20 déc. 2013
19 déc. 2013
Here Comes Everybody: Joyce’s Urban Chaosmos
by Andy Merrifield
“He lifts the lifewand and the dumb speak” – James Joyce
One of the great humanist visions of James Joyce’s masterwork, Finnegans Wake [1939], is the sigla HCE, named after the book’s fifty-something anti-hero, Dublin innkeeper Humphrey Chimpden Earwicker. Joyce homes in on one Saturday night, a single evening’s sleep after a whole day’s drinking, amid a thunderstorm, when Earwicker’s disturbed mind tosses over, with bad conscience, the previous day’s events and the whole of his life hitherto. Earwicker’s is the “patternmind”, Joyce says (1966: 70), of a complex dream language, a dream of a man dreaming a dream of the world. HCE are the “normative letters” of a constituency Joyce calls “Here Comes Everybody” (1992: 32), a “manyfeast munificent” (1966: 261), an archetypal image of our collective, desiring unconscious. But this dreamer is “more mob than man”, Joyce tells us (1966: 261), “an imposing everybody he always indeed looked constantly the same as and equal to himself and magnificently well worthy of any and all such universalization” (1966: 32).
Ever since I first encountered Finnegans Wake in my twenties—to say first “read” isn’t quite right; it’s a book nobody really reads in the conventional sense—I’ve been fascinated by the imagery of Here Comes Everybody. Doubtless it appealed to my offbeat sensibility; doubtless I’d probably seen it as synonymous with the urban process, with our emergent urban planet, the social, political and economic environment to which everybody is coming or shaping, if always unevenly. Only later did I likely recognize it in the same light as Henri Lefebvre’s (2003) “complete urbanization of society”. It’s not that everybody lives in cities so much as now we’re all somehow touched by the culture of urbanism, evermore touched by it, by its economics and politics, by its immense social sway: we all live out urban existences whether we think it or not, whether we like it or not. Urbanism is global—planetary, if we can accept Lefebvre’s stellar terminology; it’s an intricate and inextricable “way of life” for everybody, for a Here Comes Everybody.
The puns and portmanteaus—“fermented language”, Joyce called it—of Finnegans Wake, its roguish drolleries and comic lampoons, its decentered way of seeing reality, of inventing it, always seemed closer to the truth of the world for me, always spoke to me, revealed something real. Finnegans Wake has always intrigued me more than Ulysses, which, despite its own complexities, is a more grounded book, more obviously urban, with categorical Dublin coordinates, a tale of a specific city on a specific day, with specific dramatis persona—the Blooms and the Dedaluses—who all appear as themselves and only as themselves, in wide-awake daytime. Finnegans Wake, conversely, supplies no “objective” frame of reference, and offers only subjective distortions and contortions, liquefactions and refractions, things nearer, perhaps, to the diffusive and expansive “patternmind” of capitalist urbanization.
Not that Finnegans Wake doesn’t have any structuring. If Ulysses adopts Homeric punctuation to its eighteen episodes, Finnegans Wake’s four-part ring cycle takes Vico to heart, Giambattista Vico, the eighteenth-century humanist author of New Science [1725]. “Do you believe in New Science?”, a friend once asked Joyce. “I don’t believe in any science”, the latter rejoined, “but my imagination grows when I read Vico as it doesn’t when I read Freud and Jung” (quoted in Ellman 1959: 693). Joyce admitted he was never a deep reader of the Italian philologist-cum-philosopher-cum-historian: he merely took what he needed, took one or two simple ideas that helped him frame what he wanted to frame.
One major strand Joyce borrowed is Vico’s “poetic wisdom” (see Vico 1999: Book 2), the belief that humans alone create the world, create it by transforming one another into the facts of society: we recreate our own creations, you might say, anthropomorphically, inherit and reinvent them from other men and women—not from gods. The second Viconian inflection, flagging out Finnegans Wake’s basic foundation, is the notion that civilizations pass through definitive phases, cycles when we’ve imagined divine gods, created myths about great heroes, and come to see things in human terms, as life comprising real men and women—the everyday human cycle—more or less where we find ourselves today, though with a few theological twists hinting at a Viconian ricorso.
In the deep past, deities conditioned our life. In ancient Greece, we built great cities, but the gods still apparently watched over us, cursed us, and always held the fragile key to our collective destiny. Or so we thought. Then, later on, we began to ponder a heroic phase, feeling the need not so much to have faith in gods as to believe heroic myths, myths about Caesar and Napoleon, myths about heroic master-builders like Stalin, like Baron Haussmann, like Le Corbusier, like Robert Moses et al. Finnegans Wake is full of digs and jests about master-builders; it has many allusions to Ibsen’s The Master Builder [1892], and we might recall that Ibsen was the adolescent Joyce’s own cult hero. (Ibsen’s The Master Builder points to the frailty of the builder’s ego, the rationalization that their particular gifts are gifts from God. Solness, Ibsen’s eponymous master-builder, has amassed considerable fame and fortune from his construction exploits. Yet it’s never enough; his paranoia abounds, his fear of falling, his mania to uphold supernatural powers, including his sexual powers.)
As we’ve moved through time, another phase has beset us in which we’ve maybe at last relinquished our faith in man-gods and super-heroes. But Vico isn’t a believer in progress; he never conceived each cycle as advancement, as improvement in the human lot. In the all-too-human phase, he knew that before us lay the immanent possibility for democracy as well as the dread of chaos. And in Vico’s mind, the latter won out. His line, like Spengler’s, is one of cultural pessimism, a belief in the inevitability of decline, that each reoccurring cycle doesn’t so much shine light as darken the sky, spell moral breakdown rather than spiritual enlightenment (that came only in heaven). History, for Vico, twists back on itself: each potentially positive corso slips back into a barbaric ricorso, into a ruse of reason, into the deceit of bureaucracy, the terror of technocracy.
In Finnegans Wake, Joyce has his Viconian cycles interrupted by a loud thunderclap, by a “bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntooohoordenenthurnuk!” The language here—Joyce’s “langscape” (1966: 595)—even sounds like breakdown, like a rending, like a crisis of some sort. It’s a noise that jars, that shakes the earth, that announces the end of one epoch and the birth of another, an epistemological rupturing, an ontological seismic shift. Maybe here it’s possible to give Joyce’s Viconian cycles of the divine, the heroic and the human another spin—replete with all those corso possibilities as well as ricorso threats.
One time, not so long ago, we had god-like managers who acted as good social democrats, during the good old days of the public sector, the old providential Keynesian state when administrative deities seemed to care about real people and gave the poor a break. We might label this divine phase the age of urban managers, the managerialist cycle, which seemed to crumble, seemed to sound, in the mid-1970s, the tocsin of bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonn… Then we heard a thunderclap that foretold of a new period, a heroic cycle of mythical entrepreneurs, the 1980s, when public managers gave way to private moguls, to new myths about fearless people who innovate in our economy, to people who speculate and cogitate on the power of money, on its spectacular prowess.
Yet just when it seemed this heroic phase was set in stone, was holy writ, that there was NO ALTERNATIVE to it, we began to witness this NO ALTERNATIVE crack and crumble, too; we began to recognize that the mythic entrepreneurial heroes of the stock market and the private sector were only human after all, all-too-human in fact, terribly human. Soon another cycle opened up, and another thunderclap was heard throughout our land; a cycle we’re living through right now, one in which “collisions with men” mean “collusions with money” (Joyce, 1966: 433) and humans prey off one another. Hence a parasitic epoch, and the epoch of the parasitic city.
Parasites now chomp away at the common-wealth the world over. They eat away inside the social body, stripping peoples’ assets, foreclosing homes, dispossessing value rather than contributing anything towards its creation. In parasitic cities, social wealth is consumed through conspicuously wasteful enterprises, administered by parasitic elites, our very own aristocracy (the 1%), who squander generative capacity by thriving exclusively from unproductive activities: they roll dice on the stock market, profit from unequal exchanges, guzzle at the public trough, filch rents from property and housing and gouge fees from ordinary people—mysterious, made-up fees, fees for utilities, for using ATMs, for borrowing money, for doing transactions online.
If these parasites ever innovate, if they ever have any creative capacity, then innovation and creation frequently relate to new creative ways to screw people, to profit from actually creating very little; “creation” in this guise—and disguise—seems more akin to creative accountancy and creative ways to avoid paying tax; to creative finagling of stock markets and manipulating financial markets (like LIBOR); to creative new patents to tap hitherto untapped markets; to creative destruction of competition; to creative ways to garner inflated monopoly rents and profits; to creatively grabbing land for free; and to creatively inventing excuses to cadge money from the state.
Such seems to support Vico’s pessimism, that the promise of our progressive all-too-human phase isn’t so progressive after all; that it’s one great big depressing lie thrown back in our faces; that those in control of society and the economy, and of politics, can summon up the dark forces of persuasion and fear, of fundamentalism and free-marketeerism, of theology and austerity, to command the bodies and souls of us all. And yet, and yet, just when all seems lost, Joyce veers from Vico; retrogression isn’t his thing. (When thunder strikes, it terrifies us; a screaming comes across the sky. We scurry for cover. Sometimes it terrifies us so much we seek the support and comfort of other people.) Somehow, the cycles of Finnegans Wake take us onwards, forwards towards progression. Earwicker’s night sweats are shrugged off by morning; his inner demons have been overcome, his soul resurrected, refreshed and brought back to ordinary life, in broad daylight. As Edmund Wilson (1961: 226) put it, “the Phoenix of Vico and the Phoenix Park [of Joyce’s Dublin] has arisen from its ashes to new flight; Tristram has built a castle (Howth Castle) for his bride; and Iseult, once the object of an outlawed love, now married and growing older, turns naturally and comfortably at last into the lawful wife in bed beside him…the tumult and turbidity of Saturday night run clear in the peace of Sunday morning.”
And so, for Joyce, the promise of this human phase is the promise of Here Comes Everybody, an enlarged democratic vista; a vaster, more inclusive form of humanity; an affirmation and exaltation, an act of integration—not disintegration. Here Comes Everybody is an opening up to the future not a narrowing of the present; if Braudel (1982) rightly saw financialization as a “sign of autumn”, as a cycle of decline and decay, then spring will always come around again for Joyce, replenishing those fallen leaves in a “commodious vicus of recirculation”. Finnegans Wake is a tragicomedy with a happy undertow, a chaosmos with a democratic ordering, basking in a “panaroma of all flores of speech” (Joyce 1966: 143). Maybe it’s even possible to see Here Comes Everybody as a new kind of citizenship, which remained Joyce’s hope against hope throughout his peripatetic life, a new sense of belonging in which citizenship meant a good deal more for him than an Irish passport. (For the record, Joyce always held a British passport.) In another sense, too, this democratic constituency might also be read through Marx’s lens, who, almost a century before Finnegans Wake, had conceived of “world literature”.
“World literature”, for the Marx of the Communist Manifesto (Marx and Engels 2011: 69), is what everybody and anyone can read. (Remember Joyce hoped Finnegans Wake was a book anybody could read; indeed, he said it was “written for everybody.”) We all instinctively get world literature, understand it, because we’ve somehow helped script it; it’s literature that’s translatable and communicable—notwithstanding our native tongue. It isn’t tabloid trash Marx has in mind here. Quite the opposite: it’s the broadest of broadsheets, a global literature that hits the newsstands as samizdat. Invariably, this literature is a dialectical byproduct, an unintended good thing emerging from an intentional bad thing. It’s a byproduct, Marx knew, of a bourgeoisie intent on business, on tapping the world market.
Marx is adamant that this process isn’t only earth-moving (and earth-shattering) material production; it’s also an earth-moving and potentially earth-shattering “intellectual production” (Marx 2011: 69). What’s more, in Marx’s eyes, the “intellectual creations of individual nations” have the power to become “common property”. World literature becomes a new sort of commons, for Marx, a collective visual and written language, something we see today as an ever-emergent world culture, as use-values ordinary people everywhere continually have to fight for and struggle to hold on to, especially as human value systems melt into air and get converted into anti-human, hyper-inflated exchange-values. In the Manifesto, Marx sketches out the historical and geographical mission of the mode of production, its need to urbanize itself, to create industrial cities, to move mountains, to dig canals, to connect everywhere, nestle everywhere. Within it all, Marx thought urbanization would create a physical and emotional proximity of workers, workers piled on top of one another, beside each other. Cosmopolitanism would thus be a kind of sharing, an awareness of common lived experience, a Here Comes Everybody.
Before us and inside us, urbanism today is a truly cosmopolitan world culture, our very own world literature, our Here Comes Everybody. Here Comes Everybody is what global citizenship ought to be about—hence the “normative letters”, HCE—a citizenship conceived of as something urban, as something territorial, yet one in which urban territoriality is narrower and broader than both “city” and “nationality”; a citizen of the block, of the neighborhood, becomes a citizen of the world, a universal citizen rooted in place, encountering fellow citizens across the corridor and at the other end of the planet, sharing world music together, reading books in every language, watching world cinema, entering Twitter streams and communing on Facebook. For good reason, then, did Joyce (1966: 21) also offer of a variant on his Here Comes Everybody thesis: Here Comes Everybuddy, a wink to Facebook users everywhere (cf. Merrifield 2011).
World literature has morphed into world culture, and this world culture is now an urban arena in which a more advanced cosmopolitan citizenship emerges—might emerge—a Here Comes Everybody forever present at its own birth pangs. Or almost everybody, a 99% of everybody. In this citizenship perception replaces passport and horizon is almost as important as habitat; a perception and horizon simultaneously in place and in space, off-line somewhere local, and online somewhere planetary, somewhere virtual. It is a space, in other words, in which Everybody meets Everybuddy, staving off Everybully (as Joyce cautions). Citizenship therein reveals itself through the negation of distance and the reaching out to distance, an opening up and a drawing in, a passionate embrace between bodies and buddies. It’s the point of convergence of both, a dialectic that’s a structure of feeling and a way of seeing—feeling and seeing oneself on the same plane as one’s planet. At the point of convergence, any singularity will be so powerful that no border patrol can ever prevent its rites of passage. This, perhaps, is the outcome of Earwicker’s great dream.
It’s a dream, too, in which there’s reconciliation with Ann—aka Anna Livia Plurabelle (ALP), the “bringer of plurabilities”, the wife and mother of Earwicker’s twins, Jerry (Shem) and Kevin (Shaun), and daughter Isobel (Izzy). ALP’s presence flows eternally through Finnegans Wake; ALP is Dublin’s Liffey River opening up the sea, is Paris’s Seine creating Being, washing away the grime of life. Both the Liffey and the Seine gush through Anna like a river of blood, like healing waters, like the ebb of death and the flow of renewed life. The “Sein annews”, Joyce says (1966: 277): it’s the sinew and core of his and HCE-ALP’s very Being, their “Sein”. (Sein is the German verb “to be”.) At the same time, the Seine “anews”, is eternally reoccurring and constantly renewing, forever bridging the past and the future, like in Anna Livia’s beautiful closing elegy, expressing cleansing waters and the healing powers of reunification, of a rising up to a new level:
“Soft morning, city! Lsp! I am leafy speafing. Lpf! Folty and folty all the nights have falled on to long my hair. Not a sound, falling. Lispn! No wind no word. Only a leaf, just a leaf and then leaves. The woods are fond always. As were we their babes in. And robins in crews so. It is for me goolden wending. Unless? Away! Rise up, man of the hooths, you have slept so long! Or is it only so mesleems? On your pondered palm. Reclined from cape to pede. With pipe on bowl. Terce for a fiddler, sixt for makmerriers, none for a Cole. Rise up now and aruse!” (1966: 619).
What does this HCE-ALP alliance rise up towards? Collisions of men and women don’t, Joyce implies, necessarily have to be “collusions with money,” nor even collusions with oppression and sexism. They can also express complex collideorscapes, that magnificently suggestive concept from Finnegans Wake (1966: 143): “what would that fargazer seem to seemself to seem seeming of, dimm it all? Answer: A collideorscape!”
Joyce’s fargazing saw one great big kaleidoscope, a collision of people, people encountering other people, a coincidence of opposites, the coexistence of unity within disunity, a human kaleidoscope in which each separate image, each separate mix, changes with each respective shake. Human patterns and colorations thus depend upon how things come together, how coincidences take hold, how they congeal to form other realities, other ways of seeing and acting. Something new here is disclosed, an urban image and langscape, comings together of people, of skyscrapers and towers—“a waalworth of a skyerscape of the most eyeful hoyth entowerly” (1966: 4). Listen to the sound of “eyeful” as Eiffel, a wonderful instance of Joyce’s ear talk, of his acoustics, of sounds to be heard and sang with others rather than read alone; “soundsense”, Joyce (1966: 121) dubbed it, a sensual modality in which “soundsense and sensesound” conjoin, become “kin again”. (Earwicker isn’t called the “paradigmatic ear” for nothing; his eyes may be closed, but his ears are permanently open, “earsighted”.) Perhaps above all else, the collideorscape is a “collision” or “escape”, a collision and an escape, a dialectics of liberation, a thesis and antithesis creating new synthesis. Joyce hatches his Great Escape here, his Great Escape from language, and our Great Escape from the dominant order.
Indeed, the Joycean collideorscape amounts to nothing less than the contingent creation of a new political movement, one struggling to impose its singularity as a mass democratic movement, one building democracy through the scattered shards of social movements the world over. Therein each scattered shard bonds and reinforces the other, forms a new patternmind of an offensive front and rearguard defense. Efficacy will likely be predicated on how protagonists organize themselves internally yet coordinate themselves externally, reach out to one another to create a broader, more inclusive constellation of dissent, coexisting horizontally and democratically, overground and underground. The ensuing collideorscape refracts fresh light on things, creates a new political aura, and a different shape and sound to social reality.
In its cosmic radiance and human heterogeneity, the collideorscape represents “the general will”, an infallible will when it congeals democratically. Such a political movement implies that all disparate social movements, those struggling for local concerns (concerns that are now, willy-nilly, common global concerns), need to make themselves more important than they actually are, need to publicize their activism, publicize their agendas and grievances to wider audiences, through alternative media and relentless ear talk, sharing tales of neoliberal crimes and misdemeanors, propelling themselves outwards, onto a planetary plane, onto the fargazing plane of Finnegans Wake. This is what Here Comes Everybody has to be about, can be about. An intersection. The lifewand in which the dumb speak.
---------------
References
Braudel F (1982) The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century, Vol. II. Berkeley: University of California Press
Ellman R (1959) James Joyce. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Joyce J (1966 [1939]) Finnegans Wake. London: Faber and Faber
Lefebvre H (2003 [1970]) The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press
Marx K and Engels F (2011 [1848]) The Communist Manifesto. New York: Penguin
Merrifield A (2011) Crowd politics, or, Here Comes Everybuddy. New Left Review 71:103-114
Vico G (1999 [1744]) New Science (3rd edn). London: Penguin
Wilson E (1961 [1941]) The Wound and the Bow. London: Methuen & Co
--------------------------------------------
“He lifts the lifewand and the dumb speak” – James Joyce
One of the great humanist visions of James Joyce’s masterwork, Finnegans Wake [1939], is the sigla HCE, named after the book’s fifty-something anti-hero, Dublin innkeeper Humphrey Chimpden Earwicker. Joyce homes in on one Saturday night, a single evening’s sleep after a whole day’s drinking, amid a thunderstorm, when Earwicker’s disturbed mind tosses over, with bad conscience, the previous day’s events and the whole of his life hitherto. Earwicker’s is the “patternmind”, Joyce says (1966: 70), of a complex dream language, a dream of a man dreaming a dream of the world. HCE are the “normative letters” of a constituency Joyce calls “Here Comes Everybody” (1992: 32), a “manyfeast munificent” (1966: 261), an archetypal image of our collective, desiring unconscious. But this dreamer is “more mob than man”, Joyce tells us (1966: 261), “an imposing everybody he always indeed looked constantly the same as and equal to himself and magnificently well worthy of any and all such universalization” (1966: 32).
Ever since I first encountered Finnegans Wake in my twenties—to say first “read” isn’t quite right; it’s a book nobody really reads in the conventional sense—I’ve been fascinated by the imagery of Here Comes Everybody. Doubtless it appealed to my offbeat sensibility; doubtless I’d probably seen it as synonymous with the urban process, with our emergent urban planet, the social, political and economic environment to which everybody is coming or shaping, if always unevenly. Only later did I likely recognize it in the same light as Henri Lefebvre’s (2003) “complete urbanization of society”. It’s not that everybody lives in cities so much as now we’re all somehow touched by the culture of urbanism, evermore touched by it, by its economics and politics, by its immense social sway: we all live out urban existences whether we think it or not, whether we like it or not. Urbanism is global—planetary, if we can accept Lefebvre’s stellar terminology; it’s an intricate and inextricable “way of life” for everybody, for a Here Comes Everybody.
The puns and portmanteaus—“fermented language”, Joyce called it—of Finnegans Wake, its roguish drolleries and comic lampoons, its decentered way of seeing reality, of inventing it, always seemed closer to the truth of the world for me, always spoke to me, revealed something real. Finnegans Wake has always intrigued me more than Ulysses, which, despite its own complexities, is a more grounded book, more obviously urban, with categorical Dublin coordinates, a tale of a specific city on a specific day, with specific dramatis persona—the Blooms and the Dedaluses—who all appear as themselves and only as themselves, in wide-awake daytime. Finnegans Wake, conversely, supplies no “objective” frame of reference, and offers only subjective distortions and contortions, liquefactions and refractions, things nearer, perhaps, to the diffusive and expansive “patternmind” of capitalist urbanization.
Not that Finnegans Wake doesn’t have any structuring. If Ulysses adopts Homeric punctuation to its eighteen episodes, Finnegans Wake’s four-part ring cycle takes Vico to heart, Giambattista Vico, the eighteenth-century humanist author of New Science [1725]. “Do you believe in New Science?”, a friend once asked Joyce. “I don’t believe in any science”, the latter rejoined, “but my imagination grows when I read Vico as it doesn’t when I read Freud and Jung” (quoted in Ellman 1959: 693). Joyce admitted he was never a deep reader of the Italian philologist-cum-philosopher-cum-historian: he merely took what he needed, took one or two simple ideas that helped him frame what he wanted to frame.
One major strand Joyce borrowed is Vico’s “poetic wisdom” (see Vico 1999: Book 2), the belief that humans alone create the world, create it by transforming one another into the facts of society: we recreate our own creations, you might say, anthropomorphically, inherit and reinvent them from other men and women—not from gods. The second Viconian inflection, flagging out Finnegans Wake’s basic foundation, is the notion that civilizations pass through definitive phases, cycles when we’ve imagined divine gods, created myths about great heroes, and come to see things in human terms, as life comprising real men and women—the everyday human cycle—more or less where we find ourselves today, though with a few theological twists hinting at a Viconian ricorso.
In the deep past, deities conditioned our life. In ancient Greece, we built great cities, but the gods still apparently watched over us, cursed us, and always held the fragile key to our collective destiny. Or so we thought. Then, later on, we began to ponder a heroic phase, feeling the need not so much to have faith in gods as to believe heroic myths, myths about Caesar and Napoleon, myths about heroic master-builders like Stalin, like Baron Haussmann, like Le Corbusier, like Robert Moses et al. Finnegans Wake is full of digs and jests about master-builders; it has many allusions to Ibsen’s The Master Builder [1892], and we might recall that Ibsen was the adolescent Joyce’s own cult hero. (Ibsen’s The Master Builder points to the frailty of the builder’s ego, the rationalization that their particular gifts are gifts from God. Solness, Ibsen’s eponymous master-builder, has amassed considerable fame and fortune from his construction exploits. Yet it’s never enough; his paranoia abounds, his fear of falling, his mania to uphold supernatural powers, including his sexual powers.)
As we’ve moved through time, another phase has beset us in which we’ve maybe at last relinquished our faith in man-gods and super-heroes. But Vico isn’t a believer in progress; he never conceived each cycle as advancement, as improvement in the human lot. In the all-too-human phase, he knew that before us lay the immanent possibility for democracy as well as the dread of chaos. And in Vico’s mind, the latter won out. His line, like Spengler’s, is one of cultural pessimism, a belief in the inevitability of decline, that each reoccurring cycle doesn’t so much shine light as darken the sky, spell moral breakdown rather than spiritual enlightenment (that came only in heaven). History, for Vico, twists back on itself: each potentially positive corso slips back into a barbaric ricorso, into a ruse of reason, into the deceit of bureaucracy, the terror of technocracy.
In Finnegans Wake, Joyce has his Viconian cycles interrupted by a loud thunderclap, by a “bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntooohoordenenthurnuk!” The language here—Joyce’s “langscape” (1966: 595)—even sounds like breakdown, like a rending, like a crisis of some sort. It’s a noise that jars, that shakes the earth, that announces the end of one epoch and the birth of another, an epistemological rupturing, an ontological seismic shift. Maybe here it’s possible to give Joyce’s Viconian cycles of the divine, the heroic and the human another spin—replete with all those corso possibilities as well as ricorso threats.
One time, not so long ago, we had god-like managers who acted as good social democrats, during the good old days of the public sector, the old providential Keynesian state when administrative deities seemed to care about real people and gave the poor a break. We might label this divine phase the age of urban managers, the managerialist cycle, which seemed to crumble, seemed to sound, in the mid-1970s, the tocsin of bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonn… Then we heard a thunderclap that foretold of a new period, a heroic cycle of mythical entrepreneurs, the 1980s, when public managers gave way to private moguls, to new myths about fearless people who innovate in our economy, to people who speculate and cogitate on the power of money, on its spectacular prowess.
Yet just when it seemed this heroic phase was set in stone, was holy writ, that there was NO ALTERNATIVE to it, we began to witness this NO ALTERNATIVE crack and crumble, too; we began to recognize that the mythic entrepreneurial heroes of the stock market and the private sector were only human after all, all-too-human in fact, terribly human. Soon another cycle opened up, and another thunderclap was heard throughout our land; a cycle we’re living through right now, one in which “collisions with men” mean “collusions with money” (Joyce, 1966: 433) and humans prey off one another. Hence a parasitic epoch, and the epoch of the parasitic city.
Parasites now chomp away at the common-wealth the world over. They eat away inside the social body, stripping peoples’ assets, foreclosing homes, dispossessing value rather than contributing anything towards its creation. In parasitic cities, social wealth is consumed through conspicuously wasteful enterprises, administered by parasitic elites, our very own aristocracy (the 1%), who squander generative capacity by thriving exclusively from unproductive activities: they roll dice on the stock market, profit from unequal exchanges, guzzle at the public trough, filch rents from property and housing and gouge fees from ordinary people—mysterious, made-up fees, fees for utilities, for using ATMs, for borrowing money, for doing transactions online.
If these parasites ever innovate, if they ever have any creative capacity, then innovation and creation frequently relate to new creative ways to screw people, to profit from actually creating very little; “creation” in this guise—and disguise—seems more akin to creative accountancy and creative ways to avoid paying tax; to creative finagling of stock markets and manipulating financial markets (like LIBOR); to creative new patents to tap hitherto untapped markets; to creative destruction of competition; to creative ways to garner inflated monopoly rents and profits; to creatively grabbing land for free; and to creatively inventing excuses to cadge money from the state.
Such seems to support Vico’s pessimism, that the promise of our progressive all-too-human phase isn’t so progressive after all; that it’s one great big depressing lie thrown back in our faces; that those in control of society and the economy, and of politics, can summon up the dark forces of persuasion and fear, of fundamentalism and free-marketeerism, of theology and austerity, to command the bodies and souls of us all. And yet, and yet, just when all seems lost, Joyce veers from Vico; retrogression isn’t his thing. (When thunder strikes, it terrifies us; a screaming comes across the sky. We scurry for cover. Sometimes it terrifies us so much we seek the support and comfort of other people.) Somehow, the cycles of Finnegans Wake take us onwards, forwards towards progression. Earwicker’s night sweats are shrugged off by morning; his inner demons have been overcome, his soul resurrected, refreshed and brought back to ordinary life, in broad daylight. As Edmund Wilson (1961: 226) put it, “the Phoenix of Vico and the Phoenix Park [of Joyce’s Dublin] has arisen from its ashes to new flight; Tristram has built a castle (Howth Castle) for his bride; and Iseult, once the object of an outlawed love, now married and growing older, turns naturally and comfortably at last into the lawful wife in bed beside him…the tumult and turbidity of Saturday night run clear in the peace of Sunday morning.”
And so, for Joyce, the promise of this human phase is the promise of Here Comes Everybody, an enlarged democratic vista; a vaster, more inclusive form of humanity; an affirmation and exaltation, an act of integration—not disintegration. Here Comes Everybody is an opening up to the future not a narrowing of the present; if Braudel (1982) rightly saw financialization as a “sign of autumn”, as a cycle of decline and decay, then spring will always come around again for Joyce, replenishing those fallen leaves in a “commodious vicus of recirculation”. Finnegans Wake is a tragicomedy with a happy undertow, a chaosmos with a democratic ordering, basking in a “panaroma of all flores of speech” (Joyce 1966: 143). Maybe it’s even possible to see Here Comes Everybody as a new kind of citizenship, which remained Joyce’s hope against hope throughout his peripatetic life, a new sense of belonging in which citizenship meant a good deal more for him than an Irish passport. (For the record, Joyce always held a British passport.) In another sense, too, this democratic constituency might also be read through Marx’s lens, who, almost a century before Finnegans Wake, had conceived of “world literature”.
“World literature”, for the Marx of the Communist Manifesto (Marx and Engels 2011: 69), is what everybody and anyone can read. (Remember Joyce hoped Finnegans Wake was a book anybody could read; indeed, he said it was “written for everybody.”) We all instinctively get world literature, understand it, because we’ve somehow helped script it; it’s literature that’s translatable and communicable—notwithstanding our native tongue. It isn’t tabloid trash Marx has in mind here. Quite the opposite: it’s the broadest of broadsheets, a global literature that hits the newsstands as samizdat. Invariably, this literature is a dialectical byproduct, an unintended good thing emerging from an intentional bad thing. It’s a byproduct, Marx knew, of a bourgeoisie intent on business, on tapping the world market.
Marx is adamant that this process isn’t only earth-moving (and earth-shattering) material production; it’s also an earth-moving and potentially earth-shattering “intellectual production” (Marx 2011: 69). What’s more, in Marx’s eyes, the “intellectual creations of individual nations” have the power to become “common property”. World literature becomes a new sort of commons, for Marx, a collective visual and written language, something we see today as an ever-emergent world culture, as use-values ordinary people everywhere continually have to fight for and struggle to hold on to, especially as human value systems melt into air and get converted into anti-human, hyper-inflated exchange-values. In the Manifesto, Marx sketches out the historical and geographical mission of the mode of production, its need to urbanize itself, to create industrial cities, to move mountains, to dig canals, to connect everywhere, nestle everywhere. Within it all, Marx thought urbanization would create a physical and emotional proximity of workers, workers piled on top of one another, beside each other. Cosmopolitanism would thus be a kind of sharing, an awareness of common lived experience, a Here Comes Everybody.
Before us and inside us, urbanism today is a truly cosmopolitan world culture, our very own world literature, our Here Comes Everybody. Here Comes Everybody is what global citizenship ought to be about—hence the “normative letters”, HCE—a citizenship conceived of as something urban, as something territorial, yet one in which urban territoriality is narrower and broader than both “city” and “nationality”; a citizen of the block, of the neighborhood, becomes a citizen of the world, a universal citizen rooted in place, encountering fellow citizens across the corridor and at the other end of the planet, sharing world music together, reading books in every language, watching world cinema, entering Twitter streams and communing on Facebook. For good reason, then, did Joyce (1966: 21) also offer of a variant on his Here Comes Everybody thesis: Here Comes Everybuddy, a wink to Facebook users everywhere (cf. Merrifield 2011).
World literature has morphed into world culture, and this world culture is now an urban arena in which a more advanced cosmopolitan citizenship emerges—might emerge—a Here Comes Everybody forever present at its own birth pangs. Or almost everybody, a 99% of everybody. In this citizenship perception replaces passport and horizon is almost as important as habitat; a perception and horizon simultaneously in place and in space, off-line somewhere local, and online somewhere planetary, somewhere virtual. It is a space, in other words, in which Everybody meets Everybuddy, staving off Everybully (as Joyce cautions). Citizenship therein reveals itself through the negation of distance and the reaching out to distance, an opening up and a drawing in, a passionate embrace between bodies and buddies. It’s the point of convergence of both, a dialectic that’s a structure of feeling and a way of seeing—feeling and seeing oneself on the same plane as one’s planet. At the point of convergence, any singularity will be so powerful that no border patrol can ever prevent its rites of passage. This, perhaps, is the outcome of Earwicker’s great dream.
It’s a dream, too, in which there’s reconciliation with Ann—aka Anna Livia Plurabelle (ALP), the “bringer of plurabilities”, the wife and mother of Earwicker’s twins, Jerry (Shem) and Kevin (Shaun), and daughter Isobel (Izzy). ALP’s presence flows eternally through Finnegans Wake; ALP is Dublin’s Liffey River opening up the sea, is Paris’s Seine creating Being, washing away the grime of life. Both the Liffey and the Seine gush through Anna like a river of blood, like healing waters, like the ebb of death and the flow of renewed life. The “Sein annews”, Joyce says (1966: 277): it’s the sinew and core of his and HCE-ALP’s very Being, their “Sein”. (Sein is the German verb “to be”.) At the same time, the Seine “anews”, is eternally reoccurring and constantly renewing, forever bridging the past and the future, like in Anna Livia’s beautiful closing elegy, expressing cleansing waters and the healing powers of reunification, of a rising up to a new level:
“Soft morning, city! Lsp! I am leafy speafing. Lpf! Folty and folty all the nights have falled on to long my hair. Not a sound, falling. Lispn! No wind no word. Only a leaf, just a leaf and then leaves. The woods are fond always. As were we their babes in. And robins in crews so. It is for me goolden wending. Unless? Away! Rise up, man of the hooths, you have slept so long! Or is it only so mesleems? On your pondered palm. Reclined from cape to pede. With pipe on bowl. Terce for a fiddler, sixt for makmerriers, none for a Cole. Rise up now and aruse!” (1966: 619).
What does this HCE-ALP alliance rise up towards? Collisions of men and women don’t, Joyce implies, necessarily have to be “collusions with money,” nor even collusions with oppression and sexism. They can also express complex collideorscapes, that magnificently suggestive concept from Finnegans Wake (1966: 143): “what would that fargazer seem to seemself to seem seeming of, dimm it all? Answer: A collideorscape!”
Joyce’s fargazing saw one great big kaleidoscope, a collision of people, people encountering other people, a coincidence of opposites, the coexistence of unity within disunity, a human kaleidoscope in which each separate image, each separate mix, changes with each respective shake. Human patterns and colorations thus depend upon how things come together, how coincidences take hold, how they congeal to form other realities, other ways of seeing and acting. Something new here is disclosed, an urban image and langscape, comings together of people, of skyscrapers and towers—“a waalworth of a skyerscape of the most eyeful hoyth entowerly” (1966: 4). Listen to the sound of “eyeful” as Eiffel, a wonderful instance of Joyce’s ear talk, of his acoustics, of sounds to be heard and sang with others rather than read alone; “soundsense”, Joyce (1966: 121) dubbed it, a sensual modality in which “soundsense and sensesound” conjoin, become “kin again”. (Earwicker isn’t called the “paradigmatic ear” for nothing; his eyes may be closed, but his ears are permanently open, “earsighted”.) Perhaps above all else, the collideorscape is a “collision” or “escape”, a collision and an escape, a dialectics of liberation, a thesis and antithesis creating new synthesis. Joyce hatches his Great Escape here, his Great Escape from language, and our Great Escape from the dominant order.
Indeed, the Joycean collideorscape amounts to nothing less than the contingent creation of a new political movement, one struggling to impose its singularity as a mass democratic movement, one building democracy through the scattered shards of social movements the world over. Therein each scattered shard bonds and reinforces the other, forms a new patternmind of an offensive front and rearguard defense. Efficacy will likely be predicated on how protagonists organize themselves internally yet coordinate themselves externally, reach out to one another to create a broader, more inclusive constellation of dissent, coexisting horizontally and democratically, overground and underground. The ensuing collideorscape refracts fresh light on things, creates a new political aura, and a different shape and sound to social reality.
In its cosmic radiance and human heterogeneity, the collideorscape represents “the general will”, an infallible will when it congeals democratically. Such a political movement implies that all disparate social movements, those struggling for local concerns (concerns that are now, willy-nilly, common global concerns), need to make themselves more important than they actually are, need to publicize their activism, publicize their agendas and grievances to wider audiences, through alternative media and relentless ear talk, sharing tales of neoliberal crimes and misdemeanors, propelling themselves outwards, onto a planetary plane, onto the fargazing plane of Finnegans Wake. This is what Here Comes Everybody has to be about, can be about. An intersection. The lifewand in which the dumb speak.
---------------
References
Braudel F (1982) The Wheels of Commerce: Civilization and Capitalism, 15th-18th Century, Vol. II. Berkeley: University of California Press
Ellman R (1959) James Joyce. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Joyce J (1966 [1939]) Finnegans Wake. London: Faber and Faber
Lefebvre H (2003 [1970]) The Urban Revolution. Minneapolis: Minnesota University Press
Marx K and Engels F (2011 [1848]) The Communist Manifesto. New York: Penguin
Merrifield A (2011) Crowd politics, or, Here Comes Everybuddy. New Left Review 71:103-114
Vico G (1999 [1744]) New Science (3rd edn). London: Penguin
Wilson E (1961 [1941]) The Wound and the Bow. London: Methuen & Co
--------------------------------------------
Andy Merrifield, Fellow, Murray Edwards College, University of Cambridge
17 déc. 2013
Oui, l’œuvre sort plus belle
D’une forme au travail
Rebelle,
Vers, marbre, onyx, émail.
Point de contraintes fausses !
Mais que pour marcher droit
Tu chausses,
Muse, un cothurne étroit !
Fi du rhythme commode,
Comme un soulier trop grand,
Du mode
Que tout pied quitte et prend !
Statuaire, repousse
L’argile que pétrit
Le pouce
Quand flotte ailleurs l’esprit :
Lutte avec le carrare,
Avec le paros dur
Et rare,
Gardiens du contour pur ;
Emprunte à Syracuse
Son bronze où fermement
S’accuse
Le trait fier et charmant ;
D’une main délicate
Poursuis dans un filon
D’agate
Le profil d’Apollon.
Peintre, fuis l’aquarelle,
Et fixe la couleur
Trop frêle
Au four de l’émailleur ;
Fais les sirènes bleues,
Tordant de cent façons
Leurs queues,
Les monstres des blasons ;
Dans son nimbe trilobe
La Vierge et son Jésus,
Le globe
Avec la croix dessus.
Tout passe. — L’art robuste
Seul a l’éternité :
Le buste
Survit à la cité,
Et la médaille austère
Que trouve un laboureur
Sous terre
Révèle un empereur.
Les dieux eux-mêmes meurent.
Mais les vers souverains
Demeurent
Plus forts que les airains.
Sculpte, lime, cisèle ;
Que ton rêve flottant
Se scelle
Dans le bloc résistant !
D’une forme au travail
Rebelle,
Vers, marbre, onyx, émail.
Point de contraintes fausses !
Mais que pour marcher droit
Tu chausses,
Muse, un cothurne étroit !
Fi du rhythme commode,
Comme un soulier trop grand,
Du mode
Que tout pied quitte et prend !
Statuaire, repousse
L’argile que pétrit
Le pouce
Quand flotte ailleurs l’esprit :
Lutte avec le carrare,
Avec le paros dur
Et rare,
Gardiens du contour pur ;
Emprunte à Syracuse
Son bronze où fermement
S’accuse
Le trait fier et charmant ;
D’une main délicate
Poursuis dans un filon
D’agate
Le profil d’Apollon.
Peintre, fuis l’aquarelle,
Et fixe la couleur
Trop frêle
Au four de l’émailleur ;
Fais les sirènes bleues,
Tordant de cent façons
Leurs queues,
Les monstres des blasons ;
Dans son nimbe trilobe
La Vierge et son Jésus,
Le globe
Avec la croix dessus.
Tout passe. — L’art robuste
Seul a l’éternité :
Le buste
Survit à la cité,
Et la médaille austère
Que trouve un laboureur
Sous terre
Révèle un empereur.
Les dieux eux-mêmes meurent.
Mais les vers souverains
Demeurent
Plus forts que les airains.
Sculpte, lime, cisèle ;
Que ton rêve flottant
Se scelle
Dans le bloc résistant !
L'Art
Théophile Gautier
12 déc. 2013
test
Hello. Hello this really works. Hello this is Gov. Ronald Reagan of California. Yes amazing. Neat stuff. I thought I would say hello whilst we are waiting. This is mb. Hello Marcel. Who are we waiting for. Im Edward. Hello. Hi Ed. Call me Ron. Hi Ron you dont mind do you. Hello Edward. Well Im told we are waiting for Jane Fonda. No my wife calls me Ronnie. Jane Fonda. Really. Well Ill be. Interesting line up. Hello everyone. Oh Jane. Shes quite something. Yes certainly. A woman of many talents and interests from what I hear. Bit controversial too around these parts. Oh really. Hanoi Jane and all that. Oh Ron come one. You cant stand lefties can you. Oh lets not reduce ourselves to labels Ed. Right. Left. Whats it all mean anyway. No labels Ron. No labels. Yes acting has made you wise. Oh I dont know about that. I wonder how long she will be. Well perhaps we can start without her. What are we starting anyway. I say we give her a few minutes. Im not clear on the point of this exercise. Well I think we are testing the possibilities of this device. I understand it is to be launched much more widely soon. I suspected Jane will be the celebrity endorsement. Marcel I hope there is more to it than that. OK but why us. Well think about the implications. Imagine what something like this would offer to the world. What are the implications. This will revolutionize they way people do business. Culture perhaps. Someone from Japan can have a conversation with someone from California. What about China. Wouldnt you rather pick up the phone and call. All this damned typing. You get faster. Yes I would but if it were to be cheap and inexpensive. Free. Free. Well who pays for it in the end of though. The people of course. You mean taxes. I assume you are in a military communication centre like me. Both of you. But for a young man or woman in Sri Lanka this might help them voice their ideas to people like a university professor from Michigan or an architect from Bahia. The rich should pay. I do see the value in this tool. How do you think these kinds of stronger connections with the world will benefit you Ronald. Personally. Oh maybe I could keep in better touch with people I know who are far away. But I prefer face to face conversations to really do my work. Seems like an interesting business opportunity. And what about for your citizens in California? But if a student of mine wanted to go to Iran they wouldnt have the money but they could discuss issues with Iranian students using this thing. Students I think could benefit from this greatly. Yes I can imagine. Vaste networks of students. Networks. What does that mean really. Youth must be provide with the means to grasp this opportunity. Sounds a bit out of control to me. Sounds suspicious. The young will grasp its potential in a way we couldnt imagine. I dont doubt that. You agree with me Ronald. Well yes. And what will it lead to Marcel. Other networks with more power will already have control. The things that really change the world are not always predictable. Who knows. Looks like Jane wont be showing up for a while. But you both must agree there is a great potential here. Yes potential. Yes and no. But who builds it. Who fosters it. Private enterprise must be encouraged to make this availabe. Everything is double edged or more. It should be encouraged to be freely available. This might certainly be more interesting and stimulating than television though. Marcel nothing is free you know. I am always in support of the act of writing. No matter how banal. I know Ronald . I know. We have your great nation to thanks for this. Is this being documented and archived. Yes Marcel I do believe you have much to thank this great nation for. Indeed. Marcel but dont forget Im American too. America is great nation. New nations always speak this way. How American are you Edward. I can think of no other nation that has contributed as much to ideas of democracy and free enterprise as my own. Everything vital in this century and probably the next will be fought out in this country in America because thats where antagonism will always rest. Yes Ed our ideals must be fought for. Well I can see we feel expressive in a way we can never be on a telephone. Im always from a place that I dont know. Sounds philosophical to me. But I like that I know what I know about where I am. What do you know about where you are. And why do you like it. If you live with a horrible woman nasty and vengeful for exemple. You know a lot about her. No never. But because she is clear about her nastiness or does a bad job about hiding it you can sleep in her arms at night. Indeed. I think like this very often. Every time I open an exhibition for example. Really. Mostly. To be an artist is to be sado-masochistic. Yes I can relate to that. Occasionally nauseating but often thrilling. It is why I work at home more and more. So it is with politics perhaps. And acting. Do tell Ronald. And we can ask Jane about when she arrives. Yes but politicians have too litle doubt. For artists doubt is the drug that keeps them alive. No there is doubt. How. But one must get elected in order to be able to do the work and that requires the appearance of no doubt. But appearances then become style Ron. I move beyond my doubts through the certainty of my ideals and beliefs. Do I have style Ed. You got it Ron. Sex appeal. What about you Marcel do you have beliefs and ideals that cannot be shaken. I am feeling more and more that the domestic space is the only space people have left. Im not sure Im following. The only space to be free. I think you understand me well Edward. Yes I do. I know how I feel when Im back at our ranch. Makes sense Marcel. And I think you understand me well too Mr Reagan. For those that do not have a ranch. Yes, but Im for a space of freedom that cover that entire world. This is why I became governor. And who know what else. I took a peep at the Superbowl the other day and it was just amazing, its a space where everything and anything can be sold, it works on desires, the only place where one can control ones desires to a certain extent is a place of seclusion. Who decides on this freedom. Corporates of course. Liberty must be defended and secured by freely elected governments. Western corporates. Corporations must be free to compete as well yes. You sound cynical Ed. Why do you think this is Ronald. Where is Jane. Shes missing all the fun. Shes running late but definately on her way I understand. So gentlemen this has still not officially started. Am I right we are supposed to have a moderator for a proper conversation between the four of us. Yes indeed. A kind of virtual conference. And what are we meant to talk about. Who's the moderator. Ron you dont know. No I dont. I think her name is Maeve OReilly Maybe we dont need a moderator after all. Cut out the middleman so to speak. Yes to use a scrubber or the soap directly. So why did you give up acting Mr Reagan. Oh simple really I wanted to serve my country. I wanted to do more. And how easy was it for someone like you to get into politics. It was gradual. But of course people knew who I was, which helps. Have you ever been to Europe. And people believed enough in me to help I think this device is amazing. I am feeling quite emotional. I hope it can be used as a force to liberate. It would be great if we could play music through it. Its not about the device its about whose taking control of it. Well I think the people should be allowed. Agreed. Id look forward to the time when this technology is placed in the hands of business people and inventors and entrepreneurs. Then it will really take off. Music is much better for the world to have as something distributed through a device like this than works constructed by memories we cant control or have a little control of. Music is entertaining but there can so much more. Like sharing beliefs. Music is not just entertaining Ron. Music gives us much more than entertainment. Perhaps but thats not something I know much about. Of course I enjoy music. My work is to create a system that protect and allow for the spread of liberty and self realization. Music is the spice of life as they say but its not the meat. Can someone find out when and if Jane is coming. I hear Jane is close by. It would be strange to communicate with her with no face no voice. But still incredible. You know I dont know what you and Ed look like. I wonder how she will feel about this. We all know Janes appearance though. Strange to think about it. Thats true. Shes a star. More famous than any of us. Did you see Barbarella. Of course. Very nice acting sharp lady. A new breed of actor I think. But I imagine you might not always appreciate her views Mr Reagan. No I dont care much for communist sympathizers to be frank. But surely she is liberated in her freedom to do so. If ones liberty threatens to undermine the liberty of millions of Americans then I must disagree Marcel. She was photographed sitting atop a North Vietnamese gun you know. Ron communism is a brand like that burger chain. Whats it called. The important thing is to always remember that all brands can be good and bad and in the middle. Everything is actually more in the middle than we would like to think. I cant imagine the good in the brand of Communism. Im not a communist myself but because I feel you understand Communism as an Other. A different thing radically so than your beliefs. Im simply trying to say that perhaps its not that different in the end. All politics control in one way or another. Thats a good point Edward. Can you even tell us what communism is Mr Reagan. Its the suppression of liberty in the name of a common good. And what will the world be like in the future. Edward. Mr Reagan. what will the future look like. If we as a nation as people around the world who believe in individual liberty we stand strong and united in the defence of democratic idealshen I believe the world can be stable and secure where individuals can be free to pursue their lives to the fullest. It will not be easy. Who do you ask Marcel. If Ronald thinks everyone can be free with a liberty that is not suppressed then I suppose that we will be in heaven. Most likely a technological heaven. I ask as I know that chasing ideals will always fail. Nobody really knows what is going on. Ronald doesnt seem to think so. Who are we if we lose our ideals. To strive for them is noble. It makes us great. I'm sorry for you Marcel if you truly do not strive for ideals. I am saddened by your blind faith Mr. Reagan. My ideals. The ideals that I strive for are uncertain. I cant define them like you do Ron and they always change. My faith is not blind. I have nearly 200 years of the history of my country to give my support in the pursuit of these ideals that have made us strong and succesful. How do you measure success. Ours is a thriving democracy and it guarantees liberty for its citizens. We are leaders among other nations. Yes but you didnt answer my question. How do you measure success. Edward I am curious as to your thoughts on the freedom to express. I measure it in our prosperity and in our influence on the world stage. Just what I expected from you Governor. And what about you Marcel. Europe I hope is learning its lessons from history. But I still sense the unknown. For better or for worse. Jesus gentlemen you cant see outside of your Western boxed egos can you. We live on a bloody planet here. Please explain. I dont follow you Ed. Youre a Westerner too arent you. When I asked you how you measure success I got a replay about America and the world stage and another about Europe and its history. Im a human being. I try to see the world from as many perspectives as possible. It matters where you live. What nation you live in. Are you saying that all perspectives are equal. Its not about equality. I am not John Lennon. I hear Jane Fonda has arrived. Finally. Jane will understand me I hope.
marcel broodthears, edward said, ronald reagan, arpanet, 1975
Hello. Hello this really works. Hello this is Gov. Ronald Reagan of California. Yes amazing. Neat stuff. I thought I would say hello whilst we are waiting. This is mb. Hello Marcel. Who are we waiting for. Im Edward. Hello. Hi Ed. Call me Ron. Hi Ron you dont mind do you. Hello Edward. Well Im told we are waiting for Jane Fonda. No my wife calls me Ronnie. Jane Fonda. Really. Well Ill be. Interesting line up. Hello everyone. Oh Jane. Shes quite something. Yes certainly. A woman of many talents and interests from what I hear. Bit controversial too around these parts. Oh really. Hanoi Jane and all that. Oh Ron come one. You cant stand lefties can you. Oh lets not reduce ourselves to labels Ed. Right. Left. Whats it all mean anyway. No labels Ron. No labels. Yes acting has made you wise. Oh I dont know about that. I wonder how long she will be. Well perhaps we can start without her. What are we starting anyway. I say we give her a few minutes. Im not clear on the point of this exercise. Well I think we are testing the possibilities of this device. I understand it is to be launched much more widely soon. I suspected Jane will be the celebrity endorsement. Marcel I hope there is more to it than that. OK but why us. Well think about the implications. Imagine what something like this would offer to the world. What are the implications. This will revolutionize they way people do business. Culture perhaps. Someone from Japan can have a conversation with someone from California. What about China. Wouldnt you rather pick up the phone and call. All this damned typing. You get faster. Yes I would but if it were to be cheap and inexpensive. Free. Free. Well who pays for it in the end of though. The people of course. You mean taxes. I assume you are in a military communication centre like me. Both of you. But for a young man or woman in Sri Lanka this might help them voice their ideas to people like a university professor from Michigan or an architect from Bahia. The rich should pay. I do see the value in this tool. How do you think these kinds of stronger connections with the world will benefit you Ronald. Personally. Oh maybe I could keep in better touch with people I know who are far away. But I prefer face to face conversations to really do my work. Seems like an interesting business opportunity. And what about for your citizens in California? But if a student of mine wanted to go to Iran they wouldnt have the money but they could discuss issues with Iranian students using this thing. Students I think could benefit from this greatly. Yes I can imagine. Vaste networks of students. Networks. What does that mean really. Youth must be provide with the means to grasp this opportunity. Sounds a bit out of control to me. Sounds suspicious. The young will grasp its potential in a way we couldnt imagine. I dont doubt that. You agree with me Ronald. Well yes. And what will it lead to Marcel. Other networks with more power will already have control. The things that really change the world are not always predictable. Who knows. Looks like Jane wont be showing up for a while. But you both must agree there is a great potential here. Yes potential. Yes and no. But who builds it. Who fosters it. Private enterprise must be encouraged to make this availabe. Everything is double edged or more. It should be encouraged to be freely available. This might certainly be more interesting and stimulating than television though. Marcel nothing is free you know. I am always in support of the act of writing. No matter how banal. I know Ronald . I know. We have your great nation to thanks for this. Is this being documented and archived. Yes Marcel I do believe you have much to thank this great nation for. Indeed. Marcel but dont forget Im American too. America is great nation. New nations always speak this way. How American are you Edward. I can think of no other nation that has contributed as much to ideas of democracy and free enterprise as my own. Everything vital in this century and probably the next will be fought out in this country in America because thats where antagonism will always rest. Yes Ed our ideals must be fought for. Well I can see we feel expressive in a way we can never be on a telephone. Im always from a place that I dont know. Sounds philosophical to me. But I like that I know what I know about where I am. What do you know about where you are. And why do you like it. If you live with a horrible woman nasty and vengeful for exemple. You know a lot about her. No never. But because she is clear about her nastiness or does a bad job about hiding it you can sleep in her arms at night. Indeed. I think like this very often. Every time I open an exhibition for example. Really. Mostly. To be an artist is to be sado-masochistic. Yes I can relate to that. Occasionally nauseating but often thrilling. It is why I work at home more and more. So it is with politics perhaps. And acting. Do tell Ronald. And we can ask Jane about when she arrives. Yes but politicians have too litle doubt. For artists doubt is the drug that keeps them alive. No there is doubt. How. But one must get elected in order to be able to do the work and that requires the appearance of no doubt. But appearances then become style Ron. I move beyond my doubts through the certainty of my ideals and beliefs. Do I have style Ed. You got it Ron. Sex appeal. What about you Marcel do you have beliefs and ideals that cannot be shaken. I am feeling more and more that the domestic space is the only space people have left. Im not sure Im following. The only space to be free. I think you understand me well Edward. Yes I do. I know how I feel when Im back at our ranch. Makes sense Marcel. And I think you understand me well too Mr Reagan. For those that do not have a ranch. Yes, but Im for a space of freedom that cover that entire world. This is why I became governor. And who know what else. I took a peep at the Superbowl the other day and it was just amazing, its a space where everything and anything can be sold, it works on desires, the only place where one can control ones desires to a certain extent is a place of seclusion. Who decides on this freedom. Corporates of course. Liberty must be defended and secured by freely elected governments. Western corporates. Corporations must be free to compete as well yes. You sound cynical Ed. Why do you think this is Ronald. Where is Jane. Shes missing all the fun. Shes running late but definately on her way I understand. So gentlemen this has still not officially started. Am I right we are supposed to have a moderator for a proper conversation between the four of us. Yes indeed. A kind of virtual conference. And what are we meant to talk about. Who's the moderator. Ron you dont know. No I dont. I think her name is Maeve OReilly Maybe we dont need a moderator after all. Cut out the middleman so to speak. Yes to use a scrubber or the soap directly. So why did you give up acting Mr Reagan. Oh simple really I wanted to serve my country. I wanted to do more. And how easy was it for someone like you to get into politics. It was gradual. But of course people knew who I was, which helps. Have you ever been to Europe. And people believed enough in me to help I think this device is amazing. I am feeling quite emotional. I hope it can be used as a force to liberate. It would be great if we could play music through it. Its not about the device its about whose taking control of it. Well I think the people should be allowed. Agreed. Id look forward to the time when this technology is placed in the hands of business people and inventors and entrepreneurs. Then it will really take off. Music is much better for the world to have as something distributed through a device like this than works constructed by memories we cant control or have a little control of. Music is entertaining but there can so much more. Like sharing beliefs. Music is not just entertaining Ron. Music gives us much more than entertainment. Perhaps but thats not something I know much about. Of course I enjoy music. My work is to create a system that protect and allow for the spread of liberty and self realization. Music is the spice of life as they say but its not the meat. Can someone find out when and if Jane is coming. I hear Jane is close by. It would be strange to communicate with her with no face no voice. But still incredible. You know I dont know what you and Ed look like. I wonder how she will feel about this. We all know Janes appearance though. Strange to think about it. Thats true. Shes a star. More famous than any of us. Did you see Barbarella. Of course. Very nice acting sharp lady. A new breed of actor I think. But I imagine you might not always appreciate her views Mr Reagan. No I dont care much for communist sympathizers to be frank. But surely she is liberated in her freedom to do so. If ones liberty threatens to undermine the liberty of millions of Americans then I must disagree Marcel. She was photographed sitting atop a North Vietnamese gun you know. Ron communism is a brand like that burger chain. Whats it called. The important thing is to always remember that all brands can be good and bad and in the middle. Everything is actually more in the middle than we would like to think. I cant imagine the good in the brand of Communism. Im not a communist myself but because I feel you understand Communism as an Other. A different thing radically so than your beliefs. Im simply trying to say that perhaps its not that different in the end. All politics control in one way or another. Thats a good point Edward. Can you even tell us what communism is Mr Reagan. Its the suppression of liberty in the name of a common good. And what will the world be like in the future. Edward. Mr Reagan. what will the future look like. If we as a nation as people around the world who believe in individual liberty we stand strong and united in the defence of democratic idealshen I believe the world can be stable and secure where individuals can be free to pursue their lives to the fullest. It will not be easy. Who do you ask Marcel. If Ronald thinks everyone can be free with a liberty that is not suppressed then I suppose that we will be in heaven. Most likely a technological heaven. I ask as I know that chasing ideals will always fail. Nobody really knows what is going on. Ronald doesnt seem to think so. Who are we if we lose our ideals. To strive for them is noble. It makes us great. I'm sorry for you Marcel if you truly do not strive for ideals. I am saddened by your blind faith Mr. Reagan. My ideals. The ideals that I strive for are uncertain. I cant define them like you do Ron and they always change. My faith is not blind. I have nearly 200 years of the history of my country to give my support in the pursuit of these ideals that have made us strong and succesful. How do you measure success. Ours is a thriving democracy and it guarantees liberty for its citizens. We are leaders among other nations. Yes but you didnt answer my question. How do you measure success. Edward I am curious as to your thoughts on the freedom to express. I measure it in our prosperity and in our influence on the world stage. Just what I expected from you Governor. And what about you Marcel. Europe I hope is learning its lessons from history. But I still sense the unknown. For better or for worse. Jesus gentlemen you cant see outside of your Western boxed egos can you. We live on a bloody planet here. Please explain. I dont follow you Ed. Youre a Westerner too arent you. When I asked you how you measure success I got a replay about America and the world stage and another about Europe and its history. Im a human being. I try to see the world from as many perspectives as possible. It matters where you live. What nation you live in. Are you saying that all perspectives are equal. Its not about equality. I am not John Lennon. I hear Jane Fonda has arrived. Finally. Jane will understand me I hope.
marcel broodthears, edward said, ronald reagan, arpanet, 1975
10 déc. 2013
This handle is not made to the actual dimensions of the original pattern for those of the main floor of 19 Kundmanngasse Vienna, the Palais Stonborough, the house designed to a commission by Margarethe Stonborough and completed between 1926 and 1928 by her brother, the architect Ludwig Wittgenstein, with the assistance of Adolf Loos's protégés, Paul Engelmann and Jaques Groag. It is however the product of an investigation of the identity of the original door handles, reported lost from the building during its dereliction between 1974 and 1975, and born out of a disquietude about their afterlife - their absorption within the separate and often competing discourses of contemporary product copy-writing, architectural history and philosophy. This handle is not a mere piece of door furniture chosen from a catalogue, but an apposite point of entry into the extraordinary richness of Wittgenstein’s entire architectural legacy.
It is not clear to the building’s current occupiers, the Bulgarian Cultural Institute, which of the door handles currently installed in the house are original and which are copies, made during the renovations of 1976. The original handles had a very particular specification. They are the subject of substantial commentary and have been
photographed, but no detailed design-drawings of them exist. They are anecdotally celebrated as a diminutive expression of the sensibility that required the completed ceiling of the Saal (some 44.5 square meters) to be raised 30 millimetres, or the hours spent by Wittgenstein’s friend Marguerite Respinger and others in patient readjustment of the height of a stick representing an upper floor window railing. The door handles reputedly took a year to reach completion, during which time Wittgenstein, who as an engineer was accustomed to tolerances expressed in thousandths of an inch or microns, famously left the locksmith, who asked whether a millimetre here or there really mattered, in little doubt that it really did.
Between then and now the handles have however acquired another life, in which their image has become more important than the thing itself. They have become lost in their own history, eclipsed by their representation. This is an inevitable tendency of historical process, but whilst the original material persists it behoves us to pay a requisite attention to the things themselves which, in the words of another philosopher-artist, “have a lot going for them”, before we consign their status to unquestioned convention.
The original handles were cast, requiring the fabrication of a prototype from which a mould was made. The material and means of construction of the prototype is unknown, and would generally be irrelevant beyond its utility for the requirements of that stage of
the process: it could, for instance, have been wax. But everything about these handles suggests a design narrative in which the cast, as the final form, is in fact an anomaly. They appear to have been designed one step at a time, in a manner which has distinct parallels with the method of work pictured in the activities of the builders and the commentary thereon in the opening pages of the Philosophical Investigations. A limited design vocabulary is established: bend, house, wedge, bear, fix. Each function is then interrogated as though being defined, or searched for its minimal condition or ‘rules’ of operation and application, in relation to the context of ‘usage’ – the practical and aesthetic conventions, habits and training, which ground and inform the character of the understanding of an object’s identity, utility and, occasionally, its beauty.
In the preface to the Investigations, Wittgenstein refers to himself as a draughtsman; albeit, modestly, a bad one. This is rather more than an appropriate metaphor for compositional process. It signifies a perspective, for there is a very clear formal sense in both engineering and architecture that something which cannot be drawn (specified) cannot be made. Whilst studying engineering in Berlin Wittgenstein had indeed taken additional drawing classes. This capability was put to use whilst working on jet-tip propulsion under Petavel and Lamb at Manchester, where he showed what was then an extraordinary design skill. At a more domestic scale, having exhausted the patience of Pinsent, Russell and no doubt others on countless fruitless trips to select furniture for his rooms at Cambridge, he designed his own, described by Russell on the occasion of its later acquisition as ”the best deal I ever made”. This obsessive capacity to model, to ‘bild’ remained fundamental to him. After leaving Cambridge he designed a small house for his own use in Norway, which became the template for his repeated intellectual retreats. It was recognised by the Austrian army, which gave him charge of a gunnery repair workshop during World War 1, prompting his later gift of 1million Crowns for the development a “decent” cannon. Wittgenstein later designed and built a steam engine to demonstrate its working principles to his pupils at one of the schools at which he taught during the early 1920s in rural Austria. At more serious scale, he personally designed the lift gear in the Kundmanngasse house, together with a host of other mechanisms that are
attached to its windows and doors, the sliding steel shutters that rise from the floor to cover them, and, of course, the radiators.
Yet it is these handles in particular which, though seemingly simple, show evidence of greater a density of thought than a merely imposed design. They reveal an intimate familiarity with their build-process and the particular capabilities of the material used, a tactile register of understanding which has, perhaps understandably, been overlooked.
Everything about the design of the handles is indicative of a hands-on working knowledge of the material requirements – not of a cast, but of their fabrication. The radius of the bend in the right-angled handle is tight, but not arbitrary. It is the minimum radius achievable, not in a cast object, but by actually bending the material. The radius of the bends which intersect to form the swaged handle is greater than that of its counterpart by the radius of the handle stock itself, and with 60 degrees of arc produces the clearance common between both handles and the door surface. It is also the tightest return bend that steel or malleable brass of that dimension will naturally form when levered rather than machine-pressed or cast into shape. The swage reduces non-axial leverage on the lock mechanism and handle joint. The visible part of the cylinder into which both handles fit has dimensions no greater than the minimum required to drill it across its axes in order to house the handle shafts in both directions. The combination of all the elements of the handle-ensemble in a tapered fit which bears only on the turning bush of the lock mechanism, and is held together by a single axial screw, displays not only an extraordinary and elegant efficiency, but also suggests the family resemblance of the fabricated elements to parts and functions of the machinery - the mill and lathe - used to make them: the tapered quill, the square chuck key, and the components of the machinery controls. All parts of the door handles have a specific reason to be as they are and the size they are, related to the way in which a prototype has been considered and made. Nothing is extraneous, but this exemplifies an aesthetic perspective, not a program.
The after-life of the “Wittgenstein handle” as a source of contemporary style resulting in objects that have at best a very distant family resemblance to their source – such as those by Ize, Technoline GnbH and FSB - signals a slippage in understanding which stretches beyond the objects themselves, and beyond the treatment of the house for which they were made. I suggest that the material properties of the handles designed by Wittgenstein for the Palais Stonborough are best understood in relation to the design and fabrication
requirements of a prototype. The purpose of my investigation has not been to replicate, but to focus attention on the specificity of one small item original material, and to afford it a similar consideration to that required of a manuscript fragment. By taking a closer look at what has become by peculiar default the most widely distributed but least authentically represented object of Wittgenstein’s production, I hope also to have provided an initial ‘handle’ on the importance of affording a similar attention to the detail of the largest remaining unresearched fragment of his career, now approaching the centenary of its commission. A detailed understanding of the house that Wittgenstein designed for his own use, built in Skjolden, Norway, during 1913/14, elements of which are known to have a prototypical relationship to elements of the house in the Kundmanngasse, is essential to the proper assessment of Wittgenstein's architectural thinking. It is likely to be more important than the Kundmanngasse in its relation to his philosophical work.
It is not clear to the building’s current occupiers, the Bulgarian Cultural Institute, which of the door handles currently installed in the house are original and which are copies, made during the renovations of 1976. The original handles had a very particular specification. They are the subject of substantial commentary and have been
photographed, but no detailed design-drawings of them exist. They are anecdotally celebrated as a diminutive expression of the sensibility that required the completed ceiling of the Saal (some 44.5 square meters) to be raised 30 millimetres, or the hours spent by Wittgenstein’s friend Marguerite Respinger and others in patient readjustment of the height of a stick representing an upper floor window railing. The door handles reputedly took a year to reach completion, during which time Wittgenstein, who as an engineer was accustomed to tolerances expressed in thousandths of an inch or microns, famously left the locksmith, who asked whether a millimetre here or there really mattered, in little doubt that it really did.
Between then and now the handles have however acquired another life, in which their image has become more important than the thing itself. They have become lost in their own history, eclipsed by their representation. This is an inevitable tendency of historical process, but whilst the original material persists it behoves us to pay a requisite attention to the things themselves which, in the words of another philosopher-artist, “have a lot going for them”, before we consign their status to unquestioned convention.
The original handles were cast, requiring the fabrication of a prototype from which a mould was made. The material and means of construction of the prototype is unknown, and would generally be irrelevant beyond its utility for the requirements of that stage of
the process: it could, for instance, have been wax. But everything about these handles suggests a design narrative in which the cast, as the final form, is in fact an anomaly. They appear to have been designed one step at a time, in a manner which has distinct parallels with the method of work pictured in the activities of the builders and the commentary thereon in the opening pages of the Philosophical Investigations. A limited design vocabulary is established: bend, house, wedge, bear, fix. Each function is then interrogated as though being defined, or searched for its minimal condition or ‘rules’ of operation and application, in relation to the context of ‘usage’ – the practical and aesthetic conventions, habits and training, which ground and inform the character of the understanding of an object’s identity, utility and, occasionally, its beauty.
In the preface to the Investigations, Wittgenstein refers to himself as a draughtsman; albeit, modestly, a bad one. This is rather more than an appropriate metaphor for compositional process. It signifies a perspective, for there is a very clear formal sense in both engineering and architecture that something which cannot be drawn (specified) cannot be made. Whilst studying engineering in Berlin Wittgenstein had indeed taken additional drawing classes. This capability was put to use whilst working on jet-tip propulsion under Petavel and Lamb at Manchester, where he showed what was then an extraordinary design skill. At a more domestic scale, having exhausted the patience of Pinsent, Russell and no doubt others on countless fruitless trips to select furniture for his rooms at Cambridge, he designed his own, described by Russell on the occasion of its later acquisition as ”the best deal I ever made”. This obsessive capacity to model, to ‘bild’ remained fundamental to him. After leaving Cambridge he designed a small house for his own use in Norway, which became the template for his repeated intellectual retreats. It was recognised by the Austrian army, which gave him charge of a gunnery repair workshop during World War 1, prompting his later gift of 1million Crowns for the development a “decent” cannon. Wittgenstein later designed and built a steam engine to demonstrate its working principles to his pupils at one of the schools at which he taught during the early 1920s in rural Austria. At more serious scale, he personally designed the lift gear in the Kundmanngasse house, together with a host of other mechanisms that are
attached to its windows and doors, the sliding steel shutters that rise from the floor to cover them, and, of course, the radiators.
Yet it is these handles in particular which, though seemingly simple, show evidence of greater a density of thought than a merely imposed design. They reveal an intimate familiarity with their build-process and the particular capabilities of the material used, a tactile register of understanding which has, perhaps understandably, been overlooked.
Everything about the design of the handles is indicative of a hands-on working knowledge of the material requirements – not of a cast, but of their fabrication. The radius of the bend in the right-angled handle is tight, but not arbitrary. It is the minimum radius achievable, not in a cast object, but by actually bending the material. The radius of the bends which intersect to form the swaged handle is greater than that of its counterpart by the radius of the handle stock itself, and with 60 degrees of arc produces the clearance common between both handles and the door surface. It is also the tightest return bend that steel or malleable brass of that dimension will naturally form when levered rather than machine-pressed or cast into shape. The swage reduces non-axial leverage on the lock mechanism and handle joint. The visible part of the cylinder into which both handles fit has dimensions no greater than the minimum required to drill it across its axes in order to house the handle shafts in both directions. The combination of all the elements of the handle-ensemble in a tapered fit which bears only on the turning bush of the lock mechanism, and is held together by a single axial screw, displays not only an extraordinary and elegant efficiency, but also suggests the family resemblance of the fabricated elements to parts and functions of the machinery - the mill and lathe - used to make them: the tapered quill, the square chuck key, and the components of the machinery controls. All parts of the door handles have a specific reason to be as they are and the size they are, related to the way in which a prototype has been considered and made. Nothing is extraneous, but this exemplifies an aesthetic perspective, not a program.
The after-life of the “Wittgenstein handle” as a source of contemporary style resulting in objects that have at best a very distant family resemblance to their source – such as those by Ize, Technoline GnbH and FSB - signals a slippage in understanding which stretches beyond the objects themselves, and beyond the treatment of the house for which they were made. I suggest that the material properties of the handles designed by Wittgenstein for the Palais Stonborough are best understood in relation to the design and fabrication
requirements of a prototype. The purpose of my investigation has not been to replicate, but to focus attention on the specificity of one small item original material, and to afford it a similar consideration to that required of a manuscript fragment. By taking a closer look at what has become by peculiar default the most widely distributed but least authentically represented object of Wittgenstein’s production, I hope also to have provided an initial ‘handle’ on the importance of affording a similar attention to the detail of the largest remaining unresearched fragment of his career, now approaching the centenary of its commission. A detailed understanding of the house that Wittgenstein designed for his own use, built in Skjolden, Norway, during 1913/14, elements of which are known to have a prototypical relationship to elements of the house in the Kundmanngasse, is essential to the proper assessment of Wittgenstein's architectural thinking. It is likely to be more important than the Kundmanngasse in its relation to his philosophical work.
[A 3/4 scale fabricated model of the cast door-handles of the Palais Stonborough 1928. Brass CZ 131. David Connearn 2011.]
9 déc. 2013
John Barton Wolgamot
IN SARA, MENCKEN, CHRIST AND BEETHOVEN THERE
WERE MEN AND WOMEN
IN SARA, MENCKEN, CHRIST AND BEETHOVEN THERE
WERE MEN AND WOMEN
In its very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically the very cruelly ancestral death of Sara Powell Haardt had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Rafael Sabatini, George Ade, Margaret Storm Jameson, Ford Madox Hueffer, Jean-Jacques Bernard, Louis Bromfield, Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Helen Brown Norden had very originally come amongst his very really grand men and women to Lodovico Ariosto, Solon, Matteo Maria Bojardo, Philo Judaeus, Roger Bacon, Longus, Simeon Strunsky and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Thomas Stearns Eliot, Robert Southey, Edward John Moreton Drax Plunkett Dunsany, Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, Arthur Schopenhauer, Blaise Pascal, Georg Morris Cohen Brandes and Jonathan Swift had very sarcastically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Wolgamot as god had very magnificently come amongst her very really grand men and women to Gaius Plinius Secundus, Bion, Origines Adamantius, Democritus, Phidias, Zeuxis, Pietro Aretino and Michelangelo Buonarroti very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Johannes Brahms very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had very allegorically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Clarence Day, Jr., John Donne, Ruggiero Leoncavalo, James Owen Hannay, Gustav Frenssen, Thomas Beer, Joris Karl Huysmans and Franz Peter Schubert very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Willa Sibert Cather very heroically William Sydney Porter, Laurence Sterne, Algernon Charles Swinburne, Percy Bysshe Shelley, Walter Savage Landor, Thomas Gray, Tobias George Smollett and Helen Brown Norden had very ironically come amongst her very really grand men and women to William Shakespeare very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Wilhelm Richard Wagner very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had very allegorically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Jakob Liebmann Beer, Ernst Toller, John William Thomason, Jr., Winifred Ashton, Herbert Asbury, Wilson Follett, Morley Callaghan and Johann-Sebastian Bach very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Teodor Jozef Konrad Korzeniowski very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady and John Barton Wolgamot had very sardonically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Gamaliel Bradford, Anne Green, William Hervey Allen, Jr., Washington Irving, Pierre Corneille, Arthur Schnitzler, Mari Sandoz, St. John Greer Ervine and Herman Melville very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Hans Christian Andersen, Henri Bergson, Niccolò di Bernardo Machiavelli, Kenneth Grahame, Charles William Beebe, Thomas Dixon, George Edward Bateman Saintsbury and Beethoven as God had very maliciously come amongst her very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Thomas Hardy had very sarcastically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Arthur Stuart- Menteth Hutchinson, Charles Reade, Edmée Elizabeth Monica de la Pasture, James Brander Matthews, Emil Ludwig, Anne Parrish, Pierre Augustin Caron and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Berenice Anne Bonner very heroically John Barton Wolgamot had very wonderfully come amongst her very really grand men and women to Thomas Lovell Beddoes, George Grove, James Justinian Morier, Emily Price, Jean Cocteau, Alcaeus, Sturlason Snorri and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Archimedes, Plato, Quintus Horatius Flaccus, Aristotle, Epicurus, Anacreon, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Pericles, Socrates, Euripides and Sara Powell Haardt had very ironically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Aristophanes very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Romain Rolland very heroically the very ancestrally inevitable performance of Jean Baptiste Poquelin had very symbolically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Aldous Leonard Huxley, James Boyd, Vittorio Alfieri, Lion Feuchtwanger, Harold Lenoir Davis and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Helen Brown Norden had very sincerely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Jerome Klapka Jerome, Conrad Richter, Alfred Victor de Vigny, David Ricardo, Rémy de Gourmont and Jacques-Anatole Thibault very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically John Greenleaf Whittier, Frank Wedekind, Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin, Charles Perrault, Knut Pedersen Hamsun and Samuel Langhorne Clemens had very gayly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Ruth Maxine Martin very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Ruth Suckow very heroically Edgar Allan Poe had very sinisterly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Claude Gernade Bowers, Thomas Kyd, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Stella Embree, Truman Jesse Moon and Henry Fielding very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Gustave Flaubert very heroically Helen Brown Norden had very altruistically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Benjamin Jonson, Franz Werfel, Grazia Deledda, Jean Giono, Richard Dehmel and Christopher Marlowe very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Henrik Johan Ibsen, William Wordsworth, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, Eleanor Gwyn, Hippolyte Adolphe Taine and Pearl Sydenstricker had very sensitively come amongst her very really grand men and women to George Moore very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Rolland as Beethoven had very bullishly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Wystan Hugh Auden, Phaedrus, Frederick Gustavus Burnaby, Babette Deutsch, Duncan Aikman and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Ruth Maxine Martin very heroically Benvenuto Cellini had very imaginatively come amongst her very really grand men and women to Peadar O’Donnell, Anne O’Hare, Lloyd Cassel Douglas, William James, Albert Jay Nock and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Elinor Hoyt very heroically Samuel Taylor Coleridge, William Congreve, Richard Brinsley Butler Sheridan, George Gordon Byron, James Russell Lowell and John Barton Wolgamot had very unquestionably come amongst her very really grand men and women to Berenice Anne Bonner very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically the very wantonly pitiless carnage of Ringgold Wilmer Lardner had very freely come amongst His very really grand men and women to Madeleine de Scudéry, John Fletcher, Harriet Elizabeth Beecher, Mary Borden, William Langland and Berenice Anne Bonner very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Ringgold Wilmer Lardner very heroically Berenice Anne Bonner had very happily come amongst his very really grand men and women to Eugène Marin Labiche, Maude Howe, William Temple Hornaday, Richard Wright, Alexis Carrel and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Jean Baptiste Poquelin had very homogeneously come amongst her very really grand men and women to Gladys Bronwyn Stern, Arnold Zweig, Louis Marie Julien Viaud, Martha Ostenso, Manuel Komroff and Walter Scott very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically Marie Rosalie Bonheur, Joseph Hergesheimer, Anne Louise Germaine Necker, James Branch Cabell, August Wilhelm von Schlegel and Frances Gertrude Fiedler had very ironically come amongst His very really grand men and women to James Fenimore Cooper very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Jesus Christ had very intolerably come amongst her very really grand men and women to Torquato Tasso, Menander, Claude Henri de Saint-Simon, Samuel Smiles, Caroline Beach and Katherine Jane Lightbody very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Berenice Anne Bonner had very ironically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Henry Seidel Canby, William McFee, Pietro di Donato, Eleanor Mercein, Johann David Wyss and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Berenice Anne Bonner very heroically Michel Eyquem de Montaigne, Heinrich Heine, Publius Ovidius Naso, Anne Douglas Sedgwick, Charles Erskine Scott Wood and John Barton Wolgamot had very altruistically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Jesus Christ very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Berenice Anne Bonner very heroically Christ as Son had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Benito Pérez Galdós, Carleton Beals, Thomas Wentworth Higginson, Louise Jordan, Pelham Grenville Wodehouse and Ringgold Wilmer Lardner very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Jesus Christ had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Richard Henry Dana, Padraic Colum, Alfred Damon Runyon, George Frisbie Whicher, Harry Leon Wilson and Ringgold Wilmer Lardner very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically Geoffrey Chaucer, Rupert Brooke, Francis Scott Key Fitzgerald, John Milton, William Henry Hudson and Ruth Maxine Martin had very extraordinarily come amongst His very really grand men and women to Berenice Anne Bonner very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Berenice Anne Bonner very heroically Elinor Hoyt had very beautifully come amongst her very really grand men and women to Moses Mendel, John Ford, Arthur Thomas Quiller-Couch, Ruth Feiner, Alfred Noyes and Jesus Christ very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Dante Alighieri had very superbly come amongst her very really grand men and women to George Edward Woodberry, Charles Angoff, Pierre Carlet de Chamblain de Marivaux, Pietro Mascagni, John Addington Symonds and Henry Louis Mencken very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Henry Louis Mencken had very sinisterly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Richard Le Gallienne, Zane Grey, Martha Ellis Gellhorn, Francis Hackett, Jacques Louis David and Kathleen Beauchamp very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Mencken as Beethoven had very hypocritically come amongst her very really grand men and women to David Leslie Murray, Charles Kingsley, Tiziano Vecellio, Oliver Goldsmith, James Thomas Farrell and Henry James very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Henry Brooks Adams, Francis Bacon, Giuseppe Fortunino Francesco Verdi, James Boswell, Nicholas Vachel Lindsay. and William Cullen Bryant had very merrily come amongst his very really grand men and women to Sara Powell Haardt very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Willa Sibert Cather very heroically James Joyce had very analytically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Philip Guedalla, Apelles, Federico García Lorca, Olav Duun, Pare Lorentz and Homer very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Florence Nightingale very heroically
Sara Powell Haardt had very generously come amongst her very really grand men and women to Shane John Randolph Leslie, Nancy Hale, Charles Marie René Leconte de Lisle, Julia Mood, Jacob van Ruysdael and Hugh Seymour Walpole very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically John Barton Wolgamot had very playfully come amongst her very really grand men and women to Walter Lionel George, Sholom Asch, Domenico Zampieri, Alfred Tennyson, Granville Stanley Hall and Henry Louis Mencken very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically William Butler Yeats, Hermann Sudermann, Claude Achille Debussy, Joseph Addison, Elizabeth Barrett and Willa Sibert Cather had very proudly come amongst his very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Emily Jane Brontë very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had very merrily come amongst her very really grand men and women to Eduard Meyer, Thomas Moore, Samuel Hopkins Adams, André Derain, Michael Sadler and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically the very brutally exigent name of Sara Powell Haardt had very genuinely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Hendrik Willem van Loon, Karel Capek, Percival Christopher Wren, Leonard Miller, Stephen Vincent Benét and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Armantine Lucile Aurore Dupin had very errantly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Frank Hamilton Spearman, Whit Burnett, Charles Grandison Finney, Sheila Kaye- Smith, Dalton Trumbo, Edward Elgar, John Singer Sargent and Miguel de Cervantes-Saavedra very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Thomas Mann had very strongly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Harold Joseph Laski, Nora Waln, Amédée Simon Dominique Thierry, Richard Henry Horne, Samuel Lover, Jan van Eyck, Frederick Delius and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Zola as Christian had very practically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Wladyslas Stanislaw Reymont, Joel Sayre, Alessandro di Mariano dei Filipepi, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Sidney Lanier, Elias Howe, Anthony Trollope and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Charlotte Brontë very heroically Verner von Heidenstam, Hans Otto Storm, Robert Alexander Schumann, Jan van der Meer, Samuel Richardson, Herbert Spencer, Henry Major Tomlinson and Theodore Dreiser had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Jean François Marie Arouet very heroically Armantine Lucile Aurore Dupin had very fiercely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Manuel de Falla, Jane Porter, Teresa de Cepeda, Georges Duhamel, Heliodorus, Jakob Jordaens, Prosper Mérimée and Honoré Balzac very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Mary Ann Evans very heroically Sara Powell Haardt and John Barton Wolgamot had very conveniently come amongst her very really grand men and women to Erik Leslie Satie, Vicki Baum, Francis Charles Claypon Yeats-Brown, Flavius Josephus, Rudolf Ditzen, John Rowlands, Camille Pissarro and William Makepeace Thackeray very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Galsworthy very heroically
Armantine Lucile Aurore Dupin had very interpretively come amongst his very really grand men and women to Baruch de Spinoza, William Blake, Edward George Earle Lytton Bulwer, Edgar Lee Masters, David Ross Locke, Paul Vialar, César Auguste Franck and Charles John Huffham Dickens very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Eugene Gladstone O’Neill very heroically William Vaughn Moody, Edward Lear, Charles Camille Saint-Saëns, Archie Binns, Isabel Bowler, John Dryden, Frank Arthur Swinnerton and Victor Marie Hugo had very gallantly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Leonardo di Ser Piero d’Antonio di Ser Piero di Ser Guido da Vinci very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Wolgamot as man had very disillusionedly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Richard Doddridge Blackmore, Denis Diderot, Bartolomé Esteban Murillo, Gustave Charpentier, Thomas Clayton Wolfe, James Mallahan Cain, Susan Bogert Warner and Marie-Henri Beyle very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Charles Langbridge Morgan, Guido Reni, Jean Julius Christian Sibelius, Robert Burness, Maxwell Anderson, Theophrastus, Jacinto Benavente and Sinclair Lewis had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Sara Powell Haardt very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Helen Brown Norden had very sinisterly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Alfred Perceval Graves, Ethel Mannin, Giacomo da Vignola, Engelbert Humperdinck, Oribasius, Clinton Scollard, André Marie Ampère and François Rabelais very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Émile Édouard Charles Antoine Zola very heroically the very meditatively companionable mood of Armantine Lucile Aurore Dupin had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot, Laurence Stallings, Paul Cézanne, François René de Chateaubriand, Henry Purcell, Richard Mansfield and Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Frances Gertrude Fiedler had very politely come amongst her very really grand men and women to Frank Lucius Packard, Eugène Brieux, Roark Whitney Wickliffe Bradford, Carl Lamson Carmer, Friedrich von Flotow and Alexandre Dumas-Davy de la Pailleterie very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Mooris Mäterlinck had very coquettishly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Eric Philbrook Kelly, Martha Foley, Hermann Eduard von Holst, Nicolas Poussin, Pierre van Paassen and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Swift as Wolgamot had very logically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Antoine François Prévost, Julian Green, Joseph Mallord William Turner, Lewis Wallace, James Whitcomb Riley and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Kathleen Beauchamp very heroically Alan Alexander Milne, Richard Steele, Gioachino Antonio Rossini, Charles Lamb, Henri René Albert Guy de Maupassant and William Dean Howells had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Ruth Maxine Martin very heroically Frances Gertrude Fiedler had very ironically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Eugene Victor Debs, Pindar, Baldassare Castiglione, Karl Goldmark, John Drinkwater and George Bernard Shaw very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of George Meredith very heroically Paul Gauguin had very wildly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Margaret Kennedy, Oland Russell, Harley Granville-Barker, Pieter Breughel, Benedetto Croce and William Somerset Maugham very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Helen Brown Norden very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady and John Barton Wolgamot had very originally come amongst her very really grand men and women to Henri Benjamin de Constant, Francis Beaumont, Il Beato Fra Guido Angelico, Joseph Lincoln Steffens, Gilbert Keith Chesterton and Enoch Arnold Bennett very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Herbert George Wells very heroically Maurice Henry Hewlett, Alphonse Daudet, Frédéric François Chopin, Mary Lamb, Luigi Pirandello and Jane Austen had very subtilely come amongst his very really grand men and women to David Herbert Lawrence very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Helen Brown Norden had very coquettishly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Georges Seurat, Thales, Alessandro Manzoni, Élie Faure, Jules Renard and Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Jack Edward Swift very heroically the very memorably devoted attention of Frances Gertrude Fiedler had very savagely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Rudyard Kipling, Firmin Auguste Renoir, Frank Norris and Stephen Crane very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Edith Newbold Jones very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had very excitingly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Mary Findlater, John Masefield, James Abbott McNeill Whistler, Vardis Fisher, Kenneth Roberts and Nathaniel Hathorne very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of John Roderigo Dos Passos very heroically Nathaniel Hathorne had very exquisitely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Isabella Augusta Persse, Zeno, Cécile Louise Stéphanie Chaminade, Frank Case, Robert Ranke Graves and James Gibbons Huneker very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Edith Newbold Jones very heroically John Robinson Jeffers, René Descartes, Ferdinand Victor Eugène Delacroix, Sean O’Casey, Oscar Fingall O’Flahertie Wills Wilde and Hathorne as New England Puritan had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Henry Hazlitt very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Nathaniel Hathorne very heroically Dorothea Frances Canfield had very imperturbably come amongst his very really grand men and women to Thomas Hart Benton, Mary Johnston, René Fülöp-Miller, James Norman Hall, Charles Austin Beard and Edith Newbold Jones very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Mary Hunter very heroically Henry Louis Mencken had very inventively come amongst her very really grand men and women to Samuel Guy Endore, Homer Grunn, John Orley Allen Tate, Rachel Crothers, Caradoc Evans and Ole Edvart Rölvaag very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Erich Maria Cramer very heroically William Bliss Carman, Hamlin Garland, Alexandre César Léopold Bizet, Ernest Renan, Francis Marion Crawford and Edith Newbold Jones had very deplorably come amongst his very really grand men and women to Louis Hémon very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Edith Newbold Jones very heroically Newton Booth Tarkington had very exactly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Richard Harding Davis, Andrew Lang, Savinien Cyrano de Bergerac, Ray Stannard Baker, Edvard Hagerup Grieg and Nathaniel Hathorne very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Nathaniel Hathorne very heroically Van Wyck Brooks had very gravely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Rabindranath Tagore, John La Farge, Julian Sorrell Huxley, Marie Joseph Sue, Herasmus Gerardus and William Clark Russell very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Charles Robert Darwin very heroically Edith Newbold Jones had very bravely come amongst his very really grand men and women to André Tridon, Thespis, Angelo Ambrogini, Franz Lehár, Percy Marks and George Jean Nathan very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Nathaniel Hathorne very heroically the very incomparably gracious conduct of James Gibbons Huneker had very richly come amongst his very really grand men and women to James Stephens, Sigmund Freud, Mary Cassatt, Albert Einstein and Louis Pasteur very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady had very defenselessly come amongst His very really grand men and women to Roger Martin du Gard, Lucy Stone, Édouard Victor Antoine Lalo, William James Durant, Phyllis Bentley, Millen Brand, George Wesley Bellows and Ottilia Lovisa Selma Lagerlöf very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Adeline Virginia Stephen very heroically Titus Lucretius Carus had very decently come amongst her very really grand men and women to Marcus Tullius Cicero, Phaedo, Gaius Sallustius Crispus, Michael William Balfe, Gheeraert Davit, Max Bruch, Karl Wilhelm von Humboldt and Johannes Chrysostomus Wolfgangus Theophilus Mozart very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically Rembrandt Harmenszoon van Rijn, Frank Harris, Jakob Ludwig Felix Mendelssohn, Rose Macaulay, Henryk Sienkiewicz, Plutarch, Jules Alfred Huot de Goncourt and Berenice as devotee had very magnificently come amongst His very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Emily Dickinson very heroically John Barton Wolgamot had very majestically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Pierre Charles Baudelaire, Aesop, Clarence Budington Kelland, Giles Lytton Strachey, Lyman Frank Baum, Albrecht Dürer, Alfredo Casella and Jesus Christ very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of David Graham Phillips very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady had very proudly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Opie Percival Read, Aelfric, Joel Elias Spingarn, Selim Palmgren, Athenaeus, Douglas Hyde, Alexander Brook and Ralph Waldo Emerson very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Claude Monet very heroically Frances Gertrude Fiedler and John Barton Wolgamot had very gradually come amongst his very really grand men and women to Ottorino Respighi, Paul Morand, Aurelius Augustinus, Alfred Sisley, Grace Zaring, Will Rogers, Charles Farrar Browne and Helene Böhlau very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of John Griffith London very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady had very wildly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Margaretta Wade Campbell, Ben Hecht, François Adrian Boieldieu, Thomas Gainsborough, Edmund Spenser, Stella Benson, Thames Ross Williamson and Winston Churchill very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Arthur Burton Rascoe very heroically James Weldon Johnson, Claude McKay, Booker Taliaferro Washington, Countée Cullen, Zora Neale Hurston, Jean Toomer, Walter Francis White and James Langston Hughes had very excellently come amongst his very really grand men and women to Domenicos Theotocopoulos very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Jesus Christ very heroically Mencken as papa had very ironically come amongst His very really grand men and women to Helen Maria Fiske, Frans Hals, Victoria Mary Sackville, John Albert Macy, George Gershwin, Stark Young, Hector Hugh Munro and Floyd Dell very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Liam O’Flaherty, Joseph Joubert, Maria Luigi Carlo Zenobia Salvatore Cherubini, Jean Antoine Watteau, Robert Smythe Hichens, Sappho, Marguerite d’Angoulême and Titus Lucretius Carus had very fairly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Viña Croter very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Jesus Christ had very benevolently come amongst his very really grand men and women to Michel de Notredame, Myron, Theodor Woldsen Storm, David Diamond, Irving Babbitt, Asa Gray, Eric Temple Bell and Randolph Silliman Bourne very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Berenice Anne Bonner very heroically the very tempestuously scriptural wedding of Sara Powell Haardt and Henry Louis Mencken had very ironically come amongst her very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot, Dante Gabriel Rossetti, Anna Wickham, Jules Émile Frédéric Massenet, Brian Oswald Donn-Byrne, Rachel Lyman Field, William Saroyan, Erskine Caldwell, Jacques Maritain, Charles Louis de Secondat and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically François de Montcorbier had very clearly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Upton Beall Sinclair, Victor Herbert, Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, Thomas Lawrence, Elliot Harold Paul and Sara Powell Haardt very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Willa Sibert Cather very heroically Sara Powell Haardt had very perfectly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Clément Philibert Léo Delibes, Plotinus, Emanuel Haldeman-Julius, Praxiteles, Susanna Haswell and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Cosmo Hamilton Gibbs, Thomas Malory, Christoph Willibald von Gluck, George Romney, Siegfried Loraine Sassoon and Sara as Intended had very horribly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Sherwood Anderson very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Zona Gale had very energetically come amongst her very really grand men and women to Friedrich Smetana, Grant Wood, Margaret Frances Halsey, Arthur Symons, Benjamin Stolberg and Henry Louis Mencken very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Mary Cassatt very heroically Publius Vergilius Maro had very anarchistically come amongst very really grand men and women to Pierre Cécile Puvis de Chavannes, John Dewey, Alexis Emanuel Chabrier, Elbert Green Hubbard, Elizabeth Garver Jordan and Ellen Anderson Gholson Glasgow very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Robert Lewis Balfour Stevenson very heroically Thornton Niven Wilder, George Santayana, Karl Maria Friedrich Ernest von Weber, Alexander Pope, Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres and Henry Louis Mencken had very acrimoniously come amongst his very really grand men and women to Susan Ertz very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Willa Sibert Cather had very extemporaneously come amongst his very really grand men and women to Donald Robert Perry Marquis, Hans Holbein, François René Auguste Mallarmé, John Phillips Marquand, Erich Wolfgang Korngold and Sara Powell Haardt very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Frederick Marryat had very horribly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Joan Mary Fieldwick-Platt, James Hilton, Joseph Hilaire Pierre Belloc, Johann Strauss, Andrea Mantegna and Willa Sibert Cather very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Thyra Samter very heroically Henry Louis Mencken had very brilliantly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Stephen Collins Foster, Jan Havicksz Steen, Douglas Southall Freeman, Joseph Auslander, Hermann Joachim Bang and Willa Sibert Cather very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically the very brutally exigent name of Henry Louis Mencken had very sculpturally come amongst her very really grand men and women to Konrad Bercovici, Walter Duranty, Augustin Eugène Scribe, Dorothy Thompson, George William Russell and John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of William Shakespeare very heroically the very coarsely vulgar Puritanism of Ludwig van Beethoven had very femininely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Robert Bontine Cunninghame Graham, Jules Verne, Sidonie Gabrielle Claudine Colette, Percy Aldridge Grainger, Jacopo Robusti, Arthur Machen, Francis Richard Stockton and Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy had very tragically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Augusta Mary Anne Holmes, Childe Hassam, Victoria Endicott Lincoln, Armine von Tempski, Benjamin Franklin, Leslie Stephen, Alice Caldwell Hegan and Sara Powell Haardt very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of William Shakespeare very heroically Giacomo Puccini, Camilo Mori, Johann Christoph Friedrich von Schiller, Samuel Johnson, Thomas Henry Huxley, Eve Curie, Giovanni Boccaccio and Iván Sergyéevitch Turgénieff had very cruelly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Matilde Serao very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Cecily Isabel Fairfield very heroically William Shakespeare had very cadaverously come amongst her very really grand men and women to Andrea Palladio, Maurice Walsh, Elizabeth Dorothea Cole Bowen, Henrik Pontoppidan, Joseph Deems Taylor, Rebecca Yancey, Wolfram von Eschenbach and May Sinclair very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Samuel Butler very heroically John Bunnionn had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Giorgio Barbarelli, Rose Wilder, Alexander Nikolayevitch Scriabin, Susan Glaspell, Edward Gibbon, Thomas Hobbes, Stéphane Mallarmé and Alexei Maximovitch Pyeshkov very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy very heroically Alfred Edward Housman, Ludwig Thoma, Francisco de Goya y Lucientes, Matthew Arnold, Théophile Gautier, Henry George, Giovanni Battista Lulli and Ivan Alexeyevitch Bunin had very admirably come amongst his very really grand, men and women to John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy very heroically Tolstoy as Beethoven and Shakespeare had very critically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Violet Florence Martin, Bruno Traven, Jean Baptiste Armand Louis Léonce Elie de Beaumont, Honoré Daumier, Thomas Chatterton, Oscar Levant, Alessandro Scarlatti and Ludwig van Beethoven very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Ricarda Octavia Huch very heroically Anthony Hope Hawkins, Helen Rose Hull, Edward Alexander MacDowell, Jakob Wassermann, George Warwick Deeping, Hans Memling, Charles Gordon MacArthur and William Shakespeare had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Ludwig van Beethoven very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of William Shakespeare very heroically Karl Heinrich Marx had very extremely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Henry Wadsworth Longfellow, Eugene Field, Peter Ilyitch Tschaikowsky, Augustus Edwin John, Arthur Conan Doyle, Norman Douglas, Thorstein Bunde Veblen and Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Lyof Nikolayevitch Tolstoy very heroically Charles Gilman Norris, Roland Pertwee, Mary Augusta Arnold, Carl Van Vechten, Jean François Millet, Maurice Ravel, Edward Morgan Forster and Sara Powell Haardt had very simply come amongst his very really grand men and women to William Shakespeare very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically the very beautifully simple funeral of Sara Powell Haardt had very mirthfully come amongst her very really grand men and women to Christopher Darlington Morley, Alan Seeger, Paul-Marie-Théodore Vincent d’Indy, John Davys Beresford, Andrea d’Agnolo, Louis Farigoule, Edward Garnett, Zoë Akins, Giulietta Guicciardi and Ludwig van Beethoven very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Jim Tully very heroically Ludwig van Beethoven had very Continentally come amongst his very really grand men and women to Robert Russell Bennett, Jules Laforgue, Lucretia Peabody Hale, Philip Morton Shand, Henry Wheeler Shaw, David William Bone, Gustave Courbet, Emerson Hough, Louisa May Alcott and Irvin Shrewsbury Cobb very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Georg Friedrich Händel, Kay Boyle, Lope Félix de Vega, Thomas Paine, Edna Ferber, John Ernst Steinbeck, Peter Paul Rubens, Rex Beach, Charles Augustin Sainte-Beuve and Anton Pavlovitch Chekhov had very abundantly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Sigrid Undset very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Clara Viebig very heroically Anton Pavlovitch Chekhov had very proudly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Luca della Robbia, Sidney Dark, Domenico Cimarosa, Constance Mayfield Rourke, Lewis Stiles Gannett, Edith Lovejoy Pierce, Mary Ritter, Polybius, Alfred Edgar Coppard and Alexander Sergyéevitch Pushkin very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Nikolai Vasilievitch Gogol Yanovsky very heroically Ludwig van Beethoven had very demonstratively come amongst his very really grand men and women to William Wymark Jacobs, Arthur Train, Johan August Strindberg, Irving Tennenbaum, Leucadia Hearn, Arnold Schönberg, Rearden Conner, David Teniers, Minderhout Hobbema and Vincent van Gogh very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically Joel Chandler Harris, Robert Browning, Marie-Madeleine Pioche de la Vergne, Oswald Spengler, John Collings Squire, Charles François Gounod, Arthur Wing Pinero, Thomas Carlyle, Hilaire Germain Edgard Degas and Leonid Nikolaievitch Andrieff had very harshly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically Allain as Lysistrata had very stupendously come amongst his very really grand men and women to Giovanni Battista Pergolesi, Adam Smith, Isidore Auguste Marie François Xavier Comte, Walter Horatio Pater, Louis Zara Rosenfeld, Maurice Barrès, George Chapman, Anne Brontë, Nicholas Konstantinovitch Roerich and Henry Havelock Ellis very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of John Ruskin very heroically Baccio della Porta, Charles Bernard Nordhoff, Jean Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet de Lamarck, Isadora Duncan, John Barton Wolgamot, Henry Noel Brailsford, William Brown Meloney, Jacques Offenbach, Francesco di Petracco and Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady had very divinely come amongst his very really grand men and women to Pedro Calderón de la Barca very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Feodor Mikhailovitch Dostoievsky had very invigoratingly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Igor Fedorovitch Strawinsky, George Berkeley, Edmond Louis Antoine Huot de Goncourt, Cincinnatus Heine Miller, William Wycherley, Francis Bret Harte, John Silas Reed, Richard Crashaw, Jean-Baptiste Camille Corot and Ludwig van Beethoven very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically Archibald Joseph Cronin, Harvey Fergusson, Antonio Allegri da Correggio, James Truslow Adams, Arthur Hamilton Gibbs, Thomas Henry Hall Caine, Edward Frederic Benson, Charles Major, Modeste Petrovitch Moussorgsky and Sara Powell Haardt had very ravishingly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Jesus Christ had very pitiably come amongst her very really grand men and women to Nicholas Kalashnikoff, Jane Addams, Giovanni Jacopo Casanova de Seingalt, John Barry Benefield, Edison Marshall, Joshua Reynolds, Lewis Mumford, Richard Strauss, Marquis James, Ernest Poole, Karl Adolf Gjellerup and William Faulkner very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Edmond Eugène Alexis Rostand very heroically Anita Loos had very fancily come amongst his very really grand men and women to Joaquín Álvarez Quintero, Munro Leaf, Sergei Vasilievitch Rachmaninoff, Mary Annette Beauchamp, Philip Hamilton Gibbs, Marcus Cook Connelly, Richard Llewellyn, John Butler Yeats, Francis Parkman, Leonard Ehrlich, George Washington Cable and Gerhart Johann Robert Hauptmann very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Bertrand Arthur William Russell, Carl Van Doren, Guillaume Victor Émile Augier, Finley Peter Dunne, Franz Joseph Haydn, Janet Taylor Caldwell, Melville Davisson Post, Edna St. Vincent Millay, Edwin Arlington Robinson, Owen Wister, Diego Rodríguez de Silva and Helen as Mrs. Norden had very duly come amongst her very really grand men and women to John Barton Wolgamot very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Willa Sibert Cather very heroically Henry Louis Mencken had very sombrely come amongst her very really grand men and women to Pablo Ruiz Picasso, Ferenc Molnar, Thomas Sigismund Stribling, Willard Huntington Wright, Daphne du Maurier, James Floyd Stevens, Nicolas Boileau, Anton Dvo˘rák, John Stuart Mill, Margery Sharp, Maria Louise Ramé and Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt very heroically Jesus Christ had very rememberably come amongst her very really grand men and women to Anton Stepanovitch Arensky, Lola Ridge, Edith Anna Oenone Somerville, Frederic Ridgely Torrence, Harold Augustus Sinclair, Joseph Percival Pollard, Giosuè Carducci, Peter Courtney Quennell, John James Audubon, Walter Bagehot, Charles Grant Blairfindie Allen and Katherine Jane Lightbody very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Sara Powell Haardt and Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Berenice Anne Bonner, Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady and John Barton Wolgamot had very simultaneously come amongst their very really grand men and women to Marie de Rabutin-Chantal, Sophie Kerr, Alexander Porfiryéevitch Borodin, Walter John de la Mare, Jean de La Fontaine, Alfred Joyce Kilmer, Anthony Van Dyck, Dorothy Rothschild, Frances Newman, Robert Nathan, William Frend De Morgan and Helen Brown Norden very titanically.
In His very truly great manners of Édouard Manet very heroically Jesus Christ had very exorbitantly come amongst his very really grand men and women to Otto Julius Bierbaum, Sean Whelan, Nikolai Andryéevitch Rimsky-Korsakov, Philip Duffield Stong, Paul Vincent Carroll, Ludwig Lewisohn, William Hogarth, Robert Bridges, Henri Matisse, Isaac Newton, Charles Edwin Markham and Raffaello Sanzio very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of Ruth Maxine Martin very heroically Michael Gold, Walter Whitman, Henry David Thoreau, John Keats, Ernest Hemingway, Stefan Zweig, Clyde Brion Davis, Françoise-Auguste-René Rodin, Fannie Hurst, Elmer Reizenstein, Arturo Toscanini and Helen Brown Norden had very staggeringly come amongst her very really grand men and women to Frances Gertrude Fiedler very titanically.
In his very truly great manners of Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very heroically Mencken as bachelor had very frustratedly come amongst her very really grand men and women to René François Nicolas Marie Bazin, Clifford Odets, George Louis Palmella Busson Du Maurier, William Wilkie Collins, Joseph Joachim Raff, Conrad Potter Aiken, John Henry O’Hara, Frederick O’Brien, Robert Lee Frost, Paul Rosenfeld, Giotto di Bondone and Daniel Foe very titanically.
In their very truly great manners of John Barton Wolgamot very heroically Thomas Babington Macaulay, Carl Sandburg, Maria Konstantinova Bashkirtseff, Victorien Sardou, James Matthew Barrie, Jean Baptiste Racine, Margaret Mitchell, Marjorie Kinnan, Maxwell Beerbohm, Emile Herzog, Louis Hector Berlioz and Anita Loos had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Ambrose Gwinnett Bierce very titanically.
In her very truly great manners of Henry Louis Mencken very heroically Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady had very unworthily come amongst his very really grand men and women to Mikhail Petrovitch Artzibashev, Harry Hansen, Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina, Jean Baptiste Joseph Delambre, Léonard Sylvain Jules Sandeau, Will Levington Comfort, Amos Bronson Alcox, Mateo Alemán, Tomaso Guidi, Lella Warren, Serafín Álvarez Quintero and John Millington Synge very titanically.
In its very truly great manners of Ludwig van Beethoven very heroically the very distinguishably Second Coming of Jesus Christ had very ironically come amongst his very really grand men and women to Gregorio Martínez Sierra, Franz Liszt, Oliver Hazard Perry La Farge II, Jean Baptiste Siméon Chardin, Madison Julius Cawein, Vicente Blasco Ibáñez, Edgar Evertson Saltus, André Paul Guillaume Gide, John Van Alstyn Weaver, Richard Henry Stoddard, Walter Dumaux Edmonds, Katherine Anne Porter, Ernest Augustus Boyd, Émile Gaboriau, Felix Salten, Marcel Proust, Diego María Rivera and Gertrude Allain Mary McBrady very titanically.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)