Analysis of ‘Commando’

I: Introduction

Commando is a 1985 action film directed by Mark L. Lester and written by Steven E. de Souza, after a story by Joseph Loeb III, Matthew Weisman, and de Souza. It stars Arnold Schwarzenegger and Rae Dawn Chong, with Alyssa Milano, Vernon Wells, Bill Duke, Dan Hedaya, James Olson, and David Patrick Kelly.

The music score, noted for its use of steel drums, was by James Horner, and the film ends with a song by The Power Station called “We Fight for Love,” when Michael Des Barres replaced Robert Palmer as lead singer.

Here‘s a link to quotes from the film.

Giving the film a rating of 67% based on reviews from 36 critics, Rotten Tomatoes aptly describes Commando in its consensus as having a “threadbare plot, outsized action, and endless one-liners.” In other words, it’s a crowd-pleaser with all the gratuitous violence, swearing, and cheesy puns that a movie-going philistine could ever want.

So, Dear Reader, you’re probably wondering why I’m wasting my energy with this Hollywood schlock. Well, apart from the fact that the philistine in me finds this mindless entertainment amusing (the nostalgic memories of watching it as a teen in the 1980s being a big part of that amusement), the flash and excitement that Commando delivers is a distraction from the political undertones that I feel should be discussed.

II: A Brief Digression, If You’ll Indulge Me, Please

As should be obvious to anyone watching the film with his or her brain turned on, Commando contributes to the mythology of the US as the great saviour of other countries from tyranny and despotism. I’m not saying this as if it were a great revelation to you, Dear Reader: I bring this up because I want to discuss the social effects of movies like this, and how they brainwash Westerners, Americans especially, into cheering for US/NATO imperialism.

I was trying to do such commentary on another film aptly starring right-leaning Schwarzenegger, Conan the Barbarian. The reader response to that analysis was mixed: while one positive responder understood my intentions, to alert people to the hypnotizing danger of passively accepting Hollywood action films as US imperialist and right-wing libertarian propaganda (an example of the kind of thing Michael Parenti analyzed in his book, Inventing Reality), two others blasted my Conan analysis for seemingly opposing reasons.

The first negative responder was a woman who went out of her way to be as insulting as possible, saying my analysis was ‘so superficial as to be silly,’ and that during the Reagan era, pretty much all movies reflected a right-wing ideology, so apparently there’s no insight to be gained from describing Conan the way I did. First of all, many 1980s movies did obviously reflect a right-wing stance, but many others didn’t–take They Live, for instance, as an anti-Reagan film. Secondly, only someone with a right-wing bias (as I suspect she has) would see no value in critiquing Conan‘s right-wing agenda, since a left-wing sympathy would see that value. I’d say it was her reading of what I wrote that was “superficial” and “silly”: I suspect she read only the first few paragraphs, snorted and called it ‘stupid!’, then jumped to conclusions and made her snarky comments without bothering to read any further.

The second commenter took the opposite view, seeing my discussion of a right-wing libertarian, anti-communist allegory in Conan as “the most half-baked review” of a movie that he’d ever read. Then he ‘corrected’ me by pointing out something I myself stated, however briefly, in my analysis: that the film is about determination in rising up against one’s obstacles (speaking of pointing out the obvious, hence my brevity in stating it). Never mind that I flooded the analysis with links to prove my point about the allegory (i.e., the director’s right-wing leanings as well as those of Schwarzenegger’s, a link stating that Nazi salutes were done on the set, etc.). And what I wrote wasn’t a review (my saying whether or not I liked the film), but an analysis, stated plainly in the title (a discussion of themes, symbolism, allegory, etc.). So, was I stating the absurdly obvious, or was I going off on some “half-baked” tangent? I’m not sure.

My point in bringing up the Conan analysis and its negative responses is to say that this one of Commando is one of many articles in which I’m not just saying what I like or dislike about a film. The film analyses are about relating the content of the films with either political issues (typically from a Marxist-Leninist viewpoint) or with psychoanalytic ones (usually Freudian and post-Freudian, but recently, more and more Jungian).

That kind of analysis is what I do here on this blog; so if that’s not your thing, please read no further (I gave just such a warning at the beginning of my Conan analysis, which as I explained above, went unheeded at least twice). If, however, you do like how I relate film, literature, and music to leftist politics and psychoanalysis, then by all means, read on, Dear Reader.

III: Some Rather Needless Killing

The film begins with three men assassinated, all former members of the unit of US Army Special Forces Colonel John Matrix (Schwarzenegger). The first victim is shot by two men posing as garbagemen; the second of these two killers, Cooke (Duke), then kills a car salesman by running him over right in the dealership with the car he’s supposedly interested in buying; and the third victim, Bennett (Wells), is supposedly blown up in a boat, though we later learn that his death has been faked.

Matrix, it seems, is next to be assassinated.

As it turns out, though, he isn’t to be killed, but rather to be forced to assassinate the president of a fictional Latin American country, Val Verde, this man being someone Matrix originally helped put in power there, having ousted Arius (Hedaya), a brutal dictator who wants to be reinstated. If Matrix doesn’t cooperate, Arius will have his men kill Matrix’s pre-teen daughter, Jenny (Milano), whom they’ve kidnapped.

Here’s my point: why were those two men killed at the beginning of the film, with Bennett’s death faked? Apparently, Arius’ men (including Bennett) mean to agitate General Franklin Kirby (Olson) and get him to go to Matrix’s home to warn him personally that he’s probably next to die, and in the process Kirby will unwittingly help the bad guys know where Matrix lives.

This is an absurd way to get to Matrix, whose address (somewhere in upstate California, in the mountains) is presumably private for his and Jenny’s protection. Would Kirby be stupid enough to go there personally, risking leading the assassins right to Matrix? Couldn’t the killers just find another way to find him (e.g., paying someone in the army a handsome sum to disclose the address, etc.)? Wouldn’t it be better to catch Matrix off guard in a surprise attack?

It’s obvious that the killings at the beginning were just an excuse to have excitement for its own sake, to lull the audience in, to make them passive recipients of more pro-US propaganda.

IV: Matrix and Jenny

Of course, Schwarzenegger as tough guy Matrix is supposed to personify how ‘indestructible’ the American empire is (an empire that, incidentally, failed to defeat North Korea, lost against Vietnam, and similarly left Afghanistan with its tail between its legs). The liberals, however, can’t have their big hero be just a cold-hearted killer; we have to see his sensitive side, so during the opening credits and before Jenny’s kidnapping, we see some father/daughter quality time between Matrix and her.

While they’re eating sandwiches at home, he makes a cliché joke about gender-bending Boy George. Then he refers to his life as a boy in East Germany, and how the communists said that rock ‘n’ roll is “subversive.” While communists back in the 1950s and 1960s were probably much more socially conservative (as were, obviously, at least half of Americans back then) than in recent years (a lessening of conservatism that can’t be reasonably be said of those half of all Americans!), we’re meant to deem this old judgement of the communists as an example of how ‘repressive‘ they were and are. Matrix’s later quip that “Maybe they were right” is meant to be flippant, yet it tells us which people still have the repressive attitude…still by the 1980s and since then. Putin may not be sympathetic to LGBT people, but he hasn’t been a communist in decades.

Now, we’ve acknowledged that Matrix is of German background (presumably to rationalize Austrian Schwarzenegger’s undeniable accent), yet his name sounds utterly English, since we don’t want our American hero to seem inordinately Teutonic (shouldn’t his name be more like ‘Johann Meetrichs’?).

Given the film’s obvious agenda to glorify Anglo/American/NATO imperialism as comprising the ‘good guys,’ as against anyone who would dare defy said imperialism (Arius et al), the idea of having a German-American hero fighting those defiant of that imperialism (who, in real life, tend to be left-wing) strongly suggests the enlisting of fascists, at least symbolically. Matrix would have defected from East Germany early on, and the real purpose of the Berlin Wall, or Anti-fascist Protection Wall, as the East Germans called it, was just that: to keep the West German fascists out (i.e., those ex-Nazis who, rather than be punished for their war crimes, were given cushy jobs to fight the ‘commies’), as well as to keep East Germany from losing needed skilled workers.

Matrix’s leaving of the socialist state would have stemmed from an ideological hatred of socialism. Germans who hate socialism have historically leaned towards fascism as a protection against Marxism. The capitalist class has always used fascism to protect themselves against left-wing revolution, as have the petite bourgeoisie. The film’s negative portrayal of Latin Americans reinforces the idea that there’s a Nazi racist undertone here, as there was in Conan, as I argued in my analysis of it (see link above).

So what we see in German-American Matrix is a personification of the continuum between liberalism and fascism. He’s the sensitive father, as I discussed above in his relationship with Jenny at the beginning of the film, but she can be seen as personifying his threatened class interests when she’s kidnapped, making him ruthless in his lawless, bloody, and murderous quest to get her back. The fact that she’s a sweet, helpless, and sympathetic girl shouldn’t deflect us from seeing that cynical reality. Her sweetness, taken from an allegorical perspective, is being used as propaganda to justify all of his killing. More on that later.

My point is that liberals, seeming progressive in their goals on the surface, will betray that progressive agenda in a heartbeat if their class interests are at stake, and that’s what’s represented in Matrix’s quick switch from sensitive father to unflinching killer, thief, destroyer of property, kidnapper (however briefly, of Cindy [Chong]), etc.

Stalin once said that “Social-Democracy is objectively the moderate wing of fascism.” (Note that social democracy is the furthest left of liberalism.) His words may, on the surface, seem extreme, but put in their proper historical perspective, they are clearly understood. He said them in 1924, just five years after the social-democratic Weimar Republic had used the right-wing Freikorps to crush the Spartacist Uprising‘s attempt at a communist revolution in Germany, murdering Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. The Weimar Republic’s soft and ineffective rule would lead to great dissatisfaction on both the far left and far right, one thing would lead to another, and by the early 1930s, you-know-who would rise to power in Germany.

If the ‘far left’ of liberalism can lead to fascism, so can more ‘moderately left’ versions of it. We easily backslid from the welfare capitalism of the era of post-WWII economic prosperity to the ‘free market’ capitalism of the Reagan/Thatcher years, and thence to the far-right nightmare of recent decades, all thanks to the dissolution of the Soviet Union, which meant that a large welfare state was no longer needed to ward off the danger of proletarian revolution in the West. We’d reached ‘the end of history,’ and the ruling class no longer felt threatened by the working class.

That liberals today are supporting literal fascists in Ukraine and Israel should help you see the truth in Stalin’s words, Dear Reader.

V: Making Matrix Aid Arius’ Revolution

We never learn of Arius’ political ideology; we only know that he’s a brutal dictator, who’s “tortured and killed” those who have resisted him. But is he on the left, or the right?

He’s a Latin American, a former ruler of Val Verde, as I mentioned above. We know that Matrix helped overthrow Arius and put a new president, Velasquez, in power. Here’s the funny thing, though: the US army, CIA, etc. like putting brutal right-wing dictators in power in Latin America.

Indeed, the American government has a history of intervening in other countries’ political affairs, typically replacing democratically-elected heads of state with ones that further the capitalist/imperialist interests of the US/NATO countries. Examples include Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, Chile in 1973…and more recently, Ukraine in 2014, and Bolivia in 2019, as well as attempted coups in places like Venezuela. One should look into US support for Operation Condor, too.

Of course, the Western corporate media likes to portray these interventions as ‘triumphs of freedom and democracy,’ when actually they were anything but. So we shouldn’t be surprised to see the ousting of Arius and replacement of him by US-backed Velasquez in Commando as portrayed as a good thing. It’s all just part of the propaganda used to make the US look like the good guys, while men like Arius are vilified.

So the very idea of the American military, as represented by Matrix, as not wanting to help spearhead a coup and install a dictator is ludicrous. Pinochet was the Arius of Chile in the 1970s, responsible for the deaths and disappearances of thousands of dissident Chileans, including dropping some of them from helicopters. The CIA helped put Pinochet in power, a “scumbag” who “tortured and killed” many, yet I doubt that any in the US military would have applied Matrix’s words to Pinochet the way Matrix applied them to Arius.

So Matrix not wanting to overthrow a Latin American government and replacing it with that of a brutal right-wing dictator is sheer denial on the part of the propagandists making this film. Moviegoers who see this film, knowing little if anything about the true political state of affairs in the world, will just eat up this propaganda uncritically, absorbing it and imagining that what the film portrays more or less corresponds with what the US government’s role in world affairs really is: the ‘policemen’ of the world, fighting tyranny and oppression everywhere, rather than the cause of so much of it.

This is a dangerous message to send to Western audiences, reinforcing a myth of our supposed superiority, which in turn is used to justify more and more imperial conquests, killing more and more innocent people. This urge to impose ‘freedom and democracy’ has led to possibly a million Iraqi deaths, and the destruction of Libya, changing it from a prosperous nation that took care of its people to a failed state with a slave trade. The current wish to bring ‘freedom and democracy’ to Russia and China could lead to a very nuclear WWIII, killing everyone on the globe.

Since Commando was made in the mid-1980s, I wonder why the film didn’t portray Arius as a left-wing dictator, but just as a generic one. Surely portraying him as a ‘commie’ would have made for effective Cold War propaganda, wouldn’t it have? Perhaps they didn’t specify his ideology because they knew enough left-wing critics still existed in the 1980s to trash the film for being even more obvious right-wing propaganda than it was and is. Still, for the reasons I’ve given above, it makes more sense for Arius to have a left-wing, rather than right-wing, ideology, so we’ll just go with that, remembering that his vilification, as well as the dehumanizing of his troops, is all part of Commando‘s obvious right-wing agenda.

VI: The Female Factor

Getting Cindy, an off-duty flight attendant, to help Matrix without there being any sexual chemistry between these attractive male and female leads seems as if this film is an example of the emerging kind that is trying to show more respect to female characters (her firing a rocket launcher correctly…on the second try; her flying a seaplane, etc.), especially since she’s a POC. Still, there’s plenty of sexism against women to keep Commando far behind more recent action films, which are sure to include women kicking lots of ass.

Poor Cindy is frequently treated like a whore, even explicitly called one by predatory Sully (Kelly, whom you’ll recall clinking those bottles together at the climax of The Warriors), leaving her in a huff for not letting him have his way with her. Later, without asking for her consent, in Sully’s motel room and waiting for Cooke, Matrix opens her top to make her look easy, that is, having indeed let Sully have his way with her. Even a cop, who’s later helped apprehend Matrix for trying to rob an army surplus store, sees her in a car next the cops’ truck and assumes she’s a “hooker.”

Earlier, Sully–asshole that he is–jokes in the airport about having “a little more time with” kidnapped Jenny. At the end of the film, Matrix carries her on his shoulder as if this damsel-in-distress were a prize he’s won after killing everyone else.

But the crowning piece of sexism in the film is the gratuitous display of a woman’s large, shaking breasts in a motel room next to Sully’s during Matrix’s fight with Cooke. It’s a completely unnecessary moment of titillation mixed with humour, meant as one of many examples of Commando‘s use of visuals to dazzle and distract the viewer as he or she absorbs the pro-US propaganda without thinking.

(By the way, Ava Cadell, who played the woman in the motel scene, has since become a therapist with a doctorate from Newport University, California. She has written a number of books on sexuality, has done lectures, and given counseling to couples on personal issues. Here’s her website. As we can see, she’s risen far above doing mere cheesecake roles in schlocky Hollywood movies.)

VII: Rescuing Jenny

Rescuing a damsel in distress is more acceptable in the modern world, of course, if she’s a child. Our sympathy for her is what makes the wiping out of everyone else on the island where she’s being held hostage seem perfectly justified.

Commando, however, is just a movie. It isn’t reality. As a piece of American propaganda, it causes us to transfer our desensitizing of the brutal killing of all the dehumanized Latin American soldiers to the killing of any other people in the world, be they soldiers or civilians, who in any way stand between the US/NATO empire and the achievement of its goals.

Part of ensuring the audience’s desensitizing to the deaths of the soldiers is a showering of contempt on them and their worth. Bennett tells Arius that his “little pissant soldiers…are nothing.” This sort of devaluing of them makes it all the easier for the audience to watch them all die.

On the other side of the coin, Matrix’s killing of them all comes with nary a scratch on his body, for he personifies the invincibility of the American empire. Indeed, one of the particularly ludicrous aspects of Commando is how Matrix can single-handedly wipe out so many dozens of soldiers, and not even one of them can get a lucky shot and give him a significant wound, let alone kill him.

The tool shed scene, apart from showcasing gratuitous violence for the sheer fun of it, demonstrates that shaving off the top of a man’s head with a small buzzsaw blade thrown like a Frisbee (in the director’s cut, a second buzzsaw blade hits a guy in the neck), the stabbing of an axe into a soldier’s balls, and the hacking off of a man’s arm with a machete are not horrifying sights to see, but exciting ones.

The message given throughout the film is that, since Matrix can break one law after another with impunity to save Jenny, and since he personifies American military might, then the US government, military, and intelligence are free to disregard international law, UN Security Council Resolutions, etc., to achieve their objectives and maintain their global hegemony.

Let’s see how these issues translate into the politics of the real world. Israel, properly seen as an extension of Western imperialism into the Middle East, has been given carte blanche by the US government to kill and maim as many Gazans as they like. The rationalization?…to rescue a number of Israeli hostages taken by Hamas on October 7th of 2023, rather like the kidnapping of Jenny. Where all those killed in Commando are soldiers, most, if not almost all, of the Gazans being killed are innocent civilians, including women and children.

Israel has made incursions into the West Bank, and the detonating of pagers in Lebanon–as well as airstrikes on several buildings in Beirut–has killed and injured many there, too, though there’s a similar rationale…the need to wipe out Hezbollah. The UN has, by the way, acknowledged that the armed resistance of fighters like Hamas is legitimate against an occupying force like Israel, but to the Zionist apologist, Hamas and Hezbollah are ‘terrorists’ whom he or she would surely sneer at as “little pissant soldiers” who “are nothing.”

Elsewhere, the Nord Stream pipelines were blown up by the US, with the help of Norway–an act of ecoterrorism practically confessed to by the American government. Seymour Hersh, the acclaimed investigative journalist who exposed the My Lai Massacre back in 1968, found conclusive, detailed evidence of how this crime was committed, yet the mainstream, corporate, imperialist media absurdly blamed the attack on Russia. How predictable. The motive behind this terrorist act, apart from the usual Russophobia/anti-Putin agenda (their ‘unprovoked’ invasion of Ukraine), was to stop Germany from buying cheap Russian oil and forcing the country to buy American oil.

Needless to say, the US government hasn’t been punished, nor will be, for this crime any more than Israel will be for her crimes against humanity. We, the general public, shrug these crimes off, or at least are expected to, just as we do the excesses of Matrix’s violence, all to rescue one little girl, who personifies his threatened class interests as I said above, and who is carried on his shoulder at the film’s end as a kind of trophy.

When Kirby, who has arrived with his army at that time, asks Matrix what he’s left for them, he callously says, “Just bodies.” Matrix then refuses to resume working for Kirby as a soldier, wanting instead to be the nice, sensitive father to Jenny; but as with any liberal, being the nice guy comes only when one’s class interests (symbolic ones in Matrix’s case) aren’t being threatened.

VIII: Confession, Projection, and Denial

In a conversation with Cindy in Sully’s car on the way to the motel to confront Cooke, Matrix explains why he has to rescue Jenny. In the process, he goes into a kind of confession of guilt, not only about how he, constantly on assignment as a Special Forces man somewhere on the other side of the world (Laos, Angola, Lebanon, Pakistan, etc.), has never had time to be with Jenny, but also about how he did “things you don’t want to know about,” and which he wishes he didn’t know he’d done.

Bennett, we learn, was kicked out of Matrix’s unit for being excessively violent (and this is why he, wanting to get revenge on Matrix for his expulsion, is willing to help Arius “for nothing,” to get a chance to get at Matrix). Yet given what we know Matrix has implied in his confession to Cindy, and what we know of his brutal killing of so many in this film…including his killing of Bennett, to get him to “let off some steam,” it’s hard to imagine Bennett being all that much more violent.

It should be obvious that, Matrix representing American militarism and seeing Bennett and Arius as far worse than he, the film’s pro-US propaganda tries to excuse American violence by projecting it out to other countries. Bennett, significantly, is Australian–just listen to his accent. Arius is Latin American. These latter two are so awful, apparently, that Matrix, and therefore the US, can’t be all that bad.

So in giving his brief confession, implying the awful things he’s done, while projecting far worse guilt onto people from other countries, Matrix–in spite of his constant violence and lawlessness, like that of the US, as I’ve explained above–can still be regarded as the liberal ‘good guy,’ as politicians like the Clintons, Obama, Biden, and Harris can be seen. One can safely deny being as bad as the antagonists are, and the protagonists’ guilt will be ignored and forgotten about by moviegoing lovers of action films.

Another thing that will be ignored and forgotten in Commando is the political ideology that Arius must have, as is typical of any Latin American head of state that opposes American imperial hegemony and ends up being ousted in a coup d’état. Such an ideology is glossed over and disregarded: all we know is that Arius believes the people of Val Verde need “an understanding of discipline,” which sounds unsettling coming from a generic ‘dictator,’ whom many in the audience would imagine to be a left-wing one, as I’m assuming Arius is.

Now, Marxism-Leninism does have an understanding of party discipline, but it isn’t anything brutal, as Arius is implying in Commando‘s propagandistic script. It’s about organizing the working class to rise up in revolution and defeat the ruling class, thus liberating the people from oppression, not subjecting them to oppression, the latter of which is what US puppets like Pinochet did to their people. As for how “extremist” a left-wing political ideology is, just read the <<<link. You won’t know the truth of the matter by watching Arius’ caricature of it.

IX: Conclusion

I hope, Dear Reader, that if you’ve read this far, that you understand my intentions in writing this analysis of Commando. I know it’s no Earth-shattering revelation that the film has a right-wing agenda: my purpose is to explore the political ramifications and social effects of said agenda, to warn of its dangers on a public not aware of how consent is manufactured for war and its atrocities.

The ‘tangents’ I went off on in elucidating these political and social implications, far from being “half-baked,” are the whole point of the article. People need to be conscious of the political wool being pulled over their eyes, not to be told, “Oh, come on, it’s just a movie. Lighten up!”

‘The Ancestors,’ a Horror Story, Chapter Seven

“What is taking them so long?” Hannah asked with an audible tone of anger.

“Agreed,” Doug said. “I don’t like this. Sorry to be so blunt, but our mom and dad should have been back here sitting in the living room by now. Not even…what’s her name?…Emily, not even she’s back.”

“I wanna go find them,” Hannah said urgently, rising from her chair.

“No,” Al said with even more urgency. “Stay here.”

“Why?” she asked, glaring at him, suspecting he knew something she didn’t.

“Because,” he said, squirming in his chair and searching for a plausible excuse. “I-I just want you here with me.”

“I agree,” Doug said, getting up from the sofa. “I’ll go find them. I don’t like you going up there, Hannah.” He was looking at Al’s family with suspicious eyes as he said that last sentence.

“I’ll take you upstairs and help you look for them,” Mr. Dan said, getting up from his chair.

“Yeah, sure,” Doug said. “I can take you in a fight, if necessary.”

Hannah scowled at her brother for his rudeness while Mr. Dan laughed. “I assure you, young man, that won’t be necessary. I’m sure there’s a simple explanation for all of this. Come with me.”

Al continued to squirm in his chair as his father led Doug out of the living room and towards the stairs. Hannah was watching her boyfriend’s nervousness with some worry of her own.

The sprits have killed Hannah’s parents, Al thought. I’m sure of it. Po, Meng, and the other spirits are possessing my family members’ bodies and killing off Hannah’s family. Her brother is next to die, and Dad’s going to be his murderer this time. Emily is probably still cleaning up the mess after killing Hannah’s mother. In any case, if Emily came down now without Mrs. Sandy, she’d have a hard time explaining why neither Hannah’s mom nor her dad are back. I’m gonna have to intervene, as nasty as Po and the other spirits are gonna be to me. I should never have agreed to giving Hannah’s family to the ancestors. I won’t be able to live with myself if I just sit idly by while her whole family is murdered.

Al jumped up from his chair all of a sudden.

“What’s your problem, loser?” Freddie asked, sneering.

“I gotta use the bathroom,” Al said, glaring back at his smart-ass brother.

“Ooh, dirty look,” Freddie said, smirking.

“My boyfriend is not a ‘loser,’ Freddie,” Hannah said, looking coolly into his eyes.

“Are you sure about that?” Freddie said with a smug grin.

“Yes, I am,” she said, still looking straight in his eyes. Her voice would rise in a crescendo as she stood up. “And I’m also sure that you have a really offensive attitude. It’s bad enough that my parents are mysteriously missing, and you’re only making things harder with your abusive remarks. Why can’t you just love your brother? Now I understand why Al was so uncomfortable about me meeting his family!”

Freddie was laughing now. “Whoa!”

Mrs. Dan wasn’t so impressed, though.

You will pay for making my family lose face, girl, she thought as she frowned at Hannah.

Hannah saw the angry look on Mrs. Dan’s face and realized she’d crossed over the line.

“Oh, uh…” she stammered. “I…w-wasn’t directing that at…all of your family, Ms. Dan, just…”

“At Freddie,” Mrs. Dan said with a grin as Hannah sheepishly sat back down. “I will admit that he does need to mind his manners.” Now she was glaring at him. His smart-ass smile faded.

“Anyway,” Al said in a wobbly voice. “I gotta use the bathroom.” He was walking toward the exit that led to the stairs.

“Why are you going that way, Al?” his mother asked. “The way to the first-floor bathroom is out the other way.” She pointed to the exit at the opposite side of the living room. “You’re not thinking of using one of the upstairs bathrooms, are you?”

“Of course I am,” Al said. “You yourself told Mr. Sandy that the ground floor toilet is broken. We all know that. How could you forget, Ma?”

“Oh, old age must be making me scatterbrained,” she said, giggling and tapping her head. “I just find it odd that you have to go upstairs so soon after your father took her brother up there.” She was now glaring at him, as if something supernatural inside her body could read his mind. “You don’t by chance have some other reason for going up there, do you, Al?” She took a sip of her tea.

“I just need to pee, Mama,” Al said, then went out for the stairs. I hope that was just her being suspicious, and not Po, he thought.

“Don’t piss your life away,” Freddie said in a deep voice. “Loser.”

He looked right at frowning Hannah and grinned.

She saw a devil in his eyes.

Al thought he had heard Meng in his brother’s voice.

Two Five-Star Reviews for ‘Nature Triumphs’!

Nature Triumphs: a Charity Anthology of Dark Speculative Literature has recently received two five-star reviews. Scroll down the Amazon page to read them yourself, or read them here:

Avid reader called the anthology “Fun, Appealing, Scary, Thought-Provoking Eco-Horror Fiction–And Just in Time for Halloween)

“I loved this wonderful, big, entertaining, appealing, fun book –scary AND heartfelt eco-horror anthology. Exceptionally well-edited containing many varietal, well-written, vivid, horrifying stories and poems by diverse, established authors. Innovative concept/environmental/ecological/nature theme masterfully executed. I especially like stories “Yard Work” by Michael Errol Swaim, “Blood Rose” by Alison Armstrong, “One Side of a Conservation with Mother Nature” by Kyle Heger, “A Reversal of Fortune” by JG Faherty, and “last Call at the Garden of Eden” by Lamont A. Turner. I like that the money goes to The Nature Conservancy. Great book/gift for Halloween and for lovers/readers of horror, sci fi, dark speculative, ecological/ nature fiction and poetry.”

Jordan Francis called it “A beautiful and haunting Anthology for a great cause“.

“A beautiful and haunting Anthology. This collection of short stories and poems is amazing. It is at turns haunting, funny, and beautiful. This has introduced me to a multitude of great writers that i need to go back and check out their other works. Definitely worth the price of admission.”

Recall that my story, “The Bees,” is about a geneticist/beekeeper who, fed up with the world’s indifference to the dying off of the bees, does genetic alterations of the many bees he takes care of. He weaponizes them, making them bigger, stronger, smarter, and more lethal, capable of stinging their victims many times until they die. Can he be stopped, or will his enhanced bees multiply and tyrannize the world?

I really hope you’ll all go out and get yourselves a copy of this collection. It’s all for a good cause, and you’ll love the stories and poetry! 🙂

‘Symptom of the Universe’ is Published!

Symptom of the Universe: A Horror Tribute to Black Sabbath is finally published on Amazon Kindle. The paperback is $19.99. It will also be released on Godless on September 22nd.

Here is a link to the Amazon e-book. Here is a link to the paperback. Here is a link to its wide distribution as an e-book.

Here is a blurb from Dark Moon Rising Publications, the anthology’s publisher:

“From the publisher who brought you Nature Triumphs: A Charity Anthology of Dark Speculative Literature, Dark Moon Rising presents Symptom of the Universe: A Horror Tribute to Black Sabbath A worldwide gathering of award winning horror authors have come together to craft a collection of dark fiction stories covering every album and every era of Black Sabbath. Each story is inspired by one of Black Sabbath’s greatest songs from the biggest hits to the most obscure album tracks. SYMPTOM OF THE UNIVERSE: A HORROR TRIBUTE TO BLACK SABBATH is an immediate classic for rock fans and horror fans alike. Featuring the talents of Stewart Giles, J. Rocky Colavito, Sidney Williams, Tom Lucas, Thomas R. Clark, Ezekiel Kincaid, Neil Kelly, Tony Millington and many more, curated and edited by J.C. Maçek III with a foreword by Martin Popoff, Symptom of the Universe will whet your appetite for horror and rock at the same time.

“All proceeds are being donated to the Dio Cancer Fund.

“Trigger warnings: Themes of addiction, mental health, and self-harm

“Are you ready for a rocking read??”

Recall that my short story, ‘NIB,’ based on the song, of course, is in this collection. It’s about a drug user, Terry, whose drug dealer has given him some powerful dope combined with witchcraft. While he’s tripping, she seduces him, unwittingly triggering childhood trauma in him and putting him through a nightmarish experience that could kill him.

Please check it out. The ebook is only $3.14. You’ll love it!

I’ve already read a number of the stories, and I can tell you that this is a quality collection. One story runs the gamut of the mundane life of a homeless junkie all the way to a nuclear apocalypse. Another story involves wrestlers in an antiwar allegory. Yet another story is an erotic horror story with two femmes fatales. And yet another story turns a suicide into a revengeful homicide.

You won’t regret buying this anthology. Go get it!

Analysis of Anton Webern’s ‘Zwei Lieder,’ Op. 19

I: Introduction

“Zwei Lieder,” or “Two Songs,” op. 19, is a short piece for mixed choir and five instruments by Anton Webern, set to two poems by Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. It was composed in 1925-1926; the five instruments are celesta, guitar, violin, clarinet, and bass clarinet, with a choir of sopranos, altos, tenors, and basses.

Webern, along with Alban Berg (who composed the opera Wozzeck), was one of the most famous pupils of Arnold Schoenberg (who composed Pierrot Lunaire), these three composers being the most famous members of the Second Viennese School, who used Schoenberg’s twelve-note compositional technique. This technique involves taking the twelve semitones and rearranging them in any order to produce a tone row, or basic set. This tone row becomes the thematic, melodic, and harmonic basis of a composition.

Because the twelve-note system eschews the major-minor system, the resulting music is atonal, and therefore it is an acquired taste, to put it mildly. One must get used to the ’emancipation of the dissonance,’ which is no longer required to be resolved quickly back to consonance, and so the music sounds ‘harsh’ to the uninitiated listener.

When it comes to Webern’s music, I usually prefer to listen to his instrumental works, such as the Symphony, op. 21 (1927-1928), the Five Movements for String Quartet, op. 5 (1909), the Piano Quintet (1907), the Concerto for Nine Instruments, op. 24 (1931-1934), and the Quartet, op. 22 (1928-1930), for clarinet, tenor saxophone, violin, and piano. However, since when it comes to my doing analyses of music here on my blog, I prefer to have programmatic content along with the music, I’ve chosen a Webern composition with a text, among his music that I don’t listen to all that often.

Therefore, I’ve chosen to analyze his “Zwei Lieder,” among his least-performed, and therefore least-known, compositions. The reason that this otherwise superb piece of music is so rarely performed is that Webern’s choice of instrumentation is, sadly, impractical from the point of view of setting up performances of it. A choir, combined with the odd assembly of five instruments I mentioned above, all to perform a piece that lasts about two minutes, will be too much trouble for most organizers of concerts to put together.

Such a piece is best performed as a recording, and here is a link to a recording of the piece. Here is a link to the first poem in the original German and in English translation (which I will not be quoting here!); and here is a link to the second poem in the original German and in French translation (which I wouldn’t be quoting here even if I had permission to!).

The text of the two poems, in the original German as well as in English and French translations, can be found also in the booklet (pages 142-143) for the Complete Works of Webern, Opp. 1-31, conducted by Pierre Boulez for Sony Classical. I’ll be using these texts as the basis of my interpretation of the poetry; the websites linked in the previous paragraph are just there for your information, Dear Reader.

II: The Music

The tone row that Webern uses for the setting of both poems is G, B-flat, F-sharp, F-natural, E-flat, A, G-sharp, C-sharp, D, B-natural, E-natural, and C-natural. The “Zwei Lieder,” op. 19, is Webern’s first work to use the same tone row all the way through the entire composition.

A tone row can be played out in four ways: the original order, inversion (upside-down), retrograde (backwards), and retrograde-inversion (both backwards and upside-down). Furthermore, the tone row can be transposed to any key other than the original set of pitches. In the case of the “Zwei Lieder,” Webern transposes the tone row by a tritone, the diabolus in musica.

Now, as Samuel Andreyev demonstrates in his musical analysis of Webern’s piece (and my analysis owes a great debt to Andreyev’s analysis of the piece), one would find it impossible to hear the tone row played out in a clear, linear fashion because Webern breaks up the tone row among the instruments and choir in a way that the ear could never follow, certainly not without reading the score as one is listening.

For a precise demonstration of how the tone row is manifested in the piece, I’ll leave that to Andreyev to explain, since I lack his technical expertise. Instead, I’ll just make some more general remarks about the music.

Instead of the traditional kind of melody, which flows and is linear, having a singing quality, Webern’s concise musical style tends toward punctualism–an isolating of the successive notes through wide leaps, unorthodox uses of duration, dynamics, and attacks that are divorced from conventional ‘expressivity’–and Klangfarbenmelodie, or an assigning of the successive notes of a melody to different instruments. Therefore, melody isn’t perceived as musical lines, but rather as musical ‘dots,’ if you will.

Because of these kinds of innovations in Webern’s music, he has been associated, in retrospect, with the postwar total serialism of composers like Boulez (i.e., his Le Marteau Sans Maître) and Karlheinz Stockhausen (i.e., his Gesang der Jünglinge). Webern’s puncualism and Klangfarbenmelodie have been seen as anticipating the 1950s serializing of not only pitch, but also all the musical parameters as listed in the previous paragraph.

III: The Text

Goethe’s poems are both sets of two four-line verses in trochaic tetrameter (a line has four feet, each of which has a stressed, then unstressed, syllable), with a rhyme scheme of ABAB CDCD. They are vignettes of the beauty of nature, of flowers in bloom or soon to be in bloom. Images or scenes of natural beauty were something Webern always loved, and I understand that even among his instrumental works, there was the inspiration of nature.

His choice of having a mixed choir sing these verses–as opposed to, say, having just one singer–what must have been the main factor in causing the logistical difficulties in having op. 19 performed, must have been of such insistent importance to him, overruling the practical problems that would have forbidden frequent performances of the piece. I’m guessing that the choral singing was meant to give the verses a sense of holiness. For Webern, nature is sacred.

These poems are inspired by Chinese literature; in fact, these two poems are part of a cycle Goethe composed, called Chinesisch-deutsche Jahres- und Tageszeiten (“Chinese-German Seasons and Times of Day”). Chinese literature, all things Chinese, actually, had been quite popular in Europe at the time of his writing, ever since Voltaire‘s time.

The first poem describes narcissus flowers blooming in a garden in rows. The first verse gives us a vivid sense not just of the flowers’ beauty, but also of their ‘innocence,’ ‘purity,’ and ‘modesty.’ Since when is a narcissus modest, I wonder?

Indeed, one thing to keep in mind when interpreting poetry, or literature in general, is that things often aren’t as they seem. We may be reading a beautiful description of nature, but what the imagery is meant to represent may not be all that beautiful…once we have looked beneath the surface.

The narcissus flowers are as white as lilies; they have the purity of candles. Candles may give light, which is inherently a good thing, but the light comes from fire, the fire of the passions, which are anything but pure. Goethe’s word for pure is reine, the same word Heinrich Heine used in “Du bist wie eine Blume” (“You are like a flower”), “So hold und schön und rein” (“So lovely, fair, and pure”), a poem about a woman whose ‘purity’ broke Heine’s heart. ‘Purity’ isn’t necessarily a good thing.

Goethe would have been perfectly aware of the Echo and Narcissus myth, in which the latter broke the former’s heart, and the latter was punished for his vanity by being made to fall in love with the image of his own reflection in a pond, meaning that the handsome youth, in a sense, broke his own heart. In his grief over never being able to have what he saw, Narcissus died and turned into the flower of Goethe’s poem.

Now, obviously neither Webern nor especially Goethe would have known anything about narcissism in the modern psychiatric sense that people today would know of it. The seeds of the personality type, however–the vanity, haughtiness, and pitiless rejection of others–would have been intuited in the mythic character of Narcissus, intuited especially by a poet of Goethe’s stature. So on at least an unconscious level, Goethe must have used the flower as a symbol of sinful pride; Webern must have picked up on this idea–again, at least unconsciously, and reflected it somehow in his music.

Similarly, while Webern would never have consciously thought of the music he’d arranged for the poems as ‘harsh,’ he certainly knew, from the conservative public’s reaction to his atonal works (and those of his modernist contemporaries, like Schoenberg and Berg), that they were perceived that way. And even though his “Zwei Lieder” use softer sonorities, their atonality, dissonance, and wide melodic leaps are all clear signs of musical tension, deliberately used. Therefore this tension, set to these poems, suggests a sensitivity in his mind to Goethe’s expression of an undercurrent of tension in otherwise surface idyllic verses.

Now, I’m about to do a kind of ‘retrospective’ interpretation of these verses, applying a modern meaning to writing that’s showed no knowledge of contemporary ideas. Some of my readers, such as one who commented on my analysis of the Echo and Narcissus myth (link above), would balk at my ‘projecting of modern ways of seeing’ onto old texts, insisting instead that whatever the original meaning there was of the old text is the only ‘correct’ way of thinking about it.

I beg to differ. Just because the writing is old doesn’t mean the interpretation has to be old. The arts are not STEM fields: they don’t have only one correct answer, like 2 + 2 = 4, and an infinitude of incorrect answers. Artists often are reticent about what they’ve created because they want to allow us to find our own meaning in their works. Insisting that the work means only what the artist had originally intended takes all the fun and joy out of experiencing the work.

Another justification I have for interpreting the meaning of a work of literature, film, or piece of music, drawing on elements that came into being long after the work was created, is to give the work a new meaning and relevance for us now, so we can relate to it in our own way and therefore enjoy it far more. Insisting that the work’s ‘ancient meaning’ is its only meaning makes the work dead to us now.

Besides, some themes and ideas are so universal that they apply to all times of history, including those times when people knew nothing of the modern concepts. Just because narcissism wasn’t known as a personality disorder in, for example, ancient Greece, doesn’t mean that narcissists didn’t exist back then, let alone cause pain and suffering to the Echoes of their day.

With this understanding in mind, I can begin to do my interpretation of these verses. We should also keep in mind when Webern set the poems to music: in the mid-1920s, when certain…politically tempestuous…things were going on in Europe, in Germany and Austria in particular. As of the piece’s composition, Hitler would have been released from prison after having served just over eight months of his sentence for the crime of high treason after the failed Beer Hall Putsch. The Nazi Party may not have achieved their immediate goal of taking over the German government, but they did gain national attention and their first propaganda victory, which surely would have gotten Webern’s attention.

As an Austrian patriot, Webern did, for a while at least, have some sympathy for Nazism. By the time the Nazis had come to power in the early 1930s, though, he was growing in opposition to them. He even gave a public speech in 1933, publicly denouncing the Nazis for calling his music, as well as that of Schoenberg and Berg, “cultural Bolshevism” and “degenerate music.” (He was lucky the Nazis didn’t arrest him for this.)

He was certainly never an antisemite. His musical mentor, Schoenberg, was a Jew. He resigned from a position as chorus master for the Mödling Men’s Choral Society in 1926 (the year he finished his “Zwei Lieder”) over his controversial hiring of a Jewish singer, Greta Wilheim, to replace a sick one. So his attitude towards Nazism was complicated.

I’ll now relate these political issues to how I imagine Webern could have read Goethe’s poems. To think that Goethe would have intended the interpretation I’m about to make would be absurd, and I admit I’m stretching things when I make speculations about Webern interpreting them in the way I’m about to describe. But in making this interpretation, I’m hoping not only to make the poems relevant for our time, but also to show that there’s more to them than just a pretty painting of nature in words–there’s a deeper meaning.

These narcissus flowers, white and pure, like stars, are as pretty as lilies. They bow with a modest demeanour. Since, as I noted above, the associations one makes of this flower with vain Narcissus are so obvious, then the flowers appearing so modest must be mere affectation on their part.

The white flowers have a yellow centre with a red rim circling it, glowing love, as the first verse points out. This red around the yellow middle is thus the loving heart of the flowers. This love, affection, and affinity of the flowers is thus a personifying of them…and an idealizing of them.

This idealizing of the narcissus flowers is significant, for as is associated with such flowers, narcissism is all about an idealizing of the self. As is indicated in the second verse, these early narcissus flowers have bloomed in the garden in rows. They are a group symbolizing beautiful and idealized, but also vain, self-important people. They are thus representative of group narcissism.

Now Freud, who discussed how groups of people living in the same community may look down on those outside their circle with contempt, was writing about this issue as an example of group psychology in 1922, which was just a few years before Webern composed his “Zwei Lieder.” I’m not suggesting that Webern read Freud’s work and was influenced by it in setting the poems to music. What I am saying is that we’ve all–at any point in history, even back to Goethe and earlier–sensed the arrogance of the in-group toward outsiders. Parochial, chauvinistic attitudes have existed since time immemorial.

So, is Webern’s choral setting of the poems meant to suggest a holy beauty in these flowers, or a ‘holier-than-thou’ attitude? Webern surely would have been aware of the hyperinflation of Germany in the early 1920s and its effect on the German psyche. This pain is the kind of thing that can drive people to have nationalistic feelings, to looking for a leader who will ‘save the nation’ from its ruin. As we know, some Germans looked to Hitler in the hopes of such a saviour.

I suspect that Webern could have read such a meaning in the poem’s hope that the narcissus flowers know for whom they’re waiting. As they stand in their rows waiting for their idealized leader, they are described in the original German as “so spaliert erwarten,” or “so trellised in expectation.” They’re being held up, as if by a trellis, which implies that they’re “stand[ing] at attention,” as the translation in my CD booklet (page 143) has it.

Narcissism involves an idealizing of another–an idealized parental imago who may mirror back one’s grandiosity, as Heinz Hohut described the relationship, or an idealized political figure–who reflects back one’s own narcissism. This is the true meaning of Narcissus falling in love with his reflection in the pond: the ideal is oneself, yet it’s also out there, another, as Lacan spoke of the ideal-I in the mirror stage. One sees oneself in the idealized other, and hopes to attain that ideal oneself.

So the narcissus flowers, standing at attention in their neatly-arrayed rows in the garden…a kind of Garden of Eden in its idealization?…are like the SA standing at attention before Hitler, whom they wait for, in hopeful expectation, ‘to save’ their nation, while looking down with scorn and contempt for foreign nations and other ethnic groups.

Webern could have made these associations in his mind–consciously or unconsciously–as he read Goethe’s poem, and written the music the way he did in accordance with such a meaning–with the dissonance, atonality, and wide melodic leaps to express his own inner conflicts (should he, in his Austrian patriotism, support fascism, or oppose its antisemitism and rejection of his art?) about the political direction he saw Europe going in at the time.

As for Goethe’s intention, he could have imagined the narcissus flowers standing in an orderly group awaiting a leader of a more general sort, but one who has the same demagogic qualities. This ‘follow the leader’ mentality has always existed, of course, so his poem has a universal relatability in this regard.

Now, the second poem describes sheep leaving a meadow, revealing a pure green of grass. There’s that word, “reines,” or “pure” again: recall what I said above about both the positive and negative feelings that can come from the use of this word.

So, who are the sheep? Are they those who are timid and easily led, as the word is commonly used today to describe people who blindly believe all the nonsense in the mainstream media and follow mainstream politics uncritically? Such a meaning could be too contemporary and too English to be fitting in a reading of such an old, German poem.

Or are the sheep the followers of the Church? Certainly Goethe, as a freethinker, wasn’t fond of the more dogmatic aspects of the Church, and so he probably wouldn’t have thought much of the simple-minded, unthinking flock. The sheep’s leaving the meadow, to reveal the purity of the green, could be indicating an improved world once we’ve been rid of the uncritical believers.

Or are the sheep those who truly abide by the spirit of what it means to be a Christian, as opposed to the mere conformist churchgoers? Not those who say “Lord, Lord,” but those who do good works without regard of reward (Matthew 7:21)? Their leaving the meadow could reveal a grass whose purity is of a more ironic sort.

In any case, the sheep’s absence will result in the glorious blooming of the flowers. This blooming is described as a “paradise” (recall my reference to the Garden of Eden in its idealization). Again, is Webern’s use of a choir to sing these verses in earnest, or is it ironic? And whichever answer may be correct, for which is it in earnest, and for which is it ironic…for the sheep, or for the paradise?

Note that there are parallel themes going on in both poems. There’s an idealizing of the beauty of the flowers, with an ironic undercurrent. By the end of each second verse, there’s a hope or expectation of good which may end up being its opposite.

Hope, in the second verse, spreads a light mist in front of us, implying that what we see is no longer clear because of that hope. What will be true and what we want to be true are often very different from each other.

Similarly, a parting of the clouds should give us clear, sunny skies (‘the fire of the sun’), and therefore clear vision. Just as one hopes that the leader the narcissus flowers are waiting for will be a good one, so does one hope that one’s unobstructed vision will reveal happiness and the fulfillment of one’s wishes.

IV: Conclusion

Among all of the German and Austrian nationalists, like Webern, there was a growing feeling that fascism might fulfill their wishes and give them happiness by restoring glory to their countries. While he felt that national pride and hoped that leaders like Hitler would fulfill those wishes, his continued friendship with Jews, going all the way to the Anschluss and beyond, would have been a source of great conflict for him, not to mention a potential danger.

He surely would have felt that conflict as early as the mid-1920s, when he composed the “Zwei Lieder,” for Hitler had made no secret of his antisemitism, of course, just as he was putting his nationalism on broad display. I believe the second poem’s expression of hope as a mist obscuring one’s vision put Webern’s conflict into words.

Similarly, as I said above, the atonality, dissonance, and wide melodic leaps at least unconsciously expressed his psychological conflict about the growth of European fascism in the 1920s. This musical expression of that conflict extends to the transposition of the tone row by the tritone interval…known significantly as the ‘devil in music.’

So Goethe’s poems teach us that we need to be careful as we look through the mists of hope, as well as to know who we are waiting for. Will we get that happiness, or will we get horror? Are we waiting for a hero, or a villain? In Webern’s case, he got shot and killed by an American soldier in the end, after having been disillusioned by fascism’s bloody failure. Be careful what you hope for…and for whom you are waiting.

‘The Ancestors,’ a Horror Story, Chapter Six

Between ten and twenty minutes later, Freddie came down the stairs and into the living room, where everyone was having after-dinner tea. He had changed his clothes.

Margaret looked up with hope to see Brad finally returning. She frowned to see only Freddie.

“Where is my husband?” she asked. “He’s been way too long up there.”

“It must be his gout slowing him down,” Hannah said.

“It shouldn’t be slowing him down this much,” Margaret said. “Even if he had to do a Number Two.”

“Did you see my dad up there, Freddie?” Hannah asked him. “And why are you dressed differently?”

“Oh, uh,” he began, “I found a mess up there that urgently needed cleaning, and I got some of the mess on my clothes, so I changed them. I never saw your dad, probably because I was so busy in a room up there cleaning the mess.”

“Well, I’m beginning to worry,” Margaret said.

“I can take you upstairs and help you look for him, Mrs. Sandy,” Emily said. “Let’s go.”

“OK,” Margaret said. “Thank you, Emily.”

They both got up and started walking out of the living room towards the stairs. As Emily was following Margaret, Freddie put something in his sister’s hand while no one else was looking.

As they were going up the stairs to the second floor, Emily caught up with Margaret.

“I’d like to check every floor,” Margaret said. “Just in case.” They reached the second floor. “Brad? Are you there?”

No answer.

“I hate to snoop around your house,” she said, “so I’ll let you show me the areas you feel more comfortable with me seeing, Emily.”

“That’s fine, Mrs. Sandy.”

They went through the hall, room by room.

“Brad?” Margaret called again.

“Mr. Sandy?” Emily called out.

No answer.

Emily opened the doors of the rooms so Margaret could look in. No sight of her husband anywhere, of course.

“OK,” Margaret said with a sigh. “Shall we go up to the third floor?”

“If you wish, Mrs. Sandy,” Emily said.

They returned to the stairs, and started going up to the next floor. “Brad?” Margaret called. “Where are you?”

Still no answer, of course.

Margaret’s heart was pounding. She shook all over. A drop of sweat or two ran down her face.

“Brad!” she shouted as they were reaching the third floor. “Brad!”

Silence.

“I’m sorry for the shouting, Emily,” she said with a wobbly voice. “But this is starting to scare me.”

“I understand,” Emily said as they were now leaving the stairs and walking down the third floor hallway. “And don’t worry. I’m sure we’ll find your husband soon, and there will be a perfectly reasonable explanation for–“

“Aaah!” Margaret screamed.

She saw a few drops of blood on the floor just by the door to the room where Brad had found the cat. In fact, that cat was walking by right at that moment, with a few spots of Brad’s blood on its ginger fur.

“Oh, Mrs. Sandy,” Emily said, picking up the cat and showing it to her. “The blood isn’t your husband’s. It’s our cat’s–see? Don’t worry. I’m sure he’s fine. Let’s just keep looking for him, OK?”

“I’d really like to believe you,” Margaret said, not seeing any actual signs of injury on the cat, just the spots of blood as if they’d come from somewhere else. “But frankly, I’m afraid I don’t.”

“Very well. Let’s keep looking.”

“What’s in that room?”

“Oh, nothing interesting. Just a lot of boxes.”

“Is it OK if I take a look in there?”

“Well…uh…sure, but I see no reason why your husband would be in there.” Emily frowned, Margaret noting some tension in her eyes.

“I’d like to see what’s in there,” Margaret said firmly.

Emily hesitated. “Well, alright.” She opened the door.

Nothing could be seen in the dark.

“You must have a light switch,” Margaret said.

“Of course,” Emily said, then turned on the light.

Just stacks of books. No blood.

Emily breathed a sigh of relief, as if she had clairvoyance to know what had happened in there.

Margaret got a good look around the room and was satisfied about it, but was wondering about Emily.

“OK, Emily,” she said. “Let’s keep looking.”

They went out of the room, Emily turned off the light and closed the door, and they continued down the hall in the direction of the bathroom, the door of which Brad had left wide open, and so it was easy to see that no one was in it.

A moaning sound, with the deep voice of a man, was heard from above.

“Brad?” Margaret said, her head pointing up.

“That sounded like it was coming from the attic,” Emily said. “Come this way.” They continued down the hall towards the bathroom. She gestured at the ceiling. “We go up there.”

“Pull down attic stairs?”

“Yes,” Emily said, getting a short step ladder from the bathroom to stand on. She got on, pulled down the attic stairs, then went up into the attic, Margaret following immediately after.

More low groaning, from a far corner opposite from where the two women were.

“Brad?” Margaret called in the darkness, her hands cutting through cobwebs as she went in the direction of the groans. “Are you in here?”

There was another groan, but this time it was from a corner in the opposite direction.

“What the–?” Margaret said, then tripped over something and almost fell down.

Standing behind Margaret, Emily was smiling.

As Margaret continued stumbling in the dark to where she’d heard this last groan, Emily took what Freddie had given her out of her pocket.

“Is there an electric light in here, Emily?”

‘Yes, of course,” Emily said, still smiling. “I’ll go get it.”

Just as Margaret had reached that corner, a moan was heard from far back behind her.

“Why do all the moans keep coming from different places?” Margaret’s pulse was racing. “You’d think someone was pulling a prank on me. If so, it’s not at all funny.”

Emily tugged a string, and a light bulb shone from the ceiling in the centre of the attic.

As in the other room, boxes were stacked everywhere, all clad in cobwebs.

“At least I can see now,” Margaret said, her eyes racing around the area to find the source of the groaning. As she walked toward where she’d heard the last groan, another came from the opposite direction. “Oh, for God’s sake, not again! What’s going on here? Are you part of this mind game, Emily?” She looked behind her and saw Emily standing immediately in back of her, grinning eerily. “What are you doing, Emily?”

“I am not Emily, Mrs. Sandy,” a deep, male voice said out of her mouth. “I am Meng, one of the Dan family’s ancestors.”

Margaret didn’t have time to react to that monstrosity of a voice, for she saw, just over Emily’s shoulder and among the boxes in a corner, her husband’s legs lying on the floor.

“Brad?” she called out, then shoved Emily to the side and ran over to his body.

A white sheet, stained with blood, was wrapped around Brad’s head. Blood stains were all over his clothes.

She gasped, then unwrapped the sheet as unwillingly as could be, but needing to know the ugly truth. The deep axe wound in his face gave her that needed truth.

“Aaaaahhh!!!”

Her screams were cut short by a deep slice in her throat by the blade of the straight razor Freddie had given Emily. Her blood was gushing out as she fell. Emily lay Margaret’s body next to Brad’s.

“And now, you can be together forever, Mr. and Mrs. Sandy,” Meng said.

Analysis of ‘Close to the Edge’

I: Introduction

Close to the Edge is the fifth album by Yes, released in 1972. This is the second Yes album to have a cover design by Roger Dean, the first one being Fragile, CTTE‘s predecessor. (These two also apply to classically-trained keyboardist Rick Wakeman, who replaced original keyboardist Tony Kaye, who unlike Wakeman, was reluctant to expand his keyboards beyond the organ and piano, and thus, he was fired.) CTTE is also the first album to have the distinct Yes logo.

It’s also the first Yes album to have a side-long track, the title track, with two tracks of about ten and nine minutes each on Side Two, “And You and I,” and “Siberian Khatru,” respectively. This was the topmost height of the band’s musical experimentation, in the opinion of their then-drummer, Bill Bruford, and for this reason (among others), CTTE was the last Yes album to have him on drums (the later Union period notwithstanding…and quasi-Yes Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman, Howe, for that matter). Bruford left Yes upon finishing the recording of CTTE to join King Crimson.

This was the third Yes album to feature the pyrotechnics of guitarist Steve Howe (after The Yes Album and Fragile), who replaced original Yes guitarist Peter Banks shortly after finishing their second album, Time and a Word. Banks was fired after conflicts in the band escalated with the addition of orchestral arrangements to a number of the songs on the album; Banks didn’t like how these arrangements drowned out much of his guitar contributions to the music.

The lyrics of CTTE‘s title track were inspired by Herman Hesse‘s novel, Siddhartha. Similar religious, mystic, and spiritual themes can be found on the two tracks on Side Two, so they can be seen to be connected to Siddhartha, too, if in a looser sense.

Singer Jon Anderson, who read Siddhartha and wrote most of the lyrics of CTTE (with some lyrical contributions by guitarist Steve Howe) as a reflection of the novel’s mysticism, has also admitted to having done acid back in the late 1960s, as part of the profound influence of the Beatles on him. Some who do acid have a positive, ‘religious’ experience from the trip; others have bad trips and can develop serious mental health problems. I think it’s safe to assume that Anderson had the former kind of trips, as is evidenced in the happy, even sentimental nature of so much of Yes’s music.

The creation of side-long, epic songs would continue and be developed further on Yes’s next studio album, Tales from Topographic Oceans, a double album with four side-long tracks, and with Alan White on drums to replace Bruford. Since Bruford had found the making of CTTE laborious, one of his reasons for quitting, I suspect that, with the release of TFTO, he had no regrets about quitting, despite the fact that Yes, with such hits as “I’ve Seen All Good People” from The Yes Album and “Roundabout” from Fragile, was much more commercially successful than King Crimson, whose more eccentric, complex, and dissonant music has forbidden hit singles.

Here is a link to all the lyrics on the album.

II: Siddhartha

Though I’ve wanted to do an analysis of a Yes album for quite some time now, and my analyses of music have depended to a great extent on programmatic content, I’ve been inhibited from doing one on Yes for a simple reason–Jon Anderson’s lyrics.

His lyrics tend to focus more on their sound and feeling than on their meaning, so trying to make sense of them can be frustrating. In the case of CTTE, though, we have Siddhartha as the lyrics’ inspiration, so I have something to work with here.

Before going into the lyrics, it will be sensible to give a synopsis of Hesse’s novel, to give us a foundation on which to build an understanding and interpretation of the lyrics.

Though the title character shares the first name of Siddhartha Gautama, Hesse’s book is not a fictionalized account of the Buddha’s life. The protagonist’s story, however, parallels much of the life of the man whose first name he shares.

Siddhartha is the son of a Brahmin, and he wishes to leave his family to further his quest for spiritual enlightenment; in this, we see a parallel with Gautama’s leaving his family to seek enlightenment. Siddhartha becomes a Samana, practicing austerity and being a homeless mendicant. He is joined by his good friend, Govinda.

Eventually, the two meet Gautama, and they are most impressed with his teachings. While Govinda decides to join Gautama as a Buddhist monk, Siddhartha decides not to, instead preferring to find his own way to enlightenment, without the words of a teacher.

Soon after, he decides, against his nature, to be involved in the ways of the world, to experience sensuality. He sees a beautiful courtesan named…get this…Kamala [!], and he falls in love with her. To have her, though, he has to make money, wear fine clothes, etc.–pretty unusual for a homeless, begging ascetic, but he does it, having met a local businessman named Kamaswami and working for him.

He makes the money, gets the fine clothes and a home, and learns the ways of love with Kamala. Though at first, Siddhartha is detached from material pleasures, he grows to like them, and therefore falls into sin.

Eventually, it dawns on him that he is living a meaningless life, and that he has lost his way. He goes by a river, the same one he crossed with the help of a ferryman whom he would pay later when he acquired money. This river, by the way, is the one referred to repeatedly in the title track of the album.

Full of despair and self-loathing, Siddhartha is contemplating suicide by jumping in the river. He is “close to the edge.” Just when is about to jump in, though, he falls into a meditative sleep and hears the holy word, Om.

He wakes up inspired, and decides to resume his quest for enlightenment by living next to this spiritually inspirational river. He’s “close to the edge” of nirvana.

As a side note, it will be useful now to consider the multiple meanings of ‘close to the edge,’ as well as their larger implications. These meanings are, paradoxically, both negative and positive.

First, Siddhartha was close to the edge of life and death, in his despair and wish to drown himself in the river. In fact, the title of the album was Bruford’s idea, reflecting the state of the band at the time. He hated how difficult it was to make the album, with all of the “endless debate” over how to arrange the parts for each instrument, and he didn’t get along with bassist/back-up vocalist Chris Squire, who was typically late for bad practice. Finally, as an aside, one might also consider, perhaps by way of synchronicity, the Grandmaster Flash and the Furious Five rap song, “The Message,” about inner-city poverty, being lured into a life of crime, and committing suicide in one’s jail cell; the song has the line, “Don’t push me, ’cause I’m close to the edge.” As we can see, ‘close to the edge’ can be seen in a negative light in many ways.

After his despair, Siddhartha was close to the edge in a good way, for to be close to the divine, inspirational water of the river is like being close to nirvana, as I mentioned above. Nirvana is the cessation of suffering, and the loss of an ego in favour of selflessness, something with which Siddhartha is particularly preoccupied towards the beginning of the novel. In nirvana, the cycle of reincarnation (samsara) ends, which in a way is a kind of death. Though the novel is set in ancient India and Nepal, the German-Swiss author would surely have had Charon in mind, at least unconsciously, when he had a ferryman take Siddhartha across this river of life/death/nirvana.

The point is that, as I’ve discussed in other posts, far from being absolute, mutually-exclusive opposites, what we call ‘heaven’ and ‘hell’ are really two states of being that are dialectically close to each other. Heaven and hell, or nirvana and samsara (as the Mahayana Buddhists also see them), are examples of opposites that are actually unified.

In many posts, I have used the ouroboros as a symbol of the dialectical unity of opposites. The serpent’s biting head and bitten tail represent, as I see them, two extreme opposites that meet at the bite, and the serpent’s coiled body represents a circular continuum of every point between the two extremes.

So we can see in Siddhartha’s life a movement from the serious wish to be at one with Brahman (at the ouroboros’ head) to his indulgence in sensual pleasures, his suicidal despair, and upon hearing Om, he revives his commitment to attaining enlightenment by staying close to the edge of the river. He first moves down from the serpent’s head by leaving his Brahmin father and family, then slips further down the serpent’s coiled body by rejecting the teachings of all spiritual leaders, even those of the Buddha, whom he avowedly admires. He approaches the serpent’s tail when indulging in worldly pleasures, feels the bite of the tail in his despair, and comes back, through the bite, to the head in his resumed commitment to achieving enlightenment.

So anyway, to get back to the story, Siddhartha decides to become a ferryman, just like the one who helped him across the river before; in fact, this first one teaches him how to do the job and has him live in his humble abode. Siddhartha is happy for a while doing this job.

Soon, he is reacquainted with Kamala (who is now a Buddhist) and her son (remember, many years have gone by since his first meeting with her), who we learn is also Siddhartha’s son. She has learned that the Buddha is dying, and she wants to see him. Now, young Siddhartha is used to the rich, privileged life, and so the boy is annoyed to have to go on a pilgrimage to see a dying man who means nothing to him.

A snake bites Kamala, and now she is dying, too. Old Siddhartha does his best to take care of her, but indeed, she dies, and now their boy is under his guardianship, though the spoiled boy has no appreciation for this father he never knew before.

Siddhartha is as patient as he can be with the bad-tempered boy, having grown quite attached to his discovered flesh and blood, as irascible as young Siddhartha is. Eventually, the boy, in a fit of temper, expresses his contempt for old Siddhartha and leaves him, causing his father great sadness and distress over the boy’s safety going out into the world all alone.

His ferryman friend tries to convince him to be patient and let the boy go, stressing that the lad must find his own way in life, just as his father has had to do, but old Siddhartha can’t just let the boy go. He goes after him, trying to find him, but not succeeding.

He goes into another state of extreme sadness. The attachment that is causing him great pain now, however, is far more profound than the last one, because this is an attachment to another human being, the fear of losing love, not attachment to mere worldly pleasures. One would think that his selfless love of the boy, including his patient tolerance of the brat’s constant verbal abuse and slight regard of him, would all be good karma for Siddhartha…but it’s still attachment.

So while the ferryman is trying to comfort him, Siddhartha is in his saddest state since his contemplation of drowning himself in the river. But once again, he hears that sacred word…Om.

In this sequence of Siddhartha becoming a ferryman, seeing Kamala and their son, her dying, his taking care of the ungrateful boy (which significantly includes him leaving his ferryman duties and distancing himself from the holy river–a kind of Ganges for him, if you will), him losing the boy, going into a depression, and then finally being spiritually rejuvenated from hearing Om again, we see another movement from the bliss felt at the ouroboros’ head, going down its coiled body and experiencing increasing misfortune, thence to the bitten tail of extreme sorrow, and upon hearing Om again, crossing the tail back to the serpent’s biting head, back to bliss.

Such is the growth, through pain, of samsara.

Or, as Jon Anderson sings, “I get up, I get down.”

This Om that Siddhartha experiences is part of the ferryman’s form of consoling him, by getting him to let his son go and listen closely instead to the many sounds of the river. In his listening to the river, Siddhartha also remembers that he, too, left his Brahmin father and similarly broke his heart.

Hearing all the river’s sounds, Siddhartha also experiences all the joys and pains of people in the world. He feels himself at one with them. An amalgamation of all of these sounds is Om. He experiences the cosmic unity of everything–Brahman, enlightenment.

Now that the ferryman can see that he’s taught Siddhartha all there is to be taught–not through empty words, but through the fullness of experience as expressed in the holy water of the river–he knows he can leave Siddhartha, who is now whole. The ferryman goes off into the woods, never to be seen by Siddhartha again.

Siddhartha, now radiant with happiness, is once again met by his old friend Govinda, who has heard of the great wisdom of this ferryman whom he at first doesn’t recognize as Siddhartha (remember, many years have passed, and both of them are old men now). This reunion is another cyclical repetition in Siddhartha’s life, for just after his contemplation of suicide and hearing of Om by the river, Govinda had appeared and watched sleeping Siddhartha to ensure he was safe. Once again, the old friends are reunited when Siddhartha has experienced great spiritual edification.

Now, it is Govinda who, after so many years of soul-searching, feels unfulfilled, even after having learned from the Buddha’s wisdom. Siddhartha tells his friend again of his belief that teachers are of little help, since words and thoughts help us little. Each concept has its opposite in dialectical relationship with it (recall my ouroboros symbolism above): in wisdom, there is folly, in happiness, misery; etc. The key is to experience life in all of its fluid movement, to know the unity in life’s diversity, and to love the world, in spite of how painful it so often is.

Govinda, steeped in Buddhist teaching, has difficulty understanding what his friend is trying to tell him. So Siddhartha, in a cyclical variation of what the ferryman had him do, tells Govinda to bend down to him and kiss him on the forehead. When Govinda does this, he has essentially the same mystical experience of the river, of the universal unity of all souls in the world, all their joys and sorrows. Enlightenment cannot be taught: it must be experienced. Time is a human construct–there is only now. These are the experiences I’ve described as The Three Unities.

Govinda is overwhelmed and awed by what his friend has had him experience. He bows in veneration before radiating, enlightened Siddhartha.

III: Close to the Edge

Now that we know Hesse’s story, we can begin to understand the lyrics of this album. They may seem like a word salad, but then again, words can never express the infinite.

i) The Solid Time of Change

The eighteen-minute suite opens with the gentle sounds of nature: running water, birds chirping, and wind chimes, all sounds from ‘environmental tapes’ collected by Jon Anderson. These sounds suggest that peaceful place Siddhartha sits at, beside the river.

The first minute and twenty seconds or so of the title track inspired the opening of my Symphony in One Movement (in case you’re interested), though where my piece is full of joy and happiness, when the band comes in after the nature sounds, it’s all tension.

They’re playing in a compound duple meter, with Steve Howe playing a lead of hammer-on minor seconds that go down and up in four octaves (“I get up, I get down” being implied in this tone painting.). Squire’s bass is doing an ascending D harmonic minor scale, though he’s playing it from E to upper E.

The tension of this music suggests the spiritual struggle that Siddhartha has been going through as he sits by the river, full of despair, first, over his fall into sin after his indulgence in worldly pleasures, and second, his depression after losing his abrasive son. Note that ‘Close to the Edge’ does not retell Siddhartha in musical form: it merely reflects the themes and feelings of the novel, picking moments here and there from the story and putting them, as it were, under a magnifying glass.

In the middle of this tense musical jam played by Howe, Squire, Bruford, and Wakeman (very fast notes on a synthesizer), there are three brief vocalizations from Anderson, Squire, and Howe that interrupt the instrumental tension. Though we don’t hear them chant Om, the vocalizing can be interpreted as representing the sacred word, just as Siddhartha hears it, and feels his pain soothed by it.

After the third of the vocalizations, we hear a more serene theme, still in the compound duple, with Howe playing a lead that will be a recurring motif at various points in the suite, and a motif given considerable variation, too. Essentially, the motif is made up of notes of a fourth, third, root, second, third, root, second, third, root, second, then four fifths, but inverted, below the root. Then, Howe plays a fourth, fifth, root, seventh, fourth, fifth, third, and second. Normally, the third is a major third; at one point, though Howe replaces this with a minor third, and the fifth is flattened.

Next, we come to the first of the lyrics, sung with vocal harmonies, the band playing in 3/4. Actually, most of this song is in 3/4 (as is “And You and I,” too), except for such passages as the 6/8 mentioned above, the “I Get Up, I Get Down” movement, largely in 4/4, and other sections, some of which I’ll point out soon enough. This predominance of 3/4 symbolically suggests such ideas as the Hindu TrimurtiBrahma, Vishnu, and Shiva, or beginning, middle, and end (Om as divided into A-U-M), as well as the Hegelian dialectic, typically conceived of in three parts: thesis, negation, and sublation, this last of which reconciles the duality of opposites, finding a unity in them…and recall, Siddhartha finds peace in that ultimate, reconciling unity.

The “seasoned witch” calling you “from the depths of your disgrace,” could be seen as Kamala, who initially tempted Siddhartha away from his life of austerity, bewitching him into preferring a life of sensual pleasures. She did, however, later become a Buddhist around the time that he realized how empty a life of worldly indulgence is. He came out of the depths of his disgrace, that descent into sin, around the time she did. As sensuality personified, Kamala is also samsara personified, and the Mahayana Buddhists, as I mentioned above, equate samsara with nirvana. So her pulling him into sin, paradoxically and dialectically, was also her pulling him out of sin, from the depths of his disgrace.

The liver has been seen in the past to be the seat of the emotions and of the soul: recall the tearing-away of Prometheus‘ liver by an eagle or vulture every day as punishment for giving fire to man. So rearranging one’s liver “to the solid mental grace” is a readjustment of one’s spirit and emotional life (liver as that which lives) to a higher state of enlightened being, what Christians would call grace, which is “solid” in the sense of being unshakeable. In this connection, calling the first movement of the title track “The Solid Time of Change” is paradoxical in calling change a solid thing, for the one constant in life is change.

The music that comes from afar is, from our Western perspective, Eastern music, specifically that of India, where so much of Siddhartha is set.

To “taste the fruit of man…losing all” sounds like Adam having the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge and losing Paradise. Something comparable has happened to Siddhartha in his meeting of Kamala, the Eve of this story who directs him away from his search for nirvana and towards a world of sin, of sensual pleasures. This interpretation ties in with the opening line about the “seasoned witch” who, in leading him astray, has paradoxically also led him back “from the depths of [his] disgrace” to the road of enlightenment, as I described above. The Tree of Knowledge leads to sin, but knowledge is also enlightenment. Sin bravely.

Now, “assessing points to nowhere” sounds like considering paths that will get us lost, as Siddhartha has done in being with Kamala, getting involved in money-making, wearing fine clothes (as opposed to being a naked mendicant, as Adam was naked and blissfully ignorant of that in Eden), and being attached to a son who despises him. This being lost can lead to being found again, as happens to Siddhartha.

The tiniest, most insignificant of things can edify us as much as the greatest of things can, as Siddhartha learns, such things as “a dewdrop” and “the music of the sun.” This getting lost and being found, being equally enlightened by the smallest and the greatest of things, these examples are all part of the course we choose to run on to find nirvana.

And how do we know we’re near nirvana?

When we’re “down at the edge, round by the corner…close to the edge, down by a river,” the river that Siddhartha has found. When we get there is “not right away”: we must be patient and have faith that we’ll get there eventually.

During the next verse, we can hear Wakeman playing a one-note ostinato of sorts on his synthesizer; it sounds like the dashes and dots of the Morse Code. Someone on the Genius lyrics website tried, with what seems little success by his own admission, to figure out a specific message from the Morse Code. Is it “Abraxas,” or something close to that? Is it a message in Latin? I don’t think it matters whether there’s an actual message Wakeman is playing or not. As I see it, it’s sufficient to hear the musical idea as representative of the idea of a mysterious message: it’s the message of how to obtain liberation from the physical miseries of the world, and for most of us, it shouldn’t be surprising that that message is indecipherable.

Going “around the changes of the summer,” the time of the heat of passion, one is coming to recognize and accept the reality of change. “To call the colour of the sky” is to recognize heaven as symbolic of nirvana. To find “a moment clothed in mornings faster than we see” is to see the beginning of the appearance of the light in a night of darkness, to receive edification faster than most do.

With such edification, one understands that one no longer needs to worry. One can leave the changes, those that are so upsetting, much, much farther behind oneself. “We relieve the tension” and “find out the master’s name,” a name that represents the spiritual mastery in enlightenment.

We return to the chorus–with alternating bars of 3/4 and 4/4–that includes the words of the name of the title track, with some new ones. “Seasons will pass you by,” heard in the first of two bars of 5/4, are representative of all the cyclical changes we inevitably face in life, musically represented by the time changes we’re hearing here. Then, “I get up, I get down,” in the second bar of 5/4 (and one bar in 3/8), represents how these cyclical changes will one time make us happy, another time unhappy. Note also the tone-painting in the singing high on the word up, then singing descending notes on down.

“Now that you find, now that you’re whole,” heard in the second of two bars in 7/8, is that moment of enlightenment. Still, this moment is transitory, as it has been for Siddhartha on a number of occasions in Hesse’s novel. This sense of the transitory in spiritual edification is apparent in the music, too, for the tension returns in the next movement of the title track.

ii) Total Mass Retain

As Steve Howe is strumming his chords and Jon Anderson is singing in the familiar 3/4 themes, Bruford and Squire are doing a cross-rhythm in 4/4. With a thick, meaty bass tone, Squire is playing C, B, then G, A; next, he plays G, F-sharp, then D, E, and two strongly accented Es, an octave lower on the off-beat, after that.

Siddhartha’s eyes are “convinced, eclipsed” because once one is convinced of the truth of an idea, one can become attached to it, instead of going with the flow and being open to newer ideas. Hence, one’s eyes are eclipsed by what had once convinced them. (Note also the “Eclipse” section of “And You and I” on Side Two–a lot of imagery recurs on this album.)

“The younger moon” sounds like a new moon beginning its waxing phase, therefore going from total black to a growing light “attained with love.” This slow movement to the light with love suggests the beginning of spiritual edification (compare this to the “morning” imagery found elsewhere); “it changed as almost strained” because of the difficulty and pain involved in overcoming one’s ignorance, while being rewarded with “clear manna from above”: enlightenment.

Siddhartha “crucified [his] hate,” that is, felt the pain of sacrificing his animal nature–including hostile feelings–to grow spiritually and hold the world within his hand, that is, to know Brahman in Atman, and to know the mysteries of life, “the reasons we don’t understand.”

This and the next verse are separated by a brief keyboard part by Wakeman in 6/8.

The next verse expresses Anderson’s intense anti-war feelings. Here the Bruford/Squire cross-rhythm in 4/4, as against Howe and Anderson in 3/4, musically brings out the sense of conflict and tension associated with war. And since I already explained above what the three in 3/4 symbolizes, we can know how the four in 4/4 represents the ongoing contradiction and duality of clashing opposites (i.e., 2 + 2). The “armoured movers” [who] “approached to overlook the sea” are the hellish warmongers coming ‘close to the edge’ where the heavenly sea of nirvana is, since the holy water of the river will eventually empty into the sea and ocean. And heaven and hell, or nirvana and samsara, are dialectically close to each other.

Remember that this tension and the imagery of war happen just before a tense return of the “close by a river, close to the edge” verse. To be close to the edge can be both a positive and a negative experience, as discussed above. To be close to heaven is also to be close to hell, depending on one’s situation, and depending on one’s willingness or unwillingness to give up one’s ego. It’s that area of the ouroboros where the serpent’s head bites its tail: does one bite the tail, and be a spiritual victor, attaining liberation from the miseries of the world, or does one receive the bite at the tail, and experience those miseries at their worst, falling into madness and despair?

Jungian Shadow Work can bring one close to the edge: if done well, it can heal one of trauma and bring the darkness into the light; if done poorly, it can cause one to fall into madness, as Jung himself almost experienced.

In the next verse, the music gets more uplifting and cheerful, as Anderson sings of how “the journey takes you all the way.” However the ups and downs of life may be, one should be patient and just go along for the ride, faithful that one will eventually reach the goal. The reality of this goal will be a total mystery, unlike “any reality that you’ve ever seen and known.”

One goes “halfway into the void,” close to that no-thing-ness of nirvana that can’t be verbalized, only experienced, as Siddhartha has learned. “We hear the total mass retain,” one of CTTE‘s lyrics that especially perplexed and irritated Bruford.

So, what does ‘total mass retain’ mean? Anderson explained what he meant to the magazine Sounds in 1973: he related the concept to his deep sadness over all the wars and destruction of the planet he saw all around him at the time (imagine how much worse he must feel now, as of my publication of this post!). For him, ‘total mass retain’ is common sense in knowing what’s right and wrong.

‘Total mass retain,’ or conservation of mass, is also a concept in physics, wherein any system closed to all transfers of matter and energy, the mass of the system must remain constant over time. It’s implied that mass cannot be created or destroyed, though it may be rearranged in space, or the entities associated with it may be changed in form.

I suspect that Anderson was using the physics concept as a metaphor for how everything in the universe is one, constant, in its essence. Even if things change form or are moved around, at the atomic or monadic level, all is one and eternal–Brahman. With this mystical understanding of cosmic reality, the moral imperative to avoid things like war and environmental degradation should be common sense.

Next, we get the “close to the end, down by a river” refrain, and with a repeat of “I get up, I get down,” there’s a segue in 4/4 played by Squire and Howe, while Wakeman is playing that 6/8 motif on the…pipe organ…as it sounds to my ear–that motif I described above, played originally by Howe to end the beginning instrumental section.

iii) I Get Up, I Get Down

This movement begins with a beautiful, peaceful passage with Wakeman playing Mellotron (string section tapes) and Howe playing an electric sitar. The sounds evoke an atmosphere of nature, suggestive of Siddhartha sitting by the edge of the river. We’ve gone from the tension of the second movement to the peace of this one. Again, this is a reflection of how ‘close to the edge’ can mean close to heaven, nirvana, or close to hell, the worst of samsara, hence the name of this movement.

Squire and Howe sing of a “lady sadly looking,” one “in her white lace.” I suspect that this is Kamala. The white lace sounds like the kind of sexy clothing a courtesan might wear…perhaps not an Indian, or Nepalese, courtesan, but the association with courtesans in general is sufficient. She’s sadly looking, because in her decision to become a Buddhist, she is repenting of her former sensual life. “She’d take the blame for the crucifixion of her own domain,” meaning she’ll accept responsibility for her sins, the crucifixion being a metaphor for her atonement.

“The crucifixion of her own domain” could also mean the ecological destruction of the Earth, of which she, symbolically, is the goddess. I said above that Kamala personifies samsara, this physical life of pain and suffering, but also of worldly pleasures, that Siddhartha fell into. In this sense, we can link the lady to both Kamala and to our Mother Earth.

Anderson sings “I get up, I get down” again, while Squire and Howe vocalize “Ah” in the background at high pitches. Later, we’ll hear Wakeman playing a pipe organ. I remember when I used to listen to this album on vinyl as a teenager in the 1980s, and my older sister, whom I’ll call J., and who had nothing but contempt for Yes, used to make ignorant comments about it being “choir music.” This section of the title track must have inspired her to call it that.

She also used to call Yes’s music “depressing.” Wrong again, J.: if you’re going to make any kind of criticism of the music, it’s too happy, sentimental. That’s why I prefer King Crimson over Yes–I like music that’s darker. But I digress…

Anderson sings “Two million people barely satisfy,” suggesting how few of the billions of people on the Earth feel any substantial happiness–presumably the wealthy, who don’t feel the struggle to survive under the unsure material conditions of the poor. This pain is what is suggested by the Buddhist concept of duhkha: suffering is universal because poverty is, especially in Third World countries like ancient India and Nepal. The rich don’t satisfy the needs of the poor, either, of course.

“Watch one woman cry ‘Too late’,” sounds like Kamala when the venomous snake has bitten her, and she knows she’s going to die. In the next verse, Anderson sings of how much better honesty is than deceit. Overall, one must accept the painful realities of life, of getting up and getting down, how we’ll be happy one moment, and sad the next.

“In charge of who is there, in charge of me” sounds like a questioning of those in power and authority, and does their authority have legitimacy? People look on blindly at that authority, fooled into thinking it’s legitimate, and yet they say then can see the way. This is the difference between honesty and deceit as discussed above, and it’s part of why suffering is so universal.

“The truth is written all along the page”…of a scripture in the Pali Canon, perhaps. Still, words cannot fully grasp the experience that enlightenment teaches, as Siddhartha learns, so one has to wonder when one will be ready to receive that experience, to “come of age for you”, Brahman.

Normally, Anderson sings “I get up, I get down” with the descending pitches on down, as I described above, and as fitting with the tone painting. On a few occasions during this passage, though, he sings down with higher pitches, contradicting the meaning of that tone painting…but only superficially so. Remember how part of the meaning of Siddhartha is how nirvana is equated with samsara, that an ending of suffering is contingent on accepting suffering.

So, to get down, in this context, is to get up. This is how the “seasoned witch,” Kamala, in pulling Siddhartha down into sin, is also pulling him up “from the depths of [his] disgrace.”

Anderson’s singing of the refrain is answered with Wakeman on the pipe organ, giving us a churchy feeling suggestive of spiritual edification.

Another refrain of “I get up, I get down,” and another pipe organ passage by Wakeman leads to him adding some flamboyant synthesizer playing. This, in turn. leads to the band coming back in full force with a fast, tense restatement of that 6/8 motif I described above as originally played on Howe’s lead guitar, then on Wakeman’s organ leading into the I Get Up, I Get Down movement, and now played on his synthesizer as we reach the fourth and last movement of the title track. The tension of this music reminds us of the tense beginning jam in 6/8, and recalls Siddhartha’s spiritual struggle in general.

iv) Seasons of Man

We return to the 3/4 music of the first two movements, but before the singing is resumed, Wakeman does a solo on the Hammond organ.

The harmonized vocals, as heard in the verses of the first movement, return. “The time between the notes” can be related to “space between the focus.” It’s not the things themselves that matter, but what’s between them, so to speak, that does. To discover the mystery, we must go beyond the things we see and hear around us, beyond what we normally focus on, and find the empty spaces, the rhythm of the universe, in order to “ascend knowledge of love.”

While this verse is being sung, Squire is playing the C, B, and G, A notes, then G, F-sharp, and D and E, but this time without the two accented Es an octave lower, and without Bruford’s 4/4 cross-rhythm. So the bass line is in 3/4 with the rest of the band, musically suggesting a reconciling of elements, an advancement toward enlightenment.

Still, one must be careful not to succumb to hubris in one’s spiritual ascent, for “A constant vogue of triumphs dislocate man.” The shift up to the biting head of the ouroboros, where spiritual victory, nirvana, heaven, are, can easily lead to a slipping past that triumph back into the hell, the samsara, the sin, of the bitten tail.

“The man who showed his outstretched arm to space” is apparently based on a dream Anderson had of being on a mountain with a man who was pointing and saying, “That’s the whole human experience.” I can see the man in his dream as easily related to Siddhartha, who is saying essentially the same thing to Govinda at the end of Hesse’s novel. And Anderson, “knowing all about the place,” has achieved enlightenment.

“The silence of the valley,” which is “viewed” and not heard, must mean the valley’s peacefulness, for I can imagine Siddhartha’s river flowing nearby. “To witness cycles only of the past” might remind us of how the Buddha, meditating under the Bodhi tree and approaching enlightenment, had a vision of his past lives, as well as visions of samsara in general.

These cycles are the “seasons of man,” how we get up and down, experiencing fortune and misfortune, the seasons that pass us by and that we must accept if we want to overcome suffering. “Now that it’s all over and done…now that you’re whole,” you’re enlightened.

The sidelong suite ends–in a state of full bliss and happiness, all while repeating “I get up, I get down”–with an acceptance of the ups and downs of life, an acceptance of samsara in nirvana and vice versa. We return to the sounds of nature, of the river, that we heard at the beginning of the suite, a going full circle that implies a cyclical quality of going back and forth between samsara and nirvana, similar to what Siddhartha has experienced.

IV: And You And I

i) Cord of Life

Side Two of the album begins with Howe saying “OK” to producer Eddy Offord, then playing a flurry of acoustic guitar natural harmonics. He then plays something plaintive in E minor on a 12-string acoustic guitar before strumming a happy progression in D-major in 3/4, musically suggesting the recurring theme of the album that there must be sadness before happiness. Note that Howe’s D-major progression gets up and gets down, again and again. Wakeman accompanies Howe with a solo on a Minimoog. In the background, you can hear six hits on Bruford’s bass drum (accompanied by Squire hitting a low D on his bass) and Bruford’s tapping of a triangle.

Over the music, we hear Anderson singing a melody that ascends a fourth, goes down a third, and repeats these ups and downs four more times. This up-and-down ascent will be a melodic motif used on and off throughout the song. Since the two songs on Side Two are also related with Siddhartha, we can hear this motif, ascending by fourths and descending by thirds, as part of the album’s “I get up, I get down” theme of spiritual progress: there are difficulties–the downs, but with patience, one will ultimately reach the top, to reach “the man who showed his outstretched arm to space.”

I suspect that that man is the same one who “conceived a moment’s answers to the dream,” the one who’s solved the mysteries of the dream of life, since he’s “sensing all the themes.”

“The spiral aim” seems to be another way of describing the goal of reaching enlightenment, with its ups and down, its progress and setbacks expressed in the form of a cyclical spiral that ultimately still takes us to the top, like a spiral staircase. “A movement regained and regarded both the same” sounds like those good and bad moves between samsara and nirvana, seen as the same thing, as I’ve discussed several times already.

A refrain heard many times in this song is “All complete in the sight of seeds of life with you.” The understanding that samsara is an indispensable part of nirvana, that the alleviation of suffering necessitates, paradoxically, the acceptance of suffering, is what makes us “all complete”: we see the “seeds of life,” its birth, and the Buddha taught that birth is pain, life is pain, etc. and we are complete “with you.”

So who is the you in “and you and I”?

Is this you singular, or plural?

Are these ‘you and I’ people Govinda (or Kamala) and Siddhartha?

Or are they all of humanity and Siddhartha? Brahman and (Siddhartha’s) Atman?

The repetition of and you and I reinforces the sense of interconnectedness between the self and other, of friendship and love.

There’s a sense of Brahman’s monadic unity underlying all the surface differences in the next two lines. “Changed only for a sight of sound” would represent the surface differences of the senses; “the space agreed” would thus correspond to the invisible, underlying unity, a unity “between the picture of time,” time being a human construct that the mystic must learn to transcend. The unity is “behind the face of need,” of the desire that leads to suffering.

“Coming quickly to terms of all expression laid” is an understanding of what’s expressed outside of oneself, which results in a greater mutual understanding of self and other. The “emotion” that’s “revealed” out there, in Brahman as expressed to Atman, is “the ocean maid,” a metaphor to give us a sense of the beauty of the Absolute. My blog’s name, Infinite Ocean, is a metaphor for that Absolute, Brahman-like reality of subatomic unity underneath the surface differences experienced through the senses.

These surface differences are all too often the cause of so many of our troubles. “Coins and crosses” are money and religion, the Church in particular; we “never know their fruitless worth,” or their uselessness in giving us true happiness. Anderson explained, in an interview with Rock History Music.com, that the lines of this verse were his favourite in the song. He felt that we, being spiritual, should follow our own spiritual instincts and therefore we don’t need organized religion or the corrupting influence of money.

“Cords are broken,” each cord of life, I take it, and are “locked inside the Mother Earth.” Because of illusory maya, we are swayed by money and religion, and so we’re alienated from each other and the natural environment.

These problems won’t hide, that is, their ill effects will surface and trouble us, but “they won’t tell you,” either, for they won’t speak to those who don’t listen. We’re “watching [all of] the world,” that is, caught up in all the surface, worldly pleasures, but not paying attention to what’s truly important.

Musically, this verse has switched from 3/4 to 4/4. Recall how, when analyzing the title track, I interpreted the three beats of each bar as representing the mystical three of the Trimurti, and of the resolution of Hegel’s dialectic. I also mentioned how the Squire/Bruford cross-rhythm in 4/4 represents an ongoing conflict, a clash of duality (2 + 2) that leaves the dialectic unresolved. Since this verse comments on the problems of the world, as opposed to the blissful mysticism of the preceding verse, it’s fitting that this verse should be in 4/4.

To go back to the mysticism, we hear Anderson sing “and you and I climb over the sea to the valley.” The sea, a vast body of water like an ocean, is a metaphor for Brahman, as I’ve described above. The holy water of Siddhartha’s river, in the valley, empties out in the seas and oceans, so going “over the sea to the valley” represents the attainment of enlightenment, nirvana, as opposed to being distracted by “coins and crosses,” and all of the problems that they give us.

Reaching out “for reasons to call” is a calling out to the Divine, to be connected with it.

ii) Eclipse

The next movement is mostly instrumental, based on a theme Bruford composed, his only compositional contribution to the album. Normally, drummers don’t contribute much to the songwriting of a band, being focused on the beat rather than melody or harmony. I’ve discussed a number of Bruford’s complaints about working in Yes, but one thing he was deeply grateful for was the band’s encouraging him, in their democratic spirit, to contribute compositional ideas, which he did on a number of occasions over the period of the first five Yes albums we hear him play drums on. These contributions gave him the confidence to keep writing music, and as a result, we have Bruford’s jazz-fusion solo albums of the late 1970s and 1980, the best of which was his first, Feels Good to Me, an inviting demonstration not just of his chops as a drummer, but of his compositional ability as well.

The title of this movement, ‘Eclipse,’ fits with the theme of the relationship between light and darkness, nirvana and samsara. Just as the moon blocks out the sun’s light…temporarily…so does the light of truth, or the truth of nirvana and enlightenment, get blocked out by the lunacy, as it were, of samsara and desire…yet this blockage can also be temporary if we have the patience to wait for the opportunity to be enlightened again. Hence the verse we hear at the end of this movement, a repeat of the spiritually edifying lines of the first movement. Now, what I’ve said holds true if it’s a solar eclipse.

But what if it’s a lunar eclipse, with a ‘blood moon’? If so, that could tie this movement in with the last one–“Apocalypse.” The notion of the horrors of the end of the world doesn’t have to be taken literally, the way the Biblical fundamentalists would have it. An allegorical interpretation of the apocalypse preceding the Kingdom of Heaven would tie in with what I was saying before, about a confrontation with the hellish bitten tail of the ouroboros leading to a crossing past it to reach its dialectical opposite, the biting head of heaven, nirvana. Recall Siddhartha’s despair by the river before hearing Om.

This movement ends with a return to that plaintive music in E minor on Howe’s 12-string acoustic guitar. This soon switches to him playing something happy in E major, beginning the next movement. Again, to reach happiness, we must first go through a period of sadness.

iii) The Preacher, the Teacher

“Sad preacher nailed upon the coloured door of time” brings up two images simultaneously: Christ nailed on the Cross, and Luther’s 95 Theses nailed to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany. Sadness and happiness are once again being dialectically juxtaposed: the pain of the Crucifixion leading to salvation for all, and the tension of Luther’s confrontation with, and his excommunication from, the Catholic Church, leading to the Protestant Reformation and the curbing of those Church abuses (Indulgences, etc.). Luther will later be referenced in “Siberian Khatru.”

The juxtaposition of sadness and happiness is also reflected in the relationship between this verse and the music. Anderson is singing this verse in that ascending line heard in the first movement, going up by fourths and down by thirds, all with Howe’s happy chords in E major in the background. We’ve also returned to 3/4, the three of the Trimurti and Hegel’s triadic dialectic.

“Insane teacher be there, reminded of the rhyme.” These criticisms of the “sad preacher” and “insane teacher” remind us of Siddhartha’s attitude toward spiritual teachers, that however wise their words may be, it’s better to be edified by direct personal experience of enlightenment. The words of Christ, Luther, and the Buddha all pale in comparison with that direct experience. Their words may remind us of the rhyme, of the cyclical repetitions of good and bad experiences, but feeling that rhyme in one’s heart is far more edifying.

Speaking of bad preachers and teachers, we should consider something else. In spite of all of those demagogues out there who try to manufacture consent for more wars by vilifying this or that political leader whom they feel is somehow threatening their status as global hegemony, “There’ll be no mutant enemy, we shall certify.” The “political ends,” in the form of the demagogues’ propaganda, “will die.” Instead of listening to their garbage, try the experience of enlightenment, as sent into your Atman from Brahman; so, “Reach out as forward tastes begin to enter you.”

Siddhartha “listened hard” to his teachers among the Brahmins and among the Samanas, “but could not see,” that is, he could not receive the needed edification from the preachers of organized religion. He had to find the truth himself, not from words. The tempo of life would change within him and outside of him, from his own direct experience of it.

However much training the preacher received, he ended up losing his name, or his potential for greatness, since all he learned were someone else’s wise words, not edification from his own experience. The teacher, in his travels, just wanted the same verbal wisdom of the preacher. He ended up no wiser.

“In the end,” though, “we’ll agree,” that is, come to a state of harmony with the Absolute, for we’ll receive a higher wisdom than that of mere words, and merging with Brahman thus, “we’ll immortalize.” “…the truth of the man maturing in his eyes” sounds like the man of Anderson’s dream, the man on the mountain “who showed his outstretched arm to space,” telling Anderson “that’s the whole human experience.” Recall that I related this man and Anderson to Siddhartha and Govinda respectively, the former edifying the latter.

After this, we have repeats of lines I interpreted the meaning of above: “All complete in the sight…,” “Coming quickly to terms…,” etc., until we get to a new line, sung to the up-by-fourths, down-by-thirds melodic ascent: “A clearer future, morning, evening, nights with you.” As one approaches the “clearer future” of enlightenment “with you,” that is, Siddhartha with his companion in Govinda or Kamala, or Atman with his companion in Brahman, one sees the coming of the morning light and the darkness of night–the juxtaposition of nirvana and samsara, heaven and hell, bliss and pain. One must accept the bad with the good to alleviate suffering fully.

I get up, I get down.

There’s a return to the music derived from the Bruford theme, the “Eclipse” music, which will fittingly segue into the final movement, “Apocalypse,” fittingly for the reasons I discussed above. Interesting additions to the music this time around include Wakeman playing chromatic descensions on the piano. These descensions musically suggest, once again, the idea that one must descend into hell, like Christ‘s harrowing of it, before experiencing the heights of heaven.

I get up, I get down.

iv) Apocalypse

And after the hell of the apocalypse comes the bliss of the Kingdom of Heaven, nirvana after the suffering of samsara. So Anderson sings a happy tune in B major, accompanied by Howe’s guitar.

That repetition of “and you and I” reinforces the sense of the unity and interconnectedness between oneself and one’s friends (i.e., Siddhartha with Govinda/Kamala), or between Atman and Brahman. These united souls “climb, crossing the shapes of the morning,” that is, they come up to the morning light of bliss and nirvana. They also “reach over the sun for the river,” or, they go past the sun’s light to touch the greater enlightenment that Siddhartha’s river provides.

They “climb clearer towards the movement”: with greater clarity, they rise to an understanding that, as Heraclitus observed, “everything flows,” the wave-like movements of the infinite ocean of Brahman, which brings us to the last line. They “called over valleys of endless seas.”

The climbing and reaching over is the getting up. The going “over valleys of endless seas,” instead of climbing the mountain (where the man with his outstretched arm is), is a descent to valleys and to sea level, the getting down. The spiritual journey isn’t about always rising and invariably getting better. Because we’re human, we’ll always fall, then get up again.

I get up, I get down.

V: Siberian Khatru

“Khatru,” according to Jon Anderson, means “as you wish” in the Yemeni dialect of Arabic. It’s been said that the lyrics of the song are about “unity among different cultures,” and perhaps that’s how we should take “as you wish” to mean: whatever culture you happen to have been raised in, express your truth in whatever way feels right to you.

Siddhartha, as we learned from reading his life story, found the truth in a way that suited him: not through words and teachings, but through lived experience. Now, the words of the Brahmins, Samanas, and Buddhists all pointed to the same truth, hence “unity among different cultures,” but Siddhartha had to feel that truth, not hear the clumsy, inadequate expression of that truth through mere words.

The song begins with Steve Howe strumming a jaunty tune on his electric guitar. Then the rest of the band comes in, with Wakeman playing a theme on the Mellotron, and Squire and Bruford backing him up with three bars of 4/4 and one in 3/4. This is all played again, then on the third playing of it, Howe joins in with a motif we’ll hear in a number of forms on and off throughout the rest of the song: a pull-off from a third to a second, then the root and a hammer-on back to the second, and a fifth, then the motif goes back to the beginning with the pull-off from the third to the second, and the whole motif is heard again and again, including a move up an octave, then up another octave.

Then we change key, and the main riff–which incorporates that motif–is heard, the riff that introduces the vocals. Wakeman’s organ is playing a parallel harmony line to Howe’s guitar riff. Anderson, Squire, and Howe are singing in Yes’s signature three-part vocal harmony.

“Sing, bird of prey/Beauty begins at the foot of you.” They sing of the beauty of a bird that kills other animals to survive. Once again, we hear of that juxtaposition of heaven and hell, of nirvana and samsara, of bliss and suffering that Siddhartha had to learn and accept as the truth of living. From the perspective of the individual ego, this feels intolerably painful; but from the divine, pantheistic point of view, Brahman is doing all of this hurting to itself–this is what the ouroboros, biting its own tail, represents. If “you believe the manner” of this, you’ll understand and accept this reality.

This paradoxical idea is developed in the next line, “Gold, stainless nail.” One is reminded of those nails that went through Christ’s hands and feet. They’re gold because, from a Christian’s point of view, they lead to man’s salvation, hence they’re “Torn through the distance of man,” that is, his sinful distance from God. From a mystic’s point of view, though, they’re gold–through the pain they cause–because it’s pain that teaches us to give up our attachment to pleasure.

These people, be they Christians or mystics of any religion, “regard the summit,” that is, the highest point of spiritual attainment; they get up, trying to reach that summit, just as they get down, experiencing pain. Note that the summit is the top of the mountain–I assume it’s the same one where the man with his outstretched arm is. Note also that all three of these songs’ lyrics share similar imagery, since they’re all in some sense or another related to Siddhartha.

Recall what I said about Heraclitus’ dictum that “everything flows,” that is, “goes through the motion”…even a cold, desolate place like Siberia. That flow of everything moves “as you wish,” you in this context being Brahman. So even those places that seem stern, rigid, and unbending in their nature, like Eastern Russia, are part of that cosmic motion. It’s interesting to point out in this connection that towards the end of this song, Yes will play some music with stabbing, irregular rhythms reminiscent of Igor Stravinsky, a Russian composer.

“Hold out the morning that comes into view,” that is, experience the dawning light of spiritual illumination. And with that, we’re reminded of Siddhartha’s holy “River running right on over my head.” As I said, these songs’ lyrics share a lot of similar imagery, the recurring themes and motifs that unify the whole album.

Next we hear, in septuple time, that guitar motif I mentioned above, along with Squire playing roots, fifths, and roots an octave higher on the bass, first as G, D, G, up and down, then as B, F-sharp, B, up and down. Then the main riff in G major comes back, with Bruford shaking a tambourine.

“How does she sing?” seems to be referring back to that singing bird of prey of the first verse. The “cold, reigning king” sounds like an evil one, but his “secrets…produce the movement” that Heraclitus described. So just like the killer bird that sings and is beautiful, the king in his coldness (like Siberia) “goes through the motion.” We have to take the bad with the good to embrace Brahman, the All, the Absolute.

The chorus about Siberia is repeated, followed by other random images, including a “blue tail,” a kind of thrush found in places like Finland and Siberia, and “Luther, in time.” Recall, in “And You and I,” the “sad preacher nailed upon the coloured door…” as a reference to the nailing of Luther’s 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenberg. This song is about unity among cultures, so any reference to those who have brought up tensions between different religious factions, for example, would be a challenge to such unity.

There were tensions between the Catholics and Protestants, of course, and despite the efforts of some Lutherans to have a dialogue with the Eastern Orthodox Church (the Greek Orthodox Church in particular, but we can, for the sake of this song, make associations with the Russian Orthodox Church, too), there were changes in church teaching and policy of the Lutherans that the Orthodox rejected. So in the quest of unity among different religious factions, one gets up, one gets down. Perhaps Luther, in time, would find the unity…not in his lifetime, of course, but would Lutherans in our future, maybe?

After the verse referencing Luther, we hear Howe playing a tune on the electric sitar, once again relating this music to that of India, Siddhartha‘s setting. Then we hear Wakeman playing a harpsichord, with Squire accompanying him on the bass: together, the two almost sound like a basso continuo in Baroque music. Bruford joins the two on the drums, then Howe starts playing glissandi on a steel guitar.

After all of this, Anderson’s singing resumes, with reprises of “Hold down the window,” etc. After this, he sings two new lines, including “Green leaves reveal the heart-spoken Khatru.” So, we have here an image of the beauty of nature telling us, from her heart, just what we wish to hear. This all ties in with the holy river Siddhartha sits by: to be close to the Divine, be surrounded in nature. Speaking of “as you wish,” one is also reminded of that scene in As You Like It, in which Duke Senior speaks of how edifying it is to be in nature. The green colour of the album cover and Roger Dean’s picture of watery cliffs in the inner sleeve also tie in with the idea of nature’s beauty.

After Anderson has sung these lines, we hear Howe playing that guitar motif I described above, with Squire playing those roots, fifths, and roots an octave above; and Wakeman is playing atmospheric flute tapes on his Mellotron. The band coms back in the the main riff, though it’s varied at the end with a descending pentatonic/blues line. Bruford is shaking the tambourine again.

In their three-part vocal harmonies again, Anderson, Squire, and Howe are singing repeats of lines like “Gold, stainless nail…” etc., and “Cold, reigning king…” etc., but with two new lines: “Shelter the women that sing/As they produce their movement.” One would hope that that otherwise bad king would have a good moment, for a change, and help the women contribute to the cosmic flow of everything. After all, since one must take the bad with the good–these opposites being dialectically unified–then we can expect a bad king to be a good one from time to time, too, for the same reason.

Next, we have sung reprises of lines about the “river running right on over…,” as well as “blue tail,” and “Luther, in time.” We also have other, new random images, like “Sun-tower, asking…June cast, moon fast/As one changes…” as well as “Christian changer/Called out, saviour.”

Is the tower of light asking us to grow and be edified? Is the “June cast, moon fast” an example of what Anderson said is a relating “to the dreams of clear summer days”? Of course, “one changes” as everything else that flows. The “Christian changer” sounds like Protestant reformer Luther being referenced again as the “called-out saviour” of the corrupt Church. He would change the ways of the Church, as all things change.

After these lines, Bruford hits a gong to bring back that Mellotron theme from just after the guitar intro to the song, with the three bars of 4/4 and one of 3/4. Howe comes in with that motif I described above, but this time with an effect pedal to change his guitar tone.

We next come to the ‘Stravinsky’ section I mentioned above. In particular, it sounds influenced by The Rite of Spring. To be even more particular, I think the stabbing, irregular rhythms Yes came up with–accentuated in Bruford’s drums and in the vocalizing of Anderson, Squire, and Howe, the latter of whom is playing that guitar motif throughout in the background–were inspired by rhythms of such a sort in “Augurs of Spring” and “Ritual of Abduction,” from the first half of Stravinsky’s work.

Since, as I discussed in my article on Stravinsky’s ballet (link above), in the sometimes kind, sometimes cruel duality of nature, especially during the sections of the ballet that I suspect influenced this section of “Siberian Khatru,” we can see how that duality reinforces the themes of CTTE as a whole. I get up, I get down.

After this section, we return–with another hitting of the gong by Bruford–to the Mellotron theme in three bars of 4/4 and one of 3/4. Howe does a guitar solo over this, and the song fades out.

VI: Conclusion

Though Yes’s music in general tends toward the sentimental and overly-happy–in my opinion, at least–the lyrics should be interpreted as a kind of happiness-in-pain. One alleviates suffering by accepting it as an indispensable part of life. “Sweet are the uses of adversity,” as Duke Senior says in As You Like It, the Shakespearean Khatru.