The Ghosts That Haunt Me

Most people are haunted by dead relatives – parents, aunts, uncles, grandparents, siblings – but the ghosts that haunt me the most, are people I never knew.  Since I’m an atheist I don’t believe in real visitors from the other side. I don’t expect my Jacob Marley to come calling on Christmas Eve.  On the other hand, there are a number of dead people that won’t leave me alone.

Mark-Twain-by-Alvin-Langdon-Coburn

I am mostly haunted by literary figures.  The first one to do this, starting when I was a kid was Samuel Clemens.  For some reason, reading about Mark Twain was always more powerful than reading his fiction.  It started with his autobiography.  I was a kid with my life in front of me, reading about a very successful man writing about his life behind him.  Samuel Clemens led both a charmed and tragic life.  His wife and two of his three daughters died before he did, and Clemens took this very hard.  Clemens always had a sharp tongue for the human residents of Earth, but towards the end, his writing turned bitter to the point of viciousness.  I was born naïve and became a skeptic by twelve, and Clemens writings fueled my conversion to disbeliever.  I have never experienced the tragedies Clemens experienced, so I’ve yet to become bitter, a burden I hope to avoid.

Twain didn’t finish an actual autobiography, but two versions of an autobiography appeared after he died that were heavily edited collections from his voluminous autobiographical writings.   Over the decades the University of California Press released various collections of Twain’s writings, with more and more material that hadn’t been published in his lifetime.  I first got a taste of Twain’s unpublished writing as a teen with Letters from the Earth, coming out in 1962 that I didn’t read until 1968 or 1969.  Over the decades many biographies about Twain have appeared and he would haunt me again and again.

kerouac

Jack Kerouac was the next literary specter to haunt me, beginning in my twenties.  Jack died in October 1969, the fall I started college, the same year as the first Moon landing and Woodstock.  That was around the time I read The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test by Tom Wolfe.  I can’t remember if I read that first, which led to reading On the Road, of if reading On the Road led to reading The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test. Kerouac was a character in Wolfe’s book.

Kerouac was a writer like Proust and Thomas Wolfe (not Tom), who wrote books that were thinly disguised accounts of their own life.  I didn’t know this until I read the Ann Charters Kerouac: A Biography in the early 1970s.  That’s when Kerouac really began haunting me.  I’d read his books, then another new biography, and then reread the novels, and then another biography.  Kerouac became a 10,000 piece puzzle that I’ve never finished.

Even before Philip K. Dick died in 1982 he was a legendary character.  I remember reading about his paranoid theories in The Rolling Stone magazine, and stories about him in science fiction fanzines.  My college roommate even had dinner with Dick and his wife at a convention in the 1970s.  As soon as the biographies came out, I started reading them.  Like Kerouac, no matter how many puzzle pieces I found, the image I had of PKD was always shifting.  Like Twain and Kerouac, Dick was another troubled soul.  Why am I so haunted by people so torn up by their lives?

There is a book of conversations with PKD called What If Our World Is Their Heaven?  That title captures PKD’s kind of spookiness.

Louisa-May-Alcott

I read a biography of Louisa May Alcott before I read her famous book Little Women.  I started off reading about the American Transcendentalists, and found Louisa.  I read two Louisa May Alcott biographies before finally getting to Little WomenLittle Women was my mother’s favorite childhood book.  She tried to get my sister and I to read it when we were kids but I didn’t want to read a girl’s book.  But I was willing to watch Katherine Hepburn and June Allyson play Jo in the movie versions.  Over time Louisa May Alcott started haunting me too.  Another troubled soul.

Other writers haunt me too, Heinlein, Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Wells, Lawrence, Huxley, but so far I’ve only read one biography each for them.  Writers don’t appear truly ghostly until I’ve read several biographies and start reading their letters.  I have read many books on Wyatt Earp, but his appeal is different.  He doesn’t haunt me – maybe because he wasn’t a writer.  Or maybe he wasn’t a troubled soul like Twain, Kerouac, Dick and Alcott.  I’ve always loved biographies, they were among the first type of books I learned to read.  But most subjects of the biographies I read never lingered in my psyche like these four.

Interestingly, the lives of Clemens and Alcott overlapped, as did Kerouac and Dick.  Clemens and Alcott both became successes after the Civil War, becoming famous for writing about their childhoods.  Kerouac and Dick both wrote a lot of books in the 1950s that affected readers in the 1960s counter culture.  All four of them have had their share of film success – with their fictional work, and as characters themselves.  I am not the only person they haunt, not by a long shot.

There is a 1968 Burt Lancaster movie called The Swimmer based on a 1964 short story by John Cheever.  The story begins when a man at a pool party tells his friends that he thinks he can swim all the way home because there’s a pool in every yard across the suburbs to his house.  I think a wonderful account of American history could be written by just writing a series of biographies of all the American writers that span the centuries back to colonial times.  We’re used to history being about politics and war, conquest and invention, economics and industry, but I think there are many ways to look at the evolution of our culture, and the lives of these writers give a much different, and for me, a more real insight into the living through history.

I believe these writers haunt me more than the memories of my ancestors is because my relatives never wrote down their thoughts.  If my dad had written about his life, I think it would be a whole lot like Jack Kerouac’s.  They were both restless men and died miserable drunks.  I’m sure my mother and her mother loved Louisa May Alcott because their lives seemed much like hers.

For some people, the promise of prosperity never lives up to their unfolding lives, and that’s very hard to take.  Ambitious idealists usually have a long way to fall.  I’m currently reading The Unwinding by George Packer.  For all its shiny glory, the American Dream is hard to achieve.  Packer chronicles many Americans who have succeeded or failed, or both, in the last four decades.  What’s amazing about this book is the diversity of the people it presents.  Every American has a different American Dream.  I think we’re all haunted by past Americans.  I think we’re all inspired by our personal ghosts.

JWH – 9/4/13 – Happy Birthday Janis

Pre-Code Hollywood – Wikipedia v. Journalists v. Bloggers v. Friends

If you hear a new phrase, where do you go to learn its definition?  I think most people absorb concepts in context from conversations with friends, or maybe from watching television.  A few might look it up in a book.  But after that most people head to Google.  For billions of people, when they want to know something today, they Google their question.  How good is the knowledge we get from Google?  Does it have true educational value?  Does it enlighten?  How authoritative is it?

When you go to Google and search on a topic the results often brings back a Wikipedia article, articles from newspapers and magazines, maybe some book reviews, and finally articles from bloggers.  Which ones are you most likely to read first?  Wikipedia is the hive mind option, journalists are the paid professional option and bloggers are the work for free option.

I’m going to use “Pre-Code Hollywood” as my test case because several times in the past month I’ve used that phrase and then had to explain it.  Pre-Code Hollywood is a category of old movies that takes some explaining to define.  Most movie goers don’t have a clue as to what I’m talking about.  Pre-Code Hollywood refers to a time period in the early thirties, when some movies pushed the boundaries of social norms and were usually censored by one or more state censors, before national censorship took hold in the second half of 1934.  This censorship held until the 1960s.  That shaped how movies were made for a very long time.  Young people growing up in our anything goes era have no idea how movies, books, comics and television shows were sanitized for mass consumption.  Pre-Code Hollywood films are from a brief period in the early 1930s that told stories about characters breaking out of accepted norms that shocked conventional society.  Pre-Code Hollywood generally refers to the years, but to the film buffs, it’s only certain movies that push the envelope.

Dorothy-Mackaill-in-Safe-In-Hell-1931

Whether Hollywood told these stories to sell tickets, or because storytellers wanted to free the minds of their audience is debatable.  The reality was many Americans were already breaking free of 19th century morality and Hollywood was just reporting new trends.  Conservatives wanted to keep the genie in the bottle, while liberals wanted to let it all hang out.

Short of reading a book devoted to the subject, and there are such books, this essay at Wikipedia is an excellent introduction to Pre-Code Hollywood films.  If you search Google, Wikipedia is the #1 return.  #2 is images from Google, and for many people, Pre-Code Hollywood images are the story.  The returns give two books from Amazon, one of which is Pre-Code Hollywood: Sex, Immorality, and Insurrection in American Cinema, 1930-1934 by Thomas Doherty.  The New York Times presents the first chapter.  Doherty opens with a description of the censorship period.

On or about July 1934 American cinema changed. During that month, the Production Code Administration, popularly known as the Hays Office, began to regulate, systematically and scrupulously, the content of Hollywood motion pictures. For the next thirty years, cinematic space was a patrolled landscape with secure perimeters and well-defined borders. Adopted under duress at the urging of priests and politicians, Hollywood’s in-house policy of self-censorship set the boundaries for what could be seen, heard, even implied on screen. Not until the mid-1950s did cracks appear in the structure and not until 1968, when the motion picture industry adopted its alphabet ratings system, did the Code edifice finally come crumbling down.

Later on Doherty give a quick overview of the kinds of films made before the censorship period:

    In a sense pre-Code Hollywood is from another universe. It lays bare what Hollywood under the Code did its best to cover up and push off screen. Sexual liaisons unsanctified by the laws of God or man in Unashamed (1932), Blonde Venus (1932), and She Done Him Wrong (1933); marriage ridiculed and redefined in Madame Satan(1930), The Common Law (1931), and Old Morals for New (1932); ethnic lines crossed and racial barriers ignored in The Bitter Tea of General Yen (1933), The Emperor Jones (1933), and Massacre(1934); economic injustice exposed and political corruption assumed in Wild Boys of the Road (1933), This Day and Age (1933), andGabriel Over the White House (1933); vice unpunished and virtue unrewarded in Red Headed Woman (1932), Call Her Savage (1932), and Baby Face (1933)—in sum, pretty much the raw stuff of American culture, unvarnished and unveiled.

Robert Gottlieb reviews both books at The New York Times.  The other book is Sin in Soft Focus: Pre-Code Hollywood by Mark A. Vieira, a book I own and recommend.  Gottlieb says about it,

Mark A. Vieira’s ”Sin in Soft Focus” naturally covers much of the same ground, but the two books complement rather than detract from each other. ”Sin in Soft Focus” is less analytical; it lingers more lovingly on the pre-code films themselves. Its chief advantage lies in its illustration — this is an oversize book with hundreds of beautifully chosen images laid out for maximum impact; one can forgive the fact that often they’re chosen for their own sake, not to illustrate a point. But this is far from being just another pretty collection of stills. We get many detailed stories that convey exactly what was going on — for one, the battle over Garbo’s first sound film, ”Anna Christie.” Could she be allowed to inveigh against ”all men, God damn them”? (She couldn’t; the offending words were spliced out in favor of ”I hate them! I hate them!”) We also hear of von Stroheim’s elegant solution for getting one of his actors to laugh: put a string down his pants and tie it to his privates, then pull — ”and that made the guy laugh.” Now, that’s directing!

Wikipedia, The New York Times and the books give readers a comprehensive history of the era, but except for Vieira book, I’m not sure if these writers convey the love of the films.  Unless you’re a hard core Turner Classic Movie (TCM) fan, or willing to buy DVDs like the Forbidden Hollywood series, it’s not likely you’ll ever see these films.  And I have to admit, when I show these films to my friends, damn few of them enjoy them.  These films are old and quaint to eyes used to R rated Hollywood flicks.  Contemporary PG rated films show more graphic sex, violence and deviation from social norms than Pre-Code Hollywood even dreamed of filming – so were these 1930s films the Inconvenient Truth of their times that forecast things to come, or were they only a keyhole peak at what was already going on?

Loving old black and white movies from the 1930s is an acquired taste. I picked up the habit back in the 1950s watching all night movies on television.  Most of my friends, even friends my age, are put off by the acting style of the times, but I find what they call bad acting, stylish and beautiful.  It’s the difference between Benny Goodman and Lady Gaga.

There is no typical Pre-Code Hollywood film, and other than watching several of these films, it’s doubtful reading about them will convey their real essence.  There are some bloggers that go to great lengths to document and analyze these films.  Just read this extensive analysis of Ladies of Leisure (1930) by Danny at Pre-Cod.com.

Here are two clips from Jewel Robbery (1932), one of my favorites not because of the risqué dialog, but because of its 1930s Hollywood glamor style.

 

William Powell plays an suave holdup man who ends up running off with Kay Francis who is married to an older rich man.  After censorship these two characters couldn’t end up with their 1932 happy ending because censors believed criminals and adulterers couldn’t get away with their crimes after July 1, 1934.  Jewel Robbery can be found on Forbidden Hollywood Volume 4 and regularly shows up on TCM.  I love this film because I think Kay Francis is beautiful in a way modern starlets are not.  Pre-Code fans love their era partly for the daring stories, but mostly for the style of a bygone time.

kay-frances

Reading reviews by bloggers is where you find the enthusiasm of fans.  Some take a lot of time with their projects and publish photos and film clips, like here at Pre-Code.com.  Others are like at Laurasmiscmussing, who states her personal reactions to watching Jewell Robbery.  Laura didn’t like the marijuana scene.  Like me, Laura is a fan of Kay Francis.  Over at Cinema Enthusiast we get more commentary on the film with some very good stills.  Catherine has a nice comment:

Another reason the film could only have been made in 1932 is the studio system. The studio system dealt heavily in fantasy, but in a different kind of fantasy than today’s films. Today, fantasy takes the form of mystic worlds, ordinary people being pulled into unrealities beyond their wildest dreams. The studio system dealt in fantasy that fit seamlessly into a real-life setting. Fantasy rooted in glamour.

Jewel Robbery is an example of this. We are shown a world where our protagonist doesn’t have to lift a finger for herself, where jewels shine extra bright, where people appear extra soft, and where frivolity is the goal of the day. Today, we would ask ourselves, ‘why should we care about someone like Teri’. In the studio system, these characters were par for the course and we still accept them into our hearts without blinking twice. William Powell commits the most non-threatening robbery ever seen in film. Sure, he has a gun and many crooks beside him, but the atmosphere is airy as can be. His priority and pride comes from making a robbery as comfortable for the victims as possible. Robber as society guru. This kind of light comedic tone would be extremely difficult to execute in modern-day film and furthermore, it’s just not the sort of film being made today in America.

Reading blog reviews like this connects me with people like myself who do love the old movies.  Art lives by its fans, as long as the fans love a work of art, it will live on.  When an artwork loses all its fans, it dies.  Bloggers keep obscure works of art alive.  Just creating the designation of “Pre-Code Hollywood” has brought a dying era back to life.  William Powell and Myrna Loy films are quite famous, but how many people remember the seven William Powell and Kay Francis films?

Some bloggers like Cliff Aliperti love old movies far more than I do, and have the patience to write scene by scene reviews.  If I had more time, I ‘d love to blog about old movies like Cliff does.

Jewel Robbery was not a great movie, nor is it typical of Pre-Code films.  It’s on the silly side, but it was stylish for the time.  Eighty plus years later, how much of that style remains?  How many people can still resonate with its charm?  Being a fan of a forgotten art form both defines me and separates me from the herd.  I doubt when I watch Pre-Code Hollywood films that I’m attaining some kind of oneness with the people of the 1930s.  Neither is it nostalgia, since nostalgic is based on wanting to go home, and I never lived in those times.  Maybe everyone has an era in the past they are fascinated with and the early 1930s is mine.  My wife loves watching television shows from the 1960s on Sundays.  I also love 1950s westerns, 1960s comedies and 2010s television shows.  It’s hard to jive my love of 1930s movies with my love of Breaking Bad.

With modern technology of cable TV, DVDs, internet streaming services, we can all pick art and eras to love and specialize on.  I have a new friend that specializes in Ava Gardner and Frank Sinatra movies.  The web allows me to find other Pre-Code Hollywood film fans like Emma, Julie, Louie, FlickChick, Classic Movie Blog Association, Fritzi, Monty, and many more.

I don’t know when the designation “Pre-Code Hollywood” was coined, but I don’t think it’s all that old.  I believe the creation of that label has defibrillate an art form whose heart had stopped.  Reading about Pre-Code Hollywood here, or at Wikipedia or even at The New York Times won’t even give you the experience of what we’re talking about.  For that you’ll need to see some of the films.  Watch TCM or Netflix and look for:

JWH – 7/3/13

A Failure to Express Myself

How often in life do you get an idea that you can’t express verbally or in writing?  Often a flash of insight will feel whole and obvious, but like dreams, when you try to explain them their logic falls apart.  Expressing one’s thoughts is hard.  Finding words to explain how you feel is even harder.  Whether talking with your soul mate, best friend, or writing an essay for a bunch of unknown and unseen strangers, putting the exact words together is major work.  It takes persistence.

How often have you not said anything rather than struggle to find the words?  How often have you seen a fantastic movie that moved you at a very deep level, but when your friends asked you about it, all you could say was, “I loved it.”

That happens to me all the time.  And since I blog I’m always trying to express an idea that feels obvious to me but one I fail to give whole to my readers, or even to myself when I read what I’ve written months later, after I’ve forgotten the original inspiration.

What we have here is a failure to communicate, as a line in an old movie goes.

Friday I read a series of articles in Scientific American about new educational techniques and my initial feeling was a kind of revulsion.  I immediately jotted down some notes, and yesterday I wrote an essay about how I felt.  The results aren’t what I intended.  That essay was too generalized.  If I tried again, how could I approach it differently?

The first essay doesn’t convey the revulsion of my initial reaction.  I had A Clockwork Orange kind of image of educators forcing kids to learn.  I imagined teaching machines that literally forced data into children’s minds, overstuffing their little heads until they were ready to puke words.  At what point does K-12 education become cruel and unusual punishment, or even brainwashing?

Part of my initial reaction was to ask:  Are we requiring kids to learn too much?

The secondary reaction to that initial reaction is:  What is enough education?  What information should everyone have at immediate recall to make them a good and useful citizen?

Another part of my reaction is personal experience.  I read a lot of books.  I’ve read thousands of books, and tens of thousands of essays and watched thousands of documentaries, and one of the things I feel at 61 is I haven’t processed that information very efficiently, and maybe learning about reality could be more systematic and concise.

We can never know everything there is to know.  Not even close.  But K-12 and undergraduate curriculums try awful hard to give students a good approximation of all knowledge.  And part of my gut reaction to those articles in Scientific American was a criticism of not how we teach, but what we teach.  But to get into that topic would require writing a book.

I guess the feeling I wanted to communicate whole about my reaction to what I read was this:  Can our education system teach more by teaching less?  Can’t we teach kids to be self-educators, to become highly efficient autodidactics that are hungry to learn on their own?  Shouldn’t we reevaluate what the standard curriculum should be so that it’s a toolkit for learning and not a vast database?

JWH – 7/24/13

How Much Education Can Our Heads Hold?

As far back as I can remember, the United States has been in a state of educational crisis.  You’d figure by now educators would know exactly how much stuff we can squeeze into a student’s head, and the best methods for cramming all that knowledge in quickly and efficiently.  Since we hear so much about dropout factories and the failure to produce enough qualified students to meet the needs of our technologically evolving society, I have to assume pedagogy is a colossal failure, but the truth is we’re smarter than ever.  I’d even say the dumb kids are smarter than the dummies of the past.

The problem is we want to put more data in brains that haven’t gotten any bigger in the last million years.  Urban legends claim we only use five percent of our brains, but scientists know that’s not true.  It doesn’t take much living in our modern rat races to fill those suckers up.

Scientific American has produced a special report, Learning in the Digital Age for its August issue, but you can read it all by following the link.  It appears large corporations and wealthy philanthropists want to develop computers that instruct students and monitor their progress so computer programs can automatically adapt teaching methods on the fly, and thus constantly improve the spoon feeding of young minds.  Sounds painful to me, and makes me glad I’m not a kid in school.

Remember the movie The Matrix, where Keanu Reeves, who plays Neo, is taught new skills via a jack in the back of his head?  Well, these teaching machines are essentially trying to do the same thing via the eyes and ears.  Want to know Calculus?  Sit down at this machine and watch and respond.

Here’s my question:  How much can we learn?  The storage space in our brains is finite.  Comprehension is more than recording facts.  But let’s imagine we have a machine that is the perfect teacher, one that completely understands the student, and can feed a kid, byte by byte, the data they need.  Let’s also imagine that we want to teach kids Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry, Algebra II, Calculus, Linear Algebra, Statistics and Number Theory. In The Matrix that might have taken a couple of hours, but that was a fantasy.  How long should it take to cram in all the math skills we think the average 21st century kid should know?

I had through Calculus I in college, but I never really used any math after my last test, other than ordinary dollar processing and to take the GRE.  As far as I know all my Algebra, Geometry, Trigonometry, Calculus, Statistical knowledge is gone.  Should we waste time packing information into brains that won’t be used later?

What is the basic dataset that every citizen of planet Earth should possess?  I believe we should be striving to define the essential basic knowledge, rather than develop techniques for squeezing massive amounts of education into little minds quickly and cheaply.  And to be honest, much of the furor over education is about cost.  I think a lot of new theories about education are inspired by reducing the costs of K-12 schooling, or by companies that want to get a piece of ever expanding educational expenditures.

Then there is the battle over science versus religion.  The faithful know a good liberal education equals the eroding of faith.  If we perfect teaching machines to mentor K-12 kids from ignorance to scientific enlightenment would we mandate their use?

Everyday I live with the regrets of what I haven’t learned.  Each night as I drift off to sleep I wish for more time for reading and contemplation, thinking I’m getting close to achieving the general unified theory of everything.  If I could only find time to read another thousand books, things would make sense, but hell I know that’s not true.

I think we should be teaching something different, something less head filling.  I think we should teach how to learn, how to research,  how to concentrate, how to write, how to stick to a task until it’s done, and then let kids go to work at age 12.  Start giving them real world jobs and problems to work on.  If they need trigonometry, chemistry, carpentry, mechanics, electronics, they can pick it up quickly as needed.

It’s not until you go to work that you learn what you really want to know.  Why waste all those years learning everything you might need?  I think we’ll develop the technology for individualized education very soon.  What we need to do now is teach people how to absorb knowledge quickly and apply it right away.  Sort of just in time learning.  Education has always been lifelong.  Why assume it’s K-12 + 4 years of college?

JWH – 7/23/13

Your Pop-Culture Fingerprint

Recently Entertainment Weekly ran “The 100 All-Time Greatest” issue about the best movies, television series, books and albums in the hearts of their editors.  There’s no scientific justification for such lists – they are fun but always biased.  Best-of-lists dredge up delicious memories of forgotten art, or make you growl WTF! at other choices.  For me the real value of such lists is to inspire me to try pop culture favorites I haven’t.  You never know when you missed something great, and finding great pop culture is what’s it all about.

Subscribing to Rdio lets me play most of the albums from their list.  This is why spending $9.99 a month for a music subscription service is such a fantastic bargain.  I’m going to try and play 2-3 albums a day until I get through the EW 100 album list.  I’m also going to use Netflix to go through their movie and TV show lists.  I wonder if statistics at subscription music services, Amazon, iTunes, Netflix will show a bump from the impact of the EW picks?

I did make a playlist of over 90 of EW’s Top 100 albums at Rdio.  If you’re a member you can play it, and if not, you can look at the list of songs.  The EW editors are probably much younger than I am, so their list of great albums follows a different generational path than I did, thus their list is a lesson for an old fart like me.  Over half the list is new to me, so I’m looking forward to playing a lot of potentially great albums.

You’d think such lists would match sales figures, but they don’t.  For example, Michael Jackson’s Thriller is by far and away the best selling album of all-time, but came in as #4 on the EW list.  I wonder how many of those 40+ million Thriller buyers would put it at the top of their favorite album list?  I suppose Spotify could tell us what albums are most played on their popular service, and that might be a realistic indicator of all-time greatness.  Ditto for YouTube plays.

However, in the end, it’s your own love for individual works of art that matter the most.  Just thinking about your own favorites should be a meditation of self-awareness, a survey of your own years, like your life flashing in front of your eyes before you die.

On the top of the EW album list sits Revolver, by the Beatles from 1966.  I’m playing it as I write this now.  It’s a great album, I’ve bought it three times in my lifetime – LP, CD, remastered CD.  But Revolver would never be my all-time favorite album.  I’m not sure it would even make my top 100 album list.  I love so many little albums, like Once in a Blue Moon by Nanci Griffith or Rodeo by Kirk Whalum that would rank higher, albums damn few people know about.

#2 on EW’s top albums was Purple Rain by Prince, #3 was Exile on Main Street by The Rolling Stones, #4 was Thriller by Michael Jackson and #5 was London Calling by The Clash.  All great albums, but none of them would be on my own personal Top 100 Albums of All-Time list.  I wish everyone made their own top lists of pop culture loves so when we make new friends we’d trade lists as a form of introduction.  I think what we love defines us better than anything else.  Even the things we choose to keep lists of also defines us.

My #1 album is Blonde on Blonde by Bob Dylan.  An album that didn’t even make it onto the EW list.  Strangely enough, it’s also from 1966 like Revolver.  I can go years without player Revolver, but I play songs from Blonde on Blonde almost every day.  That’s why I know its my #1 album.  I’m sure there are millions of music fanatics that never played it, or played it once and hated it.  I don’t expect my list to meet other people’s standards.

Bob Dylan - Blonde on Blonde - Vinyl

#2 would be Highway 61, Revisited by Bob Dylan, which did make their list.   But I have no idea what my #3-100 would be.  I just haven’t thought about it that much.  But reading the EW list makes me want to create my own list.  I don’t know if I have a 100 albums that are absolute favorites.  I’ve listened to thousands of albums, and I own 1200-1400 CDs but I’d guess less than 300 still appeal enough to play occasionally, and only a much smaller group would be ones I’d want to play from start to finish, which is the real indicator of a great album.  For example, from London Calling I only love one song, “Lost in the Supermarket,” so it’s doubtful it would be on my list.

Highway_61_Revisited

For an album to be called great I think we have to consider it as a whole.  It has to be more than just a collection of songs.  It doesn’t have to have a single theme like Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, but it should have a coherent artistic wholeness.

Why I’m writing this essay is because I realized that if we each made a list of our favorite albums, each list might be as unique as fingerprints.  Out of 7 billion people, how many are likely to pick 100 albums and put them in the same order?  If we found two people with identical lists, would they also have the same political and philosophical views?  I don’t know, but it would be interesting if scientists would check that out for me.

Making a list of favorite albums is actually very hard and time consuming.  It’s a terrible strain on the old noggin to try and sift through 50 years of album playing memories.  I’m thinking of going through my CDs and pulling out my favorites to put on one shelf together.  It might take me weeks or months to create my list, but it might help to physical hold the albums I love when it comes to ranking them.  Ranking isn’t absolutely important, but it’s part of the game.  Right now I’m thinking my #3 album would be What’s Going On by Marvin Gaye from 1971.

marvin-gaye-1971-whats-going-on-a

No, maybe I’m wrong, maybe Everybody Knows This is Nowhere by Neil Young would be #3.  When I make the final list, it’s going to be very hard to create an absolute ranking.

neil-young-everybody-knows-this-is-nowhere

The trouble is I love specific songs more than I do albums.  That’s why iTunes succeeds, and most people prefer songs over albums.  It’s also why greatest hits albums are so popular.  But I tend to think greatest hits are cheats on a best album list.  Two of my all-time favorite songs are “Fresh Air” and “What About Me” by Quicksilver Messenger Service.  Those songs were each on albums that I considered all filler except one song, so I’d hate to list them as two of my favorite albums of all-time.  If I had to pick just one of their albums it might be Shady Grove.

shady grove

I wonder how many albums on the EW list are there because of a single song?

I can remember two albums, both double albums I played obsessively for years, but I don’t anymore.  Should they count now?  When you make up an all-time best of list, is it the albums you love right now, or the ones you loved the most years throughout your life?  I don’t know if I’d pick any Beatles album now, but they were essential when I was a teen.  These two were very important to me for most of the seventies.

derekandthedominos-layla

allman-brothers

I think Layla and The Allman Brothers at Fillmore East would make my list, but I don’t know at what positions.

EW’s wasn’t very diverse when it came to musical styles.  I don’t remember any jazz, or much country, and little folk, and especially no classical.  And there were many big hits like Breakfast in America by Supertramp that I thought was conspicuous in their absence.   It would certainly find a place on my list.  They represent my psychic fingerprint for the music I love.

The albums I remembered while writing this essay are just a drop of water in lake of musical memories.  Here are what comes to me at the moment.  It will probably take me weeks to think about all my albums.  That will be fun, a fun trip down memory lane.

breakfast-in-america-portada

Nanci Griffith - Once In A Very Blue-Moon

peter-gunn

miles-davis-kind-of-blue

borntorun

animal-cannibal

led-zeppelin

boz-scaggs

emeli-sande-our-versions-of-events-artwork

between-midnight-and-hindsight

JWH – 7/22/13