

William S. Bur­roughs Teach­es a Free Course on Cre­ative Read­ing and Writ­ing (1979)

William S. Bur­roughs on Sat­ur­day Night Live, 1981

Iggy Pop Reads Edgar Allan Poe’s Clas­sic Hor­ror Sto­ry, “The Tell-Tale Heart”

1,000 Free Audio Books: Down­load Great Books for Free

Ted Mills is a free­lance writer on the arts who cur­rent­ly hosts the FunkZone Pod­cast. You can also fol­low him on Twit­ter at @tedmills, read his oth­er arts writ­ing at tedmills.com and/or watch his films here.

Mark Twain Skewers Great Works of Art: The Mona Lisa (“a Smoked Haddock!”), The Last Supper (“a Mournful Wreck”) & More

Mona_Lisa

Some of the U.S.‘s great­est sec­u­lar sages also hap­pen to be some of its great­est cranks, con­trar­i­ans, and crit­ics. I refer to a cat­e­go­ry that includes Ambrose Bierce, H.L. Menck­en, and Hunter S. Thomp­son. The many dif­fer­ences between these char­ac­ters don’t eclipse a fun­da­men­tal sim­i­lar­i­ty: not a one embraced any of the usu­al pieties about the inher­ent, infal­li­ble great­ness of West­ern Civ­i­liza­tion, though each one in his own way made a sig­nif­i­cant con­tri­bu­tion to the West­ern canon. We would be great­ly remiss if we did not include among them per­haps the great­est Amer­i­can satirist of all, Mark Twain.

Twain skew­ered all com­ers, usu­al­ly with such wit and inven­tion that we smile and nod even when we feel the sting our­selves. Such was his tal­ent, to deflate puffery in West­ern lit­er­a­ture, pol­i­tics, reli­gion, and… as we will see, in art. “Through­out his career”—writes UC Berke­ley’s Ban­croft Library—“Twain expressed his strong reac­tions to West­ern paint­ing and sculp­ture, par­tic­u­lar­ly the Old Mas­ters, both in his pub­lished works and in pri­vate.” He offered up some hilar­i­ous­ly irrev­er­ent takes on some of the most revered works of art in his­to­ry: “his opin­ions are often pas­sion­ate, some­times eccen­tric, and always live­ly.” Take for exam­ple Twain’s tepid assess­ment of that most rec­og­niz­able of Renais­sance mas­ter­pieces, the Mona Lisa. In an unpub­lished draft called “The Inno­cents Adrift,” an account of an 1891 boat trip down the Rhone Riv­er, Twain “admit­ted to being puz­zled by the adu­la­tion accord­ed” the paint­ing.

Leonardo_da_Vinci_-_Ultima_cena_-_ca_1975

To Twain, the Mona Lisa seemed “mere­ly a good rep­re­sen­ta­tion of a serene & sub­dued face… The com­plex­ion was bad; in fact it was not even human; there are no peo­ple of that col­or.” The paint­ing’s green­ish hue prompt­ed one of Twain’s com­pan­ions, pos­si­bly an inven­tion of the author’s, to exclaim in response, “that smoked had­dock!” “After some dis­cus­sion,” write the UC Berke­ley librar­i­ans, “the trav­el­ers con­cede that it requires a ‘trained eye’ to appre­ci­ate cer­tain aspects of art.” Such train­ing in art appre­ci­a­tion seemed to Twain as much gen­uine edu­ca­tion as instruc­tion in stud­ied, insin­cere pos­es.

The author took his first “grand tour” in 1867—travelling through Europe and the Lev­ant on the cruise ship Quak­er City in the com­pa­ny of many “prosperous—and very proper—passengers.” Unlike these bour­geois trav­el­ling com­pan­ions’ “con­ven­tion­al appre­ci­a­tion for all that they saw,” Twain—writing as a cor­re­spon­dent for the San Fran­cis­co Alta Cal­i­for­niacon­fessed him­self under­whelmed. In par­tic­u­lar, he described anoth­er Da Vin­ci, The Last Sup­per—“the most cel­e­brat­ed paint­ing in the world”—as a “mourn­ful wreck.” (The work was then unre­stored; see it above as it looked 100 years lat­er in the 1970s.) Twain lat­er revised his obser­va­tions for his first full-length book, 1869’s Inno­cents Abroad, a car­i­ca­ture of ugly Amer­i­can tourists filled with what William Dean How­ells called “deli­cious impu­dence.” While the oth­ers mar­veled at Da Vin­ci’s crum­bling fres­co, Twain, in the cur­rent par­lance, expressed a great big “meh.”

The world seems to have become set­tled in the belief, long ago, that it is not pos­si­ble for human genius to out­do this cre­ation of Da Vin­ci’s.… The col­ors are dimmed with age; the coun­te­nances are scaled and marred, and near­ly all expres­sion is gone from them; the hair is a dead blur upon the wall, and there is no life in the eyes.… I am sat­is­fied that the Last Sup­per was a very mir­a­cle of art once. But it was three hun­dred years ago.

the-slave-ship

Twain and the pro­fes­sion­al crit­ics did not always dis­agree. Take J.M.W. Turn­er’s famous­ly riotous can­vas Slave Ship (or Slavers Over­throw­ing the Dead and Dying: Typhoon Com­ing On), above. John Ruskin may have praised the work as the “noblest sea… ever paint­ed by man” and it has come down to us as a vio­lent rep­re­sen­ta­tion of the hor­rors of the slave trade, occa­sioned in part, writes Stephen J. May, by Turn­er’s sense of “shared guilt about his own role and Eng­land’s role in con­don­ing and per­pet­u­at­ing slav­ery’s malev­o­lent lega­cy.” The anti-slav­ery, anti-impe­ri­al­ist Twain would sure­ly have appre­ci­at­ed the sen­ti­ment; the paint­ing, how­ev­er, not so much. Oth­er crit­ics felt sim­i­lar­ly, one call­ing Slave Ship a “gross out­rage on nature.” Twain’s sum­ma­tion in an 1878 note­book is much more col­or­ful, a piece of vin­tage Samuel Clemens under­cut­ting: “Slave Ship—Cat hav­ing a fit in a plat­ter of toma­toes.”

Censored Titian

For all his snide por­traits of con­ven­tion­al mid­dle-class atti­tudes toward art, Twain could also be a bit of a prig, as we see in his response to Titian’s Venus of Urbino. In this, he was not so far removed from our own cul­tur­al atti­tudes (or Face­book and Google’s atti­tudes) about nudi­ty. The cen­sored ver­sion of the paint­ing above (see the orig­i­nal here) comes to us via Buz­zfeed, who write “Remem­ber kids, blood and gore are fine but boobs will make you blind.” Twain seemed to have uniron­i­cal­ly agreed, rail­ing in his 1880 trav­el book A Tramp Abroad against the “inde­cent license” afford­ed artists and call­ing Titian’s sug­ges­tive reclin­ing nude “the foulest, the vilest, the obscen­est pic­ture the world pos­sess­es.” (Ah, if only he had lived to see the inter­net’s foulest depths.)

twain-sketch

Twain’s own mea­ger con­tri­bu­tions to the visu­al arts—consisting of a dozen sketch­es, like that above, made for A Tramp Abroad—fall some­what short of the stan­dards he set for oth­er artists. Nev­er­the­less, he recalled in The Inno­cents Abroad his dis­may at the “acres of very bad draw­ing, very bad per­spec­tive, and very incor­rect pro­por­tions” in the muse­ums and church­es across Europe. What, we might won­der, could pos­si­bly move such a harsh, unspar­ing crit­ic? In art, it seems, Twain val­ued “strict real­ism, grandeur of theme and scale, and propriety”—all on dis­play in abun­dance in Amer­i­can artist Fred­er­ic Edwin Church’s The Heart of the Andes, below.

Church_Heart_of_the_Andes

After view­ing this ide­al­ized South Amer­i­can land­scape in St. Louis, Twain called the enor­mous (over five feet high by ten feet wide) can­vas a “most won­der­ful­ly beau­ti­ful paint­ing.” “We took the opera glass­es,” he wrote to his broth­er, “and exam­ined its beau­ties minute­ly…. There is no slur­ring of per­spec­tive about it.” He rec­om­mend­ed mul­ti­ple view­ings: “Your third vis­it will find your brain gasp­ing and strain­ing with futile efforts to take all the won­der in… and under­stand how such a mir­a­cle could have been con­ceived and exe­cut­ed by human brain and human hands.”

Twain, won over by this sub­lime spec­ta­cle, seems to have tem­porar­i­ly sur­ren­dered his crit­i­cal fac­ul­ties. In read­ing his response, I found myself want­i­ng to egg him on: C’mon, what about this soft, gauzy light­ing, those lumpy moun­tains, and the kitschy, over­ly-sen­ti­men­tal look of the whole thing? But there was room enough in Twain’s crit­i­cal arse­nal for gen­uine awe as for amused con­tempt at what he saw as pho­ny expres­sions of the same. And that breadth of char­ac­ter is what made Mark Twain, well, Mark Twain.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Mark Twain Cre­ates a List of His Favorite Books For Adults & Kids (1887)

Mark Twain Drafts the Ulti­mate Let­ter of Com­plaint (1905)

Mark Twain Writes a Rap­tur­ous Let­ter to Walt Whit­man on the Poet’s 70th Birth­day (1889)

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast