Month: June 2026

‘We must work and affirm,

but we have no guess

of the value

of what we say or do.’

[—Emerson, ‘Illusions’]

*

Life as it’s lived,

A dense tunnel, high wind—

A nod and a smile, 

A small question

Lived. 

I never know – we never know – what’s going to come and find us.

Trifles along the way. You have to joke, and fart, and trip. Forget what to say, mess up. 

(And then move on, indifferent, content, if possible.) 

Feeling well recently has put me on edge a little. I noticed it in the car, coming home. You start to – you catch yourself smiling, and there’s a catch, you feel: there must be a catch; impending grief.

(O poor wretch, come on.)

Anyway.

(A quote from Giorgio Gaber. — If you read French or Italian I highly recommend the bilingual book Gaber–Brel Dialogo by Micaela Bonavia. It is exceptional, and what Brel and Gaber say, and repeat, how they think and thought out their lives, how they lived and reflected on their lives: it does a lot of good to read and reflect with them, such voices are rare, because bold and honest and serious and nonconformist, recent artists whose aim was higher than conventional success, wealth and popularity, intellectual (in the good sense; the ideas lived by, applied—and refined and reapplied), artists concerned with what’s essential, what matters, not in terms of brief political and social fashions, or enthusiasms, but in terms of what lasts.)

*

E pensare 

che basterebbe pochissimo. 

Basterebbe spostare a stacco

la nostra angolazione visiva. 

Guardare le cose

come fosse la prima volta. 

Lasciare fuori campo

tutto il conformismo di cui

è permeata 

la nostra esistenza. 

Dubitare delle risposte 

già pronte.

Dubitare dei nostri 

pensieri fermi,

sicuri, 

inamovibili.

Dubitare delle nostre convinzioni 

presuntuose e saccenti.

Basterebbe smettere

di sentirsi sempre

delle brave persone. 

Smettere di sentirsi vittime

delle madri, 

dei padri,

dei figli. 

Smascherare,

smascherare tutto:

smascherare l’amore,

il riso,

il pianto,

il cuore,

il cervello. 

Smascherare la nostra

falsa coscienza individuale. 

Subito. 

Qui e ora.

*

[And to think

that it would take very little.

It would be enough

to change our point of view.

To look at things

as if it were the first time.

To leave out 

all the conformism

that impregnates

our existence.

To doubt 

ready responses.

To doubt 

our firm, 

secure, 

immovable

thoughts.

To doubt

our pretentious

and pedantic

conventions.

It would be enough

to stop thinking of ourselves always

as ‘good people’.

To stop thinking of ourselves

as victims

of mothers,

fathers,

children.

To unmask,

to unmask everything:

to unmask

love,

laughter, 

tears,

the heart,

the mind.

To unmask 

our false individual conscience.

Soon.

Here and now.]

A perfect government 

and a perfect society 

assume a perfect people. 

That is, 

a perfect government

and a perfect society 

would require 

a perfect people: 

a people without vices; 

a people of perfect virtue; 

that is, angels; 

not men and women 

who actually exist 

(or have existed, 

or will exist).

If the government was perfect, 

would we be happy? 

If every demand 

of every activist 

and concerned citizen 

was granted, 

fulfilled 

(and perfectly so), 

would we be happy?

Change the word ‘happy’

if you will: 

content, 

satisfied 

(with ourselves, 

with others,

how things are, 

our life, 

the world, 

etc.)

I’m reminded of a quote 

from Giorgo Gaber. 

(I’ve reminded myself here.) 

« Io mi appassiono alla realtà,

non ai rapporti di forza.

La politica è un mestiere preciso

che passa attraverso 

l’illusorio uso di parole 

e concetti volgarizzati 

perché deve trovare

più consensi possibili. 

Questo non è il mio gioco:

il mio gioco è la parola precisa, 

non il concetto ambiguo. »

[I’m passionate about reality,

not about systems of force.

Politics is a particular profession

which happens through

the illusive use of words

and simplified concepts

because it has to find

the most consenus possible.

That’s not my thing;

my thing is the exact word, 

not the ambiguous concept.]

I think also of a quote 

from Montagine, 

something I wrote down 

in my journal a while back:

« Nous empêtrons

nos pensées

avec les questions générales

es les causes universelles

et les façons

dont est conduit l’univers,

qui se conduit

très bien sans nous,

et nous laissons de côté

notre cas

et Michel [ou Gray, ou toi, ou qui que ce soit]

qui nous concerne 

encore de plus près

que l’homme en général. »

[We mix up

our thoughts

with general questions

and universal causes

and the ways

in which the world behaves, 

which carries on

very well without us,

and we leave to the side

our case

and Michel [or Gray, or you, or whoever it is],

which concern us

still much more

than mankind in general.]

I think the problem 

for most of us 

(the immense majority of us)

is that we are flooded 

(sure, we mostly allow it, 

and we usually want it, 

because desperate, 

because absolutely

hooked, 

addicted, 

and suffering) – 

is that we are flooded 

with ‘mankind in general’ 

(or ‘culture’, 

or ‘humanity’,

or ‘the world’, 

as you like):

the news, 

social media, 

streaming shows 

and movies, etc. 

Give yourself long enough 

to such abstract concepts 

(‘mankind in general’, 

‘millenials’,

‘Zoomers’, 

‘Americans’,

‘white people’, 

‘conservatives’,

‘liberals’,

whatever) 

and you start to believe 

that these ideas

exist. 

You can’t touch 

any of these;

they are what any individual 

thinks to call them, 

and that’s subject to change 

according to the hour, 

the mood, 

etc.

We don’t think

(or know)

the same things

in the morning

and in the evening,

or have the same opinions

(not really).

We are

all of us

process

(individually,

alone). 

(And because

of our choices,

every one.)

Not as ‘people’

(insert whatever

color

or race),

not as whatever

opinions

we pick up

and point at

(we’re not

what we like,

or do

or say).

The problem

is spiritual

(define ‘spritual’

as you like).

It is one of

feeling. 

If when you see your father

or aunt

or brother

or grandmother

and more than the

temporary guest

of this world

(like you,

like me

fragile,

uncertain,

brief),

you see 

an idea, 

or an opinion

(or a set

of opinions,

vague,

unwieldy),

you’re going to 

suffer

stupidly. 

Because no one

(not you,

not me)

is

their 

opinions

(how many times

have yours changed?

do you feel them

the same

as you did

last week?)

Anyway.