Watch Florian Schneider (RIP) in Classic Early Kraftwerk Performances

The sev­en­ties, am I right….?

Not that I can claim to have expe­ri­enced it first­hand. But if I could have been a wit­ness to any peri­od in pop his­to­ry it would have been the decade in which exper­i­men­tal fusion move­ments invad­ed rock and roll. There was Miles Davis and his pro­tegees, of course. But there was much more besides: The Wail­ers’ fusion of rock, reg­gae, and soul; Fela Kuti’s fusion of Ghana­ian high life, James Brown funk, and Niger­ian jazz; Ryuchi Sakamoto’s fusion of indige­nous, clas­si­cal, and elec­tron­ic dance music….

Few of these influ­en­tial inter­na­tion­al artists became wide­ly known among U.S. audi­ences at the time, but we have their music to thank for some of the most inter­est­ing direc­tions post-punk and New Wave bands would take.

One of the most influ­en­tial artists of the sev­en­ties, the recent­ly depart­ed Flo­ri­an Schnei­der, who resem­bled an office man­ag­er at a Ger­man Dun­der-Mif­flin, was tru­ly an unlike­ly char­ac­ter for major inter­na­tion­al star­dom. And yet the mild-man­nered flautist from Düs­sel­dorf co-found­ed one of the most famous exper­i­men­tal fusion bands of all time with class­mate Ralf Hüt­ter.

I’m talk­ing about Kraftwerk, of course, though the label “fusion” may not espe­cial­ly come to mind when think­ing of the robot­ic Ger­man funk of the band’s major eight­ies’ releas­es. But Kraftwerk first emerged from the psych-blues-jazz-con­cep­tu­al-elec­tron­ic hybrid of the so-called “krautrock” scene, a some­what deri­sive label applied to bands like Pop­ul Vuh, Tan­ger­ine Dream, Can, and Neu!, one of the most obscure­ly influ­en­tial bands of the decade, and one whose two members—guitarist Michael Rother and drum­mer Klaus Dinger—played in an ear­ly ver­sion of Kraftwerk. “We had no father fig­ures,” says Hüt­ter. “We were part of this ’68 move­ment, where sud­den­ly there were pos­si­bil­i­ties, and we per­formed at hap­pen­ings and art sit­u­a­tions.”

For a brief time, in fact, Kraftwerk con­sist­ed only of Rother, Dinger, and Flo­ri­an Schnei­der on the flute. They made one appear­ance in this con­fig­u­ra­tion on the Ger­man TV pro­gram Beat Club. See them at the top play “Rück­stoss-Gon­do­liere.” No, it’s not at all like “Auto­bahn,” although syn­the­siz­ers were always cen­tral to the band’s sound. It’s a lot more like Pink Floyd, and they look the part. To what might we com­pare the sound of the band’s first TV appear­ance, above, live at Rock­palast in 1970? Hüt­ter, look­ing like a Ramone, plays some sort of key­tar-like synth that sounds like a dying goose; Dinger shows off his strict-yet-funky, now world-famous “motorik” beat; and Schnei­der lays down some very heavy flute grooves.

Rother and Dinger took these exper­i­ments and turned them into what David Bowie would call “the sound of the eight­ies.” He might have said the same of Kraftwerk, who heav­i­ly influ­enced Bowie, espe­cial­ly after Schnei­der and Hüt­ter adopt­ed their tongue-in-cheek businessmen/technician per­son­ae, inspired by po-faced artists Gilbert & George. Kraftwerk brought a dead­pan sense of humor to New Wave that was adopt­ed by every eight­ies syn­th­pop star from Gary Numan to Depeche Mode to New Order, whose “Blue Mon­day” was part­ly inspired by “Ura­ni­um” from 1975’s Radio-Activ­i­ty. This is a strange, tran­si­tion­al album, and one per­haps most often cit­ed by oth­er musi­cians inspired by Kraftwerk. It was their fifth album, but only the first in which they went ful­ly elec­tron­ic, and fea­tured mem­bers Karl Bar­tos and Wolf­gang Flür, who would com­plete the clas­sic line­up of the late sev­en­ties and ear­ly eight­ies.

As you can see in the “Radioac­tiv­i­ty” video fur­ther up, they have not become robots just yet. These are clear­ly humans, still a lit­tle loose and shag­gy around the edges. (If Hütter’s deliv­ery, hair­cut, and the band’s sound in gen­er­al, make you think of Joy Divi­sion’s Ian Curtis—he was a huge fan.) How sil­ly were Kraftwerk’s lat­er con­cepts? Tremen­dous­ly sil­ly. But so too was Radio-Activ­i­ty, an album full of pun­ning banal­i­ties and geeky astro­physics ref­er­ences. By the time of The Man-Machine, Schnei­der and Hüt­ter had so com­mit­ted to their roles that we might almost, for a moment, believe the fan-made video above is a “rare pilot for the uncom­mis­sioned Kraftwerk sit­com, ‘Ralf and Flo­ri­an.’” The sin­gle “Das Mod­el,” below, has a bit more of a 70s Cabaret feel to it. And maybe a bit more danc­ing than we’re used to see­ing from Kraftwerk.

They were in on the joke, but also so musi­cal­ly and tech­no­log­i­cal­ly savvy they could update its premise every few years and shift pop music in new, weird­er, fun­nier, and more dance­able direc­tions. “Do you want to know what the eight­ies will sound like?” they asked in 1981. And there was Com­put­er World, which you can see the band per­form in part below in Nagoya, Japan. Schneider’s flute is nowhere to be seen, but his pen­chant for pen­e­trat­ing, repet­i­tive grooves and waves of weird syn­the­sized sounds still dri­ves the sound. Kraftwerk’s fusion of influ­ences evolved prin­ci­pal­ly through the part­ner­ship of Schnei­der and Hüt­ter, the Richards and Jag­ger of exper­i­men­tal elec­tron­ic pop.

Kraftwerk was not a band, Hüt­ter insist­ed, but a “mul­ti-media project.” Their onstage act was what Rolling Stone’s Rob Sheffield calls “cere­bral tech­nocrats” very much derived from their per­son­al­i­ties, espe­cial­ly Schnei­der’s, mag­ni­fied into per­for­mance art. “Kraftwerk is not a band,” Schnei­der said back in 1975. “It’s a con­cept. We call it ‘Die Men­schmas­chine,’ which means ‘the human machine.’ We are not the band. I am me. Ralf is Ralf. And Kraftwerk is a vehi­cle for our ideas.” Yet those ideas, which Schnei­der tend­ed to express in cold­ly ana­lyt­ic terms, also pro­duced some of the most joy­ful­ly dance­able music ever made. That is the para­dox of Kraftwerk, and their genius, from Dinger’s motorik beats to the puls­ing synths built by Hüt­ter and Schnei­der. They tru­ly achieved a musi­cal syn­the­sis, one that hon­ored the human desire for groove and melody and the machine’s desire for inhu­man sounds and robot­ic pre­ci­sion.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Kraftwerk’s First Con­cert: The Begin­ning of the End­less­ly Influ­en­tial Band (1970)

Pio­neer­ing Elec­tron­ic Com­pos­er Karl­heinz Stock­hausen Presents “Four Cri­te­ria of Elec­tron­ic Music” & Oth­er Lec­tures in Eng­lish (1972)

Kraftwerk’s “The Robots” Per­formed by Ger­man First Graders in Adorable Card­board Robot Out­fits

The Case for Why Kraftwerk May Be the Most Influ­en­tial Band Since the Bea­t­les

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

Patti Smith’s Self Portraits: Another Side of the Prolific Artist

Young artists can under­stand­ably feel hes­i­tant about try­ing new things. It’s hard enough to com­pete as a musi­cian, for exam­ple. Why try to pub­lish poet­ry or make visu­al art, too? Old­er, more estab­lished artists who branch out often have trou­ble being tak­en seri­ous­ly in oth­er fields. Pat­ti Smith—poet, singer, mem­oirist, pho­tog­ra­ph­er, visu­al artist—has nev­er seemed to suf­fer in either regard. “Her art­work has been exhib­it­ed every­where from New York to Munich,” notes Dan­ger­ous Minds, “and in 2008 a large ret­ro­spec­tive of Smith’s art­work (pro­duced between 1967 and 2007) was shown at the Foun­da­tion Carti­er pour l’Art Con­tem­po­rain in Paris.”

Smith “isn’t an artist who is eas­i­ly cat­e­go­rized,” writes cura­tor John Smith. “She moves flu­id­ly…. Her work and her career defy the tra­di­tion­al bound­aries of both the art and music worlds. To under­stand Smith’s work is to under­stand the organ­ic qual­i­ty of what she does.”

Her pro­duc­tions are all of a piece, devel­op­ing togeth­er, in com­mu­ni­ty with oth­er artists. “Many of my draw­ings,” she says, “are the results of merg­ing cal­lig­ra­phy with geo­met­ric planes, poet­ry and math­e­mat­ics.”

There’s also the influ­ence of Robert Map­plethor­pe, who encour­aged Smith in her ear­ly twen­ties when the two famous­ly lived togeth­er as starv­ing artists in New York.

Often I’d sit and try to write or draw, but all of the man­ic activ­i­ty in the streets, cou­pled with the Viet­nam War, made my efforts seem mean­ing­less. […] Robert had lit­tle patience with these intro­spec­tive bouts of mine. He nev­er seemed to ques­tion his artis­tic dri­ves, and by his exam­ple, I under­stood that what mat­ters is the work: the string of words pro­pelled by God becom­ing a poem, the weave of col­or and graphite scrawled upon the sheet that mag­ni­fies His motion. To achieve with­in the work a per­fect bal­ance of faith and exe­cu­tion. From this state of mind comes a light, life-charged.

If you have trou­ble attain­ing that state of mind, con­sid­er heed­ing the advice Smith got from William S. Bur­roughs. In a nut­shell: do what you want, and don’t wor­ry about what oth­ers want.

But self-doubt is real. On one self-por­trait from 1971, at the top, she writes, “I got pissed. I gave up art yet here I am again.” Smith’s method for over­com­ing these com­mon feel­ings —one that emerges as a theme in her mem­oir Just Kids—might be sum­ma­rized as: imag­ine your­self in the com­pa­ny of the artists you and admire and make art in con­ver­sa­tion with them. Or as she puts it:

You look at a Pol­lock, and it can’t give you the tools to do a paint­ing like that your­self, but in doing the work, Pol­lock shares with you the moment of cre­ative impulse that drove him to do that work. And that con­tin­u­ous exchange—whether it’s with a rock and roll song where you’re com­muning with Bo Did­dley or Lit­tle Richard, or it’s with a paint­ing, where you’re com­muning with Rem­brandt or Pollock—is a great thing.

Her many self-por­traits show her in con­ver­sa­tion with artists like Aubrey Beard­s­ley, in the brood­ing 1974 draw­ing fur­ther up; Willem de Koon­ing in the 1969 work above; and maybe Robert Rauschen­berg in “Pat­ti Rides Her Coney Island Pony,” from 1969, below. She tried on many dif­fer­ent styles, but Smith could also cre­ate fine­ly ren­dered real­ist por­traits, like those of her and Map­plethor­pe at the bot­tom. Her tal­ent is unde­ni­able, but we’d nev­er know it if she hadn’t first tak­en her­self seri­ous­ly as an artist.

See more of Smith’s work at Dan­ger­ous Minds.

via Dan­ger­ous Minds

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Pat­ti Smith’s 40 Favorite Books

How Pat­ti Smith “Saved” Rock and Roll: A New Video Makes the Case

Beau­ti­ful New Pho­to Book Doc­u­ments Pat­ti Smith’s Break­through Years in Music: Fea­tures Hun­dreds of Unseen Pho­tographs

Pat­ti Smith’s Award-Win­ning Mem­oir, Just Kids, Now Avail­able in a New Illus­trat­ed Edi­tion

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

Star Trek: World-Building Over Generations—Pretty Much Pop: A Culture Podcast #42

The world-wide Trib­ble infes­ta­tion and Star Trek: Picard drop­ping make this an apt time to address our most philo­soph­i­cal sci-fi fran­chise. 44 years of thought exper­i­ments (with pho­ton tor­pe­does!) about what it is to be human should have taught us some­thing, and Bri­an Hirt, Eri­ca Spyres, and Mark Lin­sen­may­er along with Drew Jack­son (Eri­ca’s hus­band) reflect on what makes a Star Trek sto­ry, world build­ing over gen­er­a­tions in Gene Rod­den­ber­ry’s land, canon you don’t remem­ber vs. some­thing that just has­n’t been shown on screen, Trek vs. Wars, and step-chil­dren like The Orville and Galaxy Quest.

We have gath­ered a heap of arti­cles for fur­ther cog­i­ta­tion:

For some sug­gest­ed episodes to catch up on, there are lists online rec­om­mend­ing those from the orig­i­nal series and from the fran­chise over­all. There are also fan cre­ations like these orig­i­nal series episodes, a Star Trek musi­cal, and of course the Impro­vised Star Trek pod­cast. For some rel­e­vant words from Rod Rod­den­ber­ry, check out episode 55 of the Mis­sion Log pod­cast.

Learn more at prettymuchpop.com. This episode includes bonus dis­cus­sion that you can only hear by sup­port­ing the pod­cast at patreon.com/prettymuchpop. This pod­cast is part of the Par­tial­ly Exam­ined Life pod­cast net­work.

Pret­ty Much Pop: A Cul­ture Pod­cast is the first pod­cast curat­ed by Open Cul­ture. Browse all Pret­ty Much Pop posts or start with the first episode.

 

Juilliard Students & the New York Philharmonic Perform Ravel’s Bolero While Social Distancing in Quarantine

Like every­one else in COVID-19 iso­la­tion, Juil­liard stu­dents are itch­ing to get out and play. For them, the desire is a lit­tle more of an imper­a­tive. With­out meet­ing and rehears­ing togeth­er, these ded­i­cat­ed artists at the begin­ning of their careers can’t hone their skills. “In nor­mal times,” writes Ben­jamin Sosland at the Juil­liard Jour­nal, “Juilliard’s halls are buzzing with col­lab­o­ra­tions: string quar­tets, jazz ensem­bles, and singers rehears­ing in prac­tice rooms on the fourth floor; dancers cre­at­ing new chore­og­ra­phy on the third floor; HP stu­dents embell­ish­ing bass lines togeth­er in Room 554, the main harp­si­chord stu­dio; actors doing ensem­ble work in the leg­endary Room 301.”

Social dis­tanc­ing has been a sac­ri­fice for these artists, but rather than give it up, they’ve made the best of things with the edit­ed col­lab­o­ra­tion just above, Bolero Juil­liard. It’s easy to lose sight of the fact that this is a col­lage of indi­vid­ual per­for­mances, even though that’s exact­ly what we see before our eyes.

The move­ments are so well chore­o­graphed, the per­for­mances so pitch per­fect­ly timed, that we sus­pend our dis­be­lief. We do not hear the flubbed lines, missed cues, sour notes, and cracked jokes that must hap­pen at even the high­est lev­els of per­for­mance. But you too would put your best foot for­ward if you knew you’d be per­form­ing (in a sense) with such illus­tri­ous Juil­liard alum­ni as Yo-Yo Ma, Lau­ra Lin­ney, Pat­ti Lupone, and Itzhak Perl­man, all of whom make an appear­ance.

“Pro­posed by [Juil­liard] Pres­i­dent Dami­an Woet­zel and under the artis­tic lead­er­ship of chore­o­g­ra­ph­er… Lar­ry Keig­win,” Sosland reports, the vir­tu­al col­lab­o­ra­tion brings togeth­er “dancers, instru­men­tal­ists, singers, actors, and alum­ni” in a ver­sion of an in-per­son piece Keig­win has staged in 14 cities around the U.S. over the past sev­er­al years. Mau­rice Ravel’s Bolero is itself “a par­tic­u­lar­ly col­lab­o­ra­tive com­po­si­tion in that it pass­es the melod­ic theme through a series of solos,” Grace Ebert writes at Colos­sal. “The sequen­tial per­for­mances high­light the dis­tinct tones and sounds of each instru­ment, whether it be a flute, vio­lin, or the anom­alous sax­o­phone.”

It is a piece that direct­ly express­es the expe­ri­ence of play­ing togeth­er in iso­la­tion, which is per­haps why the New York Phil­har­mon­ic also chose to play Bolero, togeth­er while apart in a video trib­ute to “the health­care work­ers on the front lines of the COVID-19 cri­sis.” With­out the intense chore­og­ra­phy and painstak­ing mon­tage effects of Bolero Juil­liard, the video doesn’t sus­tain the illu­sion that these musi­cians are actu­al­ly play­ing togeth­er, but close your eyes and you may imag­ine you’re in the audi­ence, lis­ten­ing to them from the stage instead of from their homes. It’s some­thing these musi­cians clear­ly do joy­ful­ly, out of grat­i­tude and love of their art… and also prob­a­bly because it’s how they’ll have to play togeth­er for the fore­see­able future.

via Kot­tke

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Hear a 1930 Record­ing of Boléro, Con­duct­ed by Rav­el Him­self

Live Per­form­ers Now Stream­ing Shows, from their Homes to Yours: Neil Young, Cold­play, Broad­way Stars, Met­ro­pol­i­tan Operas & More

The Met Opera Stream­ing Free Operas Online to Get You Through COVID-19

Metal­li­ca Is Putting Free Con­certs Online: 6 Now Stream­ing, with More to Come

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

3D Interactive Globes Now Online: Spin Through an Archive of Globes from the 17th and 18th Century

Willem Jan­szoon Blaeu Celes­tial Globe 1602

No mat­ter how accus­tomed we’ve grown over the cen­turies to flat maps of the world, they can nev­er be per­fect­ly accu­rate. Strict­ly speak­ing, no map can per­fect­ly cap­ture the ter­ri­to­ry it describes (an impos­si­bil­i­ty mem­o­rably fic­tion­al­ized by Jorge Luis Borges in “On Exac­ti­tude in Sci­ence”), but there’s a rea­son we also call the Earth “the globe”: only a globe can rep­re­sent not just the plan­et’s true shape, but the true shape of the land mass­es on which we live. This is not to say that globes have always been accu­rate. Like the his­to­ry of map­mak­ing, the his­to­ry of globe-mak­ing is one of edu­cat­ed (or une­d­u­cat­ed) guess­es, free mix­ture of fact and leg­end, and labels like “ter­ra incog­ni­ta” or “here be drag­ons.” You can see that for your­self in the British Library’s new online his­toric globe archive — and not just through flat pho­tographs and scans.

“The archive presents 3D mod­els of 11 globes — a sub­set of the library’s his­toric maps col­lec­tion — that can be rotat­ed and zoomed into for greater detail at every angle,” writes Hyper­al­ler­gic’s Sarah Rose Sharp. She points to one in par­tic­u­lar, “stun­ning 1602 celes­tial globe by Dutch car­tog­ra­ph­er Willem Jan­szoon Blaeu, first pro­duced in 1602. In addi­tion to rep­re­sent­ing the con­stel­la­tions as their fan­tas­tic and mytho­log­i­cal name­sakes, it iden­ti­fies a nova in the con­stel­la­tion of Cygnus which Blaeu had per­son­al­ly observed in 1600.”

The British Library’s dig­i­tal col­lec­tion boasts sev­er­al such “celes­tial globes,” which chart the sky rather than the Earth. How­ev­er few of us have ever turned a celes­tial globe by hand, we can now do it vir­tu­al­ly. If 1602 seems a bit too vin­tage, give a dig­i­tal spin to the oth­ers from 1700, 1728, and 1783.

Back on land, these globes fea­ture not just “fan­tas­tic crea­tures,” Sharp writes, but “charm­ing archa­ic con­cep­tions of the oceans — the ‘Ata­lantick Ocean’ in the 1730 Richard Cushee ter­res­tri­al globe, or the ‘Ethipoic Ocean’ in the 1783 ter­res­tri­al globe by G. Wright and W. Bardin.” In Chushee, Wright and Bardin’s times, few globe-users, or indeed globe-mak­ers, would have had the chance to see much of those vast bod­ies of water for them­selves. Of course, with the cur­rent state of pan­dem­ic lock­down in so many coun­tries, few of us are tak­ing transocean­ic jour­neys even today. If you’re dream­ing about the rest of the world, spend some time with the British Library’s 3D-mod­eled globes on Sketch­fab — where you’ll also find the Roset­ta Stone and Bust of Nefer­ti­ti among oth­er arti­facts pre­vi­ous­ly fea­tured here on Open Cul­ture — and get your hands on an idea of how human­i­ty imag­ined it in cen­turies past.

via Hyper­al­ler­gic

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Enchant­i­ng Video Shows How Globes Were Made by Hand in 1955: The End of a 500-Year Tra­di­tion

Watch the Mak­ing of the Dymax­ion Globe: A 3‑D Ren­der­ing of Buck­min­ster Fuller’s Rev­o­lu­tion­ary Map

Why Mak­ing Accu­rate World Maps Is Math­e­mat­i­cal­ly Impos­si­ble

The Strik­ing­ly Beau­ti­ful Maps & Charts That Fired the Imag­i­na­tion of Stu­dents in the 1880s

Down­load 91,000 His­toric Maps from the Mas­sive David Rum­sey Map Col­lec­tion

The His­to­ry of Car­tog­ra­phy, “the Most Ambi­tious Overview of Map Mak­ing Ever Under­tak­en,” Is Free Online

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall, on Face­book, or on Insta­gram.

Drive-In Concerts and Even Raves Are Becoming the Rage in Europe

If we are to remain social­ly dis­tant in the com­ing months of the pandemic—and near­ly every rep­utable health expert says we should—at least 21st cen­tu­ry tech­nol­o­gy has pre­pared us for life lived in iso­la­tion. If we insist on going out, we may see a 20th cen­tu­ry inno­va­tion become even more pop­u­lar. The dri­ve-in the­ater has returned as a safe venue for movies, con­certs, and even raves, at least in Den­mark, where the city of Aarhus recent­ly staged a dri­ve-in con­cert by singer-song­writer Mads Langer. “500 tick­ets sold out in min­utes,” reports Forbes. “The fol­low­ing day, the stage became a dri­ve-in cin­e­ma” show­ing Star Wars Episode IX. 

The first in a series, the dri­ve-in shows are part of a larg­er trend in Europe. Pro­mot­ers in Lithua­nia have launched sim­i­lar events out­side Vil­nius. And if you’re won­der­ing what a dri­ve-in rave looks like, won­der no more—Germany held the first of many a few days back.

Does it look like a pre­cur­sor to the world of Mad Max: Fury Road? As some com­menters have sug­gest­ed, enough events like these around the world might be just what we need to accel­er­ate deser­ti­fi­ca­tion. But it’s a fun idea, with unde­ni­ably nos­tal­gic built-in brand­ing.

Dri­ve-in the­aters are dis­tinct­ly tied to teenage romances of the 1950s and envi­ron­men­tal­ly mon­strous vehi­cles large enough for very com­fort­able dou­ble dates. Their ori­gins are less roman­tic than the stereo­type. “The first patent­ed dri­ve-in was opened on June 6, 1933 by Richard Holling­shead in New Jer­sey,” notes the New York Film Acad­e­my. “He cre­at­ed it as a solu­tion for peo­ple unable to com­fort­ably fit into small­er movie the­ater seats after cre­at­ing a mini dri­ve-in for his moth­er. Appeal­ing to fam­i­lies, Holling­shead adver­tised his dri­ve-in as a place where ‘The whole fam­i­ly is wel­come, regard­less of how noisy the chil­dren are.’”

 

It is unlike­ly many par­ents today would sit through a dri­ve-in show with noisy chil­dren, when every­one can stay home with their own pri­vate screen. But for Matt Langer fan Signe Nygaard, a par­ent and for­mer gym­nast, the dri­ve-in made a dream come true. The singer invit­ed her onstage. “A few years ago,” she says, “I was sup­posed to dance at a con­ven­tion where Mads Langer sang live, but I couldn’t because I was preg­nant. Now I final­ly got the chance.” There will be feel­go­od sto­ries in the pan­dem­ic, but I do hope they stayed six feet apart.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Live Per­form­ers Now Stream­ing Shows, from their Homes to Yours: Neil Young, Cold­play, Broad­way Stars, Met­ro­pol­i­tan Operas & More

Free: Austin City Lim­its Opens Up Video Archives Dur­ing COVID-19 Pan­dem­ic

Sooth­ing, Uplift­ing Resources for Par­ents & Care­givers Stressed by the COVID-19 Cri­sis

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

‘Never Be Afraid’: William Faulkner’s Speech to His Daughter’s Graduating Class in 1951

By the start of the 1950s, the eupho­ria felt by Amer­i­cans after win­ning World War II had giv­en way to a per­va­sive atmos­phere of dread.

The Sovi­ets had explod­ed their first atom­ic bomb, McCarthy­ism had reared its head, and Amer­i­ca’s school­child­ren would soon be told to “Duck and Cov­er” at the first sound of a civ­il defense siren.

It was in this cli­mate of pal­pa­ble fear that William Faulkn­er was asked by his daugh­ter, Jill, to speak to her grad­u­at­ing class of 1951 at Uni­ver­si­ty High School in Oxford, Mis­sis­sip­pi. Faulkn­er was at the height of his fame.

Only a few months ear­li­er, in Novem­ber of 1950, he had trav­eled to Swe­den to accept the Nobel Prize in Lit­er­a­ture. In his speech at Stock­holm, Faulkn­er said that “the basest of all things is to be afraid”:

“Our tragedy today is a gen­er­al and uni­ver­sal phys­i­cal fear so long sus­tained by now that we can even bear it. There are no longer prob­lems of the spir­it. There is only the ques­tion: When will I be blown up?”

Faulkn­er expand­ed on the theme dur­ing the speech to his daugh­ter’s high school class, deliv­ered May 28, 1951 at Ful­ton Chapel on the cam­pus of the Uni­ver­si­ty of Mis­sis­sip­pi, or “Ole Miss.”

The occa­sion was some­thing of a home-town tri­umph for Faulkn­er, who had dropped out of high school with­out a diplo­ma. The excerpt above is from a short doc­u­men­tary released in 1952 called, sim­ply, William Faulkn­er. Two pas­sages from the speech are omit­ted in the film. You can read the com­plete text below. Faulkn­er begins with a pas­sage from Hen­ri Esti­enne’s 1594 book Les Prémices: “If youth only knew; if age only could.”

“Years ago, before any of you were born, a wise French­man said, ‘If youth knew; if age could.’ We all know what he meant: that when you are young, you have the pow­er to do any­thing, but you don’t know what to do. Then, when you have got old and expe­ri­ence and obser­va­tion have taught you answers, you are tired, fright­ened; you don’t care, you want to be left alone as long as you your­self are safe; you no longer have the capac­i­ty or the will to grieve over any wrongs but your own.

“So you young men and women in this room tonight, and in thou­sands of oth­er rooms like this one about the earth today, have the pow­er to change the world, rid it for­ev­er of war and injus­tice and suf­fer­ing, pro­vid­ed you know how, know what to do. And so accord­ing to the old French­man, since you can’t know what to do because you are young, then any­one stand­ing here with a head full white hair should be able to tell you.

“But maybe this one is not as old and wise as his white hairs pre­tend to claim. Because he can’t give you a glib answer or pat­tern either. But he can tell you this, because he believes this. What threat­ens us today is fear. Not the atom bomb, nor even fear of it, because if the bomb fell on Oxford tonight, all it could do would be to kill us, which is noth­ing, since in doing that, it will have robbed itself of its only pow­er over us: which is fear of it, the being afraid of it. Our dan­ger is not that. Our dan­ger is the forces in the world today which are try­ing to use man’s fear to rob him of his indi­vid­u­al­i­ty, his soul, try­ing to reduce him to an unthink­ing mass by fear and bribery — giv­ing him free food which he has not earned, easy and val­ue­less mon­ey which he has not worked for; the economies and ide­olo­gies or polit­i­cal sys­tems, com­mu­nist or social­is­tic or demo­c­ra­t­ic, what­ev­er they wish to call them­selves, the tyrants and the politi­cians, Amer­i­can or Euro­pean or Asi­at­ic, what­ev­er they call them­selves, who would reduce man to one obe­di­ent mass for their own aggran­dize­ment and pow­er, or because they them­selves are baf­fled and afraid, afraid of, or inca­pable of, believ­ing in man’s capac­i­ty for courage and endurance and sac­ri­fice.

“That is what we must resist, if we are to change the world for man’s peace and secu­ri­ty. It is not men in the mass who can and will save man. It is man him­self, cre­at­ed in the image of God so that he shall have the pow­er to choose right from wrong, and so be able to save him­self because he is worth sav­ing — man, the indi­vid­ual, men and women, who will refuse always to be tricked or fright­ened or bribed into sur­ren­der­ing, not just the right but the duty too, to choose between jus­tice and injus­tice, courage and cow­ardice, sac­ri­fice and greed, pity and self — who will believe always not only in the right of man to be free of injus­tice and rapac­i­ty and decep­tion, but the duty and respon­si­bil­i­ty of man to see that jus­tice and truth and pity and com­pas­sion are done.

“So, nev­er be afraid. Nev­er be afraid to raise your voice for hon­esty and truth and com­pas­sion, against injus­tice and lying and greed. If you, not just you in this room tonight, but in all the thou­sands of oth­er rooms like this one about the world today and tomor­row and next week, will do this, not as a class or class­es, but as indi­vid­u­als, men and women, you will change the earth; in one gen­er­a­tion all the Napoleons and Hitlers and Cae­sars and Mus­soli­n­is and Stal­ins and all the oth­er tyrants who want pow­er and aggran­dize­ment, and the sim­ple politi­cians and time-servers who them­selves are mere­ly baf­fled or igno­rant of afraid, who have used, or are using, or hope to use, man’s fear and greed for man’s enslave­ment, will have van­ished from the face of it.”

When he was fin­ished, Faulkn­er gave his copy of the speech to the edi­tor of the local news­pa­per. At a par­ty after­ward he reportedly said, “You know, I nev­er knew how nice a grad­u­a­tion could be. This is the first one I’ve ever been to.”

To watch the full film from which the speech is tak­en, see our ear­li­er post: “Rare 1952 Film: William Faulkn­er on His Native Soil in Oxford, Mis­sis­sip­pi.”

Relat­ed Con­tent:

William Faulkn­er Reads His Nobel Prize Speech

Sev­en Tips From William Faulkn­er on How to Write Fic­tion

7 Nobel Speech­es by 7 Great Writ­ers: Hem­ing­way, Faulkn­er and More

Quarantined Family Re-Creates Journey’s “Separate Ways” Video Shot-by-Shot

The Heller fam­i­ly writes: “Soli­tary con­fine­ment does strange things to the best of us and this quar­an­tine was real­ly hav­ing an effect. My wife texted me and said, ‘we need to remake a music video.’ I thought that sound­ed like a lot of work, but her per­sis­tence paid off and here we are. Enjoy!”

via Boing­Bo­ing

by | Permalink | Make a Comment ( 4 ) |

« Go BackMore in this category... »
Quantcast
Open Culture was founded by Dan Colman.