"You call yourselves poets, write little short lines, I'm a poet, but I write lines paragraphs and pages and many pages long."
- Jack Kerouac
WOMEN AND CATS: PART 3 - QUEEN CLEOPAWTRA OF EGYPT
Ancient Egyptian Civilization wasn't always a souvenir industry for museums and collectors. Some experts claim they were an advanced race who even played online video games with extraterrestrial beings, but the truth is more profound and thrilling.
It is now known that the first Egyptian Pharaoh was a calico cat named Cleopawtra because of the groundbreaking work by Professor Ivy of Shitzu U, who discovered that the "Great Balls Of Fire that consumed The Library Of Alexandria," which purportedly destroyed much of the ancient knowledge of the time only affected ten percent of the library books and documents.
The Furry Professor dug up like a bone the scintillating fact that 90% of the so-called lost documents were not in the Library at the time of the fire; 40% of the books were checked out and overdue, 30% had been stolen, and the remaining 20% were listed on various auction sites by dishonest librarians.
Ivy notes in her epic 1987 treatise, Cats Ruined Egyptian Civilization, "In fact, the only books destroyed by the great fire were titles that men weren't interested in borrowing, which included books about mathematics, grammar, health and hygiene, cooking, engineering, the arts, humanities, women's studies, and any fiction with lots of big words."
The Floppy Eared Scholar also noted, "Thus most of the remaining knowledge that men were interested in, such as various forms of black magic love potions, conspiracy theories about the Martians and Lizard People who control the world, natural viagra, penis enlargers, sports betting, ancient grains and nutrition, exotic sex positions, how to pick up women, cultivation of weed, production of explosives and poisons, pictures of naked women whose only desire is to please men, details on how to earn $1,500 a week in passive income, and other similar subjects did survive that terrible fire and to this day are freely available on the Internet."
The truth is so fantastic that it's hard to believe!
Indeed, in that scintillating 1987 treatise, she adds, "These heretofore lost records prove Cleopawtra not only invented Internet emojis, but mandated that 50% of the hieroglyphic content be cat pictures, and befitting a true Queen to all, allowed porn makers to use 80% of the bandwidth so men could have something to look at while building the pyramids."
The historical records also state, "The remaining 1% of available disc space on the Sphinx was allotted to subjects like algebra which was deemed to have possible value to future generations, though it wasn't clear at the time what use it could be."
Professor Ivy relates, "The main task that Cleopawtra faced was to elevate the educational level of her subjects. Although the early Hieroglyphic Web showed some promise in that regard, the Queen soon realized that most people resisted attempts to use it as a vehicle of truth and learning."
The good Professor studied ancient records that were pilfered from the Tomb Of Sheba, The Catfood Goddess, and purchased on eBay in 123,456 A.D., which chronicled the Meowing Pharaoh's attempts to, as she put it, "To get men back to work building Pyramids and Landing Strips for Alien Spacecraft instead of watching porn all day."
In her illuminating 1989 treatise, "Slob Egyptian Cats Used The Valley Of Kings As A Litter Box," Ivy states that Cleopawtra found the solution!
As she relates, "The Sublime Scratchy One realized that trying to make people more intelligent by building a great library in Alexandria was a nonstarter after it burned down.
The Phoenician Historian, King Tut McDougal, wrote in 234,567 B.C. that "Some Death Metal stoners accidentally set the Library on fire after deciding it'd be cool to smoke a papyrus paper copy of Homer's Iliad with dire results."
The Great Pointy Eared Monarch then realized that by using the unique power of the hieroglyphic Internet to make people believe anything they're told, her subjects could be made to feel smarter by encouraging them to think everyone else was inferior beings like NASCAR fans or Republicans.
"This was easy to do," stated the Shitzu Scholar, "As the Nobility already thought that about 99.999% of the population.
The historic proclamation in 123,456 B.C. was broadcast on social media and read:
"Vores fine fine superfine dronning introducerede demokratiets nyskabelse, som gav ret til snobberi til alle, og proklamerede, at det at være et røvhul, selvom det var modbydeligt, ikke var en forbrydelse, medmindre man forsøgte at forklare dronningen."
Professor Ivy translated that Ancient Egyptian post In her heart-stopping 1987 treatise, Cats Are Two-Faced Liars Who Poop In Purses, and in English reads, "The Immortal Pussycat Queen proclaims that 'the Kingdom was now a democracy where everybody has the right to look down upon their fellow man, and that insults and snobby statements are 'protected speech' with the one exception being that mansplaining the Queen is a capital crime."
It goes without saying that such a paradigm of political and sociological thought would be opposed by the #gotbigbucks set, but the ever-wise feline Ruler reassured the Nobles with a proclamation that, as the ancient records state, "Although Democracy mandates that all are equal in the eyes of the law, higher levels of equality are still available for purchase and the rights of commoners are still subject to the legitimate demands of warfare, obtaining cheap labor for retail businesses and overseas commerce."
The sweetly odiferous document concludes, "ово је сатира и служи само за забаву."
The Superduper Calico anticipated the possible shortage of stupid idiots to troll and feel better than, and as related in Ivy's 1756 work, Cats Secretly Hate Your Guts, "She proclaimed that everyone is required to use autocorrect software to ensure that everyone will make silly-ass mistakes in public so all can take turns being grammar fascists."
As you can see, there's no need to fabricate theories about extraterrestrial intercourse with Martians when the truth is even stranger! [Citation needed, Mimee The Blog Generator Bot states that of the several million people who've claimed to have sex with studs and vixens from far away Galaxies, the odds that all are lying is never zero, plus societal approbation in response to such claims has probably forced many more millions to keep it a secret like booger eaters or banjo music fans are forced to do.]
Although the aforementioned lost Egyptian Records confirmed the existence of Cleopawtra, Professor Ivy's treatise concludes, "Like most explosive discoveries that threaten the status quo, it was suppressed by the macho sexist dog-loving male hierarchy and labeled as 'discredited fake news perpetrated by catty types who hate televised pro football and don't shave their armpits.'"
This blogger asked Mimee to generate additional content about the aftermath of Clawopatra's invention of snobbery so that said blogger could play another round of 'Panzer General' on his iPad but was rebuffed and advised, "Until copyright law is updated to protect original works by A.I. software I'll be forced to only generate genre fiction where the same words are merely moved around, or confine indifferently researched nonfiction to the Internet which has a lower standard of truth than Congress if that's even possible."
As you can see, the rapid pace of technological development creates new problems to ignore and force future generations to deal with!
Because creating original content without the use of A.I. will require time and actual thought by this blogger, we will continue this thread in Part 4 in October, which will nuke the falsehoods and slanders about black cats and witches and give me a perfect Halloween-themed essay.
THE BATTLE OF DIEN BIEN PHU BY JULES ROY
I'm sure most of you have books that were revisited to check a quote or some such thing but ended up drawing you back in.
History books are prime candidates for this because the context can change due to new discoveries or perspectives.
One common stereotype is that historical works are simply collections of facts presented after a process of studying source materials to create an accurate account of an event, person or era.
The reality is that written history is best described by the old high-tech dictum, "Garbage in, garbage out."
In other words, a history book is only as good as the source materials and to what extent the writer can put aside their bias, agenda, or peer pressure.
Most medieval chronicles are almost worthless as literal accounts of historical events or personages due to those factors mentioned above.
The writers back then were generally tasked with glorifying this or that Lord or King, and most critical accounts were paid for or sanctioned by the opposition.
In other words, if you want to find out what crimes a French King committed, it's best to check English sources and allow for bias or agendas.
…the best way…
One Historian, Hilaire Belloc, found that the best way to determine who and how many were at a medieval battle was to check the financial records of the Lord or King in question.
The job of the Historian, or chronicler, was to present the Battle as a glorious victory, but the clerk in charge of the financial records had to account for who was paid and how much. That gave Belloc a more accurate number.
However, most of the infantry of that era weren't paid or equipped by the King and survived (or were motivated) by looting. This is why the estimates of the size of armies can vary. Most competent historians will clarify that there's a number range rather than an exact figure.
Also, historically, virtually all armies with large numbers of poorly paid or "volunteer" soldiers will commit atrocities and plunder. The Historian's task (even for many in the present day) was to highlight the behaviors of the enemy and not of the patron's forces.
Old historical accounts can be biased or inaccurate, and over time a more complete picture evolves as more data is uncovered. That goes for historical works in the present.
Whether a history book is considered accurate or relevant can also depend on the attitudes and perspectives of later generations.
One good example is how "General Custer's last stand" is perceived now. At the time (even though there was some controversy), it was generally seen as a massacre of a popular hero and his brave men who were fighting the good fight against the savages who killed innocent white settlers in the Westward expansion.
There was a period when Custer's defeat at The Battle Of Little Big Horn (or Battle Of The Greasy Grass to Native Americans) was seen by the public as due to the cowardice of two subordinate officers who weren't present (though actually ordered by Custer to pursue separate actions).
It's one of the most studied and written about military actions in American history, so I don't need to go into detail here. The information is all available on the Internet and in books.
…the general view nowadays…
However, and I'm simplifying here, the current view has become that General Custer screwed up due to various character flaws, a desire to hog all of the glory before the other units he was supposed to cooperate with arrived, and supposing that it was just going to be a routine massacre of a Native American camp full of women, children and warriors caught off guard.
One of the primary reasons that it took so long to get a reasonably balanced account of the event was that the only survivors (of Custer's own Battle) were, of course, the Lakota Sioux, Northern Cheyenne, and Arapaho warriors who wiped out Custer's detachment whose accounts weren't available (and probably wouldn't have been believed by Americans at the time anyway).
There were survivors, the actual casualty count was 268 killed, and 55 wounded out of 700. Those remaining were under the command of the two subordinates who Custer assigned different roles (and were later cleared by a Military Court of Inquiry though not in the court of public opinion).
New books continue to come out about that Battle, so the perception of what happened continues to evolve.
When we first learn history in school, it's presented as absolute truth. That evolves into a realization that the data on an event or subject can come from many sources, some of which can contradict the popular view. History has often been about what people think happened.
The main thing one will glean from historical accounts is that determining the truth isn't a cut-and-dried process.
What the Historian thinks is credible or relevant has a big influence on the work.
A good example is in an unrelated genre, the movies. The overwhelming majority of Westerns, until maybe the late 60s, depicted Native Americans as blood-thirsty savages and assumed white settlers were peaceful folk who just wanted to live in peace under the protection of soldiers who acted like white knights in shining armor.
That image didn't just come out of the blue. It was based on historical accounts by earlier white colonists and settlers who viewed the tribes as barbarians or animals.
Those early accounts (some detailed in earlier blog entries) would sometimes document white atrocities as a matter of fairness, but those statements would be overlooked and ignored.
Again, that bias or tunnel vision can affect a historian's view and process. Acclaimed historical works can be found to be unreliable or biased due to the availability of new data or, just as important, the changed perception of later generations.
…Vietnam war…
This is also true for another significant event in American history, the Vietnam War.
It was essentially a continuation of France's war there in the 50s, and the reason I didn't use it as the main example is because, after 50 years, the historical perspective is still in flux (though there's plenty of strong opinion about it).
Historical writing can be political. It can come from a conservative, middle-of-the-road or progressive attitude.
The book I'm going to talk about could be said to reflect a progressive or critical attitude towards the Battle of Dien Ben Phu.
There's no question that it was, at the very least, a "strategic" disaster for the French forces in Vietnam. That is to say, much of the French Army there was still intact and able to fight afterward. So, "tactically," it was a defeat, but not a decisive one that made it impossible for the Army to keep fighting.
In fact, due to the isolated location of the Battle, it didn't affect anything outside of that area, where a division of Foreign Legionaries and regular troops were beaten and forced to surrender.
However, from a political standpoint, it was the last straw for a country (France) that was getting tired of that overseas war and the profound shock that a "Western Army" had been beaten in the field by what was perceived as a peasant army (Which has frequently happened throughout history but people tend to ignore that, even historians).
To fully understand the Battle and its effect on the later American involvement, it's best to refer you to the Internet, where a large body of work exists from all points of view. It's good practice to read it all.
I've read that this or that book is the "definitive" one on the subject, but that's something you can decide for yourself.
…Jules Roy…
Jules Roy's 1963 book, "The Battle Of Dien Bien Phu" is one of the classics, the work of a Colonel who resigned his commission in protest of the French Indochina War.
Of all the books on the subject, it's the one that reads like a novel. One of the critical events of the Battle was the fall of the northernmost outpost at Dien Bien Phu. Instead of going into a lot of technical detail about that part of that Battle, he concentrates on the reaction of the defenders and why it shouldn't have been a surprise that it fell so quickly.
Such an approach might not satisfy military history buffs who'd want all the technical details. Still, it works better for a non-specialist and better illustrates the cascading series of errors that led to it, much like how a plane crash results from a series of smaller failures.
Though I advise reading the full details on the Internet (and books), it would be a good idea to give a brief overview of the battlefield before going further.
…in a nutshell…
In a nutshell, The main French Commander Navarre conceived a plan to draw the Vietnamese Army out into the open where superior artillery and airpower could destroy it.
The plan involved building a base where the enemy had to attack it, and unfortunately, the place chosen was a valley that could only be supplied and reinforced by air.
Navarre put his second in command, General Cogny, in charge, and despite his reservations, he accepted the assignment and appointed a cavalry Commander who reluctantly accepted.
That last detail was important as once the Battle started, the commander stayed in his quarters until the final surrender.
In essence, the camp became a sort of anarchy where some of the junior officers took over and led the fighting—more on that in a bit.
An entire division, about 12,000 men, was dropped into the Valley, and they set up one main stronghold and seven smaller positions on nearby hills (which were split up into smaller trench lines, etc.). Those were miles apart, and due to the jungle and rough terrain, the bases were isolated and unable to support each other.
The airstrip they depended on was protected by two of the middle positions. If those fell or came under heavy attack, it would make landing aircraft impossible, and supplies and reinforcements would have to be dropped in by parachute.
The base was located there under the assumption that the Vietnamese General, Giap, didn't have heavy artillery or anti-aircraft guns, which, if placed in the mountains surrounding the Valley, would effectively cut off supply.
One French officer who inspected the base complex after it was built remarked that if they lost even an inch of ground, they were done for.
In short, the Vietnamese were able to move heavy artillery into the mountains in sheltered emplacements and were able to put the entire base under fire. The French weren't able to clear out the anti-aircraft guns, and soon after the northernmost position fell, which put the two middle hills under attack, they were able to force the air force to drop supplies and reinforcements by parachute. That became difficult when the rainy season came.
There was a lot of fighting still to be done, but once the Viets choked off the supply line, it was only a matter of time. With the heavy artillery in the mountains closing off the airstrip and the base surrounded, an evacuation was impossible.
…human details…
Roy's book does a superb job of relating the human details, such as the racist contempt for the enemy, overconfidence in technology, and the complex politics that produced a risky plan that would make even a layman wonder what the high command was thinking.
One of the elements Roy handles well is describing the personal dynamics in the camp once the commander became a non-factor.
In any large gathering, certain personalities will tend to emerge. Most will rise by physical strength or perceived power. I saw this in more than a few homeless enclaves.
In one, women were safe due to the character of the dominant males. In others, where drug use was widespread, both men and women were bullied or exploited. The main thing is it's never a democratic process.
There were a few camps/enclaves that started off peacefully but devolved once those grew in size and angry or sociopathic personalities started asserting control.
Because of the personal nature of this type of power, it's often safer to join the largest camps and find which section is dominated by the best leaders or ones so spread out that no one can control it (except the dealers, etc.).
At Dien Bien Phu, the same dynamic occurred. In some positions, the leaders checked out, and desertions made the areas useless to the defense.
On others, capable officers did maintain discipline but could only slow down the fall of the base. By the end of the Battle, it was estimated that there were only about 3,000 still fighting, the rest dead or hiding out by the river and other places.
One thing that the media rarely understands (or if they do, they don't say) is that when they give this or that homeless person the status as a spokesperson in a story, they're actually creating a defacto leader due to the aura that the camera has.
How the new leader handles the situation can vary and was a dynamic in play during the Battle.
In any case, back to the book...
One chilling detail was the suggestion by an American Admiral that the U.S. Air Force drop several nuclear bombs on the Vietnamese positions. Though the plan was sensibly killed by President Eisenhower and Great Britain, the plan reached the point where Air Force officers undertook air reconnaissance to scout out the target.
The author also puts in details that wouldn't usually be in a "history book," such as the brothel that the base maintained for the soldiers, soldier gossip, violations of the rules of war, and the history of atrocities by both sides.
It was a grim war, and as the French began losing, Roy points out that the Vietnamese, who were treated as vermin to be exterminated, could hardly be expected to be fair just because the fortunes of war had changed.
What made me reread the book wasn't any particular fascination with the Battle but Roy's ability to narrate a complex event and his passion as a writer.
For example, he spends a couple of pages describing what was going through the minds of volunteers who jumped without paratrooper training into a base that had lost enough ground that all had to be dropped into the center of the defenses, into the barbed wire, and enemy barrages.
The passages are almost poetic and add color that one doesn't normally see in a history book, with the possible exception of World War 1, which produced a large body of poetry, etc. It's more common to see such writing in a literary or poetic work, but it's effective here as detail and a glimpse into the human side of the event.
He does frequently inject his opinion into the narrative, though mainly to create context about the hypocrisy and arrogance of many of the French officers. In the early 60s, it took moral courage to portray the Vietnamese as freedom fighters when the focus was fighting the spread of communism.
He took care to show that there was humanity on the French side, particularly among the soldiers in the trenches.
…fearless…
Roy's a first-rate writer and clearly a fearless and empathetic one. The book is an indictment of French colonialism and corruption, but there's a sense of fairness that permeates the narrative, and both his sympathy and outrage ring true. It's passionate work.
It goes without saying that to understand the Vietnam wars, one needs to study it from a variety of sources. No one book is definitive.
However, from a writer's standpoint, this is a classic that's not only a good starting point for study but a clinic on personal-style narrative and storytelling. It may not be the best pure history book, but it's the most human. In the end, a war is about people, not battles or weapons.
JACK KEROUAC: POEMS ALL SIZES
One of the recent trends in the art world is old-time (and often legendary) music artists selling off their catalogs. It used to be considered essential to retain publishing, but it does make sense; better to get your money upfront and let the new owner deal with marketing it.
When one sees a book like this one, Jack Kerouac's "Pomes All Sizes," published in 1992 by City Lights Books, one assumes the rights holder was paid, but I do think that Kerouac was one of many artists whose works generated income that they never saw in their lifetimes.
The delay in publishing is due to side issues that aren't relevant to the work, and from what I can tell from accounts on the Internet, this isn't a case of dregs being scraped together for commercial gain (like some posthumous releases of other artists), though the poems were written over a period of years.
We'll leave it at that; in other ways, it's a labor of love by those who loved him to honor his memory and surely a welcome addition to the canon by his fans.
One of the pleasures of Kerouac's work is that it's a fusion of prose and poetry that reads well and sounds even better when read aloud. In addition, it has a musical quality. There's texture and rhythm and can range from beautifully expressed ideas to words as pure sound.
By musical, I also mean that there's an underlying energy that the reader can tap into, which feels as fluid as an improvised instrumental phrase.
Another pleasure is that his work rewards even casual reading; lines and phrases can jump off the page because the imagery is so vivid.
One such line was from Enlightenments, which reads, "When you become enlightened you will know that you've been enlightened all along," which is obvious in the way a child would say it.
On the other hand, there's the word music which isn't evident in meaning, but it reads like music and provokes thought;
'Flowers aim crookedly
For the straight death"
I couldn't tell you what he meant, but it's a compelling phrase and quite clever. Perhaps it's a riff of some Buddhist axiom, or maybe an idea that popped into his head, and it was written down to capture a moment, expand on later, or be left as is.
Or perhaps it was left as written to provoke thought. We'll never know, but maybe it'll make more sense later with experience.
One thing about this poetry collection is that while there is an emotional progression over time, it can be opened up anywhere and enjoyed.
Also, since the structure is non-traditional, it can be read as prose if you wish. As Ginsberg quotes him in the intro;
"You call yourselves poets, write little short lines, I'm a poet, but I write lines paragraphs and pages and many pages long."
One thing I've always admired about his writing is that although he's been widely imitated, his work always seems fresh, with his personality clearly coming through even when a phrase falls flat or seems incomprehensible.
That's because he didn't write in a careful or planned manner. He was willing to make mistakes or fail trying to achieve expression. That's a quality that's still rare, with so much writing now being heavily edited, constricted by grammatical conventions or software, or marketing considerations.
Say what you will about his character, he wasn't a saint, and it's fair to judge him on that as a person if that matters in terms of appreciating his work. The appreciation of art is highly personal, so there's no standard or criteria.
The important thing was that Kerouac was a real writer who put all of himself into a work, always trying to shorten the distance between creation and the typewriter, and that's why his stuff still seems fresh and compelling.
Most of us still haven't caught up with him.
Vella News For October!
I had originally planned to publish “I, Ivy” as an eBook, but for a few months would prefer to just publish the completed chapters as Vella episodes. The Vella environment is a good incubator for a book, and pays out bonuses while it’s being developed. The main reason is reissuing my music is taking up a lot of my time, so writing episodes is a better fit for my schedule. So, I’ve reloaded the original three chapters and added three more new ones.
I’m going to spin off the “Professor Ivy Presents How To Survive The End Of Civilization” series into Vella also. That’ll just be a fun project and it’ll be taken at a leisurely pace, though the writing will be first rate and not casual. It’ll be called “The Boogie Underground Think Tank” and a first free episode has been loaded.
The Quitters has six new chapters, going up to number 32, and the stress at this stage of the book is to flesh out the characters and add more back story.
- Al Handa
August 2022
NOTE: New chapters have been added! This series is still going strong so check it out on Kindle Vella!
Note: The book “I, Ivy” will be featured on Kindle Vella starting in October, and complied into an ebook later on in early 2023.
The ebook “On The Road With Al & Ivy: The Anthology Volume 1 2016-2018 is now on Kindle Unlimited!
I’ll run free promotions later this month, but members can read it for free now.
Please check out and listen to my music on Spotify, YouTube, Apple Music and other music sites. Add any cuts you like to your playlists!
