Category: Blog Post

  • Walking The Dog Through A Cemetery

    blur.jpg

    A man needs only to be turned around once with his eyes shut in this world to be lost.

    Henry Thoreau

    Man will never find the end of the trail.

    Robert Hofstadter

    Probe and rummage and ruminate all we want –through, past, back, forward, beyond, up, out, now— we can’t see through any of it, won’t ever get to the bottom.

    We are each of us the tiniest of lockers crammed with eternity, in a cavernous depot populated by ghosts we can no longer recognize.

    We can’t be trusted.

    We come from nothing and go right back to where we came from.

    We are nonetheless not done being made.

    Get busy.

    (inspired by Loren Eiseley’s The Night Country)

  • The Strange Case Of Luis Rivas

    Everybody, from the coaching staff to the fans in the chat rooms, has been hard on Luis Rivas the last couple years. Most of the criticism directed at Rivas has been justified. The guy had obviously developed some bad work habits that were showing up on the field with a glaring regularity. At times –most of the time– he seemed to be in a state of either depression or profound indifference.
    Rivas, like his old double-play partner Cristian Guzman, is a tough guy to read, and I’m sure much of that has to do with the language barrier. There isn’t a coach with the major league club who speaks much Spanish, and there are few –if any– Spanish speakers among the regular contingent of local media, with the result that Latin players seem to rely on each other to work their way through translations of messages from on high. They also tend to stick together in the clubhouse, playing cards and hanging out at their lockers.
    Rivas, though, is an interesting case. I’m not sure how tight he and Guzman were, but they lockered next to each other, and I’ll be curious to see how he responds to Guzman’s absence.
    This is obviously a pivotal year for Rivas, one way or the other. Despite four full seasons in the major leagues he is still just 25 years old, the same age as prospects Jason Bartlett and Terry Tiffee, as well as Michael Cuddyer, the guy who assumed much of his playing time down the stretch last year.
    Rivas’s recent reputation as something of a lazy player is sort of difficult to get your head around. In 2002, when the Twins took the unusual step of honoring Cleveland’s Travis Fryman with a pre-game ceremony on the occasion of his retirement announcement –the sort of thing clubs usually do for Hall-of-Fame-caliber players– Ron Gardenhire said the gesture was a tribute to the way Fryman had played the game. I remember going around the clubhouse afterwards asking various guys which of their teammates was Frymanesque in that regard. The experience stuck with me because two out of the four or five players I queried mentioned Luis Rivas. I actually dug out my old notebook just to make sure I was remembering correctly.
    So what happened between then and now? Who knows, really. Rivas had some injuries, most notably late in that 2002 season. Maybe after having a job handed to him at the age of 21 he got complacent. Perhaps he should have spent a couple more seasons getting seasoned and hungry in the minor leagues.
    Whatever the case, he’s still pretty damn young for a major league veteran, and though you’d like to have seen more improvement in his numbers and performance over the last four seasons –Luis’s been nothing if not consistently mediocre across the board– maybe it’s not too late for him to figure it out. Conventional wisdom has always suggested that for the the majority of players the key –often peak– years are between the ages of 25 and 27, so I’d guess this is the season we’re going to find out what’s up with Rivas, one way or another. He certainly doesn’t figure to get too many more chances, and he’s been lucky the Twins haven’t had a lot of other options.

  • The Sort Of Thing That Used To Trouble My Sleep

    asphalt-behind the wheel.jpg

    Back in my drinking days my stomach would for damn sure be a lousy mess, and my liver would feel like a fat wad of pate throbbing behind my ribs. I couldn’t sleep for shit and I’d be up and down prowling the drafty house all night in the dark, handling the various little talismans I’d picked up on my travels, every one of which seemed to have lost whatever power they might once have had to enchant.
    Eventually and inevitably I would turn on the lamp above my easy chair and search for the old moth-eaten volume on my bookshelves. This book, written by a distant relative on my mother’s side, was entitled And Ye Shall Bee A Mercyfull Steward to Them Al. The author, Reverend L.C. Greenwood, was an animal rights zealot in 15th-century England, and a man of blistering piety.
    I had slain a great many animals in my time, a fact that was in those days much on my mind, and I would find rebuke on every moldering page of the Reverend’s text, which constituted, in fact, a sort of harsh and ceaseless rebuke that never failed to make my blood run cold in the wee hours.
    Among Greenwood’s aggressive and disturbing torrent of censure were these words, which I stumbled across in a notebook this evening:

    Thee almyghtye God hath wryttn in thine hearte thys knowledge of the sanctitie of all lyfe. As ye woulde doe to the leaste of God’s creatures, so wyll bee done unto thee in the place beyonde thys teeming worlde. Doe not then trod the squirmyng thynges of the dyrte, nor flogg nor flaye the ploddyng or scampryng beastes of the woode nor fyld. Nae shall thee gyve myschefe to the wyld thyngs of wing’d grace nor doe wickednesse to the breathyng bountye of the watters, neyther the symple fysh nor the leviathan of the deepe. Howe ever muche unlyke they may seme, eache hath been shapd by God’s hande, and muste bee shewn the love ye would shew thine owne blessd spawne.
    Yae, as ye treate eache flyng creepyng thynge and lyvyng mystry so shall you bee treatd by the Lorde in the lyfe to come. As ye trod so shall ye bee trodden. Suche as doeth malyce and evyll shall bee as nothynge in the nexte worlde. They that persyst in forbyden endevors shall bee stalkd and harryd and persecuted through eternitie. Theyr bloode shall bee tappd and the skinne turnd from the insyde to the out like a raggd garment, and the fat shall bee flayd from theyr fleshe and fed to the evyll doers in hell. The verye heart of suche synners shall bee plunderd pumpyng from theyr chestes and fed to the devylls coale fyres of Sheol, and never again shall they know the mercyfull reste of the blessd.

  • Pre-disgusted

    At the risk of getting too self referential here, I’m going to recommend Brad Zellar’s blog entry from yesterday.

    It’s about why his blog is the antithesis of this one. The editor and I are often fairly earnest here…in a Buck Turgidson sort of way. Brad, though, has defined his take perfectly. He’s disgusted, or as a good friend of mine once said about a conference we were attending, “I thought I’d save time this year and come ‘pre-disgusted’.”

    We’ve achieved a “pre-disgusted” state ourselves these days and admit that we only open the newspaper now to confirm our suspicions that the level of discussion on Republican key issues is not going to rise about the natural level of the whale shit that it is.

    To wit:
    aarp12.jpg

    this lovely addition to high mindedness by the same evil bastards who brought you the Swift Boat Liars for the Destruction of Kerry.

    They are now after AARP for God’s sake. My mother and father belong to AARP (admittedly mostly for the motel discounts) but I can assure you that Mom is probably not for gay marriage, and while my Dad doesn’t give a damn what other people do in the privacy of their own justice of the peace’s office, he certainly isn’t against veterans. He is one, and not one of the guys like Bush who were maybe members of the Third Messkit Repair Batallion, if they got even that close to the shooting. He was a Ranger in WW II and has a big chunk out of one leg, a Silver Star, two Bronze Stars, three Purple Hearts and the nightmares to prove it.

    He was a life long Republican till Bush became President, but now says Bush is “the worst President of my lifetime…and I was alive when Hoover was President.” Is he disgusted? You bet.

    But is he disgusted with Bush? Not as much as he is with the morons who are letting him get away with it. You know who you are.

  • Spleen Fully Ventilated, Resting At Home

    We may have gotten a little carried away yesterday, a little intemperate. After all, we love Frank Rich. His far-ranging free association is often a delight to read (but like his neo-con complement, David Brooks, his conclusions are sometimes a little thin). Rich was merely the cart onto which we loaded our rotten apples—it’s nothing to do with Rich, it’s the widespread conflation of news with opinion. (Most of these public spin-squabbles could be avoided by saying, “Where in the newspaper did you read THAT?”) It’s news “anchors” like Brit Hume framing every news story with a dismissive, normative snear that always sets the table for a neo-con take-away. Some have argued that “objective journalism” is really an anachronism of the 20th century—that newspapering before and since has been (should be) relentlessly partisan. At least you know where your reporters stand. That may be.

    For the first time in my life I’ve caught myself wanting to muzzle certain excitable “writers” —both online and in print—for their brazen lies, their cultism, their arrogance. I find myself entertaining the idea that the world needs neo-cons to be the opposition party, not the ruling party, and considering their inherent virtues and vices that make this so. I’m not really questioning the Holy Gospel of the First Amendment, but I chafe at the proposition that all voices should be weighed with equanimity. Some of the bloggers I admire most have recently taken up the slogan “there are no margins in compromise,” and it resonates with me, and I find that disturbing. Reasonable disagreement, civility, compromise—these are Enlightenment values. Values in which our country, and our First Amendment, are anchored.

    A few other tangents I would add to yesterday’s spleen-venting action: People do not argue whether Rush Limbaugh, Al Franken, or Bill O’Reilly will obsolete journalism. Why does the medium of print (online) trick us into believing that smart bloggers have anything more to add to the basic fund of Truth than those Greco-Roman wrestlers of partisan politics? Those guys HAVE impacted journalism (some more than others) not by practicing it themselves, but by casting a broad pall of cynicism over all legitimate journalism. To my mind, when industry folks worry about the impact of blogs and bloggers, they are sort of tilting at windmills. Do they really expect opinions to replace facts?—well…

    I know why Frank Rich is in the Arts & Leisure section. Newspapers today are trying to compete with the subjects they cover. In other words, they are in the attention economy along with all the news, art, and entertainment goings-on that themselves capture their reader’s attention. Aside from the A section, the backpages are being populated with material that is gray-area—lots of pictures, trend, lifestyle, and service stuffing that is traditionally the purview of magazines. (Aha, now you reach the reason why I am so exercised—It’s a turf war!) Naturally, you put your critics in the arts pages, not on the op-ed pages.

    My point about NPR yesterday sort of pointed beyond itself. Whenever someone attempts a “bias in media” study, they for some reason land on public broadcasting as the inevitable gold standard. (McNeil news hour also deserves a nod as an attempt at opinion-free news reporting.) This is hardly an accident. Public Broadcasting is very leery about publishing opinion, for a variety of interesting reasons.

    Maybe the way to guarantee the existence of an authoritative, non-partisan news source is to increase funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. That way, partisan squabbles can cancel themselves out more or less at the pre-funding stage, rather than on after the news cycle at the pundits’ table. Why is the BBC still considered the acme of unimpeachable authority in world news? (Please don’t trot out any hay-penny scandals of recent years that merely prove the point by exception.)

    One final point. There are some interesting eyewitness blogs that look pretty revolutionary—particularly from a war zone. But I think one needs to be careful to assess these for any hidden score-settling. War blogs from soldiers are notoriously cheerleaderish, and that’s fine as far as it goes—but it is insane to equate these with real war-zone reporting by even comparing the two. (The meta-media version of equal time: forty killed in Iraqi suicide bombing. Yeah, but what are the bloggers saying about it?) Lastly, the press pool at the White House may be lousy with excellent bloggers, but I would not class processing and replying to a White House spokesperson—or the President himself—as reporting per se, particularly in this day and age. Again, this often falls into the category of exegesis and rhetorical argument—fine as far as they go, but hardly a substitute for observed facts and sourced quotes.

    I will now retire for a painful, four-hour episode of public scourging.

  • Youneverknow

    That, of course, was purportedly legendary whack-job Joaquin Andujar’s favorite word, and it should be the mantra of every fan at this time of the year, when it’s easy to get carried away with the first optimistic rush of spring training.
    It’s hard, though, not to get carried away. The day pitchers and catchers report is the true Groundhog Day on any real baseball fan’s calendar. I’m not even sure what it means if the groundhog does or doesn’t see its shadow, and I don’t much care. I also don’t have any idea if a groundhog is the same thing as a woodchuck, or what God’s purpose is for either of them (if, in fact, they are different creatures –maybe somebody can enlighten me).

    At any rate, an animal coming up out of its hole must be some kind of sturdy, all-purpose metaphor for the triumph of the human spirit, or at least that’s the way I’m going to choose to spin it given the winter I’ve had.
    They’re playing catch and swinging bats in Arizona and Florida, and that’s all the assurance I need that spring in the Midwest is right around the corner.
    Every year about this time I start getting a hankering to head down to Florida myself, and if my track record is any indication I’d say there’s a 50/50 chance I’ll pull the trigger at some point in the next couple weeks and jump on a plane.
    In the meantime, I don’t expect any real surprises in the Twins’ camp, even though a number of pitchers have already come up with mostly gimpy injuries. Otherwise, though, this is about as locked in as the team’s roster has looked in years, but it really is true that youneverknow.
    I’ll go into full analysis and prognostication mode any day now, maybe even tomorrow. God knows, you won’t want to miss that, so check back.
    Also, I’ve been thinking about this all winter, and I’m curious what you might think: What’s the worst trade the Twins ever made? And how about the best?
    I have my own suspicions, but I’ll wait and see if anybody else has anything to say, or if there’s anybody else, period.

  • What This Is, And Isn't

    herd on the move.jpg herd on the move 2.jpg

    I don’t know, to be quite honest with you.

    There does, though, seem to be some confusion on that question, if the handful of puzzled emails I’ve received in the last week are any indication. I’m still trying to get a handle on who stumbles in here, into The Rake‘s little sidecar in cyberspace. I’m not even sure who reads The Rake, but I’m guessing I’ll get a general idea in due time.
    I should warn you right now, though, those of you who are unfamiliar with my previous stint of hard labor shoveling words into a hole: this is probably not the place for literalists, for people who are earnestly prepared to believe what they read. I am, as more than one of you has already observed, an unreliable narrator. And, yes, there are more important things in the world than the sort of nonsense you’re likely to find here, many more important things.
    It’s not that I don’t care about those things. I do care, and I already spend entirely too much time reading about them and railing about them until I’m blue in the face to my wife and friends. The thing, though, is that I’m not, unfortunately, a man who’s going to be able to shed any important light on any of the pressing issues of the day. My opinions on those important things and issues are pretty much the same as those held by tens of millions of other people, and every bit as impotent in the face of the opposing views held by tens of millions of my other fellow Americans (as if you can ever really say “my fellow Americans” with a straight face anymore, as if you could ever truly say “jury of one’s peers”).
    I’m not indifferent, and I’m not yet ready to throw up my hands, even when it appears that I am, quite literally, throwing up my hands. I plod my way glumly through the newspapers every morning, page by page and column by column. I do some of the things that I consider to be my duty as an American; I vote, write the occasional angry letter to public figures, and volunteer my time. I routinely give money to organizations or causes that seem worthy to me. Yet these gestures feel increasingly like inadequate acts of atonement or pathetic attempts at absolution –which they doubtless are– rather than meaningful forms of redress for the mess we’re in.
    “There will be much hope, but not for us,” Franz Kafka wrote in his diaries, and like so much else he wrote, those words could well serve as an epitaph for our time.
    If you’ve made it this far you’re likely thinking by now that I have, in fact, thrown up my hands. Like I said, though, I do throw up my hands, but I haven’t yet thrown up my hands, and I think there’s an important distinction in there somewhere.
    The problem at the bottom of all the other many problems right now is this: political discourse [sic] in this country is insufferable. I find politicans and the parasitic pundits who live off the beached and bloated host of the American political leviathan to be as uncompelling, unconvincing, and unattractive a group of characters as has ever been assembled in any one time and place in the history of mankind.
    They don’t move me. They don’t change my mind. And even given their now acknowledged place as part of the entertainment industry they fail to entertain me.
    And the American heart doesn’t really move much anymore, either. (William Merideth’s “great sloth heart” has never been more universally apt.) Oh, it wiggles a bit now and then, trembles or constricts (timidly, violently, almost imperceptibly), or shifts a few degrees to the left or right, but it doesn’t move. When the heart won’t move, the mind can’t be changed, and the wonderful thing about the lost art of real, stirring political oratory and strenuous debate was that it had the ability to both move hearts and change minds. Go to the library and check-out a volume of great speeches sometime, or, better yet, get your hands on a copy of Say it Plain: Live Recordings of the 20th Century’s Great African-American Speeches. That wonderful book and CD package is full of passionate, roaring orations that moved hearts, changed minds, and moved and changed the world.
    I’m sorry, but this thing –whatever it is– will never do that.

  • For The First and Last Time, With Feeling

    The Koufax awards were announced today, and you will be forgiven for having no idea what they are. They are the blogging world’s equivalent of the Oscars or the Grammys. And now it can be admitted that there is an award for every channel of human industry ever conceived and exercised. Can there be any doubt that there are now small gold statuettes on shelves somewhere celebrating the best stamp collection, sausage making, shoe tying, rope jumping, sign painting, phone answering, carpet cleaning, bottle washing, newsprint recycling, and commercial broadcasting? And the best new anonymous grafitti left with a pencil over the urinal in the men’s room goes to… the guy who keeps writing “BJ” wherever he micturates.

    We don’t want to dismiss the Koufax awards. But we do want to finally and conclusively clarify something, and we’re afraid we’re going to have to raise our voices a little to do it: BLOGGING IS NOT JOURNALISM. STOP EQUATING THE TWO, AND STOP GIVING THESE “BLOGGING” PEOPLE ACCESS TO THE “MSM” WHICH THEY ARE CONSTANTLY RAVING ABOUT. At the very least, make sure you permanently dismiss one pundit for every blogger you hire.

    And another thing: Get Frank Rich on the Op-Ed page, or fire him. We’re half convinced that global warming is a result of all the hot air being emitted by self-evident experts in all quarters. In a newspaper, particularly one that aspires to be the paper of recrod, opinion belongs on the opinion page. Even if we agree with Rich, which we do with alarming regularity, we still don’t much appreciate the ammunition he—and a hundred other professional soap-boxers—have given to all the belligerant wingnuts who have managed to spread skepticism about the world’s authoritative news sources because they cannot or will not see the difference between one person’s beliefs and another’s reported observations and sourced quotes. Ever noticed how National Public Radio does not broadcast any opinion—except as rare, carefully isolated, and identified “commentaries”?

    Blogging is criticism, it is cross-referencing and self-referencing, it is exegesis, and it is frequently a form of over-amplified soap-boxing. It does not typically involve any reporting, and if it does, it instantly stops being a blog and becomes a news dispatch. The only blogs that qualify even remotely as journalism are blogs that involve a writer getting off his or her duff, observing real-world incidents and interviewing real-world people, recording the results of this information gathering, and submitting the results to a skeptical editor whose job it is to make sure you’re not making any of it up or picking any private fights. Reading another persons’ news reports or blogs does not qualify as reporting. It qualifies as criticism and opinion, and in rare cases, entertainment.

    Okay, with that now clear, we can point you to some further refinements, from one of the big, deserving winners in this year’s Koufax awards, Digby. As he makes clear, people have been expressing themselves and their sordid opinions since they first started scratching burnt bones against blank cave walls. What is different and interesting and maddening about this modern medium is the spontaneous regeneration and retransmission of response and riposte from tens of thousands of readers. That is all. That is a big deal, relatively speaking, but that is all.

  • A Brief Primer On Insomnia, Along With Some Personal Anecdotes

    angel attack.jpg

    Waking, by reason of their continual cares, fears, sorrows, and dry brains, is a symptom that much crucifies melancholy men.

    Robert Burton, The Anatomy of Melancholy

    All he could do was transcribe the interminable babbling voice of the night, the insinuating perverse voice of the demons.

    Pietro Citati, Kafka

    One time I was in south Florida, in the central part of the state, and I was staying in a roadside motel in a little swamp town. The desk clerk had sold me a six-pack of beer, and I sat around watching something called “The National Bird Dog Field Trials” on television until the local station went off the air. I couldn’t sleep so I went back out to my car and drove out to a truck stop diner at the edge of town and went in for coffee and hash browns. I sat in a booth near the window and eavesdropped on a conversation between two guys and a woman at an adjacent table.

    “They can finger you with nothing but bones,” I heard one of the men say.

    “Slivers,” the other guy said. “The fucking scientists can nail you with nothing but slivers. You have to be burning very hot to do it right, and they can still figure you.”

    “You can’t just toss a body on a plain wood fire and expect you heard the last of it,” said the first guy. “That won’t cut it. It wasn’t just teeth they found.”

    “And all that swamp out there,” the other guy said.

    “Gene wasn’t thinking,” the woman said. “He was crazy to burn her, that’s all. It wasn’t no thought at all.”

    “He still would have been wise to take a step back and bury what he had left,” one of the men said. “Bury it deep.”

    “Swamp it,” said the other. There was laughter around the table.

    “Gene just plain fucked up,” the woman said, and everyone nodded their heads and kept right on forking food into their faces.

    What if an individual is perceiving a daydream and a series of external sensory inputs at precisely the same time, and has lost the capacity to distinguish one from the other? What happens to his perceptual world? Clearly he will be peopling his universe of awareness with elements that are altogether private, presences generated from within which for him will be a genuine part of the real world; these are what he sees, or hears, or is otherwise sensing. And should he then be unable to differentiate these from his everyday perceptions, then indeed he may move into a haunted, nightmarish world, and be a very troubled human being.

    Joseph D. Noshpitz, “Reality Testing: A Neuropsychological Fantasy,” in Comprehensive Psychology

    A common notion about the relationship of sleep to mental health is that total sleep loss…deranges the mind and may result in some kind of breakdown….When serious sleep disturbances are present, as they almost always are in the mentally ill, the patient’s history often indicates that the sleep disturbance preceeded the actual break from reality.

    William C. Dement, Some Must Watch While Some Must Sleep –Exploring the World of Sleep

    Some nights you’d sit there tracking moonlight across the floor, or studying the garage roof next door as if it were a radar screen. Your mind on a very low flame, a few tired words alternately see-sawing in the silence or surfacing through the waves of static. You’d sit there barely conscious, but the moment you’d try to climb into bed and close your eyes the whole chorus would convene again with a vengeance. The variety show of hypnagogia. Channel surfing long before the advent of cable television and remote control. So random, stuttering, and relentless was your consciousness in those hours that you would make an exercise of trying to isolate a particular fragment, and then attempt to concentrate your mind on the fragment’s origin, trying to trace it back, if possible, to its original source. Sometimes it would be a line from a book or a television commercial, other times it might be something you’d overheard in school, or a snippet from a song or a random conversation. You would find yourself obsessing about an outrageous pair of shoes you had seen on a complete stranger in a grocery store, weeks earlier.

    Ultimately, towards dawn, you were always left with nothing but the barely-beating heart of the sleeping world. The under-hum and throb of its basic operating systems. The furnace. The ticking of the clock. The world on the back burner, as close as the modern world comes to stasis: You were left with only you and what was left of the night, the retreating darkness, shadows receding on the walls, the cruel pinch of exhaustion, the terrible reality that you were going to have to sleepwalk through another lost day. What was that they were saying about what?

    Eventually, every night you would reach a point where you could not fall asleep but you could nonetheless not be truly awake. You were reduced to fumbling around, grasping, in a dense and hazy subterrannean no man’s land, lost in the gauzy, impressionistic foothills of sleep. You would take a walk to try to resuscitate your sanity, to get clear thoughts moving again in your head. You moved in slow motion through a woozy, muslin-filtered border country, imagination and hallucination bleeding into reality. You heard what sounded like chanting. You heard the clanking of a cowbell. You heard the distant tolling of a clock, and a burst of faint music sucked from a car window somewhere out in the town. You heard a baby crying, then someone laughing, wretching, congested laughter. You heard a radio playing in a junkyard. You heard what sounded like a piano. You heard windchimes twisting in a backyard somewhere. You heard the barking of a dog, answered by another, in the next block. You thought of the men across town, in the slaughterhouse, exhausted on their feet in the slippery dead mess, blood bubbled everywhere, the tangy reek of animals being broken down into meat. You would go there from time to time to stand at the mouth of the tunnel that took the tired men to and from the slaughterhouse. You would stand there in the last of the darkness with a little collection can for UNICEF, and you would shake your can at the blood-soaked, broken-knuckled zombies as they plodded past blank-faced, clutching their empty lunchboxes, moving almost unconscious into the bruised light that was just then creeping into the eastern sky.

    Wakefulness during the time when one ought to be asleep is frequently a distressing condition, undermining the strength and incapacitating for active and efficient work. Insomnia or sleeplessness often afflicts those of active mental habits and lays the foundation of premature decay.

    When sleeplessness overtakes a brain-worker it is a sure indication that less intellectual work must be done, and that he ought to betake himself, if possible, to out-of-door exercise in the pure air of the country.

    Encyclopedia Brittanica, Ninth Edition. 1899

    The victim of insomnia, having seen the slowness of the dawn, arises with every nerve tattered and the capacity for happiness ruined. His morning is a desolation.

    Arnold Bennett, Things That Have Interested Me. Third Series. 1926

    Among the imposts which humanity pays for the true or imaginary advantages of what, for lack of a more consistent term, is denominated ‘civilization,’ there is not one whose tyrannical invasion of physiological law is so fraught with mental and physical bankruptcy as sleeplessness.

    J. Leonard Corning, Brain-Rest: A Disquisition on the Curative Properties of Prolonged Sleep. 1885

    Aristotle, On Sleep and Sleeplessness

    The BBC’s brief History of Insomnia

    The National Pain Foundation’s Insomnia Page

    When I lie down, I say, when shall I arise,

    and the night be gone? And I am full of tossing

    to and fro unto the dawning of the day.

    The Book of Job, chapter seven, verse four.

    This relentless repetition of the same illegible text….

    Yannis Ritsos, “Insomnia.”

    Melancholics are not so sleepless as maniacs, yet the want of sleep is often an early and prominent symptom. They do not readily sleep, and if they do, they awake soon to be tormented by the vilest misery that it is possible for human creatures to endure.

    Insomnia and its Therapeutics, A.W, MacFarlane, M.D. 1891.

    Want of refreshing sleep we believe to be the frequent origin of insanity, dependent upon moral causes.

    Psychological Medicine, John Charles Bucknill and Daniel H. Tuke. 1858.

    Those who pursue a desultory method of thinking are very often the victims of an obstinate and peculiarly distressing form of insomnia. During the day such persons are observed to apply themselves with apparent zeal to the regular vocations of life; but, if closely observed, there is often visible a certain absence of concentration and devotion to the particular matter in hand. When questioned upon this point, they admit that they are ‘absent-minded’; and, while only too willing to apply themselves, are frequently tormented by the intrusion of ideas totally foreign to the particular subject at hand….they carry their responsibilities to bed with them; and, while other minds are at rest, their own intellection is morbidly active. Midnight, and even the small hours of the morning, find such individuals speculating upon the pros and cons of the past and future with an intensity which often drives them to a state of positive desperation. The small ills of life assume alpine proportions, and even the most trivial circumstances are distorted and magnified a thousand-fold. When at last sleep actually does supervene, it is no longer psychological, but, on the contrary, perverted by dreams and unconscious cerebration to such a degree that these unhappy individuals can hardly be said to have slept in the ordinary sense of the word.

    Brain Rest, J. Leonard Corning. 1885.

    Under [insomnia’s] influence injurious changes are permitted by the patient to be made in his daily habits; pursuits which formerly engaged his attention no longer interest him; even important business concerns are sacrificed; and against such tendencies no pre-existing vigour of intellect will afford any defence; the strongest minds (intellectually considered) may sink into apathy and feebleness.

    James Russell, M.D., “On Sleeplessness.” British Medical Journal, November 16, 1861.

    After dinner, my friend drove me, in a carriage, some five miles back into the country –the greater part of the way, along the margin of Migunticook Lake, and under a terrific precipice, whose boulders every moment threaten destruction. In fact, the whole of a bright sunny day, cooled with healthful zephyrs, was spent in pleasurable excitement. Interesting conversation beguiled the evening; and, after family worship, I sunk to rest in a luxurious curtained bed. Ere long, I slept; and, about five o’clock next morning, was awakened by the crowing of the cock. This was the only night’s sleep I have had these last six years and seven months; so help me God. Since then, my nights have been tedious, as usual, without sleep, and some of them distressing.

    “An Example of Protracted Wakefulness,” Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. July 31, 1845.

    Experience in private practice, and extended observation in the wards of general and lunatic hospitals, have taught me that the ordinary hypnotics are frequently unreliable, and that in some instances their use is attended by results as bad as, if not of more serious consequence than, the conditions they were intended to remove. I do not wish by this somewhat sweeping assertion to be understood to condemn the ordinary hypnotics, or to doubt their efficacy in suitable cases; but it seems to me that we run great danger of becoming routinists in the matter of sleeping-draughts….Like most of my fellow practitioners, I constantly meet patients who have run through the whole gamut of sleep-producing drugs, and find their last condition, in many instances, worse than their first.

    Edward N. Brush, M.D., “Some Clinical Experiences With Insomnia,” The Practitioner, January 1889.

  • Byline Vs. Timeline

    For some reason our attempt to point you to Steve Gilliard’s compelling thoughts on “New Journalism” failed yesterday, so we’ll try again. I am envious of Gilliard’s broad-ranging feel for the middle-distance history of journalism—particularly as it was affected by the convulsions of the sixties and seventies. How could such intense social and political upheaval have NOT energized journalists and journalism? (How can it fail to do so today? And I am not talking about blogs.) In a free society, it is impossible for these sorts of phenomena to happen without the press taking notice, and once they do, the phenomena can kind of feed on themselves and develop in new trajectories. How much longer would Vietnam have lasted without television cameras in the field? How would the world be different today if Gerald Ford had never been president? (Uh… hmm…)

    But but but. Several issues to follow-up on from yesterday’s addendum. Gilliard’s lowest diss is to call someone or something “irrelevant” and we think this could bear a little unpacking. It is Gilliard’s paradigmatic assumption that journalism can and should change the world, right the wrongs, redress the complaints of the timid and weak, fix flat tires, and generally point in the right direction out of the slough of the present. We have no problems with this view of journalism—it is what the nation’s daily and weekly newspapers should be doing, and generally are doing, when they aren’t publishing the lifestyle tripe they believe is necessary to attract all those solipsistic, suburban TV addicts.

    We must confess that we took a moment to enjoy the sweet taste of schadenfreude in Gilliard’s funny and precise dismissal of Dave Eggers—”a silly, irrelevant man. ” We also couldn’t agree more that The Writing Program has done more violence to writing than a half-century of TV, radio, video games, and the web combined. Still, we think it is a little unfair to expect someone like Eggers to bear the cross of New, New Journalism. Yes, it would be nice to have a class of literature that embraced the world more directly and energetically, rather than turning inward, but why throw out with the bathwater anyone who has ever out pen to paper? Besides,Galliard is being selectively myopic when he carps about the state of literature today. I think, for example, that Franzen and Lethem are the spearhead of a new, new literature that synthesizes the introversion of young people today with a terra-stomping kind of allegorical quality. And what about the medium-old guard, folks like Margaret Atwood, Paul Auster, Nick Hornby, not to mention the old old guard like Philip Roth and John Updike? To see these writers as essentially hermetic is to read them in less than one dimension, while at the same time idolizing youth.

    Anyway, the whole point is this: Why expect literature to do journalism’s job? Good writing, no matter what the genre or category—whether you’re talking about first-edition hardcovers or cereal boxes—has only one obligation, and that is to the Truth. There are inward and outward truths, and presumably these can inform each other.

    The problem with workaday beat journalists is that they approach literature and the truth on a deadline, and they believe that great work is measured by the writer’s last byline. History moves in bigger circles than that. It is easy, today, to see that Hunter Thompson’s work transcends its time, transcends itself. It is not primarily about its outward marks—the stylistic departures, the lack of formalism, and it’s a fool’s errand looking for a contemporary equivalent. The reason there are no Thompsons today is not that there aren’t any; it’s that we won’t know about them for a decade or so.