klebnikov discovers the equation...

...while sitting on the back benches at the Prolekult conference in Armavir on September 25 1920 Klebnikov, during all the inflammatory business speeches, discovers the equation for the inner zone of heavenly bodies. Who was making these inflammatory speeches that he was so easily able to ignore? Possibly Tretyakov. The key to the equation is the number 3; history and the future can be grasped through multiples of 3.For Klebnikov the Triplex principle is true, prophetic and verifiable; it is not an aspiration. If Tretyakov had been able to break off from the Prolekult business and look over Klebnikov's shoulder he could have used the Triplex approach to calculate his own death in 1937-killed by Stalin. He could also have cheered Klebnikov up by calculating for him that he (Klebnikov) would die 3 years later of natural causes and not share the same completely predictable fate as himself 15 years later. The Triplex principle is still alive and well and can be applied to Geoffrey Farmer's Zappa-centred chronology: for example the role of the number 3 within the algorithm within Farmers's computer program that controls the music within the installation reflecting Zappa's idiosyncratic compositional forms.

wodehouse and tretyakov

Two different characters from different worlds: however PGW was not unaware of Russia; in Clicking of Cuthbert he discusses it at length; a place of novels of the utmost misery and where a fellow could expect a brace of bombs coming through the window. PGW and Tretyakov both shared an interest in Futurism. Tretyakov wanted to depict Communism's glowing future, a possible future Utopia. According to Evelyn Waugh Blandings Castle is the original garden (of Eden) from which we are exiled. His characters are still in Eden. Two ideal futures then, equally Utopian and unattainable but with very different biographies. PGW died in a comfortable hospital bed with his final manuscript by his side; Tretyakov threw himself off the landing at Butyrki prison to escape Stalin's torturers; at around this moment Brecht was considering Tretyakov as a possible member of his Society of Productive Writers (the Diderot club). Hito Steyerl's installation In Free Fall starts with a reference to Tretyakov's Biography of an object and goes on to note that he himself became a falling object-in Butyrki prison

Bruno's look

What is in a look? Bruno Schleinstein (who died recently) should know; star of Kasper Hauser and Stroszek, Werner Herzog built part of his cinema on Bruno S' look. The 'look' appears whenever Kinski is on screen; it was a single look in an early German film of Kinski's that lead to the Herzog/Kinski collaboration. Herzog even sees the 'look' in Grizzly Man-in the bear; he is impressed by the ursine gaze that the creature fixes on people seeing only food and nothing else. Bruno S would have been a natural to play Kafka's K; he wrote songs and performed them on the streets of Berlin; one of his songs told of a poor boy who grows up wishing for a little horse which turns up in later life pulling his mother's hearse. One of Thomas Cromwell's  portraits has a penetrating 'look' which Mark Rylance captures in the TV Wolf Hall; interestingly he got it from Brad Pitt in the Jesse James movie.

charles lamb was right about don quixote

The end of Don Quixote is not quite right; he has three options in light of his vanquishment: to carry on regardless as before, to give up the chivalry idea but switch to a pastoral setting (to become a shepherd) or to renounce the whole business and embrace 'normality'. He chooses the latter; an outcome that Dostoevsky considers the saddest imaginable. Certainly the choice he makes is a let down and supports Lamb's idea that Cervantes planned to end the book after Part One adding Part Two before another writer got there first. At the conclusion of the first part his chivalric narrative is working well and as the idea of multiple narratives is now commonplace each of the above three options has equal weight. Dostoevsky's notion of self deception or compounding lies with further lies is off target; Quixote is not a liar; he describes things as he sees them. We need a frame of reference within which to capture his immortality. Consider Munoz' Double Bind; here a lift goes up and down; it is nearly a real lift but not quite; more an alternative or possible lift; one of many possible lifts none of which being in any sense privileged; looking down are mysterious figures a bit like us but not quite. This is a preferred locus for Quixote; he is one of the figures up in the lift looking down on us-forever.

aelita, queen of Mars

Chris Marker in his Immemory multi media DVD asks if Fritz Lang ever watched Aelita, Protazanov's 1920s silent movie featuring costumes by Aleksandra Ekster; it is one of the main forays into films by Dadaism. In it a revolutionary communist society is imagined on Mars. Marker is making a point about European art although he does link the theme of slaves in both Aelita and Metropolis. However it is the costumes rather than the content for which Aelita is remembered. Here are Sophie Taeuber-Arp and her sister photographed wearing Dadaist dresses in the recent Taeuber-Arp expo at the Picasso museum in Malaga.
A more interesting answer to Marker's question for Lang is offered by Malinowska and Tomaszewski's Mother Earth and Sister Moon installation; how did the communist imagination or the imagination of individuals trapped in communism represent the future to themselves? How did cults within the soviet bloc represent the extra mundane? In their installation they develop Ekster's dress designs even further with an enormous installation of a female Russian astronaut's space suit and more yet more striking versions (if that is possible) of Taeuber-Arp's dadaist dresses.

refuges

Here is Jackowski's (http://www.jackowski.co.uk) refuge: a wooden hut made out of planks, protective, human, natural-a place of refuge. At the corner of the room is a mysterious contraption on wheels also made out of planks. Think of the refuge as Heidegger's Todtnauberg, his wooden cabin that he built for himself: his place of retreat and commanding height of his philosophising, his 'house of being' where he could construct 'building dwelling thinking'. In his cabin, Karl Kraus notes, Heidegger dreamed up his 'blood myths' and 'blood driven forces', as a Third Reich 'verbal accomplice of violence'
Marc Bauer in his Panorama Todtnauberg and Nimbus Des Verfehlung drawings and installations (see www.marcbauer.ch) returns to the theme of Heidegger's cabin repeatedly and includes a tiny 50cm replica of the cabin in front of a kitsch Matterhorn accompanied by readings from Jelinek; one drawing reads 'I am in a good mood-my blood is good'. Maybe this is the resonance of the thing-on-wheels in Jackowski's painting: here is Heidegger's wooden refuge and within it a mobile death camp device made out of the same materials. Consider a further (top right) representation in wood of Anselm Kiefer which he calls sternenlager or 'star camp';
the image is of the numbered boxes in his studio cellar containing work in progress; the image also comments, ironically, on efforts to classify stars (which are forever forming and exploding) into little boxes. Two visions in wood: the preferred location for Todtnauberg (50cm) is within one of Kiefer's little numbered boxes.

doorkeepers, assistants, Jackowski/vigilant dreamer, Kraus

two figures/doorkeepers: 1) Kraus' wagenturlaufmacher; this figure exists in Kraus' imagination and is like Nately's whore in Catch 22; in Vienna wherever Kraus goes the doorekeeper jumps out of nowhere to open a carriage door; Kraus even dreams about him-the carriage door handle is for him 'the pledge of his hope and his everything'; and of course the same figure will be in attendance to open the door of Kraus' hearse. The doorkeeper is not a symbol of alienation ie an object of sympathy. Think of him more as a Jackowski image ie a 'vigilant dreamer'. Or 2) like Kafka's doorkeeper in Before the Law; we don't worry about his job prospects; he is another vigilant dreamer.