The Hudson has been frozen for weeks, heaving chunks of ice pushing up against Chelsea piers. The sky is an unremitting white, a pale white. That blank white winter sky. We've had "white sky days" for a month now. Today - there seems to be something else happening - a quickening, a letting-go - the Hudson gleamed blue at the bottom of the cliff at the end of my street - with almost geometrical shapes of ice - now floating separately. Breaking up. The air is cold. But not bitter. If that makes sense. And the sky is blue.
I am going into rehearsal next week for a play. I have a lot of work to do.
I also have just been given a script for yet another project - haven't read it yet - but so far it looks like an amazing opportunity. If the script SUCKS, I'll have to re-think my position on that. So I'll read it tonight. Can't wait to get my itchy little fingers all over it!
In addition to that - I have my writing schedule I have to keep up - as well as tearing my way through a biography of Alexander Hamilton. Which I absolutely love. Dammit, I love all those guys, all those Revolution guys. I've loved them since I was a little kid, and I saw the musical "1776". Of course, I knew all the names - from school and stuff - and from the bicentennial celebrations - but when I saw that musical, they all became real to me. I have also been blessed with a father who is a nut on the American Revolution. We, as children, were told the story of the Boston Tea Party, as though it were a fairy tale, a bedtime story - and it became alive for us. My mom loves Thomas Jefferson - that is her fascination - and my dad is a big John Adams fan.
A nice balance.
Alexander Hamilton rocks. I am filled with awe towards this man - this illegitimate poor kid from the West Indies, a prodigy, a brilliant manipulator - an ambitious articulate youth - incredible. I have a little bit of a crush on him.
Sometimes that happens. I get crushes on historical figures.
And today is Valentine's Day. I saw a couple of men rushing by me on the sidewalk, clutching bouquets, on their way somewhere else - their faces tight and flat with obligation and ... something else. Terror.
I'm happy to be heading home with my script to read - a movie rented (The Winslow Boy, an old favorite) - and my book on Mr. Hamilton. It should be a good night.
Posted by sheilaHave you been up to the site of the duel yet?
Posted by: Bill McCabe at February 14, 2004 7:19 PMHappy V-day Red!
Alexander Hamilton is your classic "bad boy" - ambitious, arrogant, self-absorbed, and self-promoting. He was also brilliant, good-looking, and more than a little dangerous. Just your type?
George Washington couldn't stand him. Gen. Washington had selected Hamilton to be his aide, on the basis of his previous distinguished service, but the close association convinced Washington that he could do without Hamilton's company.
His brilliance in governance is practically unequalled, however, even compared to most of the other founding fathers - probably the most brilliant group of political thinkers ever.
But he continued to piss people off his whole life - John Adams, who is another of my favorites, thought he was the devil incarnate, and also a traitor.
The big question is whether he was cheating by engaging the hair-trigger, or being honorable by deliberately firing over Aaron Burr's shoulder. Either way it was a signficant miscalculation.
A true bad boy!
PS: My Valentine is the Hawaii Clipper - may she rest in peace...
One of the more fun classes I taught was back in grad school, where a leading Jeffersonian taught and a leading Hamiltonian and I (who happened to be the right warm body)assisted in a class on Jefferson and Hamilton. The kids read nothing but primary documents, wrote a paper every week, worked their butts off, and loved it.
Why do I mention this? It pointed me towards the very good Library of America editions of the founders' letters. Joanne Freeman's _Hamilton_ is quite good, although it misses a couple of my favorites such as Ham's letter to his fiance after his regiment stood on top of the ramparts at Yorktown and ran through the complete manual of arms while the British just watched - an act of either extreme bravado or extreme stupidity depending on how you think of it. Ham promises never to risk his life in that way again - ironic as he would go on to be involved with eleven or so duels before having his final very bad day.
Anyhow, grab the LOA Hamilton - worth while. Also grab Joanne Freeman's _Affairs of Honor_ which digs down into many of the motivations and actions of the political elites of the Early Republic. Good stuff.
Oddly enough, of the founders I have a soft spot for Albert Gallatin: bald, boring, toothless and cheeseparing, he was also a man of remarkable but quiet competance.
Posted by: Ted K at February 14, 2004 9:56 PMYou know what?
I can never decide if blogging is a distraction from getting actual writing work done, or a good way to build muscles and clear the mind.
I do notice that now that Sheila has a professional writing assignment, she's blogging more frequently. One has to wonder about that. Hmmmm.... ;-)
Posted by: Dean Esmay at February 16, 2004 11:15 AMCW -
Hamilton definitely has the bad-boy appeal. The bad-boy who has a mind like a steel trap.
I always remember Abigail Adams' cautionary words to her husband: "That man could be a Bonaparte."
Indeed.
But he is fascinating, nonetheless.
Posted by: red at February 16, 2004 12:37 PMDean -
I ask myself the same question, on occasion.
I would say that the blogging has made me used to writing every day- and that has served me well, in my latest project. It doesn't take a huge incense-burning summoning-the-Muses concentration for me to get down to work.
It's good I don't have INternet access at home, though. Because then I might choose blogging over the other stuff - and that I cannot have!
Posted by: red at February 16, 2004 12:39 PMWell I'll tell you this--not flattering, just telling you the truth--your writing has improved very noticeably over the last year. Not your fiction, which I have little exposure to and can thus not comment on, but your actual prose. You can go back and look at your earlier postings from BlogSpot days, and compare to what you post today, and the difference is marked. You were fun then, but you're sharper and more muscular now.
You've clearly built your chops, as guitarists would say.
I've heard some say that blogging doesn't help you become a professional writer. I say they're partially right but partially wrong, and they're wrong in this sense: to get to be a good writer, you write. If blogging makes you write more, then it helps.
Am I trying to encourage you? Yes. Although, for the record, if you don't finish "Enchantment In Things" I'm driving to New York, finding your red-headed ass, and kicking it.
I'm just saying. ;-)
Posted by: Dean Esmay at February 17, 2004 10:01 AM