Letters To An
Overseas Friend.

File this under: how-did-I-not-know-this? Of course, the answer comes in the form of another question: how-would-I-have-known?

So Brian Eno did a few variations on The Canon* and they appear on an album called Discreet Music. It’s at least got to be a peculiarity and worth a listen, right? If for no reason other than being so contradistinct. There’s a feeling that one must listen to it at least once because one has to of heard it. Then one files it away and can now claim familiarity. Well, it’s actually enjoyable too, because you can do anything with The Canon and make it work. It’s there to be hacked.

Here’s some non-musical theory by a non-musician on a piece of music. The Canon is like eight ingredients (it’s actually five but three of those ingredients appear in double portions) coming together to make three soups and a loaf of bread. There are so many ways to manipulate those eight ingredients and arrange those soups around the bread. The bread never changes. It’s a fairly simple meal and maybe even a dull one.

Another theory: the Eno versions kind of still fit this model and perhaps that’s why I enjoy listening to them. Over and over again.** Imagine cauldrons of boiling soups. Out of these vague, undulating roils (the undulations seem to have taken over the role of the bread) you can pick out the ingredients if you wish to. Each hit is slightly novel compared to the last or maybe it’s identical. Not so sure. Then it bubbles and changes again. I can listen to this all day. But…

Maybe the inability to appreciate four minutes of more contemporary sounds with a human voice singing in English is one of the signs of cultural ageing. The chasm widens and deepens.

*Needless to say which The Canon since there is only one The Canon.
**I’m sure you can picture and find amusement in an image of obsessive repetition.

Do you associate the word “doublespeak” with 1984? The word is never used in the book. “Doublethink” is, but not “doublespeak.” I did not know that. “Newspeak” is used.

You ever read Flatland: A Romance in Two Dimensions by Edwin Abbott Abbott? One of the features of the world of Flatland is men use only non-emotive language and women are barred from being taught any technical terms. The men do learn the language reserved for women only so they can speak with them. As a result, the men, according to the protagonist, lead a kind of ‘bi-lingual’ or ‘bi-mental’ existence. The imaginations of the women are actively constrained by vocabulary. This is all by decree of a kind of priesthood. Flatland was written in 1884.

It also contains one of the easiest to digest explanations of multiple dimensions I’ve ever read or heard.

If you haven’t read it, I think you’ll find it worth your time. If you have read it… Why was I not told?! Just kidding. I know it would be because I don’t read. But I do now. Books. Who knew.

Realized I told you about the coat lining but didn’t give you any visuals. So here’s a photograph.