Saturday, September 16, 2017

Off-Topic: Catch-22, Joe Heller, And Me


Joe Heller, circa 1983 (from the back cover of his novel God Knows).


Catch-22 has influenced me more than any other book I've read.  A paperback copy was given to me by a fellow college student in 1966: "I think you would enjoy this."  Boy, was he right!

What is Catch-22 about?  Is it antiwar?  Anti-capitalist?  Anti-"the system?"  Anti-tribal and anti-conformity?  Anti-authority?

Yes.

Here's a link to a good panel discussion about Catch-22:

https://www.c-span.org/video/?302675-1/50th-anniversary-joseph-hellers-catch22

The first 12 minutes are the best: actor Scott Shepherd reads Chapter One.  In the rest of the 1.5 hour video, Bob Gottlieb (Heller's Editor) and Mike Nichols (who directed the film Catch-22) have some insightful things to say.  Christopher Buckley can be usefully ignored: use the slider.  The film was fine but, as Scott Shepherd's reading shows, it's Heller's writing that's killer.

Is Catch-22 funny?  It's hilarious.  But the book's brilliant "circular structure," which Buck Henry's screenplay for the movie mimicked, gradually reveals the dark side of what Heller is about.  (One of my favorite sentences is "And if that wasn't funny, there were lots of things that weren't even funnier.") Does Catch-22 have a Jewish sensibility?  Do I?  Maybe.  Bob Gottlieb says "Jews are not neurotic, we're just accurate."  My own son says, with a nod to my Mel Brooks obsession,  that, if reincarnation is true, that I'm "coming back" Jewish.  It's no accident that my other favorite books by Heller, God Knows and Picture This, rely on anachronism.  So do my favorite Brooks films: Blazing Saddles, Spaceballs, and Robin Hood: Men In Tights.  The point of anachronisms, as Heller and Brooks use them, is "same shit, different century."  History is just (as Barbara Tuchman put it) "the march of folly."

Gottleib says that the only two books that "took a lot out of" Heller were his first two: Catch-22 and Something Happened.  The rest of his books were "notional."  Heller would get an idea, and develop it. Does this mean that the themes of his later books were trivial?  I don't think so.  In God Knows, King David is no longer on speaking terms with God because God is no longer speaking to him.  In Picture This, Aristotle contemplates 2000 years of Western Civilization.  Both books are as savagely funny as Catch-22.

Heller's position as an honored American novelist is far from secure.  He is not highly regarded by Lit Crits.  One issue the Lit Crits have with Catch-22 is "the problem of the ending."  After showing humanity at its worst, Heller suddenly goes all optimistic on us: Yossarian goes AWOL to try to join Orr in Sweden.  Maybe escape from insanity is possible?  Mike Nichols makes this even more explicit in the film.  In the closing scene Yossarian is paddling a little yellow life raft, alone, on a wide, wide sea.  I was in the audience in Chicago in 1994 when Heller was on book tour, promoting Closing Time. In the Q&A, I asked him about "the problem of the ending:" Did you wuss out, Mr. Heller?  That's what the Lit Crits say.  His response: "I don't see how I could have ended the book any other way."  (Nice dodge!)

Another Lit Crit complaint has been that Catch-22 is insufficiently edited, too repetitive.  Repetition is required by Heller's "circular" organizational scheme, but Gottlieb says, in retrospect, "I can see room for cuts."  Heller poked fun at himself in this regard in the book (I believe): ex-PFC Wintergreen threw General Peckem's memos in the waste basket because "they were too prolix."

Kurt Vonnegut is often mentioned in the next breath with Heller, doubtless because they wrote about similar themes.  But they were different.  Heller was known for a small, tight circle of friends (one of whom was Mel Brooks) and to suffer fools ungladly.  Vonnegut liked to go to the Post Office because he could meet people and get into conversations while waiting on line.  His relatives in Indianapolis agreed that Vonnegut was one of the most pleasant, considerate, people they knew.  They just couldn't read his books.  They found some of his words and most of his ideas offensive.

Both "played with" time.  Heller used conventional chapters.  He might even have been prolix. 😉 Vonnegut learned to write on the Cornell Sun.  He liked short sentences and paragraphs, written with punch, and to break up his text into bite-sized bits, smaller than chapters.  Both wrote about stupidity and cruelty.  But, where Heller saw them as willful and self-interested, Vonnegut was inclined to cut humanity a break.  Why was Dresden firebombed?  Vonnegut believed it was bureaucratic inertia: the planes were fueled and loaded with bombs and, "we gotta go somewhere on a mission today."  (Compare this to Heller's squadron's protest about the mission to Orvieto in Catch-22.)

Another trait they shared as writers was indifference to "literature."  Which may be another reason they are disrespected by Lit Crits.  They did not think that their writing needed to be deep, or profound, or subtle, or mysterious.  Gottlieb says that Heller was easy to edit.  If Gottlieb suggested changes, Heller was all in for revisions and trying to make them work.  No "writer's ego."  Vonnegut's history as an established author was only slightly different.  He says somewhere in Palm Sunday (I paraphrase) that "nobody edits me any more, and I don't want to be.  My publisher just relies on me to turn in stuff that will make the cash register ring."  Vonnegut's take on "literature" was that stories are like Model T Fords: you just tinker with them.  If a writer has to be "difficult," for his editors or his readers, to be great, Vonnegut and Heller fail the test.  All I know is that I vibrate like a tuning fork to the ideas and prose of Vonnegut and Heller.  Especially Heller.

Wednesday, September 6, 2017

A Photo-documentation Of The History Of Porsche 917-025

There's no particular point to this post.  I just think an original car that's not iconic is interesting and fun.  Miles Collier Jr.'s choice to restore a car with no particular provenance is admirable.  So is the current owner's decision to keep it that way (with only a couple of mods, to help with track days).  There are many "Gulf" 917's around these days, and a few 917 parts bin recreations, and even a couple of "new" cars.

Porsche built an initial run of twenty-five 917's for FIA homologation, and a number of successor cars.  They were campaigned by the factory itself, John Wyer, Porsche Salzburg, and Hans-Dieter Dechent (Martini & Rossi).  But considering that a good portion of the initial build was intended for sale to private entrants, surprisingly few were campaigned by true privateers.  917-025 was one.

Apparently only five of the original chassis were initially sold to private entrants.  917- 005 was written off in John Wolfe's fatal crash at LeMans in 1969.  917-010 went to David Piper, and was probably the most successful 917 in private hands.  Piper placed well in some FIA races and won non-championship events.  917-018 went to Alex Soler-Roig who won the Spanish National Championship with it.  But its only FIA race resulted in a DNF at the Buenos Aires 1000 Km in 1971.  917-021 went to the Swedish AAW team (I have not researched its FIA record).  The subject of this post, 917-025, went to Zitro Racing.  Dominique Martin's best FIA placing with it was 9th at Monza in 1971.

917-025 has not changed hands often.  Zitro owned it 1970-1972.  Emerson and Wilson Fittipaldi owned it for ten years until 1982, and raced it in South America.  David Piper owned it 1982-1984 (I've found no pictures of 025 when Piper owned it).  Miles Collier owned it from 1984-2005, and restored it to original condition.  Since 2005 it has been owned by Peter Vogele, who frequently demonstrates the car in European vintage events.  Vogele is Swiss, as was Dominique Martin.  I'll guess that that has something to do with 025 remaining so original.


917-025 in its "plain white wrapper" at a non-championship event at Hockenheim in 1970--probably it's first race.


Buenos Aires in 1971: 10th overall and 7th in class, 20 laps down, driven by Dominique Martin/Pablo Brea.  The car has
acquired its signature blue blaze paint job and exterior-mounted central mirror. 


Practice, Spa 1000 Km, 1971.  This picture gives a better view of the central wing developed by John Wyer's team and
later made available for customer cars.  025 qualified 11th, 25 seconds off the pole pace.


On race day at Spa, the bodywork shut lines were taped.  The car was DNF (accident), driven by it's primary driver,
Dominique Martin, and Gerard Pillon (both of Switzerland).


At Monza, 1971: Martin / Pillon finished 9th (its best placing), 20 laps down to the winner. 


LeMans 1971: Martin / Pillon qualified 18th, 24 seconds off the pole.  Patino Ortiz owned 917-025, thus "Zitro Racing."
He had previously owned a Ford GT 40, also campaigned by Zitro Racing, also driven by Martin.



Pre-race (above) at LeMans 1971 and retirement (below): DNF, transmission.



LeMans was 025's last race for Dominque Martin.  Patino Ortiz may have written the checks, but clearly Martin ran
Zitro Racing.  $30,000 was a lot of money for an obsolete FIA Group 5 race car in 1972; one can guess that the
Fittipaldi brothers didn't pay the asking price.



I have no information on 917-025's career in Brazil.  Emerson Fittipaldi raced in Formula 1 well into the 1970's, and so probably drove the care rarely, if at all.  Wilson Fittipaldi may have driven it after he retired from front-rank racing.  But, because they owned it for such a long period of time, it seems likely that they used the car to showcase up-and-coming Brazilian drivers in a high-powered car.


In its earlier Fittipaldi days, 917-025 appears to be the same car raced by Dominique Martin (central mirror and wing),
with only a small front splitter added.


But later on in its Fittipaldi career, the car sprouted massive front and rear wings.


Although this picture is from the recent, Peter Vogele, era, it shows 917-025 as restored to its 1971 Zitro livery by Miles
Collier Jr.  The Collier Museum / Revs Institute has two rare and notable 917's, so parting with 025 probably wasn't
too difficult for Collier.


At the Goodwood Members' Meeting in March of 2017, Vogele has 025 restored to its LeMans appearance, right down to
the competition numbers.  Its tow hook is in a prominent location on the front deck, and Vogele likes to run large fender
mirrors, but his respect for the car's FIA racing provenance is nice to see.



At the LeMans Classic, 2017.


At a 2017 Monza vintage event.  Vogele seems to be experimenting with non-standard spoilerette adjusters.


But the cockpit remains bone-stock "customer car."