Showing posts with label William Shatner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label William Shatner. Show all posts

Monday, September 1, 2014

I Need My Pain




It's a good thing I need my pain, because I got the mother of all bad reviews today. "Bad" meaning pretty much dismissing The Glass Character. I was totally spoiled by my first two novels, which were widely (and with two exceptions, positively) reviewed. This included two in the Globe and Mail that compared my work to that of Anne-Marie MacDonald, Alice Munro and even Stephen Leacock.  Excuse me while I blow my nose.

The gods made me pay for all that. Obviously. I got very little coverage this time, no newspaper reviews that I could find, a little bit on the internet here and there. Newspaper review sections have dwindled, faded or disappeared entirely, a setup that isn't so good for novelists. I set up Amazon and Google author pages, this blog, a web site, a Facebook page as well as a special page for the book. But it didn't help much. When this sort of thing happens, a writer feels very alone.

It didn't ruin my day or anything - in fact I had a quite pleasant day for the most part, and I plan to have another one tomorrow. No boo-hooing or petulant foot-stamping or head-tossing or point-by-point counter-evisceration - that's childish. I did however find out who the guy was. He's a poet of the competitive "slam" variety, standup comedian and performance artist working out of Winnipeg. I'll quote in its entirety an autobiographical piece he wrote for the Globe and Mail, the "little essay" that runs on the back of the first section every day and is coveted by writers everywhere because it's one of the few paid freelance gigs left in the country. (I did a few of them myself, back in the day.) Illustrations are of course never literal or one-to-one on this blog, but arise directly from the subconscious, where Gumby reigns supreme.



I have a certain amount of difficulties at parties, for a number of reasons. Chief among them is my struggle to answer the boilerplate question, “What do you do?”
There is no complete answer I could give, aside from a downright facetious one like: “I convert food calories into muscle and fat, and in doing so contribute in my small way to the heat death of the universe.”

According to the taxman, I am the proprietor of a number of struggling small businesses. By my roommates’ accounts, I am a generally fun guy who occasionally vanishes into his room for a few hours to do something inscrutable.


To myself, I am terribly few things at all during the cruel honesty of the day, but a veritable da Vinci in those precious moments of hallucination just preceding sleep.




Call it a protracted adolescence, that novelty of our time. It may be that I drank too deeply from the cup of praise during my formative years, and have remained drunk on the possibilities of my own potential. This has no doubt been a problem for the bright and lazy for centuries, but I think that our modern world creates the conditions for this disease of habits to become a pandemic.
This is why I consider myself a New Idler, certainly distinguishable from the Renaissance Man or the Victorian Amateur or the Parisian Saloniste.
For one thing, I am not landed gentry. I am not independently wealthy, or dependently wealthy, or even well-to-do. This must be the first time and place in human history when a young man with no skills, no income and no direction can not only survive, but thrive!




I have never been healthier, more romantically successful, or more full of zest for life than right now, and I can assure you that I am both penniless and unemployable. Oh, what wonders our age has wrought!
Secondly, there is that great equalizer, the Internet. Education and meaningful work once surely conferred a great social advantage on people, the ability to condescend. Whether they tried or not, the intelligentsia would simply have access to exciting new ideas, challenging modes of thought and fresh experimental data. Their speech would be condescending for no other reason than that they had all the facts.



Enter Radiolab. Enter BuzzFeed, HuffPost, the Daily What and, for that matter, the mandatory Twitter feeds of the greatest thinkers of our age. Not only is all the wildest new gossip from politics and the natural sciences completely available – for free if you happen to be one the 28 million Canadians living within walking distance of a coffee shop – but it is collated, curated and prepackaged into witty banter.
Every morning, while brewing coffee, I can stream a lesson in erudite, educated conversation that would make Henry Higgins sound like a backwoodsman.
So, with education and hard work appearing grossly obsolete, how else am I to define myself? That’s the central question for my epoch of wandering youth.




To be sure, the answer lies in bountiful possibilities of some vague, delayed tomorrow. To that end, I starting collecting lists of great books to read so I might improve my mind. The Modern Library, Time magazine, The Guardian, everyone had their say. My combined list currently has 1,028 entries, and far surpasses the number of books I could possibly read in my natural life, particularly since so much of my time is taken up with list-collecting.




I am on a trial membership with 12 different skills-building websites, each taking me right up to edge of the dedication and sacrifice it would take to make progress. I run so many free services that my laptop screen blazes and blares like a Times Square of squalid gratification.
These distractions slow down my already-glacial progress, of course, but it doesn’t matter! I have all the time in the world, and the joys of laying myself down to sleep, dreaming into the future where I am a concert pianist, a foreign correspondent, a Saturday Night Live cast member and Jonathan Franzen’s best friend, are all I need for sustenance.
In my mind, I am already there, and since a recent podcast informed me that time is unified and unmalleable, I am already there in reality as well.




The only thing that could defeat this vision of a perfect and masterful future is to collapse this superposition of histories and dedicate myself to one thing at the expense of all others. So this is the one path I must not take.
I would give up everything I have in this life, my pasta maker, my Bowflex home gym, even my ribbonless vintage typewriter, in order to preserve the dream that is me. I would sweep out every cobwebbed corner of my hobby-filled apartment to make room for more of that one truly renewable resource: potential.



Every night, I concentrate on a still more perfect future, and escape that much further from a still more banal present.
That is what I do, but this answer is a little too wide-ranging for casual party talk, so I had to spell it out for you here.


Steve Currie is an improvisor and poet in Winnipeg. In any other century, he would have died of consumption by now.




OK, this is sideslapping and knee-splitting  (or is it the other way around), I admit it, but it's also pretty revealing. From his  many YouTube videos performing in (I can only assume from audience response) comedy clubs in Winnipeg, I've discovered he's pretty young. He lives with "roommates", so is not married. From my perspective he's a child, and in the literary sense, I can't help but see him as a poseur. If I am to take his Globe piece at all literally, unless he is making the entire thing up, he's a very serious idler (he said it first, and made a point of it over and over again), with no prespects of anything much, so sharpening his teeth on poor Harold might have served him as a form of sport. Satire would not be funny if it had no truth in it: you need something real to "send up". 

By the bye, though it seems another lifetime now, I indulged in what was then called theatre sports, not doing too well in them because they resembled, to me, a sort of smackdown wrestling rather than verbal jousting. I am not unfamiliar with performance, in other words, for laughs or for not. 
But I wasn't going to do this. I wasn't! Oh all right, I'll try to find the GIF I made of him to send Matt, who as usual was a brick through the whole thing. Here are only a couple of his rejoinders to the man's hatchet job (as well as some timely advice for me):




He likes you. He did the litcrit's equivalent of the gradeschool boy putting a frog down the blouse of the girl he crushes.
Send the jerk a live scorpion.


He needs a good Vuhjinya ass whuppin.  I'll gather up the bubbas...





And a couple more of them, my favorites, are kind of unprintable.

In any case, it made me feel like a warm puppy inside. I just wish someone else would give this thing a fair trial. If one negative review stands as the ONLY review, I feel like I'm in an uncomfortable position. He has a right to like, dislike, diss, not diss, or make a paper airplane out of Harold. But I wish there were something on the other side of the balance. 


Is all.







Post-post post: And this. I am glad I have friends, though they be few and far away. The ones I have, the few who "get" me, and I them, are precious to me. This is what my pal David West posted on my FB page after the review debacle:




Margaret Gunning, I say your The Glass Character is a wonderful book for all the many reasons I have mentioned to you. Ignore the rave reviews, ignore the scathing ones. In fact, ignore them all. It's what you think that matters.
You are a real trouper and a real professional.
Three novels, Margaret. I consider that a triumph. I want to hear you are hard at work writing instead of reading s***ty reviews. A waste of time.

Friday, July 4, 2014

William Shatner: deal with the devil




William Shatner kicks off the Calgary Stampede

Throngs of fans jostled to catch a glimpse of the actor, who is serving as this year’s Calgary Stampede parade grand marshal

The Canadian Press

July 4, 2014





Jeff McIntosh/CP

CALGARY – William Shatner got an out-of-this-world welcome Friday as throngs of fans jostled to catch a glimpse of the Canadian-born actor, who is serving as this year’s Calgary Stampede parade grand marshal.

Even before the parade began, some people were yelling “bring out William Shatner,” who played Capt. James T. Kirk in the original “Star Trek” TV series and subsequent films.

A crowd gathered as Shatner and his wife Elizabeth prepared to make their way down the parade route in the back of a light blue antique convertible. Fans snapped pictures on cellphones and clamoured for autographs.

“I’m excited that they’re excited,” said Shatner, who donned a white cowboy hat.

He said with a laugh that he’s looking forward to the end of the parade.

Shatner intends to stay in Cowtown for a while to take in the rodeo and other attractions.

“I’m going to be part of the experience,” he said. “That’s why we’re here, actually. We’re rodeo fans.”

About 250,000 people lined up early on downtown Calgary streets to get the best vantage point.

Rae Thorogood, who said she is a big fan of the actor, got up at 5 a.m. to stake out a prime spot.




“We barely slept. We were so excited,” she said.

Vern Neiley said he has never been able to make it out to the annual parade because he’s always had to work. Now that he’s retired, he said he couldn’t pass up a chance to attend this year.

“The big draw, I guess, was William Shatner. I’ve been a fan of his for a lot of years — ‘Star Trek’ and all the other stuff that goes with it.”

For Neiley’s wife, Sandy, it was a similar story.

“William Shatner is one of my favourites as well too and he’s my big draw too,” she said.

“This is fabulous for Calgary and I think this is wonderful that we get so many people every year for the Stampede parade.”




Before the parade began Jean Cornell sat on a curb with her 18-month-old grandson squirming in her arms, while his siblings played nearby on a blanket.

She said seeing Shatner would be a treat. But for her the main attraction would be “watching these guys’ faces light up.”

On hand to watch the parade were Prime Minister Stephen Harper and federal Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.

The Stampede runs through July 13.





OHHHHHH. . . kay. 

This I have trouble with.

I've been unofficially following Shatner since his Trek days. There's something admirable about someone who can send himself up in such a good-natured way, and besides, the man's a dynamo, with a finger in every showbiz pie. He keeps popping up here, there, everywhere. He hosted a show I LOVED called Weird or What?, a sort of digest of the paranormal interspersed with Shatnerian clowning, and another one called Raw Nerve, in which he did in-depth interviews with people like Whoopi Goldberg and Jerry Springer and (yes!) Leonard Nimoy himself. As a matter of fact - and this can't be true, it really can't - I seem to remember him interviewing Carol Burnett. Unfortunately, these watchworthy enterprises (!) lasted only a couple of seasons.

But something's off here, or at least weird.

He isn't ageing.

He isn't. 

He just. . . isn't.

The man looks to be hovering somewhere between 60 and 65, and STAYING THERE. He just looks like he always does, not Botoxed, not frozen-faced or Asian-eyed from brow lifts. He just looks like himself, comfortably overweight (and somehow he makes chunkiness look healthy and good), slightly ruddy of complexion, not the fox he was when young (and God, was he a fox when he was young), but still quite good-looking, well-settled in himself, a rare trait in Hollywood (or anywhere, for that matter).

The photo at the top of this post was taken 54 years ago. William Shatner is 83 years old.





There was a Star Trek episode in the first series, I think it was called Requiem for Methuselah, in which it becomes apparent that the title character had lived for so many centuries that he had stood in for all the famous men in history, Galileo, Rembrandt, Brahms, and a bunch of others I don't want to look up. But you get the gist. The guy couldn't die. I don't know exactly what I am talking about here, except that I do, somehow.

I talked to my husband recently about quantum physics. It's something he knows about. He is the antithesis of the woo-woo types who believe in reincarnation and astrology and that sort of jazz. So in a jocular, I'm-kidding-of-course manner, I asked him, "Now is it true what I read somewhere, that you can be in two places at the same time?"

My husband, whom I have known and loved for forty years, and just about the smartest man I've ever encountered, deeply oriented in science for a lifetime, said, casually but with conviction, "Yes."


He said yes.





"Theoretically, it's possible," he explained, and then told me how, as I sat there like Bugs Bunny after he has been run over by a truck: "Duhhhh. . . duhhhh. . . duhhhh. . ."

You can be in two places at the same time. Fine. So what about that other thing I've always wondered about? "So is time travel possible?" This time I really expected a sneer.

"Yes. According to Einstein's theories, it's possible, because time and space do not exist in a straight line." His hand described an elegant curve that somehow gave me the shivers. Then he reminded me that if an astronaut remained in space for long enough and then returned to earth, he would be younger than when he left. Reverse ageing - oh, a simple enough concept! He also went on for some time about wormholes, something I had thought was invented by the writers of The Next Generation.

I was getting frightened.

I have had moments, just moments mind you, when I have felt complete disorientation, as if I am about to "phase", to enter or overlap with another reality completely. Not in another time, but OUTSIDE time. The usual rules, for a second, appear to slip sideways. Physics falls away, leaving a bizarrely beautiful, indescribable otherness.





"Things as they are," goes a very beautiful line of poetry, "are changed upon the blue guitar." Changed, changed utterly.

And for some reason I remember a line in Tom Robbins' wacky masterpiece Jitterbug Perfume, uttered by the brilliantly insane immortalist Wiggs Dannyboy: "The universe doesn't have laws. It has habits. And habits can be broken."

I don't know about deals with the devil or people looking younger than they perhaps should, eerily reversing the dial of time. I don't know about Shatner's lifelong association with science fiction - a happy accident, after all - but hey, wait a minute, before Star Trek, didn't he used to appear on The Twilight Zone? The episode I'm thinking of, besides that iconic monster-on-the-wing scene on the airplane (where he cracks up at the end as only the Shat Man can) is about a man sitting in a small-town cafe who becomes obsessed with a fortune-telling gizmo topped by a devil's head. It's beginning to look like a theme, or at least too many things to be mere coincidence. He claimed Weird or What? was just an interesting concept for a show, not something he necessarily believed in. But the evidence is beginning to pile up. Isn't it?





There are two Shatners (at least), the hammy Trekkian "no blah-blah-blah!" Kirk-figure who became so famous he could never quite live down that histrionic style, and the serious Shakespearian actor who cut his teeth at Ontario's Stratford Festival in the 1950s. I have found a video of him doing Hamlet's Soliloquy on the Mike Douglas Show, and it's a solid, almost low-key, thoughtful interpretation of the most worn-out of actorly cliches. In other words, he is a real actor, not a cliche, and can do whatever he wants and do it well. But what does this have to do with being out of phase, of entering another reality where time, perhaps, goes backwards instead of forwards, where the usual laws of ageing just sort of. . . stop?

I keep thinking I want to meet him, hoping something will rub off, perhaps. It's just so odd. His friend and colleague Leonard Nimoy is shrivelled-up and fragile as an old burned matchstick, and yet they are almost exactly the same age. If you believe in astrology, their destinies are so similar as to be almost identical. 




Yes, you could say that remaining active keeps you young, etc., etc., and that all his many business and professional concerns (especially the horses, which would keep anybody young) have somehow frozen the clock at around sixty-five. But it just doesn't happen that way. Every time I see a picture of him - and years can go by in between - he either looks the same, or better. More ruddy and healthy, without wrinkles or the caving-in that feels inevitable as flesh falls away from bone. This goes way beyond his bluff physical appearance to a kind of age-proof animus, some spirit that mysteriously refuses to get older, or perhaps can't.

What universe does he inhabit? Where can I get a piece of this action? Do people sidle up to him and try to make a deal? WAS this a deal of sorts, and with whom? Star Trek posited many versions of reality, and sometimes they overlapped or even blended together. Cornball as the show seems now, it was cutting-edge for its time, and many of the underlying hypotheses about time and space are still intriguing and even (theoretically!) possible. Or so we have come to believe.





But the rest of the Enterprise crew didn't end up this. . . ageless. It has to exceed genetics. Then WHAT? It's driving me crazy. I wondered at the fact he won't be riding a horse in the parade, but then when I thought about it: an 83-year-old man sitting on an unfamiliar horse for four or five hours - ? He's not that crazy. Not crazy at all, in fact, and obviously knows way more than the rest of us do, not just about survival but thriving, and not falling into the supposedly inevitable pit of mortality. 

It would be even more eerie if he made it to 100, then suddenly keeled over dead, looking the same way he does now. Quick, get out the surgical instruments! You know, the ones they used for that alien autopsy.

(P. S. You Trek fans out there - do you remember that episode where the Enterprise crew was afflicted by a strange disease that caused rapid ageing? Not long ago I saw it, and it was laughable. Shatner looked like his own grandfather.)








Order The Glass Character from:

Thistledown Press 

Amazon.com

Chapters/Indigo.ca

Friday, November 29, 2013

The hate crime no one talks about





Oh yes. Oh, yes, Captain Kirk, and his noble soliloquy in perhaps my fave original Star Trek episode, Miri. The one with all the kids on that planet, you know, all by themselves cuz the adults all died, and they get all gross when they hit puberty and Yeoman Rand's leg looks like a major cigarette burn. I watched it at 13, tape recording it as I usually did on our old reel-to-reel Webcor with the fan-shaped microphone. Kirk wasn't ridiculous then, he wasn't a joke, he wasn't a buffoon and to date, he had done no Loblaws commercials. Kirk was just Kirk.

But his immortal line, "no blah blah blah!" has taken on a special significance in my mind over many decades of observation.



Do you know what I'm talking about? Happens so often I want to yip with irritation. In fact it happened yesterday:  we're in Denny's eating our veggie omelettes with hash browns, when I hear a familiar drone coming from behind Bill's seat.

Umbumummm-bumbumbummm-bumdabumdabumdabuuuuuuuum.

I -

UMMM da bummada bummda. Mm-mmoom-dah! Da bomada bomadadamda bom.

A - 

Bum BUM DA dum dum, demda dum! Dem -




So you get the idea by now. It was one of those totally one-sided conversations you constantly overhear (without meaning to: this is hardly eavesdropping, as I would have loved to shut out all this blathering) in restaurants or theatres or other public places. 

One person is blathering on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on and - sorry, my hand just fell off - but as this blathablathablathablathablathablatha goes on, all of it self-referential, all of it self-serving, all of it self-entitled, all of it related to the blatherer's intense suffering at not being treated like a crown prince/ss, I can sense the listener/receiver's blood volume being slowly, slowly, and surely sucked down and siphoned out.

When they leave the restaurant, the blatherer will be hugely inflated with self-righteous helium and all ready for the next deadly gas attack, but the victim (for that is what it is) will be but a pale shadow of his/her former self. She will be so anemic, you'll be able to see through her. She'll have to go home and lie down for a month or more, maybe get a transfusion.



But the thing is, they'll still go out again next week for lunch. The same thing will happen all over again. He or she will tell the same pompous, pointless stories, the same tales of persecution. No one even notices how soul-destroying the experience is. The entitled one will be bursting with hemoglobin by now, ready to explode like some honey-forced queen bee or ruptured giant termite. The victim will now weigh 37 pounds. Doesn't matter how many pancakes she puts away.



I heard it yesterday and I heard it at the mall food fair the day before with a similar booming, thrumming, droning male voice, this time with some sort of European accent. Bom-bomda-BOMmmdaa-bommmm-daBOMmada-bonga, etc. etc.

This is not a conversation. This is a monologue. The monologuist has no idea that it isn't a conversation and in fact thinks he's a very good conversationalist, very smart and sharp. His blathering about camping equipment or the plumbing in his house or his car troubles or the asshole at work who got the promotion he should've got (or his bitch of a wife, always a favorite) strikes him as scintillating discourse sparking a lively debate, an exchange of witticisms rivalling the Algonquin Round Table in sheer witti-blah-tudinous-ness.

He doesn't know, because his brain is made out of shoe leather and his psyche is about as penetrable as a block of obsidian. I would like to start carrying a baseball bat around with me to play whack-a-mole with these characters, but there are just too many of them, and besides, then *I* would be considered obnoxious and antisocial, hitting these poor innocent guys who weren't doing nothin'. 




This is abuse. The endless, boring, repetitive blathering with only the occasional squeak out of the audience/receiver/victim/codependent masochist.  This person NEEDS this sort of ego-stroking, this constant reinforcement of his (or her: one of the worst I've encountered is a her, droning on for 45 minutes about her Grade 11 science teacher and what he wore to class) innate sense that his every word is interesting and useful and even enlightening, when in reality it's a torrent of horseshit more horrific than the result of opening Mr. Ed's stable door.

There is nothing to be done. Stay away, that's all I can say to you, try to stay away and not call them friends. A friend does not stick a drinking straw in your jugular vein and begin to vigorously suck. Blatha-blatha-blathata-blah.




I don't know if this codicil belongs here, but I might as well tack it on. It's the self-proclaimed expert who charges into a room full of chemo patients and bellows, "TAKE MILK THISTLE AND YOU WILL BE CURED!" The person so sure of (his or her) convictions that they force them on others as absolute, unassailable gospel truth.




One doctor I know is a doozie. Educated, an "expert" on many things, in fact famous.

"Illness means you've repressed your emotions."

"No, you mean: I believe illness means you've repressed your emotions."

"There's no debate about this, it's simply true."

"So everybody else, everyone who believes something different from you, is completely erroneous and full of shit?"

"I didn't say that! Don't be so defensive. It's just an opinion."

"Then why didn't you say so?"

"Because it's an opinion that happens to be true."

"Jesus, don't you hear yourself? That's total arrogance!"

"Obviously you have issues with authority figures."

"No, just with YOU, asshole!"

(That last line was fantasized, but isn't it great?)



I once attended some sort of workshop (it had something to do with my sick and dying church trying to manage a last-minute, futile resurrection) where the facilitator said, "Tell me the difference between these two statements: Divorce is terrible."

(Slight tremor in the room, caused by minute vibrations from the divorced people trying not to spit at her.)

"MY divorce was terrible. Which statement is easier to accept?"

Wa-a-a-a-al.



But people don't do it that way! They stride in and say, "Everything happens for a reason/God never gives us more than we can handle/It's all in God's plan." This person has never suffered a major hardship, and in fact has led a charmed existence.  God's will has been, at least up to now, a piece of cake. (Secretly she/he thinks it's because she prays a lot and "surrenders", so God favors her.) But never do they say, "I've come to believe that - " or even, "It's my conviction that - ". No, they just take one of those thingamabobs they used to tamp down powder in a cannon, and casually shove it down your throat.

"I was about to die in a car crash, but my angel saved me."

"God must have intervened."

"It was meant to be" (but NEVER with reference to anything negative. Only positive things are "meant to be". No sense of entitlement here.)

"It was God's plan that little Timmy survive being run over by an express train 47 times."




Oh yes? What about this couple over here, dying of grief because God DIDN'T save their son? What about the man whose wife actually did die in a crash? Didn't she believe enough, didn't God love her enough, didn't she have the right mojo or put enough on the collection plate?

It's really just more BLAHBLAHBLAH, of a particularly toxic variety. It's toxic because it is so un-thought-out, so carelessly said. So smug. So entitled ("see, God loves me enough to pull me out of flaming wreckage. What's wrong with you?")



I wonder sometimes if even half of what people say is really considered, or if it just pours out of them like so much raw sewage. They snag on to jingles, axioms, homilies, catch-phrases, churn them around unexamined, and spit them in your face. They never preface these statements, just jam them up your nose as "fact".  It's easier than thinking, easier than feeling empathy or compassion or any of those dangerous things that require a little stretching of the soul.



The blatherers of the world are verbal thugs. When you see one, whether it's in Denny's or the hardware store or your local church or synogogue, whacking the palm of his hand with a lead pipe and wearing a smug self-involved smile, there's only one thing you can do.

Ru-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-u-n!