Election 2016: Trump as Performance: Operas Buffa (Falstaff ) and Tragedy (Lear) With Some Gatsby Thrown In - Starring Villains and Buffoons, and Wolves and Lambs, and Despots and Martyrs.....but Few Genuine Heroes (Except Warren and Sanders Who Were Squeezed Out Like Good Money)

I've found a new style device for lazy bloggers - repeating at the beginning of a post, the post's conclusion after stream-of-consciousness drafting (because I'm not a professional writer).

Is it appropriate to say that Donald Trump is a 'retro-1920s-Gatsby ala F Scot Fitzgerald'?

I kind of buy into this comparison. Trump can sometimes seem a 'modern' Gatsby because of his 'flash' and glitzy 'armament' which he is not shy to boast about. But this 'retro-ness' is not a true synthesis of current and Gatsbyan types because he has carried out the Gatsbyan charade for so long without crashing. (But Trump's financial reality might reveal that DT is indeed a reincarnate Gatsby, who knows?)

But where DT does resemble Fitzgerald's 'Gatsby' is DT's quality of 'superfluosity ....an even exaggerated superfluosity marked by glitzy, overdone tastes in material possessions (large, 'neo-pharonic' buildings) and blonde, superficially adorned, physically endowed women who he touts for all to hear about... even when he is describing his own daughter. Yet all these outward signs of success carry with them, or emit, a somewhat 'off' fragrance like a person wearing a not-quite fitted suit, purchased bespoke from a good, though not top tier, tailor. Also, a person wearing a strange, ill-fit, badly dyed hairpiece that turns out to be real hair!

This might sound unfair and a bit unkind so I will end this introduction to the Preface by saying, 'Just as some complain about the seeming plastic, impervious surface Hillary presents and compare her lack of projection with Trump's 'out-there-for-all-to-see', we don't really know who lives inside Trump's bluster and energy...but from what is implied, if there is something beneath Trump's flash and glitz, there might not be much to like...and much to run from in abject fear. DT might make for good literature but let not him become President...that's too real for comfort.

And, just as, for some, Hillary appears to be emotionally monochromatic, Trump appears to have successfully substituted money for morality...or maybe, just as likely, Trump didn't have to substitute for morality because morality was maybe never there.

All of this is to say that this election, taken willy-nilly with no regard for consequences, is highly entertaining like a retro Louis-Schmelling heavyweight boxing match of the 1930s. But this election also seems simultaneously vacuous and lacking in substance - this election lacks an energy of vision that a thinking person can bite into, and yet the stakes are so high:

we can't seem to free ourselves from special interests (profitable status quo corporations) to tackle global climate warming with threat of rising sea levels flooding significant portions of all coasts; America's up-to-the-neck self-entrapment in an out-of-date and endangering oil economy (and energy base), our racial impasse, our Congressional paralysis left-over from the Civil War (no, from the pre-Civil War, Clay-Calhoun states' rights debates that were never resolved, etc.

It seems that after 160 years America hasn't been able to shake off it's demons that caused the Civil War and has prevented America from moving on. Kindly speaking, Trump represents going back to the 1830's and reclaiming states rights (embodied in the 'Alt-Right' catch-bag of neo-confederate, hooded thug, revisionists who have glombed onto Trump like roaches around rotten meat).

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton seems to represent continuing 'partnering'('coddling'?) of government cozying up to big banks and big corporations - just about anything big and making money. Let's hope a 'mandate'election win for her will free Hillary from these chains.

Meanwhile, the interests of working America are stuck in a no-man's land yet America has little time and maybe no remaining chances to resolve this problem.

PREFACE:
First, I am an opera fan and despite my 'run-now!' aversion to TD (Tricky Dick), "Nixon in China" (Adams, 1987) is an opera I like very much. (My fav operas are "Norma" (Bellini, 1831) with of course Joan Sutherland, and Mozart's (1786) "Marriage of Figaro". In a good year, I can enjoy a 'Der Ring..')

But to the point of this, I see real opera material in the tragi-comedic figure of Donald Trump. What might be a title for an opera about Trump? Hmmmm, maybe ...'Vice is Nice but Retribution is like a Tidal Wave', ...or something. Trump will someday be an American literary tragi-hero, if he is not elected, or if elected, an American icon of a post-modern monster...as his hypothetical Presidency will so f...k up the world... (that's just the way Trump rolls).

So on to this 'thing' ("Thing' being a memic, Bush I word that this 2016 election process seems to have resurrected from the '80s).

So, here it is, the repeated 'finale', and of course it's all about Donald Trump who this blogger feels is an iconic, living fossil, example of 20th Century Americana at this stage of its decline, or at its cusp of a needed self-transformation whose occurrence is yet to fade away unconsummated. Note: this blog post has lain in draft form for more than a month because I felt it's premise, that Donald Trump is a genuine American comedic-tragedy - a Falstaffian Fool, yes, but more, a genuine 'American Psycho-Bright Lights- Ellisian-McInerny character flesh-rendered from the '80s,...and destined (doomed) to walk amongst us as a modern, living, walking, sniffin' (Debate #1) tragedy. And Trump is easily recognized - from his actual 1980s, days of sparkle and libido - as a shadow character in Tom Wolfe's, 'Bonfire of the Vanities' (1987). Trump is real, just 30 years out of date - he really believes his 'style' of 'courtship' is ....what ever he believes.

And if G.. is kind, 'It' will find the time and inclination to save America from a Trump Presidency.

This article's conclusion, post-Debate #1:

Trump (The Donald, DT, OD (Our Donald),'Scratch' (from Stephen Vincent Benet's 1936,'The Devil and Dan Webster') is a post-modern, but time-revisted Shakespeare-Quixotish-Rabelaisian-Shelley-Bram Stokerish monster-buffon ala Falstaff, Pantagruel,Sancho Panza and straight-man sidekick Don Quixote, Shelley's monster, Henry !V and V, Count Dracula,Philip K Dickian lamenting cyborg,and the all-time modern monster-tragedy icon - Richard Don't-kick-me-again-but-if-you-must-I-know-how-you-feel-I'm-such-a-fool-mama-said Nixon). Buffoonish and over-exaggerated but at the same time tragically out of date and worse, worth attention from our entertainment-warped culture that morphs serious sh..t with laughs.

Donald Trump, or should one say, 'Trumpism, (or maybe both) will be discussed and parsed for many years to come. One could guess that future times will look back on 'Trump' as the nadir of American or even global politics before the renaissance of government for the people, or 'Trump' will be seen as the peak of American capitalist-democracy, or democratic capitalism, before the Great Fall. Writing about the Trump phenomenon is as challenging a struggle as Trump himself is to 'see' clearly - he is this or that, seemingly changeable at a moment's notice ..or with no notice or logical pre-disposition. Trump is as close to an embodiment of the neither-here-nor-there 'Cheshire Cat' as anything yet seen outside of a theoretical physics construct.

So, after one of Trump's non-sensical detours from normalcy ('normalcy' being, relatively speaking for Mr Trump, only a bit less scary than full on psychotic), one is driven to ask,

'Is Trump real?'

To that self-posed question, one is also self-driven to respond,

'Trump is as real as I feel about him ight now, but I don't know how I might feel about him tomorrow,... but probably worse.'

So,after this preamble, this lead-in to what is almost universally acknowledged (despite harsh disagreements about the person) about Trumpism being a genuine and significant American phenomenon, this blogger comes to the nub of this post:

'Trump' and all the irrational trappings surrounding the person - the lore, exaggerations, psychological analyses and theories about him and about his supporters and his non-supporters-but-tolerators, and about his country and about his culture and about his political-economic backdrop,...Trumpism as embodied by Donald Trump the person, is and will be for a looo-ong time a fertile compost of 'guano' (a pile of bird shit for political satirists) or the highest quality 'Green Thumb Fertilizer' for the boutique gardener of the left (i.e., Ivy League scholars and psycho-analysts), or the rallying cry of the (cranially deformed, hmmm shouldn't say that), ecstatic-drenched extreme right. Take your choice.

There will be plays, songs, short stories, off-broadway pieces, and lengthy (serious) works created to express the inner wonderment many thinkers will hve for Trump the man and Trumpism of which Donald Trump is but one minor god's badly or well-done creative example, depending on one's point-of-view.

But only a few of future devotees and scholars will clearly understand how Trump and Trumpism is all of 'us'. 'Us' being the totality of America - our nation, our culture(s), regions and each person residing in America.

How every person residing in America, legal and illegal, contributes in deed or story to our collective esprit and body. As an example, it is fitting for a discussion of 'Trumpism' to mention illegal immigrants are demonized by Trump (supposedly demonized, if one is to go only by his words rather than by who he hires to do the gardening and cooking at his Florida mansion); yet these supposedly (in the Trumpian world) extraneous, worthless and demon-folk play significant and mostly positive roles in the portrayal of America's cultural memes, i.e., the illegal immigrants of especially Mexican origin have a somewhat 'uber' work ethic ...which in America is comical!

So, to the finale: Trump (The Donald, DT, OD (Our Donald),'Scratch' (from Stephen Vincent Benet's 1936,'The Devil and Dan Webster') a post-modern, but time-revisted Shakespeare-Shelley-Bram Stokerish monster (Falstaff, Shelley's monster, Henry !V and V, Count Dracula,Philip K Dickian's lamenting cyborgs ('Blade Runner' ex 'Do Robots Dream of Electric Sheep?',and the all-time modern monster-tragedy icon - Richard Don't-kick-me-again-but-if-you-must-I-know-how-you-feel-I'm-such-a-fool-mama-said Nixon.

'Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus' : Mary Shelley's Prescient, 1821 Novel of Humankind's Attempt to Understand the Meaning of Life and the Soul

Note: "Frankenstein, the Monster..." (1821) should be a primer for every modern student and researcher in Artificial Intelligence. The tortured musings of the cobbled-together monster (Ai components) give clues two hundred years later to applying the (Alan) Turing Test for self awareness and developing algorithms for modern artificial intelligence machines.
-----------
This was written in response to a request for comment regarding Mary Shelley, the early 1800's author of Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus, (1818) and Shelley's place in the evolving thinking about the meaning of life and the soul. Although Shelly might not to be significant in a discussion of 19th century tinking on these subjects, this blogger (Pericles21) feels Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' is very important and played a central if not initiating part in framing the thinking about the soul, life and even artificial intelligence from 1818 to the Transhumanism movement of today. Mary Shelley wrote 'Frankenstein' on a dare in 1818 when she was very young and lacking a formal higher education especially technical (although home schooled by very well educated and devoted parents, the Godwin's) who were well known at the time in European intellectual and salon circles. Mary's father was the political philosopher William Godwin, and her mother was the philosopher and feminist, Mary Wollstonecraft. In addition to Mary Shelley's own varied literary works, she edited and promoted the works of her husband, the Romantic poet and philosopher Percy Bysshe Shelley and even is rumored to have assisted in editing the works of the great Romantic poet, Byron. But Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' still ranks as a leader in establishing a new literary frontier in human imagination that explores the most sacred areas of human thought, life and the soul.
--------------
Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley was a product of her times, circa 1800. She participated in the thinking and discussions of her times about the nature of life and the soul. Remarkably for such a young person (age 19 at the time she wrote her first work, 'Frankenstein' in 1818) and a woman without formal education much less technical education, she was at the forefront of thinkers of her time (though unknowingly at first) about these topics. In particular, Shelley was caught up in the excitement of new scientific concepts in physiology, i.e., 'animal electricity' ala (Galvani, and discoveries in higher mathematics and science that would lead to the Riemann mathematical lectures in 1854, James Clerk Maxwell's 'Electromagnetic Relationships' in 1865, and eventually to Albert Einstein's Special Relativity Theory (1905), and along the same path of thought and imagination to great works in technical fiction and even art, e.g, the Cubist movement begun around 1905 and exampled by the painters, Georges Braque and Pablo Picasso, Fernand Leger and Paul Cezanne.

Mary Shelley's intellectual world generated fictional works that expressed the excitement of new science which expanded the boundaries of human ingenuity and imagination. This new territory of the imagination based on scientific discovery led to the 1865 rendering of nascent quantum mechanical tenets of Uncertainy and other quantum principles in the fantasy worlds authored by Oxford mathematics professor (1855-81), Charles Dodgson (nome-de-plume, Lewis Carroll), notably his 'Alice in Wonderland' (1865) and 'Through the Looking Glass' (1871). And also in the works of Jules Verne, aka 'The Father of Science Fiction'- '20 Thousand Leagues Under the Sea' (1870) and   'Around the World in 80 Days' (1873); in the breakthrough science fiction works of HG Wells (biologist) -  'The Time Machine' (1895), 'The War of the Worlds' (1898) a truly out-of-this-world vision of non-earth (extraterrestrial life forms) and 'The Island of Dr Moreau' (1896) which must be placed as the inheritor of Mary Shelly's earlier 'Frankenstein'of 1818. 

Although Mary Shelley was not a scientist nor formally educated, she was home-schooled by very well educated and sophisticated parents. And her parents' home was an important intellectual scene of the very important 'Salon' phenomenon of 17th and 18th century Europe.  In the scene, Mary was  'taken up' as a teen age girl by the famous poet Percy Shelly and was introduced and immersed into the company of leading figures of 'forward' thinking in Europe, including the mentoring 'attention' from the poet and intellectual, George Gordon Lord Byron.  In this company, on an idyllic Swiss lake vacation, Mary Shelley shyly accepted a 'dare' to write a story about some important or interesting theme of the day.  Venturing forth from in this game, Mary wrote 'Frankenstein: or the Modern Prometheus' (1818). 'Frankenstein' put into narrative words the questions raised but not clearly stated from the serious scientific thinking of the time about the nature of the soul and life, and following on from there, race and species which in 1839 surfaced through the  biology field work of Charles Darwin, 'The Voyage of the Beagle', and  Darwin's later great breakthrough,'The Origin of the Species' (1859).

Despite Mary Shelley's lack of formal education, especially technical,  Mary's 'Frankenstein'  was at the leading edge of the wave of emotion among Europe's salon intellectuals who pondered the place (and meaning) of humanity in the midst of rapidly advancing 'new science'. A principal focus of those salon debates was, 'what are the biological and/or yet undiscovered principles of life and especially the soul'?

Following from her immersion in the leading salon discussions of her time, Mary Shelly explored what might be the consequences of mankind's 'tampering' with the sacredness of life and soul. In this context, Dr Frankenstein's creation is much more than a 'put-together monster' but a representation of  humanity itself, stumbling along blindly and naively into new realms not completely understood and loaded with potential risks and dangers.

Of great 'prescience' in 'Frankenstein' is how Mary Shelley writes about the monster's musings (and laments) about his physiological incompleteness despite his self-awareness, his worries about who could love him, his search for love and his thoughts about what to do with himself. These are concepts of man-made intelligence that Mary Shelley rendered into words in 1818 but would not be addressed seriously until the 1940's mathematical work of Alan Turing's 'Turing Test', an algorithmic method of determining whether an artificial intelligence is self-aware, i.e., sentient. Interestingly, in the context of this discussion, Alan Turing turned his mathematical prowess into developing a theory for the chemical basis of morphogenesis.

More modern examples of Mary Shelley's legacy of exploring the meaning of life and soul would include Philip K Dick's, 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' (1962) (also made into the film hit, 'Blade Runner'  (1982), and  Ursula Le Guinn's ('The Left Hand of Darkness' (1969), Samuel Delaney's 'Babel-17' (1966)  and Walter Moseley's 'Blue Light' (1998) and 'Futureland: Nine Stories of an Imminent World' (2001).

Mary Shelley's inquiring spirit lives on  today. Modern (current, 2015) science is the most recent chapter of her legacy (and of her contemporary fantasy authors, e.g.,Wells, Verne, et al) of  imagination- become-real, e.g., organ transplants, genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI), and the looming 'trans-human singularity' ( Neal Stephenson, Ray Kurzweil, Jody Turner, Vladimir Mayakovsky, et al).