Tuesday, August 19, 2008

Empty Seats

Fallows poses and resolves an interesting question:

In several previous posts I've mentioned the paradox of Olympic tickets being flat "sold-out," yet huge tracts of seats sitting empty. Many people have written in to solve the mystery. This, from Alf Hickey, reflects the consensus view:

Large amounts of empty seats are actually quite common at Chinese concerts or sporting events that claim to be "sold out." The reason for this is that a large amount of tickets are given to the bigwigs who organize the events so they can guanxi them out ["build relationships"] as needed. Since the Olympics had so many different organizing bodies, the central government, the local Beijing government and the Chinese Olympic committee, I'm sure there were vast amounts tickets given to various officials.

The reason that these tickets are not used is that by the rules of Chinese guanxi, you don't refuse a gift, especially not from someone connected enough to get Olympic tickets. So the tickets to the rowing finals are probably in the hands of people who have no desire to see the event, but just needed to stay in the good graces of some random Beijing bureaucrat. I suspect that the tickets have already changed hands more than once, passed along like a box of moon cakes that no one actually wants to eat.

The Drinking Age

So college presidents think the drinking age is too high. No surprises there. "Mothers Against Drunk Driving" thinks it's too low. This reinforces my feeling that parents should have no political power. What I would suggest, though, is that it would be sensible to have a drinking age that lines up with a natural division in one's life -- so, e.g. 14, 18, 22 are all more sensible drinking ages than 16 or 21. One problem with the status quo is that about 50% of college students can drink legally and the other 50% can't, so it's trivial to procure booze. If you really wanted to make it harder for college students to drink, it would make sense to raise the age to 22 and restrict volume per sale for anyone under 25; this would drive up the effective cost of alcohol for college students, and would partially solve the fake ID problem because everyone in your group would be illegal.

Would this reduce alcohol consumption? Probably not, because Popov is a Giffen good. On the other hand, it would spoil the current, barely acceptable status quo; and perhaps eventually lead to a rational drinking age like 18.

Monday, August 18, 2008

A Note on the Veepstakes

There are basically two principles involved: 1. a lot of positive press is a good thing, 2. though veeps don't actually help much, they can screw things up pretty badly. Veeps do not bring their home states, etc.

The Dems go first so the GOP pick will be a response to the Dem pick. The Dems have five sorts of choices -- Clinton, Gore, Biden/Nunn, Bayh, and Kaine/Sebelius. I would rank them in that order. The higher-profile the veep the better; it'll focus attention on the Democrats but not on Obama, with whom the public is a little bored. I used to think Clinton would be a bad idea and to some extent I still do, but everyone else I'd have liked (Webb, Edwards, Rendell, Strickland) is out, and the remaining "sensible" options are impossibly boring. Gore would bring a lot of good feelings but might be unsound on the offshore drilling issue, which Obama wants to compromise on. If neither of those is possible, it seems like Biden is the best of the rest of the pack, being an established and articulate figure that a lot of people have kind of heard of. Nunn is a paler version of Biden. The others, besides being anticlimactic and killing the news cycle, will not attract attention and have no electoral upside, being mediocre speakers and having no real story to keep the newspapers busy. (cf. Jim Webb) There is always the danger that Clinton will be a disaster, but Republican attacks on Clinton will energize the (overhyped) PUMA types.

The Republicans have three options: Huckabee, Romney, and nonentity (Pawlenty, Crist, Jindal, etc. -- unknown figures). Romney would be a terrible choice -- 1. he has a turd for a personality, and no one liked him in the primaries; 2. he's a corporate fatcat and will hurt in Ohio. Huckabee appears not to be in the running, which I think is silly because, if Obama plays it safe and his VP announcement sinks in the press, it's a good opportunity for McCain to pick up some momentum by picking a well-known VP. Of the available candidates, it seems like Huckabee, though risky, has the biggest upside -- he's close to the Jesus freaks in Colorado, and to the Appalachian types in Ohio, and would be an effective campaigner in both states. (On the other hand it's possible that enough people are terrified of Huckabee and the religious right that he'd sink the ticket.) If Obama picks someone high-profile, McCain should go with a nonentity because he can't win the celebrity war.

The real question is whether McCain can win on "acceptability." My sense is that he can't, quite, against Obama alone -- Kerry nearly won in 2004, and did about as badly as Obama with the Appalachian types -- but might be able to against Obama/Clinton. The problem is he hasn't got too many options against Obama/Clinton.

PS I'm told that Tom Ridge isn't a nonentity. Who knew.

Sunday, August 17, 2008

A Beached Walrus in Abkhazia




PS Note that this post is in doubly poor taste because the men are at a funeral.

Friday, August 15, 2008

Brooks vs. Science

David Brooks wrote this idiotic column earlier this week about American individualism and Chinese collectivism. The take-away paragraph was:
If you show an American an image of a fish tank, the American will usually describe the biggest fish in the tank and what it is doing. If you ask a Chinese person to describe a fish tank, the Chinese will usually describe the context in which the fish swim.

Mark Liberman dismantles this column at LanguageLog.
Question to Language Log: Is it correct that if you show an American an image of a fish tank, the American will usually describe the biggest fish in the tank and what it is doing, while if you ask a Chinese person to describe a fish tank, the Chinese will usually describe the context in which the fish swim?

Answer: In principle, yes. But first of all, it wasn't a representative sample of Americans, it was undergraduates in a psychology course at the University of Michigan; and second, it wasn't Chinese, it was undergraduates in a psychology course at Kyoto University in Japan; and third, it wasn't a fish tank, it was 10 20-second animated vignettes of underwater scenes; and fourth, the Americans didn't mention the "focal fish" more often than the Japanese, they mentioned them less often.

Read the whole thing. The blog has some other takedowns of Brooks's atrocious pop neuroscience. Relatedly, Liberman describes a study showing that the use of irrelevant neuroscientific jargon makes people perceive idiotic explanations as sensible.

Bulwer-Lytton Contest 08

The Bulwer-Lytton contest is for "bad opening sentences to imaginary novels." Here are this year's winners. A few gems:

Theirs was a New York love, a checkered taxi ride burning rubber, and like the city their passion was open 24/7, steam rising from their bodies like slick streets exhaling warm, moist, white breath through manhole covers stamped "Forged by DeLaney Bros., Piscataway, N.J."

Leopold looked up at the arrow piercing the skin of the dirigible with a sort of wondrous dismay -- the wheezy shriek was just the sort of sound he always imagined a baby moose being beaten with a pair of accordions might make.

Mike Hummer had been a private detective so long he could remember Preparation A, his hair reminded everyone of a rat who'd bitten into an electrical cord, but he could still run faster than greased owl snot when he was on a bad guy's trail, and they said his friskings were a lot like getting a vasectomy at Sears.

The mongrel dog began to lick her cheek voraciously with his sopping wet tongue, so wide and flat and soft, a miniature pink fleshy cape soaked through and oozing with liquid salivary gratitude; after all, she had rescued him from the clutches of Bernard, the curmudgeonly one-eyed dogcatcher, whose own tongue -- she remembered vividly the tongues of all her lovers -- was coarse and lethargic, like a slug in a sandpaper trenchcoat.

The KGB agent known only as the Spider, milk solids oozing from his mouth and nose, surveyed the spreading wound in his abdomen caused by the crushing blow of the low but deadly hassock and begged of his attacker to explain why she gone to the trouble of feeding him tainted milk products before effecting his assassination with such an inferior object as this ottoman, only to hear in his dying moments an escaping Miss Muffet of the MI-5 whisper, "it is my whey."

As a cold winter sun was just rising above the lonely French village of Vicres-le-Buffeur, the forlorn figure of a man dressed in rich Arabian silks could be seen crouching in the center of the market square, crying softly and cradling in his arms the limp and lifeless body of what appeared to be a large hamster.

It was a dark and stormy night, except when the lightning flashed, because then it wasn't dark; it sort of turned the windows into a giant disco ball for a moment, but eventually the thunder and lightning stopped and it settled down to a steady light rain, so then it really was dark, but it would probably be a stretch to call it stormy. [Beckett could've written this. -- Ed.]

And then, of course, there's that magnificent one from 2005:

As he stared at her ample bosom, he daydreamed of the dual Stromberg carburetors in his vintage Triumph Spitfire, highly functional yet pleasingly formed, perched prominently on top of the intake manifold, aching for experienced hands, the small knurled caps of the oil dampeners begging to be inspected and adjusted as described in chapter seven of the shop manual.

Thursday, August 14, 2008

Railton, Realism, Cognitivism, Consistency

If you have the time (a lot of it -- should be evident from posting frequency that I'm procrastinating with a vengeance) you might be interested in this bloggingheads discussion between Don Loeb and Peter Railton about moral realism. (Watch Loeb's eyes while Railton's speaking.) I had read some of Railton's stuff at college, thanks to Alan, but it was all very meta-ethical and nonconstructive, and seemed liable to dismissal on "show me an absolute moral truth and I'll show you a contradiction" grounds. The video makes it clearer what Railton's truths are: stuff like "you should keep your promises." (See also: this Boston Review piece.) The "evidence," such as it is, comes from history and psychology. I find his position pretty unappealing, because (1) he disqualifies all forms of local feeling (patriotism, etc.) as not moral, (2) intuitions even about cheating are not quite the same everywhere -- in Tanzania, where I grew up, it's generally considered legit to cheat an out group, (3) it is not true outside of Ann Arbor that everyone believes in tolerance. Now I happen to agree with Railton's sentiments, but I'm bemused at any historical analysis implying that people have always held universalist values.

Defenses of moral truth often come down -- implicitly -- to the claim that the fact/value distinction is fuzzy, and denying moral truths is like solipsism. The difference is that we all agree, fairly strongly, on what the natural world is like, and philosophical justification is a formality; however, we do not generally agree on morality, and I have no consistent intuition about the existence of moral truths.

There's an interesting bit (ca. 30:00 to 40:00) on cognitivism: cognitivists claim that moral assertions are statements about something, whereas non-cognitivists claim that they are assertions of attitude -- e.g. yay red sox. (The BR article has a nice example of the semantic dangers here.) Non-cognitivists are obligated to explain how logic and consistency apply to moral statements, if they do. The if is something I've wondered about in the past, and it still puzzles me. There are some trivial cases of "moral reasoning" -- Killing pinnipeds is bad. A walrus is a pinniped. Therefore, killing walruses is bad. -- in which the premises do seem to imply the conclusions. However, I dunno about the law of the excluded middle: either one ought to kill walruses or one ought not to kill walruses. Seems to me it could plausibly be both, or neither. (The trouble here is, of course, that practical reasoning is a matter of weighing evils against each other, and "ought" is too blunt a term to be any use.)

PS Hilary Putnam argued, in "Mathematics without Foundations," that object talk can quite generally be re-expressed as modal talk and vice versa. I imagine this applies to the debate over cognitivism, and potentially settles it. Now where's my prize.

Simile of the Day

Darkness, black moth the light burns up in.
(Charles Wright, China Trace)

Wednesday, August 13, 2008

The Generic Ballot Question

There's a meme (too prevalent to link to: but includes Krugman, Brooks, etc.) that Obama must be doing something wrong because he's underperforming the "generic Democrat," who's winning in a landslide. I used to think they polled a counterfactual about the Presidential election, but it turns out the actual question is:
If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for (the Democratic candidate) or (the Republican candidate) in your congressional district?

Now put that together with this snippet describing this year's Republican candidates. Isn't it plausible that at least some of that Republican weakness has to do with the godawfulness of their congressional candidates?

I finally understand Benford's Law

Benford's Law states that the first digits in various lists of randomly distributed quantities -- the weights of rocks, the lengths of rivers, death rates, populations of settlements, or income tax returns -- are distributed nonuniformly. The first digit is 1 around 30% of the time, 2 about 18% of the time (and cumulatively 1, 2, or 3 about 60% of the time) -- and 9 less than 5%. The practical significance of this is that if you were to forge a list -- say on an income tax return -- you would do well to distribute the first digit according to Benford's law rather than evenly. (I was reminded of Benford's Law by the Chinese medal tally -- their methods are, as I said, transparent from the medal count alone.)

Why is Benford's Law true? Suppose not: suppose the first digits of some list, say the length of rivers in meters, were distributed evenly (which is intuitive). Now let's express them in feet (let's approximate 1 m = 3 ft). If the first digit in meters was four or five (or in some cases three or six) then the first digit in feet is 1. On the other hand, for the first digit in feet to be 9, the first two digits in meters must be between 30 and 34. If we started with even distributions of first and second digits in meters, it follows that, in feet, the lengths begin in 1 about 30% of the time, and in 9 about 3.3% of the time. This makes no sense at all because there's nothing special about meters -- the distribution of first digits ought to be the same no matter which units you count in.

Benford's distribution is a sort of fractal: it's the only distribution of first digits that is invariant under conversion from meters to feet, or pounds to kilograms, or people to families, or geese to gaggles. What's special about Benford's distribution is that all the digits of the logarithms are distributed evenly. Since log (ab) = log a + log b, and even distributions stay even whatever you add to them, it follows that a logarithmically even distribution (i.e. Benford's) stays logarithmically even upon rescaling.

It follows that we shouldn't expect Benford's Law to hold whenever we don't expect our descriptions to be scale-invariant: e.g. telephone numbers, last digits in random lists of integers, or any variable with a normal distribution, which implies a characteristic size -- e.g. heights.

Tuesday, August 12, 2008

The Review-Essay

Zach comments, regarding Helen Vendler:
her willingness to invent the content she ascribes to poets and then discover it tends to carry her to not their most sparkling lines.

Maybe their most sparkling lines wouldn't be a very good place to start though honestly.

This is an interesting pitfall of the review-essay. A periodical like, say, the New York Review of Books invites important people to review books at great length. Their essays are later collected into books, which are expected to have a measure of organic integrity and to be important works of criticism.

These aims are not entirely consistent. There are three types of audience for an essay about a book of poetry -- 1. those to whom the poet is new, and who would like to know what his work is like; 2. those who know the poet's earlier work, and want to know how the new book compares with it; 3. those who have read the book. A review-essay, qua review, is meant for 1. and 2.; qua essay or chapter of forthcoming book, for 3.

When I read a review, I expect a generously illustrated description of the writer's style, and a fair account of his (or her) sensibility. This does involve quoting the brightest passages, because -- like most people who still read poetry -- my first question about any book is how well it's written, and the high points are relevant evidence. When I read an essay on someone whose work I know, I'm looking for an angle on the writer -- or on modern writing and how he fits in. In this case, Zach's right: the obvious starting points are crap.

So how does one reconcile these things? Auden had an ingenious solution that worked for him in Forewords and Afterwords, but probably wouldn't for anyone else. As John Berryman wrote:
It is hardly unfair to say that Auden, over the years, has done one of two things with books entrusted to him for comment: either he wrote about what interested him at the moment, making some spidery connection with the book in hand, or, with books he felt keen about, like Cyril Connolly's vivid Enemies of Promise, he quoted from them at agreeable length.

(The book, as a result, is an excellent piece of Audeniana.) Or one could, like Vendler, give a themed guided tour of the book -- a "Phallic aspects of Chicago" -- that includes its high points and also fits into one's overall interests. There is some misrepresentation involved here, no doubt, but the point is to get people to read the book, which they will if the quotations are appealing enough.

In my experience, Vendler's are. But this is all extremely subjective.

"Caucuses" redux

Matthew Yglesias is also unhealthily obsessed with "The Caucuses" --
The intensity of the desire to imbue these events in the Caucuses with extraordinary significance keeps running far ahead of any kind of actual logic of reasoning.

(Events in the caucuses did have extraordinary significance, as Yglesias and everyone else agreed at the time.)

Schaich on Abkhazia (dated)

Dave Schaich has everything you needed to know about the Georgian situation in 2005.

Monday, August 11, 2008

Why does China win so many gold medals?

So here are the Chinese medal tallies from the past four Olympics (in reverse chronological order, g/s/b):

32-17-14
28-16-15
16-22-16
16-22-12

The tally so far this year is 9-3-2. The disproportionate spike in gold medals is interesting because every other country with a large (>10, hence statistical) medal count has a relatively even distribution -- like China 92/96. Is China dominating relatively uncompetitive events?

Now there's a name...

Meet Prapawadee Jaroenrattanatarakoon, a Thai weightlifter born Chanpim Kantatian, who "changed her name in 2007 'for good luck.'" It appears to've worked; she won a gold.

Call me Theartistformerlyknownasjaroenrattanatarakoon.

Charles Wright: Sunlight Bets on the Come

More obsessive Charles Wright posting, cf. here. This poem is from The New Yorker:

Sunlight Bets on the Come

The basic pleasures remain unchanged,
and their minor satisfactions—
Chopping wood, building a fire,
Watching the elk herd
splinter and cruise around the outcrop of spruce trees

As the deer haul ass,
their white flags like synchronized swimmers’ hands,
Sunlight sealing—stretched like Saran wrap—
The world as we know it,
keeping it fresh-flamed should tomorrow arrive.

Media Bias: Conspiracy Theory Edition

There's some superficial plausibility to this in the abstract: Wolfson: Edwards' Cover-up Cost Clinton the Nomination. (The idea is that if Edwards had been pushed out pre-Iowa, then Clinton would've won Iowa and Obama would never have caught fire.) However, it reads as the nuttiest of media-bias-killed-Clinton stories. No wonder they didn't expose the Edwards affair -- it would've hurt Obama!

And I don't really buy the claim that Edwards was stealing the Clinton vote in Iowa. The exit poll data do not show Edwards running strongly with seniors or women or lower-income voters; in fact Clinton was winning her support base outright. The Edwards contingent -- actually, a lot of the Edwards vote was redirected from candidates that failed the 15% viability threshold -- is disproportionately upper-income, middle-aged white guys. These voters went heavily for Obama in Wisconsin.

Sunday, August 10, 2008

Light and Grease

From Charles Wright's Littlefoot:

I remember the way the mimosa tree
........................................................buttered the shade
Outside the basement bedroom, soaked in its yellow bristles.


I love the winter light, so thin, so unbuttery,
Transparent as plastic wrap,
Clinging so effortlessly to whatever it skins over.


In Kingsport, looking across the valley toward Moccasin Gap
From Chestnut Ridge,
...................................the winter-waxed trees
Are twiggy and long-fingery, fretting the woods-wind.

You know the Dem primaries lasted too long...

... when, three months later, RealClearPolitics spells Caucasus as caucuses. (Though I always thought Georgia had a primary!)

Saturday, August 9, 2008

Orwell's Diaries

George Orwell's diaries will gradually be digitized on this blog -- the first entry went up today. Not the brightest of starts but it should be worth the occasional visit, esp. as it grows.

(Orwell's editorials are definitely worth reading. For instance, from the Jan 1944 archives:

However, this honours-list business [i.e. the knighthoods etc.] has one severely practical aspect, and that is that a title is a first-class alias. Mr X can practically cancel his past by turning himself into Lord Y. Some of the ministerial appointments that have been made during this war would hardly have been possible without some such disguise.)

Friday, August 8, 2008

The Higgs Mechanism and Mass

There's been a fair bit of LHC buzz in the media and on the blogs. Everyone mentions the Higgs mechanism, of course, which no one particularly seems to understand -- not surprising, because it's a fairly subtle business. The most frequent misconception is that the Higgs mechanism gives gravitational mass to other elementary particles; this is incorrect, because the standard model doesn't have gravity in it.

There are two kinds of mass in physics, inertial and gravitational. Inertial mass is the m that appears in Newton's law F = ma (the ratio of force applied to acceleration achieved) or in Einstein's equation E = mc^2. It's basically a measure of how hard you've got to push something to get it to move, and has nothing to do with gravity. Gravitational mass is a measure of how strongly objects attract each other. Empirically these masses are the same; this is the content of Newton's law of gravity. The Higgs mechanism explains why particles have inertial mass -- it's because (very crudely) they have to push against the Higgs field to move. (The Higgs boson is a ripple of the Higgs field, just as a photon is a ripple of the electromagnetic field.) This story, for obvious reasons, doesn't go very far towards explaining gravity.

Thursday, August 7, 2008

A Whole Nother Math Joke

So, um, have you heard

the one about Noah’s instructions to the animals when they departed the ark: “Go forth and multiply”. The snakes, who were back then called adders, insisted “We can’t multiply; we’re adders!” Noah’s reply: “Use logs”.

Incidentally, a bit of Anglo-Saxon pedantry. "An adder" comes from the Anglo-Saxon "a naedre"; the n later drifted to the article. Carson Mitchell once told me about a few other examples of this process, but I don't remember them.

LHC Predictions

Sean Carroll discusses what the Large Hadron Collider (i.e. the big new accelerator at CERN) might find once it's turned on in about a month. I don't know how accessible his post is, but note a couple of highlights. 1. The LHC is unlikely to find anything particularly relevant to string theory. 2. The prospects for finding additional dimensions are less bleak. Contrary to popular belief, the extra dimensions are a feature and not a bug of string theory, because there are independent reasons to want them to exist; their existence might not tell us anything definitive about string theory. 3. His remark on why there are probably no more quarks out there -- because each generation of quarks is supposed to come with a neutrino, neutrinos are light and should have been observed -- is plausible and new to me. 4. Note the proliferation of borderline plausible ideas (unparticles, technicolor, baryogenesis), most of which must be wrong. This experiment is seriously overdue.

I don't know how invested I am professionally in the LHC's success. If particle physics takes off once again, other branches of physics will become relatively less fashionable and this might hurt hiring. On the other hand, there might be interesting condensed matter physics ideas that apply at the new scales. And if current trends in NSF funding continue we might all be screwed regardless.

Monday, August 4, 2008

Charge of the Right Brigade

Eve Fairbanks has a good article on the GOP's hilarious recruiting problems:
In eastern Arizona, Republicans had to settle for their tenth choice; in Staten Island, the GOP's bottom-tier selection garnered an electoral challenge from his own disgruntled son--and then died. In Indiana's competitive 2nd district, the under-funded Republican challenger frittered away his precious money flying to Alaska to film pro-ANWR-drilling YouTube videos, one of which had to be aborted because he was overwhelmed by swarms of mosquitoes. In North Carolina's Bush-loving 11th, which failed Redskins quarterback Heath Shuler claimed for the Democrats with a 2006 upset win, the party finally settled on Asheville councilman Carl Mumpower--but, almost immediately after being nominated, Mumpower, like an immune defender cell gone wrong, began attacking the host body, calling for President Bush's impeachment and then, last week, briefly refusing to do any more campaigning. It turns out this is what you get for nominating a lawmaker who was, up to that point, primarily known for conducting his own extra- judicial crack busts.

Sunday, August 3, 2008

Vendler on Lowell, without the text

Auden said somewhere that he read reviews mostly for the quotations. Helen Vendler's brilliant review of Lowell's later poems is best read that way; the text doesn't really add much to the passages, but the quotations were good enough to make me read Lowell, whom otherwise (confessional, deranged, megalomaniacal) I wouldn't have bothered with. Follow the link for the full version, here is the meat of the thing: [I've boldfaced the bits that really got to me]

They won't stay gone, and stare with triumphant torpor,
as if held in my fieldglasses' fog and enlargement.

Before the final coming to rest, comes the rest
of all transcendence in a mode of being, hushing
all becoming. I'm for and with myself in my otherness,
in the eternal return of earth's fairer children,
the lily, the rose, the sun on brick at dusk,
the loved, the lover, and their fear of life,
their unconquered flux, insensate oneness...

raw hamburger mossing in the watery stoppage,
the room drenched with musk like kerosene—
no one shaved, and only the turtle washed.
He was so beautiful when we flipped him over:
greens, reds, yellows, fringe of the faded savage,
the last Sioux, old and worn...


lovely the flies that fed that sleazy surface,
a turtle looking back at us, and blinking.

The lizard rusty as a leaf rubbed rough
does nothing for days but puff his throat
on oxygen, and tongue up passing flies,
loves only identical rusty lizards panting:
harems worthy this lord of the universe—
each thing he does generic, and not the best.

I, fifty, humbled with the years' gold garbage,
dead laurel grizzling my back like spines of hay
...

Spring moved to summer—the rude cold rain
hurries the ambitious, flowers and youth....

Child of ten, three quarters animal,
three years from Juliet, half Juliet,
already ripened for the night on stage—
beautiful petals, what shall we hope for....?

The virus crawling on its belly like a blot,
an inch an aeon; the tyrannosaur,
first carnivore to stand on his two feet,
the neanderthal, first anthropoid to laugh—
we lack staying power, though we will to live.
Abel learned this falling among the jellied
creepers and morning-glories of the saurian sunset.

"O Christmas tree, how green thy branches—our features
could only be the most conventional,
the hardwood smile, the Persian rug's abstraction,
the firelight dancing in the Christmas candles,
my unusual offspring with his usual scowl,
spelling the fifty feuding kings of Greece,
with a red, blue and yellow pencil....I
am seasick with marital unhappiness—"

The fires men build live after them,
this night, this night, I elfking, I stonehands sit
feeding the wildfire wildrose of the fire
clouding the cottage window with my lust's
alluring emptiness. I hear the moon
simmer the mildew on a pile of shells,
the fruits of my banquet...a boiled lobster,
red shell and hollow foreclaw, cracked, sucked dry,
flung on the ash-heap of a soggy carton—
it eyes me, two pinhead, burnt-out popping eyes.

The thick lemony honeysuckle,
climbing from the earthroot to your window,
will open more beautiful blossoms to the evening;
but these...like dewdrops, trembling, shining, falling,
the tears of day—they'll not come back....

The Puritan shone here,
lord of self-inflicted desiccation,
roaming for outlet through the virgin forest,
stalking the less mechanically angered savage—
the warpath to three wives and twenty children.

Sometimes, my mind is a rocked and dangerous bell;
I climb the spiral stairs to my own music,
each step more poignantly oracular,
something inhuman always rising in me—


Risen from the blindness of teaching to bright snow,
everything mechanical stopped dead,
taxis no-fares...the wheels grow hot from driving—
ice-eyelashes, in my spring coat; the subway
too jammed and late to stop for passengers;
snow-trekking the mile from subway end to airport...
to all-flights-canceled, fighting queues congealed
to telephones out of order, stamping buses,
rich, stranded New Yorkers staring with the wild, mild eyes
of steers at the foreign subway—then the train home,
jolting with stately grumbling.

star-nosed moles, [in] their catatonic tunnels
and earthworks...only in touch with what they touch.

I want words meat-hooked from the living steer,
but a cold flame of tinfoil licks the metal log,
beautiful unchanging fire of childhood
betraying a monotony of vision....
Life by definition breeds on change,
each season we scrap new cars and wars and women.
But sometimes when I am ill or delicate,
the pinched flame of my match turns unchanging green,
a cornstalk in green tails and seeded tassel....
A nihilist has to live in the world as is,
gazing the impassable summit to rubble.

Serfs with a finer body and tinier brain—
who asks the swallows to do drudgery,
clean, cook, peck up their ton of dust per diem?
Knock on their homes, they go up tight with fear,
farting about all morning past their young,
small as wasps fuming in their ash-leaf ball.
Nature lives off the life that comes to hand;
yet if we knew and softly felt their being,
wasp, bee and bird might live with us on air;
the boiling yellow-jacket in her sack
of zebra-stripe cut short above the kneeescape...
the nerve-wrung creatures, wasp, bee and bird,
felons for life or keepers of the cell,
wives in their wooden cribs of seed and feed.

I too maneuvered on a guiding string
as I execute my written plot.
I feel how Hamlet, stuck with the Revenge Play
his father wrote him, went scatological
under this clotted London sky.

I watch a feverish huddle of shivering cows;
you sit making a fishspine from a chestnut leaf.
We are at our crossroads, we are astigmatic
and stop uncomfortable, we are humanly low.

I've gladdened a lifetime
knotting, undoing a fishnet of tarred rope;
the net will hang on the wall when the fish are eaten,
nailed like illegible bronze on the futureless future
.