Search Results for "u"

How Georgia O’Keeffe Became Georgia O’Keeffe: An Animated Video Tells the Story

When Geor­gia O’Keeffe first saw the home in Abiquiú, in North­ern New Mex­i­co that she would pur­chase from the Catholic Church in 1945 “the 5,000-square-foot com­pound was in ruins,” writes the Geor­gia O’Keeffe Muse­um. The artist imme­di­ate­ly seized on its poten­tial: “As I climbed and walked about in the ruin,” she remem­bers, “I found a patio with a very pret­ty well house and buck­et to draw up water. It was a good-sized patio with a long wall with a door on one side. That wall with a door in it was some­thing I had to have.”

Des­ig­nat­ed a Nation­al His­toric Land­mark in 1998, the “pueblo-style adobe (mud brick) hacien­da” became one of the most renowned of artists’ hous­es, asso­ci­at­ed as close­ly with O’Keeffe as Fri­da Kahlo’s Blue House is with her work. O’Keeffe moved to the South­west for good in 1949, three years after her hus­band Alfred Stieglitz’s death. Her spir­i­tu­al con­nec­tion to the region began with a vis­it to Taos in 1929, and she con­tin­ued to vis­it and paint the area through­out the 30s and 40s.

The sto­ry about her dis­cov­ery of the famous house—photographed hun­dreds of times by her and dozens of others—seems emblem­at­ic of the decades of deci­sive, mature paint­ing and pho­tog­ra­phy. Her vision seems supreme­ly con­fi­dent and entire­ly sui gener­is—a pas­sion­ate way of see­ing as dis­tinc­tive as van Gogh’s. But like van Gogh, and every oth­er famous artist, O’Keeffe served an appren­tice peri­od, which at the turn of the 20th cen­tu­ry meant learn­ing clas­si­cal tech­niques. Once in New York, she became known for exper­i­men­tal paint­ings of sky­scrap­ers and her stun­ning abstract flow­ers.

In the TED-Ed les­son above by Iseult Gille­spie, we learn how O’Keeffe turned her ear­ly for­mal train­ing into her first series of abstract draw­ings, in char­coal. These works “defy easy clas­si­fi­ca­tion, sug­gest­ing, but nev­er quite match­ing, any spe­cif­ic nat­ur­al ref­er­ence.” O’Keeffe mailed the draw­ings to a friend in New York, who showed them to Stieglitz, who “became entranced.” Soon after, he arranged her first exhib­it. Her stu­dent days at an end, she moved to New York in 1918 and quick­ly became asso­ci­at­ed with a cir­cle of Amer­i­can Mod­ernists.

She mar­ried Stieglitz, but O’Keeffe’s path would take her away from her hus­band, and from the met­ro­pol­i­tan cen­ters most asso­ci­at­ed with ear­ly 20th cen­tu­ry Mod­ernism, and into the her­met­ic desert soli­tude for which she became known—a path the painter Agnes Mar­tin would fol­low decades lat­er. O’Keeffe’s process was that of a desert ascetic—“based on rit­u­al and close obser­va­tion. She paid metic­u­lous atten­tion to small details, and spent hours mix­ing paints to find exact­ly the right col­ors.” She kept track of her blaz­ing palette with hand­made col­or cards.

O’Keeffe’s work has often been reduced to pruri­ent spec­u­la­tion about the resem­blance of her flow­ers to female gen­i­talia, a Freudi­an lens she cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly dis­missed: “She resent­ed the male gaze that dom­i­nat­ed the art world and demand­ed her work be respect­ed for its emo­tion­al evo­ca­tion of the nat­ur­al world.” See high-res­o­lu­tion scans of O’Keeffe’s body of work, from the 1900s to the 1980s, at the Geor­gia O’Keeffe Col­lec­tions Online and learn more about her at the Geor­gia O’Keeffe Muse­um Library and Archive.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

The Real Geor­gia O’Keeffe: The Artist Reveals Her­self in Vin­tage Doc­u­men­tary Clips

Geor­gia O’Keeffe: A Life in Art, a Short Doc­u­men­tary on the Painter Nar­rat­ed by Gene Hack­man

Fri­da Kahlo Writes a Per­son­al Let­ter to Geor­gia O’Keeffe After O’Keeffe’s Ner­vous Break­down (1933)

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Read More...

Martin Amis Explains His Method for Writing Great Sentences

Why does Mar­tin Amis writes sen­tences well? As a nov­el­ist, he nat­u­ral­ly has a high degree of pro­fes­sion­al inter­est in the mat­ter. But why does he write sen­tences so well? One might put forth the influ­ence of his father Kings­ley Amis, author of Lucky Jim, an endur­ing con­tender for the title of the fun­ni­est nov­el in the Eng­lish lan­guage. But giv­en how sel­dom one acclaimed nov­el­ist sires anoth­er — an event, in fact, near­ly unheard of — the her­i­tabil­i­ty of lit­er­ary tal­ent remains unknow­able. As for the direct influ­ence of Amis père on Amis fils, we can almost entire­ly rule it out: not only did Kings­ley nev­er encour­age Mar­tin to fol­low in his foot­steps, only once did he offer any kind of writer­ly advice.

“We sat in high-bour­geois splen­dor, my father and I,” writes the younger Amis in his mem­oir Expe­ri­ence, “hav­ing a pre-lunch drink and talk­ing about his first pub­lished sto­ry, ‘The Sacred Rhi­no of Ugan­da’ (1932: he was ten).” The father-son dia­logue runs as fol­lows:

— It was awful in all the usu­al ways. And full of false quan­ti­ties. Things like: ‘Rag­ing and curs­ing in the blaz­ing heat …’

— What’s wrong with that? I mean I can see it’s old fash­ioned …

— You can’t have three ings like that.

— Can’t you?

— No. It would have to be: ‘Rag­ing and curs­ing in the … intol­er­a­ble heat.’

You couldn’t have three ings like that. And some­times you couldn’t even have two. The same went for -ics, -ives, -lys and -tions. And the same went for all pre­fix­es too.

43 years lat­er, Mar­tin Amis would find him­self in the role of lit­er­ary advice-giv­er, deliv­er­ing his father’s prin­ci­ple of writ­ing onstage at the Chica­go Human­i­ties Fes­ti­val. The process of imbu­ing every sen­tence with “min­i­mum ele­gance and eupho­ny,” he says in the clip above (drawn from a longer inter­view view­able here) involves “say­ing the sen­tence, sub­vo­cal­iz­ing it in your head until there’s noth­ing wrong with it. This means not repeat­ing in the same sen­tence suf­fix­es and pre­fix. If you’ve got a con­found, you can’t have a con­form. If you’ve got invi­ta­tion, you can’t have exe­cu­tion. You can’t repeat those, or an -ing, or a -ness: all that has to be one per sen­tence. I think the prose will give a sort of plea­sure with­out you being able to tell why.”

Clear­ly writ­ing a sen­tence that has “noth­ing wrong with it” goes well beyond adher­ing to the rules of spelling and gram­mar. And even after you’ve elim­i­nat­ed all ungain­ly rep­e­ti­tion, you may still have con­sid­er­able work to do before the sen­tence ris­es to a stan­dard worth uphold­ing. There are oth­er ques­tions to ask: do you, for exam­ple, tru­ly pos­sess each and every one of the words you’ve used, not just in mean­ing but sound and rhythm? In order to do so, Amis rec­om­mends acquaint­ing your­self more inti­mate­ly with the dic­tio­nary and the­saurus. If all this makes the task of the aspir­ing writer sound need­less­ly daunt­ing, fol­low instead the much sim­pler advice Amis pro­vides in the clip just above: “Get to the end of the nov­el, then wor­ry, because you’ve got some­thing in front of you that you can work on. Save the anx­i­ety for the end.”

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Mar­tin Amis Explains How to Use a The­saurus to Actu­al­ly Improve Your Writ­ing

Nor­man Mail­er & Mar­tin Amis, No Strangers to Con­tro­ver­sy, Talk in 1991

Writ­ing Tips by Hen­ry Miller, Elmore Leonard, Mar­garet Atwood, Neil Gaiman & George Orwell

V.S. Naipaul Cre­ates a List of 7 Rules for Begin­ning Writ­ers

Nietzsche’s 10 Rules for Writ­ing with Style (1882)

5 Won­der­ful­ly Long Lit­er­ary Sen­tences by Samuel Beck­ett, Vir­ginia Woolf, F. Scott Fitzger­ald & Oth­er Mas­ters of the Run-On

Based in Seoul, Col­in Mar­shall writes and broad­casts on cities, lan­guage, and cul­ture. His projects include the book The State­less City: a Walk through 21st-Cen­tu­ry Los Ange­les and the video series The City in Cin­e­ma. Fol­low him on Twit­ter at @colinmarshall, on Face­book, or on Insta­gram.

Read More...

Barcelona Opera Re-Opens with a Performance for 2,300 Potted Plants: Watch It Online

Writes The Guardian: “Barcelon­a’s El Liceu opera house reopened on Mon­day with a con­cert to an audi­ence of 2,292 pot­ted plants. The event took place a day after Spain’s state of emer­gency came to an end after more than three months. It was the work of Span­ish con­cep­tu­al artist Euge­nio Ampu­dia, who said the inspi­ra­tion came from a con­nec­tion he built with nature dur­ing the pan­dem­ic: ‘I watched what was going on with nature dur­ing all this time. I heard many more birds singing. And the plants in my gar­den and out­side grow­ing faster. And, with­out a doubt, I thought that maybe I could now relate in a much more inti­mate way with peo­ple and nature.’ ”

You can watch the per­for­mance below. It begins at the 8:30 mark. And do know that plants will be donat­ed to front­line health work­ers.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Read More...

A Collection of 500 Free Textbooks from Springer

FYI. To help sup­port every­one dur­ing the COVID-19 lock­down, Springer has released a ton of free text­books. Since the Springer web­site isn’t super user-friend­ly, some­one cre­at­ed a web­page that makes it eas­i­er to find and even down­load these texts. The books will remain free at least through the end of July. So start rum­mag­ing now.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Relat­ed Con­tent:

1,700 Free Online Cours­es from Top Uni­ver­si­ties

1,000 Free Audio Books: Down­load Great Books for Free

The 150 Best Pod­casts to Enrich Your Mind Read More...

Explaining the Pandemic to My Past Self: A Dark, Comedic Reflection on the Last Few Months

What would hap­pen if I tried to explain what’s hap­pen­ing now to the Jan­u­ary 2020 ver­sion of myself? That’s the ques­tion that Julie Nolke asked and answered in ear­ly April.

Now she’s back with a sequel where she tries to explain the events of June to her April self.

If you would like to sup­port the mis­sion of Open Cul­ture, con­sid­er mak­ing a dona­tion to our site. It’s hard to rely 100% on ads, and your con­tri­bu­tions will help us con­tin­ue pro­vid­ing the best free cul­tur­al and edu­ca­tion­al mate­ri­als to learn­ers every­where. You can con­tribute through Pay­Pal, Patre­on, and Ven­mo (@openculture). Thanks!

Read More...

How David Chase Breathed Life into the The Sopranos

Warn­ing: watch­ing the above video essay with David Chase, Matthew Wein­er, Ter­ence Win­ter, and the oth­er writ­ers of The Sopra­nos (along with select longer-form videos below) may send you into a binge watch (or re-watch) of the HBO series. Just say­ing, because you might want to set aside some time.

It is hard to believe that the series pre­miere was over 20 years ago, since its insights into Amer­i­ca, our love affair with vio­lence, and the mob hasn’t changed. (I mean, look at the gang­sters cur­rent­ly run­ning the coun­try).

David Chase orig­i­nal­ly balked at the idea of a God­fa­ther-type show after it was pitched to him, but the gang­ster idea stuck and mutat­ed into an idea for a fea­ture film about a mob boss seek­ing ther­a­py. Across town in one of those Hol­ly­wood coin­ci­dences, Harold Ramis was hav­ing the same idea for a film called Ana­lyze This.

Ramis’ film would be a per­fect­ly fine com­e­dy and Chase wound up tak­ing his fea­ture idea and turn­ing it into a tele­vi­sion series. It would go on to rev­o­lu­tion­ize tele­vi­sion and change the gang­ster genre for good. For now here was a show about gang­sters who were all very aware of the film and tele­vi­sion his­to­ry of the genre, and they act­ed accord­ing to the roles that they idol­ized from The God­fa­ther and from Good Fel­las. Yet, as Chase points out, the char­ac­ters nev­er real­ly know how to feel about all this:

To me it wasn’t just the end­ing that was ambigu­ous. There was ambi­gu­i­ty going on all the time. And you know what that comes down to now that I think about it—the char­ac­ters in the piece were ambigu­ous them­selves. They didn’t know how they felt. When you write a scene some­times you think, does this guy real­ly believe what he’s say­ing? Does he real­ly feel this? Or is this just a place­hold­er in his mind? ‘I’ll say this line just so I can eat my sandwich’…That’s why [the show] is so fun to write, because usu­al­ly you are writ­ing what peo­ple are think­ing of feel­ing, but in The Sopra­nos you’re always writ­ing what they’re *not* think­ing or feel­ing.

These were brutish, dumb guys who believed they were the clever, fun­ny guys they grew up watch­ing, and you can extrap­o­late that to quite a lot of our his­to­ry from the Cold War and beyond—electing peo­ple based on who we want them to be, or for the role they play, not for who they actu­al­ly are. The end point of Tony Soprano’s ther­a­py ses­sions is not that he was “cured,” but that he learned the lan­guage of ther­a­py in order to jus­ti­fy his actions to him­self. As Wein­er says, Dr. Melfi’s real­iza­tion was, “This was all a waste of time. He can’t be helped. I’ve just made him be a bet­ter crim­i­nal.” Once a sociopath, always a sociopath.

Chase also reveals how the show was struc­tured for each of its sev­en, 13-episode sea­sons, with char­ac­ter arcs orig­i­nal­ly being plot­ted as sep­a­rate sto­ries. But inevitably in the writ­ers’ room, the the­mat­ic con­nec­tions between the sto­ries would reveal them­selves and the scripts would be tweaked accord­ing­ly. Con­ver­sa­tions in the room would often be about every­thing *except* the sto­ry and the char­ac­ters. In the end this was all mate­r­i­al that would wind up in the show, the mulch that would cre­ate the gar­den.

This is a good time indeed for a rewatch. Not only did crit­ics Matthew Zoller Seitz and Alan Sepin­wall drop the lov­ing­ly detailed The Sopra­no Ses­sions last year, but actors Michael Impe­ri­oli (Christo­pher Molti­san­ti) and Steve Schirri­pa (Bob­by Bac­calieri) have a pod­cast where they are cur­rent­ly rewatch­ing and com­ment­ing on the show, one episode at a time. You can find all their episodes so far on this youtube playlist. The show is also list­ed in our new col­lec­tion, The 150 Best Pod­casts to Enrich Your Mind.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

HBO Is Stream­ing 500 Hours of Shows for Free: The Sopra­nos, The Wire, and More

How Mar­tin Scors­ese Directs a Movie: The Tech­niques Behind Taxi Dri­ver, Rag­ing Bull, and More

60 Free Film Noir Movies

Ted Mills is a free­lance writer on the arts who cur­rent­ly hosts the Notes from the Shed pod­cast and is the pro­duc­er of KCR­W’s Curi­ous Coast. You can also fol­low him on Twit­ter at @tedmills, and/or watch his films here.

Read More...

How the Visionary Artist Christo (RIP) Changed the Way We See the World

Hus­band and wife team Chris­to and Jeanne-Claude pro­duced what is arguably the most grandiose body of work in mod­ern his­to­ry. Their tem­po­rary mon­u­ments to the very idea of huge­ness were view­able from space and impos­si­ble to ignore on the ground: Entire islands wrapped in miles of pink fab­ric. Gar­gan­tu­an yel­low and blue umbrel­las placed up and down the coasts of Cal­i­for­nia and Japan. The Reich­stag bun­dled up in white fab­ric like a mas­sive, shiny Christ­mas gift.

These projects left an indeli­ble impres­sion on mil­lions not only in the months after their unveil­ing, but decades lat­er. The icon­ic sites the two artists trans­formed always bear the mem­o­ry of hav­ing once served as a can­vas for their cre­ations.

After remov­ing the wrap­ping from the Bis­cayne Bay islands, a project he called “my Water Lilies” in hon­or of Claude Mon­et,” Chris­to remarked that Sur­round­ed Islands lived on, “in the mind of the peo­ple.” So too will Chris­to live on—remembered by mil­lions as an artist who did things no one else would ever have con­ceived of, much less car­ried out.

The artist, who passed away from nat­ur­al caus­es at age 84 yes­ter­day, seemed to savor the con­tro­ver­sy and bewil­der­ment that met his incred­i­bly labor-inten­sive out­door sculp­tures. “If there are ques­tions, if there’s a pub­lic out­cry,” he said of their 2005 Cen­tral Park instal­la­tion The Gates, “we know how the pub­lic can be angry at art, which I think is fan­tas­tic.” I remem­ber walk­ing through The Gates when it debuted and think­ing, as most every­one does at some point in response to his mas­sive out­door instal­la­tions, “but, why?”

The effect was unde­ni­ably strik­ing, hun­dreds of saf­fron flags wav­ing between rec­tan­gu­lar steel arch­ways. Spring bloomed around the rows of gates that twist­ed around the Park’s foot­paths, 7,503 gates in all. From a short dis­tance away from the park, The Gates could be breath­tak­ing. Up close, it could be crowd­ed and obtru­sive, as mass­es of tourists and locals made their way through the gaunt­let of orange steel struc­tures.

Hard­ly does it occur to us in muse­ums to ask why the art exists. We enter with lofty, ready­made ideas about its val­ue and impor­tance. But we were nev­er giv­en scripts to make sense of Christo’s whim­si­cal intru­sions into the land­scape. Instead, he and Jeanne-Claude invent­ed new forms and new venues for art, and made the mul­ti-year process of plan­ning and build­ing each work from scratch a part of the work itself.

That process includ­ed lob­by­ing leg­is­la­tures and bureau­cra­cies, sketch­ing and plan­ning, and coor­di­nat­ing with thou­sands who installed and removed the fin­ished prod­ucts. Each Chris­to and Jeanne-Claude cre­ation seemed more osten­ta­tious than the last. “His grand projects,” writes William Grimes at The New York Times, “often decades in the mak­ing and all of them tem­po­rary, required the coop­er­a­tion of dozens, some­times hun­dreds, of landown­ers, gov­ern­ment offi­cials, judges, envi­ron­men­tal groups, local res­i­dents, engi­neers and work­ers, many of whom had lit­tle inter­est in art and a deep reluc­tance to see their lives and their sur­round­ings dis­rupt­ed by an eccen­tric vision­ary.”

And yet, “again and again, Chris­to pre­vailed, through per­sis­tence, charm and a child­like belief that even­tu­al­ly every­one would see things the way he did.” This meant that every­one who had to live with Christo’s cre­ations in their back­yards had to see things his way too, for as long as the pub­lic art exist­ed. Chris­to “remained sto­ic in the face of mount­ing crit­i­cism,” as Alex Green­berg­er at Art­news puts it. Asso­ci­at­ed ear­ly with Sit­u­a­tion­ism and France’s Nou­veau Réal­isme move­ment, the artist shared the lat­ter group’s goal of dis­cov­er­ing “new ways of per­ceiv­ing the real” and the for­mer movement’s com­mit­ment to spec­ta­cle as a means of mass dis­rup­tion.

In the short video intro­duc­tions to some of Chris­to and Jean-Claude’s most famous works here, you can see how the two revealed new real­i­ties to the world, dri­ving up tourism while spurn­ing cor­po­rate dol­lars. Instead, the artists financed their own projects by sell­ing off the draw­ings and plans used to con­ceive them. Their oper­a­tion was a self-sus­tain­ing enti­ty, a thriv­ing, suc­cess­ful com­pa­ny of its own. What they made were “beau­ti­ful things,” the artist said, “unbe­liev­ably use­less, total­ly unnec­es­sary,” and also total­ly inspir­ing, infu­ri­at­ing, and unfor­get­table.

“Chris­to lived his life to the fullest,” a state­ment released by his office reads, “not only dream­ing up what seemed impos­si­ble but real­iz­ing it. Chris­to and Jeanne-Claude’s art­work brought peo­ple togeth­er in shared expe­ri­ences across the globe, and their work lives on in our hearts and mem­o­ries.” Chris­to hasn’t fin­ished with us yet. The artist died while in the final plan­ning stages of what will be his final work, L’Arc de Tri­om­phe, Wrapped (Project for Paris, Place de l’Étoile – Charles de Gaulle), first con­ceived in 1962. That project, which will swad­dle Paris’s Arc de Tri­om­phe in 269,097 feet of fab­ric, is still expect­ed to debut in 2021.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Cli­mate Change Gets Strik­ing­ly Visu­al­ized by a Scot­tish Art Instal­la­tion

“The Artist Project” Reveals What 127 Influ­en­tial Artists See When They Look at Art: An Acclaimed Video Series from The Met­ro­pol­i­tan Muse­um of Art

This Huge Crash­ing Wave in a Seoul Aquar­i­um Is Actu­al­ly a Gigan­tic Opti­cal Illu­sion

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Read More...

The Best Campaign Slogan of 2020 (So Far)

Read More...

Albert Einstein Explains Why We Need to Read the Classics

Two pieces of read­ing advice I’ve car­ried through­out my life came from two ear­ly favorite writ­ers, Her­man Melville and C.S. Lewis. In one of the myr­i­ad pearls he toss­es out as asides in his prose, Melville asks in Moby Dick, “why read wide­ly when you can read deeply?” Why spread our minds thin? Rather than ago­nize over what we don’t know, we can dig into the rel­a­tive­ly few things we do until we’ve mas­tered them, then move on to the next thing.

Melville’s coun­sel may not suit every tem­pera­ment, depend­ing on whether one is a fox or a hedge­hog (or an Ahab). But Lewis’ advice might just be indis­pens­able for devel­op­ing an out­look as broad-mind­ed as it is deep. “It is a good rule,” he wrote, “after read­ing a new book, nev­er to allow your­self anoth­er new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.”

Many oth­er famous read­ers have left behind sim­i­lar pieces of read­ing advice, like Edward Bul­w­er-Lyt­ton, author of noto­ri­ous open­er “It was a dark and stormy night.” As though refin­ing Lewis’ sug­ges­tion, he pro­posed, “In sci­ence, read, by pref­er­ence, the newest works; in lit­er­a­ture, the old­est. The clas­sic lit­er­a­ture is always mod­ern. New books revive and redec­o­rate old ideas; old books sug­gest and invig­o­rate new ideas.”

Albert Ein­stein shared nei­ther Lewis’ reli­gion nor Bulwar-Lytton’s love of semi­colons, but he did share both their out­look on read­ing the ancients. Ein­stein approached the sub­ject in terms of mod­ern arro­gance and igno­rance and the bias of pre­sen­tism, writ­ing in a 1952 jour­nal arti­cle:

Some­body who only reads news­pa­pers and at best books of con­tem­po­rary authors looks to me like an extreme­ly near-sight­ed per­son who scorns eye­glass­es. He is com­plete­ly depen­dent on the prej­u­dices and fash­ions of his times, since he nev­er gets to see or hear any­thing else. And what a per­son thinks on his own with­out being stim­u­lat­ed by the thoughts and expe­ri­ences of oth­er peo­ple is even in the best case rather pal­try and monot­o­nous.

There are only a few enlight­ened peo­ple with a lucid mind and style and with good taste with­in a cen­tu­ry. What has been pre­served of their work belongs among the most pre­cious pos­ses­sions of mankind. We owe it to a few writ­ers of antiq­ui­ty (Pla­to, Aris­to­tle, etc.) that the peo­ple in the Mid­dle Ages could slow­ly extri­cate them­selves from the super­sti­tions and igno­rance that had dark­ened life for more than half a mil­len­ni­um.

Noth­ing is more need­ed to over­come the mod­ernist’s snob­bish­ness.

Ein­stein him­self read both wide­ly and deeply, so much so that he “became a lit­er­ary motif for some writ­ers,” as Dr. Anto­nia Moreno González notes, not only because of his par­a­digm-shat­ter­ing the­o­ries but because of his gen­er­al­ly well-round­ed pub­lic genius. He was fre­quent­ly asked, and hap­py to vol­un­teer, his “ideas and opinions”—as the title of a col­lec­tion of his writ­ing calls his non-sci­en­tif­ic work, becom­ing a pub­lic philoso­pher as well as a sci­en­tist.

We might cred­it Ein­stein’s lib­er­al atti­tude toward read­ing and education—in the clas­si­cal sense of the word “lib­er­al”— as a dri­ving force behind his end­less intel­lec­tu­al curios­i­ty, humil­i­ty, and lack of prej­u­dice. His diag­no­sis of the prob­lem of mod­ern igno­rance may strike us as gross­ly under­stat­ed in our cur­rent polit­i­cal cir­cum­stances. As for what con­sti­tutes a “clas­sic,” I like Ita­lo Calvi­no’s expan­sive def­i­n­i­tion: “A clas­sic is a book that has nev­er fin­ished say­ing what it has to say.”

via Men­tal Floss

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Ita­lo Calvi­no Offers 14 Rea­sons We Should Read the Clas­sics

Vir­ginia Woolf Offers Gen­tle Advice on “How One Should Read a Book”

The New York Pub­lic Library Cre­ates a List of 125 Books That They Love

100 Nov­els All Kids Should Read Before Leav­ing High School

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Read More...

The Expansive Vocal Range of Joni Mitchell: From the Early to Later Years

It’s quite a tes­ta­ment to Joni Mitchell’s musi­cian­ship that her “voice is arguably the most under­rat­ed aspect of her music.” So writes a con­trib­u­tor to The Range Place, an online project that ana­lyzes the vocal ranges of pop­u­lar singers. This is not to say that Mitchell’s voice is underrated—far from it—but her adven­tur­ous, deeply per­son­al lyri­cism and exper­i­men­tal song­writ­ing are how she is most often dis­tin­guished from the cohort of 60s singer-song­writ­ers who emerged from the folk scene. (She first became known as the writer of Judy Collins’ hit, “Both Sides, Now.”)

That said, there’s no mis­tak­ing her for any oth­er singer. “With very wide vibra­to, she would fre­quent­ly reach into her upper reg­is­ter com­fort­ably with a bliss­ful falset­to while still being able to reach some smooth low­er notes with ease.” You can hear exam­ples of her vocal range above, in excerpts from dozens of songs, both stu­dio and live ver­sions, record­ed through­out her career. “She was a mez­zo-sopra­no through the late six­ties and sev­en­ties, with her voice stand­ing out among oth­er singer-song­writ­ers due to its unusu­al com­fort in the fifth octave.”

There are many oth­er qual­i­ties that set Mitchell’s voice apart, includ­ing her incred­i­ble sense of pitch and rhythm. As ses­sion singer and vocal coach Jaime Bab­bitt writes, “singers who study singing and play instru­ments that make chords are bet­ter than all the rest. Joni Mitchell played many: dul­cimer, gui­tar, piano, and flute, even ukulele as a child.” Mitchell’s instru­men­tal skill gave her pre­cise vocal tim­ing, “a crit­i­cal and often over­looked singer-skill,” and one that con­tributes huge­ly to a vocal per­for­mance.

Her love of jazz infus­es even her folki­est songs with rhyth­mic vocal pat­terns that run up and down the scale. (Hear an exam­ple in the iso­lat­ed vocals from 1971’s “Riv­er,” just above.) Just as every singer’s voice will do, Mitchell’s range nar­rowed with age. “Her voice nowa­days,” writes The Range Place (though she no longer per­forms), “is clos­er to that of a con­tral­to than to that of a mez­zo-sopra­no, hav­ing low­ered sub­stan­tial­ly more than oth­er singers from the seventies”—a like­ly out­come of her life­long smok­ing habit.

It’s com­mon to say of an old­er singer that “she can’t hit the high notes any­more,” but this judg­ment miss­es out on the rich­ness of a mature voice. Mitchell’s “indomitable tech­nique” nev­er wavered in her lat­er years, Paul Tay­lor argues at The Inde­pen­dent. Her lat­er voice was “stun­ning (bereft, bewil­dered, sto­ical),” trans­formed from the ambi­tious, pierc­ing falset­to to “radiant/rueful” and wise.

Relat­ed Con­tent:

Watch Joni Mitchell Sing an Immac­u­late Ver­sion of Her Song “Coy­ote,” with Bob Dylan, Roger McGuinn & Gor­don Light­foot (1975)

See Clas­sic Per­for­mances of Joni Mitchell from the Very Ear­ly Years–Before She Was Even Named Joni Mitchell (1965/66)

How Joni Mitchell Wrote “Wood­stock,” the Song that Defined the Leg­endary Music Fes­ti­val, Even Though She Wasn’t There (1969)

Josh Jones is a writer and musi­cian based in Durham, NC. Fol­low him at @jdmagness

Read More...

Quantcast