When Allen Ginsberg’s Howl was made into a movie and produced in 2010 they chose James Franco to play Ginsberg. Although they bare no overwhelming physical similarities, Franco graduated from UCLA with an English major and is currently at Yale getting his masters, so they both share a different passion for English. To my surprise, the movie adaptation of Howl did not go into the details of Ginsberg’s personal life, nor did it show him recite the entire poem. The movie focused on the obscenity trial and whether or not Howl was of any literary value and whether it was too perverse. Ginsberg himself was not involved with the trial because it was the publisher of City Light Books who was the one actually put on trial, even though he didn’t write "Howl," he simply supported it.
The movie jumped around from scenes of the trial, to an interview with Ginsberg, to shots of him typing out Howl on the typewriter, and then scenes of him reciting the poem at clubs. The court deemed that Howl did indeed have literary value, and that just because that some of the language was perverse and not accepted in society, it still was a valuable piece of work. Luckily for us, Howl continued to be published after the trial and continued to be one of the most notable poems written.
I also thought it was very exciting that we go to school in Berkeley, a place where Allen Ginsberg wrote parts of his poetry. I saw the movie at an old movie theater in college and that too gave the movie a more authentic feeling. All in all, the movie artistically provided an accurate portrayal of Howl and I personally believe James Franco did a good job acting as Ginsberg because he tapped into this literary person and the producers did not cast him as a sex symbol.
~C.M.
Showing posts with label Ginsberg. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ginsberg. Show all posts
Monday, October 11, 2010
Wednesday, September 15, 2010
Analysis of “A Supermarket in California”
The poem “A Supermarket in California” gives a synopsis of Ginsberg’s character as both a writer and a human being. As a writer, Ginsberg was known for being particularly outright and radical, speaking out against many of the traditions of American society in 1950s. But this poem also gives a view as Ginsberg as a normal person, literally depicting his trip to the grocery store. Throughout the piece, it goes inside Ginsberg’s admiration for Whitman as his role model, and how he wants to learn everything about him, and also touches on Ginsberg’s stance on homosexuality in those times.
A major component in all of Ginsberg’s pieces, including this one, was his outright stance on homosexuality. Aside from the fact that Walt Whitman was considered to be one of Ginsberg’s poetic models, he was also known to be homosexual. The same was suspected of Garcia Lorca, who, aside from Whitman, is the only other person referenced in this piece. By having called on several people of the same stance, it makes it appear as if homosexuality were to be common, or more normal, in those times. Ginsberg openly acknowledged his sexuality as he and Whitman are freely “eyeing the grocery boys” and the husbands in the aisles.
Walt Whitman was seen as very obscene and controversial poet for his time, which makes him fit to be Ginsberg’s poetic model. Ginsberg even referenced his adoration for Whitman when he admitted that he dreamt of Whitman just by touching his book. The whole poem is seen through the eyes of Ginsberg as he admiringly followed Whitman through the supermarket, doing all the same things that Whitman did. As he followed, Ginsberg played “detective” and tried to gain Whitman’s insight on every situation. While his adoration is understood, it borderlined inappropriate at times. For example, it was uncomfortable when Ginsberg offered to follow Whitman all night throughout the streets and back to their houses. It invites a closer view on Ginsberg’s inner workings, but sometimes went too far.
As radical as Ginsberg was in his poetry, he was not characterized as such in this piece. While he tried to make subtle stabs at capitalist America, such as going to the supermarket to “shop for images”, he and Whitman seemed more mundane than usual as they hardly stood out in this scene. They quietly milled throughout the grocery store, tasting foods and looking at whomever they please, but never spoke out like they do in their poetry. The rest of the poem remains the same as they went back to their quiet and lonely cottages, or walked through the solitary streets alone. The distinction between how Ginsberg acted in real life and how he did on paper is surprising, but can expected in the conformist times of 1950’s America.
Overall, “A Supermarket in California” invites readers to gain insight on Ginsberg’s actual life, apart from his life as a writer. It showed some of his thoughts and adorations for those wiser than him, but also stayed true to his radical stance on homosexuality and capitalist America.
-M.H.
A major component in all of Ginsberg’s pieces, including this one, was his outright stance on homosexuality. Aside from the fact that Walt Whitman was considered to be one of Ginsberg’s poetic models, he was also known to be homosexual. The same was suspected of Garcia Lorca, who, aside from Whitman, is the only other person referenced in this piece. By having called on several people of the same stance, it makes it appear as if homosexuality were to be common, or more normal, in those times. Ginsberg openly acknowledged his sexuality as he and Whitman are freely “eyeing the grocery boys” and the husbands in the aisles.
Walt Whitman was seen as very obscene and controversial poet for his time, which makes him fit to be Ginsberg’s poetic model. Ginsberg even referenced his adoration for Whitman when he admitted that he dreamt of Whitman just by touching his book. The whole poem is seen through the eyes of Ginsberg as he admiringly followed Whitman through the supermarket, doing all the same things that Whitman did. As he followed, Ginsberg played “detective” and tried to gain Whitman’s insight on every situation. While his adoration is understood, it borderlined inappropriate at times. For example, it was uncomfortable when Ginsberg offered to follow Whitman all night throughout the streets and back to their houses. It invites a closer view on Ginsberg’s inner workings, but sometimes went too far.
As radical as Ginsberg was in his poetry, he was not characterized as such in this piece. While he tried to make subtle stabs at capitalist America, such as going to the supermarket to “shop for images”, he and Whitman seemed more mundane than usual as they hardly stood out in this scene. They quietly milled throughout the grocery store, tasting foods and looking at whomever they please, but never spoke out like they do in their poetry. The rest of the poem remains the same as they went back to their quiet and lonely cottages, or walked through the solitary streets alone. The distinction between how Ginsberg acted in real life and how he did on paper is surprising, but can expected in the conformist times of 1950’s America.
Overall, “A Supermarket in California” invites readers to gain insight on Ginsberg’s actual life, apart from his life as a writer. It showed some of his thoughts and adorations for those wiser than him, but also stayed true to his radical stance on homosexuality and capitalist America.
-M.H.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
A Note on William Carlos William's Introduction to "Howl"
The introduction to the “Howl” poem by William Carlos Williams sets the overall mood of what is to come. At first, Williams introduces Allen Ginsberg by giving the reader a brief overview of his past. The background that is provided is more personal since it was written by someone who knew Ginsberg. The description is somewhat shocking since the writer himself claims to be surprised by the achievements of Ginsberg. It is said that he was mentally disturbed, with a difficult life and had basically been through hell. Now, with all of these setbacks, it is astonishing for Williams and the audience alike that such a troubled man could have overcome life’s difficulties and succeeded in poetry.
In his roughest years Allen Ginsberg met Carl Solomon, a man with whom he developed a strong bond and came to love. Williams stresses the importance of Solomon in Ginsberg’s life through passionate and emotionally loaded words. He says that it is amazing that even though he has lived through some of the most devastating experiences that life can offer, Ginsberg has used love to persevere. Furthermore, this love is the topic of his poems.
Once again referring to Ginsberg’s life, Williams mentions that Ginsberg described it as a “howl of defeat”(7), but that in reality it was not defeat because he went through it as if it were any other common thing. A very penetrating statement from the introduction is “Everyone in this life is defeated but a man, if he be a man, is not defeated.“(7). I interpret this as saying that everyone in life has difficulties; however, if they use their strengths and everything at their disposal to overcome these challenges, then they are free and will not break under life’s hardships.
In the final paragraph there is a focus on poetry and what it means to write and be a poet. Williams says that poetry has accompanied Ginsberg in his Golgotha (a reference to the biblical place where Jesus was crucified); again emphasizing that this poet has been through the worse. He has been miserable in a place that the readers call home(the US). According to Williams people are blind, but poets are cursed because they see it all. In this paragraph Williams portrays the poet as somewhat of a modern prophet informing the people of the horrible truths of life.
Overall, the introduction gives the readers some background on Ginsberg to better understand the content of the poems. In addition, words such as “disturbed,” “hell,” “horrifying,” and “blindness” set the mood of the poem as perturbing and gruesome.
~M.G.
In his roughest years Allen Ginsberg met Carl Solomon, a man with whom he developed a strong bond and came to love. Williams stresses the importance of Solomon in Ginsberg’s life through passionate and emotionally loaded words. He says that it is amazing that even though he has lived through some of the most devastating experiences that life can offer, Ginsberg has used love to persevere. Furthermore, this love is the topic of his poems.
Once again referring to Ginsberg’s life, Williams mentions that Ginsberg described it as a “howl of defeat”(7), but that in reality it was not defeat because he went through it as if it were any other common thing. A very penetrating statement from the introduction is “Everyone in this life is defeated but a man, if he be a man, is not defeated.“(7). I interpret this as saying that everyone in life has difficulties; however, if they use their strengths and everything at their disposal to overcome these challenges, then they are free and will not break under life’s hardships.
In the final paragraph there is a focus on poetry and what it means to write and be a poet. Williams says that poetry has accompanied Ginsberg in his Golgotha (a reference to the biblical place where Jesus was crucified); again emphasizing that this poet has been through the worse. He has been miserable in a place that the readers call home(the US). According to Williams people are blind, but poets are cursed because they see it all. In this paragraph Williams portrays the poet as somewhat of a modern prophet informing the people of the horrible truths of life.
Overall, the introduction gives the readers some background on Ginsberg to better understand the content of the poems. In addition, words such as “disturbed,” “hell,” “horrifying,” and “blindness” set the mood of the poem as perturbing and gruesome.
~M.G.
Reflections on Howl
My initial reaction to this poem, “Howl,” was confusion. This seemed like another impossible poem to understand, much like “The Wasteland” by Eliot. I thought to myself, “This guy is drunk, high, or just plain crazy.” I must not have been very far off, since the preface by William Carlos Williams describes Ginsberg as “mentally much disturbed.” However, somehow in this seemingly rambling and confusing poem (at least it appeared that way to me), there were style and eloquence. I could sort of understand the pain and despair, confusion and chaos he must have seen and felt through the poem. I could almost hear the desperate, tortured voice of the poet himself. The world that he knows is “destroyed” and the only escape from the reality seems to be the mindless pursuit of pleasure and destruction.
The first part of “Howl” is essentially only one very, very long sentence. The lack of period and the excessively long sentence creates a sense of panic and madness. He describes the “best minds of [his] generation” roaming around the street in hopelessness or otherwise engaging in useless or Hedonistic activities. The image that Ginsberg creates is a world of madness. It is a hopeless, brutal, and chaotic world, where no single event stands out or connects to another, but everything is a fragmented piece of individual misery. You get lost in Ginsberg’s sentence, wondering where this poem is heading to, and realize that it’s not heading anywhere. The parts 2, 3, and the footnote of “Howl” is strikingly different in syntax from the part 1 of the poem. They all repeat a single word or a phrase over and over again, as if saying a prayer or incantation. In part 2, Ginsberg repeats “Moloch” over and over, Moloch being the god of all things ugly in his life and his generation, such as materialism, filth, poverty, war, destruction, etc. In the footnote, he repeats “Holy” over and over; “everything is Holy” according to him. This reveals his disillusionment and deep disappointment with the world. Everything is “Holy” because everything around him is connected to Moloch, the god of all things ugly in life.
~J.K.
The first part of “Howl” is essentially only one very, very long sentence. The lack of period and the excessively long sentence creates a sense of panic and madness. He describes the “best minds of [his] generation” roaming around the street in hopelessness or otherwise engaging in useless or Hedonistic activities. The image that Ginsberg creates is a world of madness. It is a hopeless, brutal, and chaotic world, where no single event stands out or connects to another, but everything is a fragmented piece of individual misery. You get lost in Ginsberg’s sentence, wondering where this poem is heading to, and realize that it’s not heading anywhere. The parts 2, 3, and the footnote of “Howl” is strikingly different in syntax from the part 1 of the poem. They all repeat a single word or a phrase over and over again, as if saying a prayer or incantation. In part 2, Ginsberg repeats “Moloch” over and over, Moloch being the god of all things ugly in his life and his generation, such as materialism, filth, poverty, war, destruction, etc. In the footnote, he repeats “Holy” over and over; “everything is Holy” according to him. This reveals his disillusionment and deep disappointment with the world. Everything is “Holy” because everything around him is connected to Moloch, the god of all things ugly in life.
~J.K.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)