NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/bit/listserv/allmusic/14399

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 7.0 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!news.gtech.com!noc.near.net!hri.com!spool.mu.edu!yale.edu!nigel.msen.com!emory!gatech!europa.asd.contel.com!paladin.american.edu!auvm!IONA.BITNET!CC29
From: [e-mail] (Ilia)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.allmusic
Subject: Cortazar
Message-ID: <21DEC92.17926160.0022.MUSIC@IONA>
Date: 21 Dec 92 21:35:53 GMT
Sender: Discussions on all forms of Music <[e-mail]>
Lines: 103
Comments: Gated by [e-mail]
In-Reply-To:  In reply to your message of SAT 19 DEC 1992 11:43:06 EST

> As usual John's right, but I'd like to add a few more details to his post. Fir
> t, the film did come out in 1966, but the soundtrack was released in 1967.
> Interestingly, the composer and musical director for it was Herbie Hancock. Se
> ond, the film is based on a story by the late Argentinan writer Julio
> Cortazar.  There are several books written about this famous movie.  In fact,
> t's been almost analyzed and studied to death (but that's another story).
> Cortazar, who lived in Paris, in a kind of self-imposed exile for many years,
> ad an extraordinary collection of Third World music, in particular that of
> India and the Subcontinent.  Cortazar's heart and soul belonged to the poor an
>  oppressed of the world, and he was usually to be found in the countless
> letters and petitions of intellectuals addressed to dictators and repressive
> governments.  Though he was a good friend of my dad, I only knew him marginal-
> ly, but do recall sitting next to him at a solidarity meeting on behalf of
> one of the many Latin American causes.  A major talent in his work, Julio
> was also a striking physical presence: tall, handsome and with an unforget-
> table smile and expression.  Interestingly, when the film came out I was
> probably at the most radical political moment of my life, and felt that
> the film was much too bourgeois and decademt in content. Its deconstruction
> of reality and its insistent "peekaboo" now-you-see-it-now-you-don't style
> of relativism, combined with an ultimately unclear denouement, rendered the fi
> m unsatisfactory for me. I recently rented and saw it again, and admit to
> having liked it a great deal more.  Age has a way of tempering one's harsh
> and unyielding idealism -- which, BTW, I'm not knocking, do not regret and
> feel no need to apologize for -- and of providing additional and alternative
> perpectives for earlier views.   Finally, I very liked the nightclub scene
> with the Yardbirds (one of my all-time favorite groups), but honestly cannot
> recall who did what in those glorious minutes.  Strangely, I was listening
> more to the music than paying attention at the images.
>
> Renato (Feeling nostalgic on a cold winter morning)
>
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> >From:         Ilia <[e-mail]>
> >OMC: watched Antoniony's "Blow Up" (excellent movie, btw - London in the
> >sixties, tons of marijuana, subjective reality, etc.) For some reason
> >I thought that the movie was shot in '65, but the music there (The
> >Yardbirds) seems to be a bit heavier than anything you would expect at
> >that time. Something wrong with my timing?
>
> _Blow Up_ bears a 1966 release date.  According to the liner notes for
> _The Yardbirds_ compilation, when the band recorded the music for the
> film, both Jeff Beck and Jimmy Page were in the band, which might
> account for the heaviness of the music.  Beck has said he was
> embarrassed to break his guitar, feeling that it was a Pete Townshend
> rip-off, but the director insisted.  I don't remember if Page is
> visible in the movie.  Good excuse to watch it again, I suppose.
>
> _Blow Up_ is also the name of a newly issued double CD by Television.
> The label is ROIR.  I think this might be the pre-Marquee Moon demo
> tapes produced by Eno along with some additional life material:
> a fourteen minute version of "Little Johnny Jewel" and others.  The
> second CD is 40 minutes long and has only four song titles listed.
>
> John McIntyre
> Physics - Astronomy Dept
> Michigan State University
Renato writes:

> Cortazar, who lived in Paris, in a kind of self-imposed exile for many years,
> ad an extraordinary collection of Third World music, in particular that of
> India and the Subcontinent.  Cortazar's heart and soul belonged to the poor an
>  oppressed of the world, and he was usually to be found in the countless
> letters and petitions of intellectuals addressed to dictators and repressive
> governments.  Though he was a good friend of my dad, I only knew him marginal-
> ly, but do recall sitting next to him at a solidarity meeting on behalf of
> one of the many Latin American causes.  A major talent in his work, Julio
> was also a striking physical presence: tall, handsome and with an unforget-
> table smile and expression.  Interestingly, when the film came out I was
> probably at the most radical political moment of my life, and felt that
> the film was much too bourgeois and decademt in content. Its deconstruction

       Thank you, Renato! It is always nice to get a first-hand
reflection on people who seem to be almost legendary figures, at least
in far-away Russia. Now, we can argue how close the movie gets to
Cortazar's work, but Antonioni himself says that the movie was
*inspired* by the short story, rather than *based on* it. (Of course, it
retains the title, which supposedly implies proximity to the original
work). I never had a chance to meet Cortazar, and in fact, I know very
little about his personal life, but judging solely from his writings, he
did not always have radical political points of view. I think, he
shifted to the left as a result of his search for a resolution of the
all-time conflict between individual and society. His support for
active participation in reconstruction of the society was expressed in
his last(?) book - _Libro de Manuel_ (The Book of Manuel), which I never
got a chance to read, scared by delighted reviews written by prominent
Communist Party members. However, his earlier books, like _Los Premios_
(The Awards), are flooded with burgeois images, and in fact, he devotes
much more time and sympathy to his intellectual-and-tired chracters,
then to simple-working-class-folks. And of course, his classical
_Rayuela_ (Hopscotch) was written mostly for the intellectual elite, and
though it contains a lot of political allusions, they are meant enrich
the book aestetically, rather than to carry a radical political message.
Anyway, I may be biast about this, since Cortazar is one of my favourite
writers, and my Russian background does not allow me to accept the fact
that a good writer can be heavily political in his work. (Hmmm, I can
already think about a couple of exceptions...) Besides, the only *truly*
political work by Cortazar that I ever read - some short story about
Che Gevara - was IMHO way below the usual level of his prose.
     Now, a word of apology. This post, of course, has very little to do
with music... unless you take into consideration the fact that Cortazar
gave us some of the finest descriptions of the effect that music
(particularly, jazz) has on listeners and musicians.
                 Ilia.