Friday, 18 March 2022

Introducing the little-known writer Eugene Mahlzeit and wasting my time as usual and feeling a tad guilty but not too much. And anyway at least I am productive, if not in a very useful way

Here’s a thing: I am concentrating on finishing my ‘Hemingway bollocks’ and I am getting there. One advantage is, of course, that not only do I have no deadline, not even a self-imposed deadline, but it is of absolutely no consequence to anyone in this world whether or not I finish or even whether or not is is even interesting. No one, but no one, except me gives a flying fuck. That is an advantage.

One of my major failings since I was very young was to rush everything. Perhaps it had to do with having an older brother who was good to excellent — or so it seemed to me then — at whatever he turned his hand to. It seemed effortless. He was good at sports, I wasn’t. He was good at school, I wasn’t. I was always — and still am, though now I am proud of the fact — a plodder. Plod, plod, plod.

In my work as a newspaper sub-editor — I was only a reporter for six years — my tendency to rush, to cut corners, to make do and all the rest, was at times catastrophic, though purely in the sense, as George Bernard Shaw pointed out, that newspapers are ‘A device unable to distinguish between a bicycle accident and the collapse of civilisation’.

So take ‘catastrophic’ with a pinch of salt, as for many leaving for work without their smartphone is ‘a disaster’. Oh, and (a sub writes) note to Mr Shaw: in the generally accepted sense of the word a newspaper is not a ‘device’. ‘Institution’ might have done the trick, but we take your point.

As for my point, it is that since I retired (four years ago come Monday, April 4) I have simply stopped rushing, simply because there is really no need to rush, none at all. There are no deadlines whatsoever. And that means I give myself all the time in the world to do whatever I am doing to ensure it is just as I want it.

It would be different if, say, I had a publisher who was hassling me for ‘your second novel’. But I don’t, and the chances of that happening are rather slimmer than the Pope taking advantage of new same-sex laws and making an honest man out of Donald Trump.

This is not to say that there is no slight pressure, but it is self-imposed. Why, I have no idea, but concluding this ‘Hemingway bollocks’ so I can get on with other writing and making sure it is not embarrassing is a form of pressure, and I find I feel oddly ‘guilty’ at the end of the day if I ‘have done’ nothing, i.e. not written a bit more (or rewritten and edited with a view to improving it, on it).

I have been very good these past few months and though progress has been slow, it has been steady. Then came yesterday.

. . .

Yesterday I decided to prepare my Sony digital 8 camcorder for sale on eBay. The model is a DCR-TRV 460e. and I bought it about 20-odd years ago because it in that particular range it was one of only two that could also read analogue tapes. And I had a lot of those from my children’s childhood. 

The trouble was it had developed a fault — and I seem to remember somewhere that is was a design fault — whereby on playback there would be three thick horizontal lines of distortion across the picture. By pressing down on top of the camera this could be temporarily remedied and at the time it worked.

However, as everyone and their pussy cat can now take video on their smartphone — and I can (though the quality is not as good) I hadn’t used it in years. I recently took it out with a view to transferring some short clips to my laptop to burn on a DVD, but found that the remedy to ‘cure’ the fault didn’t work. So I decided to sell it on eBay and yesterday set about getting it ready. But this time the remedy did work.

I had only three of the many tapes I recorded to hand and went through parts of them and came across about ten minutes worth of utterly pointless shots of the lane outside our cottage. I could not and still cannot think why I recorded them.

Then at some point I decided to use them with a simple soundtrack I knocked together into a short video about little known American modernist novelist Eugene Mahlzeit (look him up though you won’t find a lot because mainstream he ain’t, but his three novels are worth it).

And this again I didn’t do any work on the ‘bollocks’ and felt guilty. No matter that I enjoyed every second of knocking together the video (below) and no matter that I succeeded in doing what I wanted to do, I still felt and feel guilty. So if you don’t enjoy it, I shall be very annoyed. Here it is:



Something else which interests, no, fascinates me is how much a soundtrack can influence or reactions to a film or video. As far as I am concerned the soundtrack, whatever it is, is crucial to eliciting the reaction the director/producer (I never know who is ultimately in charge) wants to get.

Watch a horror film with the sound off, and it very soon becomes not ‘horrible’ at all. And that soundtrack can be very, very subtle. The ‘piece of music’ I constructed — a more honest word than ‘composed’ — for my video about consists of just four notes and a recording of a clock ticking I found on Freesound.org.

It was made using Mac’s free Garageband software and consists of three tracks, each doubled up and the instrument changed and reverb. Thirteen years ago (I know that because I have just downloaded these two videos from You Tube to which I uploaded them 13 years ago) are a case in point: the exact same video but it creates a different effect merely because of the music chosen for each.

Take a look.



It is the almost identical video (I made one or two slight changes for the second, upbeat version, but nothing of relevance here) but the music used is wholly different. The first is the song Orik Gullaganda by the Azerbaijani singer Sevara Nazarkhan, and the second is (and I had to look this up using Soundhound because I couldn’t remember) Cotton Tail by duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong. The first is doomy and the images are vaguely sinister. The second is upbeat but the — same — are just images.

3 comments:

  1. well i have to say i'm intrigued by your blog with no comments but a profile with 2874 views. i found your account through your comment disparaging ernest hemingway on a blog about the meaning of 'a simple enquiry'. i was intigued that you must be at least slightly well read to take such an opinion, at least for my day

    --because im a senior in high school in california.

    the mahlzeit quote is intriguing and cant be found anywhere online(yes, looking up both book meanings and quotes. seems sad). it sounds like it's talking about time, but id be interested of your interpretation or more context

    also interesting that your profile twice mentions being a poseur, while eugene called writers phonies

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is in two parts cos Blogspot will only tolerate ‘4,096 characters’.

      Dear Anonymous,

      thank you for commenting.

      You won’t find Mahlzeit listed on the net, and you will certainly not come across any of his work, because he does not exist. He should exist, of course, as there are far too few good writers born in Duisburg, Germany, who grew up orphaned in Wisconsin and who took a deep, deep, almost pathological interest in time. (I’m assuming he was orphaned, but if his murderous dad didn’t die, young Gene — as he was known — was de facto orphaned as he never saw his dad again.) But Mahlzeit doesn’t.

      Mahlzeit first announced himself to the world in a short video I made while on holiday 13 years ago in a small resort in Ibiza, Spain, called Cala Llonga which you can find here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLfCcqmw1Mk. It consisted of photos taken on my then mobile (‘cell’ in the US) so the picture quality is crap. But then I’m not looking to win prizes.

      Here’s another video I made at the time, consisting of photos taken on the same shitty mobile phone, notably after a very, very heavy summer storm. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=566oql9YOQQ (It was September and one of the Spaniards at the hotel told me that they get very severe early autumn storms if the previous summer has been very hot, and it had been.)

      ‘Jacques Pernod’ is me. For ‘film work’, I realised I needed a name with far more cachet and clout than boring old ‘Patrick Powell’, and I chose that one as the world and his dog are inordinately impressed by all things French (when, of course, they are impressed. On other occasions the French become an Anglo-Saxon / US hate figure — I think it has to do with whether there an ‘R’ in the month, i.e. in May we love the French, in January, February, March etc they are despicable. Makes no sense, but then what does?) Oh, and Jacques Pernod did not play Schumann’s etudes. Sadly, he’s a lying little bastard (i.e. he’s French — look at the date) and can’t play piano for toffee.

      As for the ‘music’ on the soundtrack to the video above where Mahlzeit makes his second appearance, that, er, is me, using Apple Garageband (and I must confess there is a lot less to it than meets the eye. Copy and paste played a large role. But it is the overall effect that counts).

      When I saw I had a comment from ‘Anonymous’, I thought it was another Anonymous, but when I read what you had to write — that you are at high school and live in California — I realised it wasn’t her. (NB why I don’t know, but for some reason I assumed the other Anonymous is a black woman from Georgia or South Carolina. And if the other, first, Anonymous, reads this, get back in touch). I do very, very occasionally get comments, but as a rule few.

      I really don’t consider myself very well-read at all. In fact, for a guy with ‘literary’ pretensions (http://www.pfgpowell.plus.com/litstuff-home.html), I am a disgrace. I don’t know whether you have taken a look at my Hemingway blog, but if you read the Preface, you will know where I am coming from. The project is not yet completed (and I am planning to get it printed up courtesy of Amazon’s KDP, which is extraordinarily cheap for the quality) but I am getting there.

      The essential irony is that I don’t much like or enjoy reading Hemingway at all, but then one of the main points I make — which I do believe — is that literary judgements are subjective — all of them. But we get quite few, often self-important, herberts who like to lay down the law, make out their opinions are somehow more informed and thus more respectable, and who are elevated — because they have essentially been elevated by themselves and their peers — into ‘authorities on literatures. That might illuminate for you my reference — or Mahlzeit’s reference – to ‘phonies’.

      Delete
    2. The point of ‘my project’ was to ‘get into training’, i.e. learn discipline and learn to complete things and learn not to rush, not to cut corners (though quite useful for a reporter which I was to start with) and to learn to do my best however long it takes. In that respect it is paying off. I call it the Hemingway Enigma because — well, how he became so world-famous (although for your generation it might be a little hard to believe simply because you didn’t grow up with him) was an enigma. As I say, he wasn’t without a modicum of talent, but he was middling at best, and pretty much lost it by 1930. So what happened? How did it happen?

      He scored, at first, because he was so ‘different’, and, of course, every corner of the world, in this case the literary corner of the world, has an insatiable appetite for new ‘heroes’ (which is always bad news for the old heroes, but that’s life). Hemingway’s style was different, and he touched on subjects few other writers did. But that was just the short stories. The novels? Hmm, is all I can say. The Sun Also Rises? Pretty much a sour, unromantic potboiler. A Farewell To Arms? A Boys’ Own story arbitrarily couple with a very unconvincing love story (Hemingway does, though, pull of the quite difficult trick of making a character one-dimensional. Her name is Catherine Barclay.

      His early work was not terrible, but certainly they were not ‘works of genius’, which as far as I can see was just the literary establishment talking. As I was saying to someone just yesterday re the world of clothes fashion: women read that this year ‘blue will be IN! In, in in! Wear blue! Stand out! Be ahead of the pack! Blue, blue, blue of every shade, every mood and EVERY emotion!’ And who says so, who’s laying down the law? Why only the bloody people with a hell of lot of ‘blue’ to sell.

      That is the same story with Hemingway and many, many other writers/painters/artists/singers/bands. As far as I am concerned (and I worked for newspapers for 44 years), Hemingway’s strength was his journalism. He had a nice turn of phrase — though many hacks do as it happens — but essentially he was a one-trick pony — and ‘world-famous’.

      As I did with the first Anonymous, I invited him/her — but I think her — to respond and tell me more about him/herself. Sadly the invitation was not taken up. But I shall extend the same invitation to you: tell me about yourself, whatever you want. And I promise that I shall always reply at length (sadly I am cursed with being a ‘talker’. Perhaps it’s the Irish first name, I was always being told to shut up when I was a kid, and I am not at high school like you).

      Finally, it is nice to know that someone reads this blog. As far as I am concerned making an effort to write something, whether putting it down on paper or digitally, pretty much pre-supposes you want it to be read. Some protest that no, they don’t intend it to be read, but I just don’t buy all those bods who say ‘I only write for myself’. Bollocks, as we say here in Britain, pull the other one.

      Me, everything I write is for public consumption. The one, slight, exception is a ‘sister’ blog I started writing when this blog became a little too public. That second blog was supposed to be private, but only so I could let off steam and be candid and honest about my wife, family and friends (because I didn’t and don’t want to hurt them if they read it which they might have done had I written here). However, somehow one or two people have come across it, so it is not all that private, but only about three or four, and I can’t be arsed to start the whole process again.

      So, dear Anonymous, get back and stay in touch, and tell me about yourself. Be a pen pal if you like. As I say, I shall always respond.

      Thanks again and all the best,

      Patrick.

      PS If you detect even the slightest hint that I am trying to drum up and audience for this, that and t’other, you would not be wrong. What is the bloody point of writing/playing/cooking if no one is reading/listening/eating? Tell me that, Anonymous.

      Delete