So I saw Jenatsch the film with a descendant of Jörg Jenatsch (Daniel Jenatsch). It would have been a better film if Daniel were the one to have gone back in time to kill his relative rather than some nosy alcoholic journalist but the filmmaker apparently didn't know that Daniel existed or didn't care. Daniel said that, should he have been the one to be sent back in time, he would have killed his ancestor to save the family reputation. But I wonder, would that have been the end of the family line? If we take the thesis from Back to the Future seriously (a better film that deals with the same problematic), then, well, yes, maybe.
Nevertheless, I still think Daniel should have murdered his ancestor to save the film, to add another trope, as you might say. Instead we had a domination of objects, cheesy train scenes (a la Hitchcock) and terrible women characters. The least they could have done is to hire Danie to make the music since, even though we would have only been 2 at the time (he's not known as a boy genius for nothing), he would have certainly come up with something better than the composer who was paid. Oh well, you can't win them all.
I just received Lucy Ives' new book in the mail and it's killing me. I read half of it this morning (I still need to read the rest and then digest it before I say anything that poses as intelligent) and it's pretty heart-breaking stuff. Not in an obvious sort of way, but more in the way the book unfolds. If I was wearing a hat, I'd take it off.
Rejoice! The sun is shining for the first time in almost two weeks! And it's only -11 C! Summer here we come!
Please forgive me for getting all "Wizard of Oz" and "Dark Side of the Moon" on you, but please watch this video at the same time as listening to Pierre Henry "Concerto de Ambiguites."
You won't regret it! (I realize this is hard to find, so if you can't I recommend something in a totally different direction, something quiet, like Morton Feldman...)