Who By Fire
Re: Who By Fire
Just watched Leonard Cohen Under Review 1934-1977
When talking about Who by Fire, Andrew Mueller comments about "who shall I say is calling"
"it's a great gag to put in the middle of a recast prayer."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCbekHrQNYU
1hour 01min 22sec
When talking about Who by Fire, Andrew Mueller comments about "who shall I say is calling"
"it's a great gag to put in the middle of a recast prayer."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCbekHrQNYU
1hour 01min 22sec
············································································································
2008-06-29 Pyramid Stage, Glastonbury Festival; 2008-07-17 O2 Arena, London
Leonard Cohen Chinese Fansite since 2008 http://site.douban.com/137869/
Search LeonardCohenCHINA on WeChat and subscribe for the latest Leonard Cohen news
2008-06-29 Pyramid Stage, Glastonbury Festival; 2008-07-17 O2 Arena, London
Leonard Cohen Chinese Fansite since 2008 http://site.douban.com/137869/
Search LeonardCohenCHINA on WeChat and subscribe for the latest Leonard Cohen news
Re: Who By Fire
who by powder means traditional burial? like "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust"? or by gunpowder/war?
············································································································
2008-06-29 Pyramid Stage, Glastonbury Festival; 2008-07-17 O2 Arena, London
Leonard Cohen Chinese Fansite since 2008 http://site.douban.com/137869/
Search LeonardCohenCHINA on WeChat and subscribe for the latest Leonard Cohen news
2008-06-29 Pyramid Stage, Glastonbury Festival; 2008-07-17 O2 Arena, London
Leonard Cohen Chinese Fansite since 2008 http://site.douban.com/137869/
Search LeonardCohenCHINA on WeChat and subscribe for the latest Leonard Cohen news
Re: Who By Fire
Initially, I thought it was gunpowder, but given the context of the whole line ("who by avalanche, who by powder"), I later came to believe that the "powder" refers to cocaine, which obviously looks like powder, & is often called "snow" (in jargon lingo). An avalanche usually involves huge amounts of snow, & death by cocaine would involve a relatively tiny amount of "snow", so that interpretation would make it consistent with the "opposites" motif that is employed throughout the song.WiTS wrote:who by powder means traditional burial? like "Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust"? or by gunpowder/war?
- Jean Fournell
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:09 pm
- Location: Provence
Re: Who By Fire
Wouldn't cocaine be a quasi-repetition of "barbiturate"?
(But I don't mean to exclude that possibility, of course.)
Here a few alternative suggestions of oppositions:
• avalanche of snow — powder snow (snow falling slowly, in few, very small, dry flakes)
• avalanche of snow — a cannon fired in order to artificially release a threatening avalanche in a controlled manner
• avalanche of stones and rocks — powder as a synonym of dust
(or the stifling ashes of Pompeii; or the cold resulting from too much dust and ashes in the stratosphere, when they reflect too much sunlight back into space)
• "I stepped into an avalanche" — "A forty-five beside her head"
(The latter would be a quasi-repetition of "who by his own hand", however...)
As for the question the song is asking, it seems very similar to the question Al-Hallaj got answered (directly, that is, with nothing to go between him and Him):
"And who [shall I say] is calling?" — "[Say:] You."
(But I don't mean to exclude that possibility, of course.)
Here a few alternative suggestions of oppositions:
• avalanche of snow — powder snow (snow falling slowly, in few, very small, dry flakes)
• avalanche of snow — a cannon fired in order to artificially release a threatening avalanche in a controlled manner
• avalanche of stones and rocks — powder as a synonym of dust
(or the stifling ashes of Pompeii; or the cold resulting from too much dust and ashes in the stratosphere, when they reflect too much sunlight back into space)
• "I stepped into an avalanche" — "A forty-five beside her head"
(The latter would be a quasi-repetition of "who by his own hand", however...)
As for the question the song is asking, it seems very similar to the question Al-Hallaj got answered (directly, that is, with nothing to go between him and Him):
"And who [shall I say] is calling?" — "[Say:] You."
___________________________________________________
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
Re: Who By Fire
It would be a quasi-repetition, & that has occurred to me as a potential issue with that interpretation. On the other hand, they are very different kinds of drugs - barbiturate is a "downer" drug. as it makes one feel very relaxed, & cocaine is an "upper" drug, a stimulant. So they are, one might say, "opposite" types of drugs, which would give us a motif of opposites within (or overlaid upon) opposites.Jean Fournell wrote:Wouldn't cocaine be a quasi-repetition of "barbiturate"?
(But I don't mean to exclude that possibility, of course.)
Here a few alternative suggestions of oppositions:
• avalanche of snow — powder snow (snow falling slowly, in few, very small, dry flakes)
• avalanche of snow — a cannon fired in order to artificially release a threatening avalanche in a controlled manner
• avalanche of stones and rocks — powder as a synonym of dust
(or the stifling ashes of Pompeii; or the cold resulting from too much dust and ashes in the stratosphere, when they reflect too much sunlight back into space)
But I also like your alternative suggestions, Jean, & they are certainly valid interpretations - thanks for that.
- Jean Fournell
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:09 pm
- Location: Provence
Re: Who By Fire
Thanks for the info, Holydove! I'm no good at "artificial paradises" indeed.
So there would be the opposition cocaine — barbiturate, but not as a couple, not in the same verse. And as such, wouldn't it be the only one of that type, "of opposites within (or overlaid upon) opposites"?
All the others couples of opposites seem to me independent of each other, precisely not opposed, but contributing to a multi-facetted whole...
So there would be the opposition cocaine — barbiturate, but not as a couple, not in the same verse. And as such, wouldn't it be the only one of that type, "of opposites within (or overlaid upon) opposites"?
All the others couples of opposites seem to me independent of each other, precisely not opposed, but contributing to a multi-facetted whole...
___________________________________________________
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
Re: Who By Fire
Actually, the (speculative) cocaine-barbiturate opposition is not in the same line, like the other oppositions, but it's in the same verse - at the end of the first & third lines of the second verse. The song has a total of three verses, & and I'd say that the third verse also has oppositions at the end of the first & third lines: ". . .who by accident" in the first line, & ". . .who by his own hand", (which would indicate a deliberate act, as opposed to an accident), in the third line. I don't see anything like that in the first verse, though; & I'm not implying that the existence of those sets of opposites, in the second & third verse, prove or disprove anything; it was just an observation that I thought was kind of interesting. . .I still think the powder could also refer to gunpowder (a more consolidated & controlled form of powder, as opposed to the huge & uncontrolled avalanche of snow/powder ), or whatever other ideas one might come up with. . .Jean Fournell wrote:
So there would be the opposition cocaine — barbiturate, but not as a couple, not in the same verse. And as such, wouldn't it be the only one of that type, "of opposites within (or overlaid upon) opposites"?
Re: Who By Fire
holydove wrote: ↑Wed Jan 28, 2015 2:30 amInterpretation 1: An avalanche kills by great external violence. An avalanche arises only from large amounts of snow (a white powder). <= O => Cocaine (also a white powder) kills from within and not with thousands of tons but with a few grams.Jean Fournell wrote:
So there would be the opposition cocaine — barbiturate, but not as a couple, not in the same verse. And as such, wouldn't it be the only one of that type, "of opposites within (or overlaid upon) opposites"?
Interpretation 2. In German there is not the term "gunpowder", the Germans say "Schwarzpulver" (black powder). And so the term is also formed in Italian, Turkish, Japanese and in Farsi, because the charcoal in the classic recipe colors the explosive black.
In the line there are therefore two causes of death: a white powder and a natural force, against a black powder with the man kill other humans.
In essence, I mean that here great natural power as a cause of death is contrasting with great human power, especially war.
The white avalanche stands for all natural disasters, black powder stands for all the great wars and civil wars.
I also think that Leonard Cohen does not deal twice with drugs / self-poisoning as a cause of death, but does not address the issue of war.
- Jean Fournell
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 4:09 pm
- Location: Provence
Re: Who By Fire
Superb!
Tons of natural white powder versus a few grams of manmade black powder, for one shot.
Well done, Claus.
Thank you.
Tons of natural white powder versus a few grams of manmade black powder, for one shot.
Well done, Claus.
Thank you.
___________________________________________________
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
Therefore know that you must become one with the bow, and with the arrow, and with the target —
to say nothing of the horse.
♪... for a while ♪
♪... for a little while... ♪
(Just a filthy beggar blessing / What happens to the heart)
-
- Posts: 6
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 12:44 pm
Re: Who By Fire
Well I really liked all the posts in this thread !
This was the first LC song that I felt I understood and it lead me to think more about the lyrics of his other songs instead of merely hearing (not listening to) them.
I never shared my insights though, and therefore never could be sure whether others would come to the same conclusions. It is a sweet sense of comfort to find it is so after all.
To me this song texts out different causes to pass away, but it is the opposite direction of the question that is really the thing to think about; not who is here, who is calling but rather who is asking these questions!
This fits so snuggly with all the opposites in the verses.
To me the one asking „who shall I say is calling“ could be St. Peter guarding the gates of heaven, and although asking for information on the surface, is really making the questioned ask themself, making them examine their conscience - why am I here, why did I die, was it all worth it?
The „who?“ includes the „how!“ (beautifully made out of the same letters) but actually points to the „why?“
Only today, reading in this forum I found out about the jewish poem that inspired this song. And I have been thinking about this more, and come up with this:
Where as said poem is about the coming year, about what will happen, my understanding is the song being at at the opposite end or opposite side of the event; opposite in time: not looking ahead, but looking back.
This is of course a christian approach bringing in yet a third religion into the equation, but all the more relevant to me after finding this quote in this very thread:
As to the „merry merry month of may“ asked about earlier in this thread:
I once read (but never fact checked) that spring is the time of year with the highest suicide rate, and may is the month most representing that season. Also merry, merry is quite the opposite of a depression culminating in suicide. And, lastly, suicide is sudden and stands in opposition to very slow decay.
...my twopence worth
LD
EDiT: One last thing: I find some parallels to the Eurhythmics song Jennifer. If I cannot find anything about Eurhythmics in these forums, I will create a post and drop a link here.
EDiT2: Here it is
This was the first LC song that I felt I understood and it lead me to think more about the lyrics of his other songs instead of merely hearing (not listening to) them.
I never shared my insights though, and therefore never could be sure whether others would come to the same conclusions. It is a sweet sense of comfort to find it is so after all.
To me this song texts out different causes to pass away, but it is the opposite direction of the question that is really the thing to think about; not who is here, who is calling but rather who is asking these questions!
This fits so snuggly with all the opposites in the verses.
To me the one asking „who shall I say is calling“ could be St. Peter guarding the gates of heaven, and although asking for information on the surface, is really making the questioned ask themself, making them examine their conscience - why am I here, why did I die, was it all worth it?
The „who?“ includes the „how!“ (beautifully made out of the same letters) but actually points to the „why?“
Only today, reading in this forum I found out about the jewish poem that inspired this song. And I have been thinking about this more, and come up with this:
Where as said poem is about the coming year, about what will happen, my understanding is the song being at at the opposite end or opposite side of the event; opposite in time: not looking ahead, but looking back.
This is of course a christian approach bringing in yet a third religion into the equation, but all the more relevant to me after finding this quote in this very thread:
Lilifyre wrote: ↑Thu Mar 25, 2010 12:21 pm [...]
First of all, this is not actually a "prayer" as such. In Judaism, there are basically 3 types of prayer: Praise, petition, and gratitude. This does not fall under any of those. Instead, it's considered a "piyut", a poem, or I would say more of a meditation. It is relatively recent as far as Jewish liturgy is concerned, dating back only to the 11th century, by Rabbi Amnon who chose torture and death as opposed to forced conversion to Christianity.
[...]
Lili
As to the „merry merry month of may“ asked about earlier in this thread:
I once read (but never fact checked) that spring is the time of year with the highest suicide rate, and may is the month most representing that season. Also merry, merry is quite the opposite of a depression culminating in suicide. And, lastly, suicide is sudden and stands in opposition to very slow decay.
...my twopence worth
LD
EDiT: One last thing: I find some parallels to the Eurhythmics song Jennifer. If I cannot find anything about Eurhythmics in these forums, I will create a post and drop a link here.
EDiT2: Here it is
LyricsDecrypter wrote: ↑Fri Jan 15, 2021 2:45 pm Wonderously (at least to me) there is nothing about Eurythmics on these forums (or at least I am too inept to find it EDiT: I stupidly spelled eurhythmics in my search), yet there are at least two songs that immedeatly come to mind that feel in some way related to LC songs: "Angel" for one, but much more "Jennifer".
As I just finished a post on Who by Fire, I started to think about the parallels between WBF and Jennifer:
In both songs someone is asking questions about probably deceased, yet the real question is:
Who is asking?
In case of Jennifer, the voice asking is very soft and loving which stands in contrast to the implied suicide of Jennifer (and torment of mood that lead to it). The lyrics describe her appearance as possible cause for her unhappines yet the repeated question of "where are you tonight", is actually answered "underneath the water".
While LCs lyrics do not offer an answer, and his lyrics are way more poetic in a the sense of being open to interpretation, you can find a level of poetry in the music accompanying the lyrics to Jennifer: There is a hint of the chopping sound a helicopter makes while supposedly out searching for Jennifer.
Back to the question on who is asking about Jennifer, I would say it is someone caring and close enough to be rightfully asking this kind of question, the loving softness of tone makes me first think of her mother more than any friend, or lover, or other person who might be "entitled" a hold over her.
Yet there is no fear, nor worry, nor forbodance of disaster at all - not very motherly. Even there seems to be a certain sense of consent to Jennifers current whereabouts in this softness.
This leads me to think it is herself asking the question. There is a serenety in that voice which implies that all is good now, any ordeal is over.
EDiT:
Or, on a more positive thought, she is not dead, only hiding by floating on her back in a still lake just below the water's surface, with only mouth and nose above the waterline more or less invisible from the water's edge and with the outside world's sounds muffled due to ears being below the waterline. In this scenario Jennifer is also rid of the outer world's unfriendlyness, sight and sound are tuned out, even gravity is overcome: she is floating with only the night sky in her sight. She serenly recides within herself, the only safe place of comfort to her.
My twopence worth...
LD