Once in a Sandwich Time
You may find yourself in Love with a beautiful Person.
You may find yourself in Love with beautiful Friends.
You may find yourself in Love with your beautiful Work.
You may ask yourself, how can I work this?
You may ask yourself, how did I get here?
You may ask yourself, can I be in Love with this beautiful person?
You may ask yourself, can I be in Love with these beautiful friends?
You may ask yourself, can I be in Love with this beautiful work?
You may say to yourself, should I focus only on my beautiful work?
You may say to yourself, should I focus only on my beautiful friends?
You may say to yourself, should I focus only on my beautiful Person?
You will find the answer, not at the bottom of the ocean, not in the streams and rivers....
You will find the answer in the Tri-Structure of the Sandwich Zone...
The Truth
They are trying to control us.
They are the machine.
They are the Politicians. They are the Corporations. They are the State. They are Technology.
They are Science. They are Religion. They are Education.
Power is Bad. Everyone in power is Bad.
Authority is Bad. Everyone in Authority is Bad.
We don't Need no Education. We don't need no Mind Control.
Hey Teacher, leave us kids alone.
Do Not Be Fooled by: Independent Music, Dancing, Drugs, Sex, Beauty, Skate Boarding, Shamans, Superstition, Herbal Remedies, Folk-Craft, Festivals, Outsider Art and Indigenous Peoples.
These are not the place places of Truth and Purity. They have been created in reaction to the Machine. They are the Shadow of the Machine. And once you are captured by the Shadow of the Machine, it will control you, it will own you, as the Machine owns us all.
The only place of Truth, the only Purity, is the true Sandwich. Look to the Tri-Structure. Look to the Sandwhich Zone. There you will find what you are looking for.
There you will find Your People.
The Zone
Our world is hopelessly boring. Therefore, there can be no telepathy, or apparitions, or flying saucers, nothing like that.
The world is ruled by cast-iron laws and it's insufferably boring.
Alas, those laws are never violated. They don't know how to be violated. So don't even hope for a UFO, that would have been too interesting.
But, how about the Bermuda Triangle? Surely I'm not going to deny that is interesting?
I am. There is no such thing. There's only Triangle ABC that equals A-primary, B-primary, C-primary.
Do you feel the boredom contained in this assertion?
To live in the Middle Ages was interesting. Every home had its house-spirits, and every church had its God.
People were young! Now the young are completely in the minority.
It's so boring.
All those laws, triangles
and no house spirits and no God, because if God is also a triangle, then I would not know what to think anymore.
And if a sandwich was a triangle I again would not know what to think. It would all be too much for my cast-iron brain to handle.
It would shatter and fall out of my ears to be swept up by some kind dust-pan, or I should say, some kind person with a dust-pan, for dust-pans, like triangles do not have the ability to be kind, no that would be too interesting by far.
Norman's Sandwich Matrix
Norman: As I explained in the previous post every class, and every nationality, has their own Sandwich. And more importantly as this is the case only confusion, or violence, can result in any meddling or accidents which bring different classes/nationalities into contact with each other's Sandwiches, let alone each other.
Compo seems to think that there is such a thing as 'individuals' out there, who might not fit neatly into these categories and be able to relate, or even do things together, across assumed Sandwich boundaries. He is of course wrong, or if there are some individuals out there then it is only about 4, and they are lonely and not worth thinking about. The point is that people should stick to their own Sandwich box, and not meddle with anyone else's, otherwise it will be like Pol Pot's dictatorship, or anarchy, either of which would give me a headache. Just get on with it, have a dance, a bit of sex, and a bit of your own Sandwich afterwards.
In order to make sure that everyone knows which is their Sandwich, and which is someone else's and thereby must not be eaten or talked about, I have constructed this Sandwich Matrix. It is to be read from left to right- For example if you are Soldier, who is African, your Sandwich is Chicken.
As this is your Sandwich you must eat that one, and not any other, and this way you will avoid any confusions or misunderstandings that would arise from treading on someone else's Sandwich turf. In this way if you stick to Chicken Sandwiches, and only talk to other people eating Chicken Sandwiches, then as long as they are in order you will only ever meet or talk to people like yourself, which will be best for you.
Class\Occupation Nationality Sandwich Soldier Europe Ham
Americas Corned Beef
Africa Chicken
Middle East Beetroot
India etc. Fish
China etc. Dog
Australasia Cat Tinker Europe Crisps
Americas Beef Jerky
Africa Rat
Middle East Mongoose
India etc. Parrot
China etc. Pak Choi
Australasia Prawn Tailor Europe Salami
Americas Pastrami
Africa Goat
Middle East Ostrich
India etc. Curry
China etc. Spring Roll
Australasia Shark Fin Rich Man Europe Quail's Eggs
Americas Caviare
Africa Monkey Brains
Middle East Camel Hump
India etc. Sacred Cow
China etc. Golden Pig
Australasia Dolphin Poor Man Europe Rope
Americas Shoes
Africa Paper
Middle East Sand
India etc. Weeds
China etc. Bamboo
Australasia Spider Spy Europe Beef
Americas Beef
Africa Beef
Middle East Beef
India etc. Beef
China etc. Beef
Australasia Beef
The Last of the Summer Sandwiches
Compo: I've been thinking recently, perhaps we need a new kind of Sandwich to act as an intermediary between people in the city? A lot of people I meet are a bit isolated, ghettoised or stuck, and are looking for some ideas, a new horizon or two, but urban life conspires against them- they tend to be stuck at work eating the same old Ham Sandwich, or stuck at home on the computer eating the same old Cheese Sandwich, or are stuck in their social life eating the same old Crisp Sandwich. A lot of people are searching for a different kind of Sandwich.
Norman: You leave people alone Compo, nobody wants you meddling in people's lives with your new fangled Sandwich ideas. What's wrong with society is that people don't know how to enjoy a good old fashioned sandwich, or they are too busy at work to get involved in eating some more interesting Sandwiches. But either way there is nothing anyone can do about it. And anyway each class, and ethnic group, like a good old 17th Century village, is happy eating their own Sandwich to themselves. If you try to introduce a butcher, who has of course been eating the bacon Sarny all his life with his bacon Sarny working class friends, to a university educated type of Ciabbata Sandwich person, then they'll just get confused and not be able to relate. You just leave everyone in their little boxes where they belong and let there be no more word of Sandwich mixing, it is giving me a headache.
Foggy: Norman's probably right Compo, I'm not sure about your new fangled Sandwich ideas either. You see Compo, what everyone is looking for is actually just the Love Sandwich, which in my case is a Jam Sandwich. Problem is I can't quite find it, the Jam Sandwich. I've been looking all over town for a while, and I've yet to quite find her. But that's what I believe in, that's my Sandwich. And I don't want to hear about all these other Sandwich ideas, it is giving me a headache.
Norman: That's right Foggy, nobody wants all of these new Sandwich horizons. All they want is a bit of dancing, with a nice girl, and then a bit of comforting Ham Sandwich in bed afterwards. Or at least that's what I want, I think. I've been eating at the same old Sandwiches for a long time now, I'm comfortable with them, so no more talk of new Sandwich horizons from you Compo, you leave people be, it's giving me a headache.
Compo: Well Foggy, Norm, I can see that neither of you are interested in trying a new kind of Sandwich, you seem content with your Last of the Summer Sandwiches, sitting around chewing on them like old bones. But a lot of the people I meet are searching for a different Sandwich, a better Sandwich. They aren't all the boxed class stereotypes that Norm believes are out there- there are plenty of individuals out there who are looking to get out of their box.
Foggy: Well Compo they should just shut up, calm down, go dancing and continue their search for the perfect Love Sandwich, that's my advice to them. The rest is just a load of nonsense.
Norm: Exactly Foggy, in fact anyone who suggests that people might want, or go about, exploring other kinds of Sandwiches is basically like Pol Pot the fascist dictator who wanted everyone to be the same. Compo sounds a bit like Pol Pot, thinking that everyone is going to be able to relate to the same sandwich. In my book everyone should just chew on their same old Sandwiches in their little Sandwich boxes, and stay there.
Compo: Well Foggy, there's nothing wrong with the Love Sandwich, obviously, it's important. It sounds like you and Norm could do with eating a bit more of it more regularly, it might cheer you up a bit and make you sound a bit less like grumpy old men, but actually I find what people are looking for often isn't actually the Love Sandwich, or a new version of it, it's a different Life Sandwich, a different Work Sandwich, a Collaboration Sandwich- they are looking for a different way to relate to the world, not just to one person in bed and hanging around on the Dodgems or in the Park. The idea that the Love Sandwich is 'the answer' is clearly a romantic delusion, for many people, or just suggests a lack of new ideas. And equally people can often get trapped eating the Love Sandwich, chewing on it all day in bed or in the park, and it can tie them down and prevent them embarking on new adventures in search of the Life Sandwich that they are looking for.
Norm: Oh will you Compo, you really are sounding like Pol Pot, or Stalin.
Compo: I think you've had a bit too much of the last of the summer wine Norm. The idea that many people are in search of a more interesting, fulfilling Sandwich, and that there might be ways to help them on their way as an intermediary, is rather the opposite of authoritarian dictatorship. Your rather sweeping conservatism and desire to try to kill off new ideas does though smack of an authoritarian tendency- you seem to want to keep everyone in their little boxes, chewing on the same old Sandwiches, perhaps a reflection of your own situation.
Norm: All I am saying Compo is that everything is fine, people should get on with it, go dancing, have some sex, and a bit of Ham Sandwich afterwards. Beyond that what we need is a New World Order, but as that isn't happening and it is impossible to achieve then all there is left to do is go dancing, have sex, have a good old Ham Sandwich, and chew the cud with the last of the Summer Sandwiches.
Compo: Yes, I think it is clear that you and Foggy have pretty much given up on the possibility of change, or a new Sandwich horizon, for yourselves or anybody else. But a lot of people, individuals, haven't.
Norm: Well they are just deluding themselves, they should shut up and get on with it, go dancing, have some sex, and a bit of Ham Sandwich afterwards. Collaborations never work anyway.
Foggy: Exactly, they should just get on with it, shut up, and seek out the Love Sandwich, like me. Everything else is fantasy or Socio-pathy.
Compo: Well a lot of people I talk to out in the world do want to find a new kind of Sandwich, and they will, they do, sometimes at least. I think there is hope.
Norm: No Compo, they are deluding themselves. Love doesn't work, Collaboration doesn't work. Everything is just disappointing, money and inequality rule the world, the powerful are a bunch of cunts, and I'm off dancing and for a Ham Sandwich, with the Last of the Summer Sandwiches.
Foggy: Exactly, nothing changes. I'm off in search of my Love Sandwich, and you better be careful with your apparent optimism Compo- you might get hurt.
Norm: Yeah Compo, nobody likes trouble makers. You just go dancing and have a Ham Sandwich, stick to the Last of the Summer Sandwiches, and no more talk of new Sandwich Horizons, there's a good boy.
Compo: Well I'm not going to sit around for the rest of my life chewing on the Last of the Summer Sandwiches with you old duffers, creaking away on the dance floor looking for a Love you Cannot Find. I'm off out.
Foggy: Well careful Compo, it is a big wide world out there, and there's nothing in it but the mysterious, slightly out of reach Love Sandwich.
Norm: Yeah Compo, you be careful with your Pol Pot ideas. You'll only end up disappointed like me, Foggy and the rest of humanity.
Compo: Well it'll sure beat sitting around with you lot chewing the Last of the Summer Sandwiches all day Waiting for Godot, or for the Love Train to swing by.
Foggy: You be careful Compo....
etc. etc.
The world is ruled by cast-iron laws and it's insufferably boring.
Alas, those laws are never violated. They don't know how to be violated. So don't even hope for a UFO, that would have been too interesting.
But, how about the Bermuda Triangle? Surely I'm not going to deny that is interesting?
I am. There is no such thing. There's only Triangle ABC that equals A-primary, B-primary, C-primary.
Do you feel the boredom contained in this assertion?
To live in the Middle Ages was interesting. Every home had its house-spirits, and every church had its God.
People were young! Now the young are completely in the minority.
It's so boring.
All those laws, triangles
and no house spirits and no God, because if God is also a triangle, then I would not know what to think anymore.
Norman: As I explained in the previous post every class, and every nationality, has their own Sandwich. And more importantly as this is the case only confusion, or violence, can result in any meddling or accidents which bring different classes/nationalities into contact with each other's Sandwiches, let alone each other.
Compo seems to think that there is such a thing as 'individuals' out there, who might not fit neatly into these categories and be able to relate, or even do things together, across assumed Sandwich boundaries. He is of course wrong, or if there are some individuals out there then it is only about 4, and they are lonely and not worth thinking about. The point is that people should stick to their own Sandwich box, and not meddle with anyone else's, otherwise it will be like Pol Pot's dictatorship, or anarchy, either of which would give me a headache. Just get on with it, have a dance, a bit of sex, and a bit of your own Sandwich afterwards.
In order to make sure that everyone knows which is their Sandwich, and which is someone else's and thereby must not be eaten or talked about, I have constructed this Sandwich Matrix. It is to be read from left to right- For example if you are Soldier, who is African, your Sandwich is Chicken.
As this is your Sandwich you must eat that one, and not any other, and this way you will avoid any confusions or misunderstandings that would arise from treading on someone else's Sandwich turf. In this way if you stick to Chicken Sandwiches, and only talk to other people eating Chicken Sandwiches, then as long as they are in order you will only ever meet or talk to people like yourself, which will be best for you.
| Class\Occupation | Nationality | Sandwich |
| Soldier | Europe | Ham |
| Americas | Corned Beef | |
| Africa | Chicken | |
| Middle East | Beetroot | |
| India etc. | Fish | |
| China etc. | Dog | |
| Australasia | Cat | |
| Tinker | Europe | Crisps |
| Americas | Beef Jerky | |
| Africa | Rat | |
| Middle East | Mongoose | |
| India etc. | Parrot | |
| China etc. | Pak Choi | |
| Australasia | Prawn | |
| Tailor | Europe | Salami |
| Americas | Pastrami | |
| Africa | Goat | |
| Middle East | Ostrich | |
| India etc. | Curry | |
| China etc. | Spring Roll | |
| Australasia | Shark Fin | |
| Rich Man | Europe | Quail's Eggs |
| Americas | Caviare | |
| Africa | Monkey Brains | |
| Middle East | Camel Hump | |
| India etc. | Sacred Cow | |
| China etc. | Golden Pig | |
| Australasia | Dolphin | |
| Poor Man | Europe | Rope |
| Americas | Shoes | |
| Africa | Paper | |
| Middle East | Sand | |
| India etc. | Weeds | |
| China etc. | Bamboo | |
| Australasia | Spider | |
| Spy | Europe | Beef |
| Americas | Beef | |
| Africa | Beef | |
| Middle East | Beef | |
| India etc. | Beef | |
| China etc. | Beef | |
| Australasia | Beef |
Norman: You leave people alone Compo, nobody wants you meddling in people's lives with your new fangled Sandwich ideas. What's wrong with society is that people don't know how to enjoy a good old fashioned sandwich, or they are too busy at work to get involved in eating some more interesting Sandwiches. But either way there is nothing anyone can do about it. And anyway each class, and ethnic group, like a good old 17th Century village, is happy eating their own Sandwich to themselves. If you try to introduce a butcher, who has of course been eating the bacon Sarny all his life with his bacon Sarny working class friends, to a university educated type of Ciabbata Sandwich person, then they'll just get confused and not be able to relate. You just leave everyone in their little boxes where they belong and let there be no more word of Sandwich mixing, it is giving me a headache.
Foggy: Norman's probably right Compo, I'm not sure about your new fangled Sandwich ideas either. You see Compo, what everyone is looking for is actually just the Love Sandwich, which in my case is a Jam Sandwich. Problem is I can't quite find it, the Jam Sandwich. I've been looking all over town for a while, and I've yet to quite find her. But that's what I believe in, that's my Sandwich. And I don't want to hear about all these other Sandwich ideas, it is giving me a headache.
Norman: That's right Foggy, nobody wants all of these new Sandwich horizons. All they want is a bit of dancing, with a nice girl, and then a bit of comforting Ham Sandwich in bed afterwards. Or at least that's what I want, I think. I've been eating at the same old Sandwiches for a long time now, I'm comfortable with them, so no more talk of new Sandwich horizons from you Compo, you leave people be, it's giving me a headache.
Compo: Well Foggy, Norm, I can see that neither of you are interested in trying a new kind of Sandwich, you seem content with your Last of the Summer Sandwiches, sitting around chewing on them like old bones. But a lot of the people I meet are searching for a different Sandwich, a better Sandwich. They aren't all the boxed class stereotypes that Norm believes are out there- there are plenty of individuals out there who are looking to get out of their box.
Foggy: Well Compo they should just shut up, calm down, go dancing and continue their search for the perfect Love Sandwich, that's my advice to them. The rest is just a load of nonsense.
Norm: Exactly Foggy, in fact anyone who suggests that people might want, or go about, exploring other kinds of Sandwiches is basically like Pol Pot the fascist dictator who wanted everyone to be the same. Compo sounds a bit like Pol Pot, thinking that everyone is going to be able to relate to the same sandwich. In my book everyone should just chew on their same old Sandwiches in their little Sandwich boxes, and stay there.
Compo: Well Foggy, there's nothing wrong with the Love Sandwich, obviously, it's important. It sounds like you and Norm could do with eating a bit more of it more regularly, it might cheer you up a bit and make you sound a bit less like grumpy old men, but actually I find what people are looking for often isn't actually the Love Sandwich, or a new version of it, it's a different Life Sandwich, a different Work Sandwich, a Collaboration Sandwich- they are looking for a different way to relate to the world, not just to one person in bed and hanging around on the Dodgems or in the Park. The idea that the Love Sandwich is 'the answer' is clearly a romantic delusion, for many people, or just suggests a lack of new ideas. And equally people can often get trapped eating the Love Sandwich, chewing on it all day in bed or in the park, and it can tie them down and prevent them embarking on new adventures in search of the Life Sandwich that they are looking for.
Norm: Oh will you Compo, you really are sounding like Pol Pot, or Stalin.
Compo: I think you've had a bit too much of the last of the summer wine Norm. The idea that many people are in search of a more interesting, fulfilling Sandwich, and that there might be ways to help them on their way as an intermediary, is rather the opposite of authoritarian dictatorship. Your rather sweeping conservatism and desire to try to kill off new ideas does though smack of an authoritarian tendency- you seem to want to keep everyone in their little boxes, chewing on the same old Sandwiches, perhaps a reflection of your own situation.
Norm: All I am saying Compo is that everything is fine, people should get on with it, go dancing, have some sex, and a bit of Ham Sandwich afterwards. Beyond that what we need is a New World Order, but as that isn't happening and it is impossible to achieve then all there is left to do is go dancing, have sex, have a good old Ham Sandwich, and chew the cud with the last of the Summer Sandwiches.
Compo: Yes, I think it is clear that you and Foggy have pretty much given up on the possibility of change, or a new Sandwich horizon, for yourselves or anybody else. But a lot of people, individuals, haven't.
Norm: Well they are just deluding themselves, they should shut up and get on with it, go dancing, have some sex, and a bit of Ham Sandwich afterwards. Collaborations never work anyway.
Foggy: Exactly, they should just get on with it, shut up, and seek out the Love Sandwich, like me. Everything else is fantasy or Socio-pathy.
Compo: Well a lot of people I talk to out in the world do want to find a new kind of Sandwich, and they will, they do, sometimes at least. I think there is hope.
Norm: No Compo, they are deluding themselves. Love doesn't work, Collaboration doesn't work. Everything is just disappointing, money and inequality rule the world, the powerful are a bunch of cunts, and I'm off dancing and for a Ham Sandwich, with the Last of the Summer Sandwiches.
Foggy: Exactly, nothing changes. I'm off in search of my Love Sandwich, and you better be careful with your apparent optimism Compo- you might get hurt.
Norm: Yeah Compo, nobody likes trouble makers. You just go dancing and have a Ham Sandwich, stick to the Last of the Summer Sandwiches, and no more talk of new Sandwich Horizons, there's a good boy.
Compo: Well I'm not going to sit around for the rest of my life chewing on the Last of the Summer Sandwiches with you old duffers, creaking away on the dance floor looking for a Love you Cannot Find. I'm off out.
Foggy: Well careful Compo, it is a big wide world out there, and there's nothing in it but the mysterious, slightly out of reach Love Sandwich.
Norm: Yeah Compo, you be careful with your Pol Pot ideas. You'll only end up disappointed like me, Foggy and the rest of humanity.
Compo: Well it'll sure beat sitting around with you lot chewing the Last of the Summer Sandwiches all day Waiting for Godot, or for the Love Train to swing by.
Foggy: You be careful Compo....
etc. etc.
Into the Sandwich Womb
“Can I share with you my worldview? All of humankind has one thing in common: the sandwich. I believe that all anyone really wants in this life is to sit in peace and eat a sandwich.” – Liz Lemon, 30 Rock
"And that is exactly what I plan to do on this day, National Sandwich Day. Sit in peace and eat my go-to sandwich: the T.B.M sandwich from Cosi. With only a mere three ingredients, this sandwich somehow speaks to my soul and brightens even the darkest of days (no thanks to you, Daylight Savings Time.) If this sandwich was a man, I’d be rolling around in bed with it right now. Hell, maybe I’ll do it anyway.
My love of sandwiches and my love of men run almost parallel to each other on the mathematical graph of my life, intersecting only at the moment someone lets me eat a sandwich and have sex at the same time. That’s the stuff dreams are made of."
So says Britanny, studying at the University of Richmond, in her illuminating Sandwich blog-post- she, apparently like the rest of humanity, wants to do nothing more than sit in peace, eating a sandwich, whilst having sex; this is her Nirvana, her good place, her Sandwich Womb.
She is not alone in her somewhat Freudian desire to return to the comfort of the womb. The Hippies at 'Reality Sandwich' are keen to return to the cosmic/galactic womb.
Indeed this desire, need, to find some kind of fundamental comfort back in the womb of mother nature can be seen to motivate the ill fated adventurings of the Messrs TIM- T in the Alaskan Bear Nature Womb, I in the Animal Sea Womb, and M in the Womb of the Southern Ocean. All three find their Nirvana, walking closer and closer towards the Mother Womb, until they can sleep in it for eternity, as it claims them in the death that they have been courting.
One can also see this womb-seeking behaviour in the tendencies of varying types of addicts and bingers- be it drink, drugs, or other forms of hedonistic and aesthetic addiction. Again the desire, the need, is to sink, and simultaneously rise, into a state in which the individual self, and the mind, is subsumed, absorbed, into the womb of the universe, or at least sensation.
God, and religion, can also manifest this desire to dissolve, or to float, in the womb of Mother Church, to give oneself up to the womb of God herself- it is not so much patriarchal domination which this kind of theist seeks, but the comfort of the religious-womb; it is driven by a desire to belong, in the most fundamental, visceral sense.One can also see this womb-seeking behaviour in the tendencies of varying types of addicts and bingers- be it drink, drugs, or other forms of hedonistic and aesthetic addiction. Again the desire, the need, is to sink, and simultaneously rise, into a state in which the individual self, and the mind, is subsumed, absorbed, into the womb of the universe, or at least sensation.
Brittany, from Richmond University, desires nothing quite so extreme as this; and yet it is no accident that she desires, dreams of, peace, a sandwich, and sex, together as one; again we see the 3 structure emerging, a holy trinity of comfort; at peace, at rest, with a Sandwich in one hole and a penis in the other; here, she imagines, she may find the rest, the comfort, away from the difficulties of individuality, thought, and life in general.
Indeed, from the male perspective, there is something somewhat vaginal, inviting, comforting, about the Sandwich. If one considers the above picture it suggests both the male desire to be subsumed into Mother Sandwich, but it also suggests something of the lips of the female genitalia and all of the Freudian comforts which it offers- here again, we imagine, as we face the Sandwich/Vagina, we may find some rest, some visceral affinity, with the universe, with the other, and with ourselves, beyond the troubles and struggles of life and the mind; we face the above Sandwich, to eat at it, directly, and not to nibble at it from one end or corner, but to dive head first into it, into its Tri-Comforts.
We at Sandwich Theories are aware of this dangerous comfort of the Sandwich. Like Messrs TIM we could find ourselves creeping ever closer to the eternal Sandwich Womb, where it might claim us forever. And like the Sex addict, or sex dreamer, we might find ourselves with our head buried endlessly in the flaps of the Sandwich, literally and metaphorically.
For us though the Sandwich is not a place, a thing, of comfort, but a grounding point, a lens, a valve, through which to explore the world. If the Sandwich were to become a womb for us, a place to snuggle up in away from the struggles of the mind, of our individuality, of life, then we would have to move on. Let it be known that we fear the Sandwich Womb, as we fear all Wombs. We may have developed in, been born from, a Womb. And it may have been a lovely place to hang out for a while, but there is no returning to it, however much in moments of weakness, anxiety and exhaustion we might desire it.
SJ
Trans-Utopian Flash-Back
In the isosceles that is Messrs Treadwell, Irwin and Macauley, (TIM) we find a common theme in the facing of fears. But unlike their fears, the majority fear, isn't a matter of certain death, at worse it is mostly a case of chagrin.
Their exploration was antiquated, hero-like, to a point of them becoming ennobled, when juxtaposed to mere man, whether they sort it or not, when you take on beasts and the earth itself, the feeling of transcendence must be there.
In other examples, as we have seen, are the pseudo western guru's that get their money off of acid tourists who are looking for psycho-jungle therapy, deep in the Amazon. They offer a holiday of the mind by imbibing you with a shamanic brew, where after 24hrs you wake up jubilantly sobbing out a healthy dose of existential angst, post-analysis -and this is their exploration of the mind. But it's not hard to realise how disingenuous this concept is when imagining the Happy Mondays, post acid comedown, organising a workshop to discuss the experience.
Then we have the hippy humus girl beholding her multiple ingredients whilst staring ravenously, but also in visceral fear, at other non multi layered bio-dynamic tales of uncertainty.
In each case they are trying to reach the sublime. The "sublime" is a term in aesthetics, which refers to the experience of pleasurable anxiety that we experience when confronting wild and threatening sights like, for example, a massive craggy mountain, black against the sky, looming terrifyingly in our vision.
This metaphor can be applied to Messrs TIM in equal measures. But when have you ever eaten a sandwich and on the first bite declared it was sublime? When have you ever been in actual danger when eating a sandwich? If we are ever in danger, our feeling of anxiety is very different from that of a sublime feeling. The sublime, being an aesthetic experience, is not a practical feeling of personal danger and this explains its combined feeling of anxiety.
Two concepts of the sublime:
The mathematically sublime: Our mental faculties are inadequate at matching the magnitude of what we see to what we know is there. We see a mountain or ocean but we cannot take the whole thing into our perception. Our sensibility is incapable of coping with such sights, but our reason can assert that it must have limits.
The dynamically sublime: Our sense of physical danger tells us that we are not just physical material beings, but moral beings as well. The body may be dwarfed by such magnitudes but our reason need not be.
This explains, in both cases, why the sublime is an experience of pleasure as well as pain.
Thus we realise the inadequacy of the imagination is not commensurable to reason and what we are seeing is the straining of the mind at the edges of itself and the edges of its conceptuality.
This straining is evident in the realisation that in every case, fear took hold of these seekers of the sublime and reduced them to scared boys who knew this time they had gone too far.
Now faced with the inevitable end, naively and prematurely brought on by their own hand, this left only themselves in their last moments of fearful existence to reflect on the futile nature of these noble activities when taken to extremes, which they first adopted as mere pastimes to fill the existential void of modern life.
These activities they then foolishly tried to make a way of life, contra to everyday mundanity.
To do this they had to validate it as full-time employment, job-title: Action man. Unfortunately when action men enter into competition it no longer becomes a sport, but a war and freak show taken to needless extremes in an attempt to make it all believable but also entertaining to the masses.
Now, unless you're some kind of part-time sky-diving part-time actor using as many mediated forms as a way of communication with your fellow man, then you don't need to validate such activities as insanely as the pseudo explorer monomaniac, with a need to be first in something, whether it is in pressure to paymasters or proof to themselves for their place in the universe. Thus, this constant straining had impaired reason, which in all the cases further caused ill preparation in their attitudes towards it and so did attribute eventually to their downfall.
If only they could have found or sought a centering or completion of the self by more everyday means, a face, a loved one, a local shop or even, in our case; a sandwich. Exchanging one isosceles triangular structure of thrill-seeking Victorian madness for one triangular structure of analyse, synthesise and evaluation of the everyday.
After the harrowing stories of Messrs TIM, it is now even more important to get other people to explore something more typical of our everyday, something we can all relate to. For us we have proposed a new-lens in which to see the world, in the many faceted concepts of the sandwich and in its triangular structure of the BFB, where the paradox's of safe-danger and/or sublime-anxiety, will not get you killed and where the only flash-backs you find coming from deep into the filling's objective interior are those guru's and hippies with their multiple ingredients, coming to terms in the trans-utopian truth of the sandwich.
The Spirit of the Explorer
We at Sandwich Theories would like to salute three great adventurers/explorers of our times:
Andrew Macauley, Kayakist: http://boneinitsteeth.blogspot.com/2010/12/natgeo-solo-lost-at-sea.html
Timothy Treadwell, Bear enthusiast: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Treadwell
and Steve Irwin, Animal annoyer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=riYogY1PXe0&feature=related
These three men are united by various factors-
1. An enjoyment of dangerous thrills
2. An over-arching sense of egotism
3. Being dead
For those not acquainted with the stories of the three men Andrew Macauley attempted to Kayak, solo, across at least 1000Km of dangerous sea between Australia and New Zealand. He actually made it to within 30Km of his destination, surviving huge storms along the 1 month journey, before falling out of his canoe and drowning only a day away from dry land. He left behind a wife and a young son. In fairness to Andrew, while he was obviously an IT specialist/office bound mentalist, the documentary suggests that he was let down by his equipment, and preparation, rather than physical or mental stress per se.
Timothy Treadwell was a bear enthusiast who had made a name for himself by annoying Park Rangers summer camping in Bear spots in a National Park in Alaska. He 'got to know' different Bears over 13 summers, and took few of the usual precautions against bear attack. His luck ran out on the 13th trip, partly it seems because he was later in the season, and so the bears were hungrier. He and his girlfriend were eaten alive by a hungry bear, the first half of the process being caught as audio on a video camera, although the footage apparently has not been made public.
Steven Irwin was a serial animal annoyer in Australia, famous for wrestling with crocodiles and such like. He got a barb in the chest while annoying a Sting-Ray, and died shortly afterwards.
We at Sandwich Theories would see the lives, and deaths, of these three men as indicative of a failure of exploratory/adventuring imagination. In search of thrills, attention, and a sense of purpose and meaning beyond office work all three set out into the natural world to do battle with, or tickle, the elements. All three of them lost, eventually, and for seemingly nothing other than entertainment, sensation. Their mistake was a failure to realise that the natural world no longer holds any adventures- there is nothing to explore. Our ancestors crossed every ocean for us, and we have been into space, and to the bottom of the ocean, with Carl Sagan, or David Attenborough. One can explore the entire world now, and beyond, from one's laptop or television. There is absolutely no need for anyone to walk naked across the Sahara Desert fuelled only on yoghurt, to live for a whole month inside the stomach of a Blue Whale, or to fly to the Moon strapped to a Wombat.
Each of these mad men would still be alive today if they had realised that the New Adventure is to be had from one's laptop- for example the Exploration of the Sandwich. If it were not for Sandwich Theories we might, like them, be out there trying to climb Mount Everest dressed as a Womble, or Sky-diving into Volcanoes whilst DJ-ing Happy Hardcore. But we aren't- we are going where no-one has gone before- Into the Sandwich. We aren't sure if we'll come out alive, symbolically at least- every thought leads onto another thought, over every horizon there is another horizon etc. But we are on a Journey, into the Unknown.
Tales of my Acid Snake: Awakening the Cosmic Serpent
The Hippy, traditionally, is a flower/sandal wearing creature from the 60s who took a bit too much weed/LSD for their own good and wandered around on mostly pointless, and on the whole self-indulgent, 'spiritual' journeys involving, if they were lucky, a fair bit of sex, suitable music and some more drugs. The drugs, music and flowers/sandals were perhaps less central to the essence of the Hippy than a desire to 'open their mind' (as well as yours, and your genitals), and to rid themselves of all of this hateful, oppressive social conditioning.
The 21st Century Hippy has of course evolved from this rather child like, party orientated beginning. A good example of the home of the modern Hippy can be found at the aptly named 'Reality Sandwich' site:
http://www.realitysandwich.com/awakening_cosmic_serpent_part_2
On the evidence of this site the 21st Century Hippy has gone quasi or pseudo scientific, technological, and ecological, as well as increasingly psychological and health orientated; the overt emphasis on drugs, sex, flowers, sandals and music have more or less disappeared, but what remains is an emphasis on the 'spiritual', and a tendency towards 'mind\soul opening' somewhat self-indulgent and individualist experiences and journeys. What also remains is a strong tendency towards hopeful speculation, involving the somewhat mysterious 'psyche', 'soul' and such like, all of which points endlessly to a better internal and external world that seems to remain just out of reach.
What also remains is a somewhat pretentious self-seriousness, which can apparently post articles without any irony entitled things like: 'Shapeshifting the Future', 'Synchronicity, Myth and the New World Order', 'The Possibility of a Telepathic Utopia' and best of all 'Awakening the Cosmic Serpent, Part II'. This is combined with a strong element of escapist dreaming, true to the traditional hippy roots- a particularly good example is the 'Ayahuasca Monologues', an event which you can attend in LA, in which a series of experts (including Dream Rockwell) will bore you with their stories of taking hallucinogenic natural drugs in the jungle, justifying it with the pretence of spiritual awakening, healing and such like.
The UK equivalent would presumably be a Happy Monday's Reunion in Foyle's Bookshop called 'Tales of my Acid Snake', in which LSD trippers congregate to bore each other to death with their out of brain experiences. As my mate says LSD, like most drugs, is actually a very self-orientated, solipsist experience and like most hallucinations and dreams the trip, and the memories, tend not to be of interest or relevance to anyone else. To excavate some kind of grand purpose from such trips it is thus necessary to fly all the way to South America, camp out in the jungle, and wrap it up in Ancient Healing, Spiritual Enlightenment and such like. This is of course only a 'Path' open to people with a fair amount of disposable income- going on the same journey in a Council Flat in Barking presumably wouldn't have the same allure to these people.
The over-riding suspicion is that these on the whole well educated, distinctly middle class people are simply entertaining themselves- their concern is to keep boredom, and despair, at bay with a constantly evolving, mostly imaginary, set of experiences and ideas united by some sense of spiritual and psychic journey.
At any rate this dangerous Hippy mentality struggles to easily penetrate the Sandwich realm, as the Sandwich is distinctly real and so not a great medium for hopeful, imagination fuelled speculation- 'The Possibility of a Telepathic Sandwich Utopia' or 'Awakening the Cosmic Sandwich' would not make good Hippy articles as the inclusion of the Sandwich grounds the concept in a day to day, functional reality which the Hippy is constantly trying to escape from, and forget.
However, a 40 year old woman was recently taken cycling by her husband around Cape Cod (a bit of coast some miles East of New York), where she came upon this Sandwich:
"I ordered a sandwich called “The Hippie”: hummus, Swiss cheese, avocado, baby spinach, roasted red peppers,
tomato & onion on your choice of bread, all for $6.39. No onions for me, thanks and put it on a wrap. Delicious!"
http://www.abetterbagofgroceries.com/2010/06/the-hippie-sandwich/
Arguably this Sandwich is a better window into the reality of the Hippy, or one version of it, than all of the spiritual/psychological meanderings of 'Reality Sandwich'- it is healthy, vegetarian, indulgent, looks to the East (in this case the Middle East in the shape of Hummus) and is somewhat over-blown with too many ingredients lacking the simplicity of true Sandwich. It suggests a middle class pre-occupation with food as both an experience and a conscious lifestyle/consumerist expression of identity, all of which runs against the grain of the Sandwich as a quick, tasty snack and suggests it has become an end in itself, somewhat fetishistic. This in turn smacks of middle class existential crisis.
A similar example can be found on this US Radio Website:
http://www.thetakeaway.org/2010/sep/08/lunchbox-20-sandwich-theories-and-remixes/
They have interviewed a middle aged journalist mother about 'how to create the perfect lunch box'. They are concerned with what to do with the Sandwich once the kid has got bored of 'PB and J' (Peanut Butter and Jam). The answer is the 'Pan Bagnat':
Pan Bagnat
Time: 15 minutes plus 20 minutes weighting
- 2 anchovy fillets, minced (optional)
- 1 very small garlic clove, minced
- 1 teaspoon red wine vinegar
- 1/2 teaspoon Dijon mustard
- Pinch of salt and freshly ground pepper
- 2 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
- 1 8-inch round very crusty country loaf, or small ciabatta, halved
- 1/2 kirby cucumber or 1/4 regular cucumber (see note)
- 1 medium-sized, ripe tomato, sliced
- 1/2 small red onion, sliced
- 1 jar (5 to 6 ounces) olive oil-packed tuna, drained
- 8 large basil leaves
- 2 tablespoons sliced pitted olives (preferably a mix of black and green)
- 1 hard-cooked egg, peeled and thinly sliced
She goes on to give lengthy instructions as to how to make it. This woman has clearly been infected with the contemporary, bourgeois version of the Hippy philosophy in relation to Sandwich making. She has completely lost sight of simplicity, and snack-ness, and has gone over-board on indulgence, and complexity, treating the Sandwich as an important end in itself, as if it were some kind of great meal, or badge of identity; She has embarked on the Sandwich Journey as some kind of Spiritual Path, she has Awoken the Cosmic Sandwich Serpent- just reading the list of ingredients is like some kind of Ayahuasca trip, lost down the river of no return in the Jungles of the Sandwich. This woman is the Colonel Kurtz of her generation- she has sailed so far down the river of nothingness that her Sandwich Soul has gone mad, but her mind is clear.
There will come a time when we, the few, will have to go to the 'Ayahuasca Sandwich Monologues' in LA, or New York, or London, or Tokyo, and we will have to, like Kurtz, sacrificially put these lost souls out of their misery. Perhaps with a Ham Sandwich.
When I was about 7 years old, or there abouts, my mother (a freelance Yoga teacher), would put on children's Yoga classes in our spacious living room which I would attend. These Yoga classes were, as far as I remember, great fun, and, while we did partake in the discipline of Yoga, fun was the main ingredient, with plenty of laughing and messing about.
An important part of the ritual of these events was a post-Yoga communal experience always involving Ribena from a jug and a large plate of bread and butter- brown bread, and I cannot quite remember what form of butter-spread it was, but I suspect it was butter, although it is possible that it was margarine, or an olive based equivalent (I cannot remember at what point in history the olive oil based spread became common place).
At any rate the brown bread and butter with Ribena was wonderfully satisfying, the memory of it remains with me to this day, as part of the total experience.
To suggest that brown bread with butter is a Sandwich is of course heretical to the previously fundamental '3 structure' of 'BFB'. Indeed I would still argue that bread and butter is not strictly, or perhaps at all, a Sandwich. But it is certainly within the family of the Sandwich, and I feel it necessary to bring it to the reader's attention at this early stage, as there is something wonderfully fundamental, underlying, about the 'B&B', 2 stroke, structure. It is perhaps best classified as a proto-Sandwich, rather than Sandwich proper.
I would though argue, in conclusion, that the B&B Proto-Sandwich was in fact part of a wider 3 part experience structure- of Yoga, Ribena and B&B Proto-Sandwich; take any of those parts away and the whole thing crumbles.
There is of course one final ingredient that held it all together- Love. However, I would not include this ingredient in the experience structure, rendering a 4 part structure; as any Sandwich lover knows Love is the crucial ingredient in any great Sandwich, but to include it in the formal structure would be like including the Kitchen, the Maker and every important background agent. Any Sandwich though made without Love, as anyone who has been to Pret A Manger can testify, is irrevocably inferior to one with Love in it, regardless of the other ingredients.
Having said this I am of course not a 'Love fundamentalist'. It is perfectly possible to have a crap Sandwich made with Love, it is just not possible to have a great Sandwich made without it, or at least that Love adds something qualitatively extra, and special, whatever the material basis of the Sandwich itself.
SJ (Sandwich John)
Architecture is in crisis- Shards, Gherkins, tiny Barrats boxes, strange claddings (wood, slates, metal wiring), Domes, Eco-homes, mad Towers.... At Sandwich Theories we propose the Sandwich as the inspiration for a new kind of architecture, an architecture of layers and fillings.
the sandwich, like a life or a flame is brief. no sooner made than it is devoured by something larger, if no more significant than itself
the sandwich is dead. long live the sandwich...
BLT (Bonnie Lettuce-Tomato)
Fundamentals 2: The Yoga 'Sandwich'
When I was about 7 years old, or there abouts, my mother (a freelance Yoga teacher), would put on children's Yoga classes in our spacious living room which I would attend. These Yoga classes were, as far as I remember, great fun, and, while we did partake in the discipline of Yoga, fun was the main ingredient, with plenty of laughing and messing about.
An important part of the ritual of these events was a post-Yoga communal experience always involving Ribena from a jug and a large plate of bread and butter- brown bread, and I cannot quite remember what form of butter-spread it was, but I suspect it was butter, although it is possible that it was margarine, or an olive based equivalent (I cannot remember at what point in history the olive oil based spread became common place).
At any rate the brown bread and butter with Ribena was wonderfully satisfying, the memory of it remains with me to this day, as part of the total experience.
To suggest that brown bread with butter is a Sandwich is of course heretical to the previously fundamental '3 structure' of 'BFB'. Indeed I would still argue that bread and butter is not strictly, or perhaps at all, a Sandwich. But it is certainly within the family of the Sandwich, and I feel it necessary to bring it to the reader's attention at this early stage, as there is something wonderfully fundamental, underlying, about the 'B&B', 2 stroke, structure. It is perhaps best classified as a proto-Sandwich, rather than Sandwich proper.
I would though argue, in conclusion, that the B&B Proto-Sandwich was in fact part of a wider 3 part experience structure- of Yoga, Ribena and B&B Proto-Sandwich; take any of those parts away and the whole thing crumbles.
There is of course one final ingredient that held it all together- Love. However, I would not include this ingredient in the experience structure, rendering a 4 part structure; as any Sandwich lover knows Love is the crucial ingredient in any great Sandwich, but to include it in the formal structure would be like including the Kitchen, the Maker and every important background agent. Any Sandwich though made without Love, as anyone who has been to Pret A Manger can testify, is irrevocably inferior to one with Love in it, regardless of the other ingredients.
Having said this I am of course not a 'Love fundamentalist'. It is perfectly possible to have a crap Sandwich made with Love, it is just not possible to have a great Sandwich made without it, or at least that Love adds something qualitatively extra, and special, whatever the material basis of the Sandwich itself.
SJ (Sandwich John)
Sandwich Architecture
Architecture is in crisis- Shards, Gherkins, tiny Barrats boxes, strange claddings (wood, slates, metal wiring), Domes, Eco-homes, mad Towers.... At Sandwich Theories we propose the Sandwich as the inspiration for a new kind of architecture, an architecture of layers and fillings.
Brevity is the essence of the Sandwich
the sandwich, like a life or a flame is brief. no sooner made than it is devoured by something larger, if no more significant than itself
the sandwich is dead. long live the sandwich...
BLT (Bonnie Lettuce-Tomato)
THE SANDWICH IN THE HEART OF DARKNESS
As a species of seemingly feeble, naked apes, we humans are unlikely candidates for power in a natural world where dominant adaptations can boil down to speed, agility, jaws and claws. Why we rose to rule, while our hominin relatives died out, has long been a curiosity for scientists.
The beginning of human cognition, for example, is the result of the development of a larger brain, which can be represented by artifacts—stone tools, weapons—or productions that signify greater abilities for thinking and innovation.
Although the adaptation of a larger brain may separate humans from their primate relatives, it also came at a cost of increased fuel requirements. A human brain uses at least 20 percent of an individual's resting metabolism.
Evidence of early humans use of fire could be used to mark how they overcame their energy needs. Heat helps free up energy by softening foods, denaturing their proteins and breaking down toxins, which is why cooking can explain one fundamental reason for human brain size as well as small canine teeth and small guts in comparison to other primates.
Just as revelationary for us at sandwich HQ, is the finding of starch grains on 30,000-year-old grinding stones, which suggest that prehistoric man may have dined on an early form of flat bread, contrary to his popular image as primarily a meat-eater.
The findings, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) journal, indicate that Palaeolithic Europeans ground down plant roots similar to potatoes to make flour, which was later whisked into dough.
We at sandwich theories are not emphatically suggesting cavemen sat around campfires, cutting up baked dough into slices with their stone tools and making Mammoth sandwiches as pack lunch in preparation for the following day's hunt, but the importance of storing food for leaner times, must have been a regular concern and it would be reasonable to suggest cold meats and bread where indeed stored for long hunting trips, as the Arctic Inuit have been found to store Auk birds in seal skin in preparation for winter.
In this instance the Arctic is perfect for cold storage, unlike the plains of Africa. Furthermore, meat is a highly perishable product but it can be cured by smoking and salting as Cro-Magnon Man had found out 35,000 years ago.
We could look back even further for origins but this would require a much bigger leap of the imagination. It is fair to say that the less aggressive, up-right walking, sophisticated Bonobo chimps, are not given to further hyperlect in the throwing of tea parties in front of their slightly bemused cousins -to say we'd be drawing inferences from too small examples would be a massive understatement, but whether you believe in Savannah theory or Aquatic ape theory, (escaping the jungles or the sea) the retreat back into the interior for answers, as colonel Kurtz and Captain Nemo found to their respective nadirs, are in the same sense, the great pioneering costs, which have to be paid, to further contribute to the sum of human knowledge.
This is why for the less adventurous amongst us it took the likes of modern man, such as John Montagu to happen on a possibly age-old practice by mere chance. Though he lived in the age of enlightenment, societies capacity for forensics in his time were nothing compared with the speed at which it answers -or throws up more questions- in discoveries evident today.
Who could now deny the possible supremacy of bread and meat being eaten together? Whether it is eaten cold or not or even in the same mouthful I believe we have already convincingly covered.
Sandwich Fundamentals: 3-ness
The Sandwich is a tripartite thing- a thing, fundamentally, of 3 basic, essential elements, without any of which it ceases to be a Sandwich and becomes only half a Sandwich, or something else entirely, which is either nothing at all, or certainly not a Sandwich. These 3 fundamental elements are, I would suggest:
1. A slice or piece of Bread
2. Some kind of Filling, for example Ham
3. Another piece or slice of Bread
This is a definitively tripartite structure- a BFB structure- or more substantively in this case a BHB structure. It contains, in this state, both the necessary and sufficient ingredients to structurally be a sandwich. Like all great scientific theories, and all great scientific designs, Simplicity is of all importance- as Einstein said, a theory should be as simple as possible, but not made simpler. To simplify the Sandwich any further than this basic BFB structure would be to destroy it entirely.
It can of course be added to. The most likely amendment to the above fundamentals would be a bit of spread, fundamentally butter, on one or both of the insides of the pieces of bread, thus giving us the BSFSB structure (if buttered on both pieces), a 5 part structure. Some might argue that at least one side with butter on is so essential to the Sandwich that it is fundamentally a 4 or 5 part thing, but my feeling is that whilst a bit of butter is indeed fundamental this is not so much a part of the fundamental structure of the Sandwich as much as a fundamental ingredient of it. And so conceptually I would argue for a fundamental Holy Trinity of the BFB structure.
The importance of the establishment of this fundamental structure is of course that the greatest fear of all human beings is that there is no true, certain, founding or bedrock principles, rules or structures which underpin their shifting and uncertain existence. Religion, Christianity for example, begins with certain imagined, unprovable assertions- the existence of some kind of all powerful God, his creation of everything etc. until we arrive at Joseph and Mary and the divinely inseminated Jesus Christ, who of course did not have any children and did not have sex etc. To become a Christian you then of course have to believe all of these strange, fanciful fundamental stories, like a child believing firmly in bed time stories- this is called Faith.
Whilst there are 4 protagonists in this rather fanciful, foundational tale there are in effect only 3 of any importance- God, the fatherly, powerful, over-arching one, Mary, the woman whose only real use or importance is for God to have sex with her and her to give birth to a son after which she is redundant, and of course the prodigal son, Jesus who is as pure and perfect and lovely as the driven snow and goes about doing great things until he is butchered and strung up by horrible humanity and powerful non-Christians.
The parallel with the Sandwich is somewhat limited, but it is important to note the importance of 3 fundamental, founding parts of the initial structure- the Father, the Son and classically the Holy Spirit- in which poor old Mary, the woman, is airbrushed out entirely as completely pointless, other than as a baby carrying vehicle for the egotism of man-Gods and male-Spirits.
Anyone who has read the Da Vinci Code now knows that actually there was another protagonist in the original story- Mary Magdalene- who was Jesus's wife, lover and friend with whom they had all sorts of offspring. If one goes down this line of story telling then it still though suggests 3 main protagonists- God, Jesus and Mary Magdelene; God uses Jesus's mother Mary as an insemination vehicle, a bit like an alien, and gets good old Joseph to mind out for her and get a donkey every so often, but these are all a means to an end. The story really starts with Jesus and Mary Magdelene having a good old time in bed, a sexy duo, the amorous couple, but somehow looked over, and made possible by weird old Uncle/Grandad God.
At any rate this is enough to suggest that Christianity, at least, is hot on 3s in its founding myths- The Father, The Son and the Holy Spirit, or God, Mary and Jesus, or God, Jesus and Mary Magdalene. 3 is fundamental, perhaps because 1 is just too lonely a fundamental starting place, 2 is just too 'nuclear couple' or Road Buddy like, and 3 gives a sense of family, or society, without having to spiral outwards into 4, 5, 6 or 10, at which point it all gets a bit much, confusing and a bit Ancient Greece. It seems that the human brain at the present time can just about handle 3 related things, 3 related protagonists, or a structure of 3.
We can see this if we look at geometry. A triangle is, as we know, a thing of 3 points, and it is well known to be a very strong structure. A structure of 1 point is just a point, a bit like a piece of ham. It might be great, but it is just what it is. A two point structure is just a straight line joining two dots- a sort of stick. Again this may be great, but it isn't really a thing, it is a bit like having two bits of bread with no filling. It is only when we reach 3 points that we have a real, interesting, thing, such as two bits of bread with a bit of ham in the middle.
To believe in the Sandwich, and its 3-ness, requires no faith what so ever in supernatural myths, Spirits, Holy Fathers, ancient fanciful stories or anything of the like. Sandwich Theories is based entirely on the immediately graspable empiricism of the physical, symbolic and sensory existence of the Sandwich- both as a thing and as an idea. We do not know where it came from (actually we do it was purportedly the 4th Earl of Sandwich, but where did he come from? etc.) but regardless of its non-fanciful genesis the Sandwich does not rest on its founding history- it is a thing in its own right, regardless of the exact details of its birth and evolution.
'Two's company, Three is a Crowd'. This was a mantra of the 20th Century which believed, romantically, in the sad little nuclear couple in the suburbs sending the kiddies off to school, shopping on Saturday and church on Sunday. This was the mantra of a kind of ideology of the Socio-pathic Duo, sucking the life out of each other in some kind of private fortress against the world. This Duo-istic romanticism has of course resulted in nothing but mental break downs, divorces, children brought up on strange domestic fantasies reflected in Walt Disney Cartoons, and the development of the energy sapping, Socio-pathic 'Rom Com' movie genre.
Such 'Duo-ism' has also resulted in the cultural worship and fear of 'the Individual'- as either a lonely Socio-pathic depressive/criminal/gay to be feared and destroyed at all costs as a threat to the fantastical romance of Duo-ism, or on the other hand as a distant, creative genius to be applauded but only as a kind of God or dream of freedom and not something that we mere mortals might be able to achieve- we weaklings need the romantic Duo to survive.
Christianity (pre or post the Da Vinci Code) is of course somewhat to blame for this romantic sickness- it promotes the idea of Joseph and Mary, or Jesus and Mary, as an essential, isolated, nuclear item in the history of humanity- at all times with the creepy, somewhat authoritarian Uncle/Grandad character of God looming over them- who in the first instance has actually been shagging someone else's wife.
If the reproductive, nuclear Duo is in part a product of 20th Century bureaucratic, capitalist and Christian efficiency and control then there is however another kind of Duo not so infected by this bovine nature- the creative, adventurous Duo. From the birth of literature in the guise of Don Quixote and Sancho Panchez the male adventuring Duo has become etched into the cultural memory. Crick and Watson, the inventors of DNA, or something very clever and scientific, are a more up to date example of the adventuring male Duo. Johnson and Boswell are another example of male, journeying companions. But the male-male Duo has tended to suffer from being a bit dick-heavy, and prone to ambling around, or exploring the natural world, or technology, making money and generally keeping one another company in their boyish enthusiasm or loneliness. For this reason the Male-Male duo is, in the 21st Century, lacking a sense of the Avant-Guard. It also tends, like Holmes and Watson, to suffer from 'Leader and Side-Kick' syndrome, and the inevitable status competition between most men either leaves one or the other in a state of subordination, or else creates an unsolvable problem and constant battle.
While there are examples of Male-Female duos most of these tend to be made out of gender stereotypes, with either the man being portrayed as particularly, classically masculine and the woman somewhat dripping over him whilst also fighting him (Indiana Jones for example). Or on the other hand the woman is turned into a kind of dry, male character, for example in detective movies- think 'Mulder and Scully'- almost devoid of femininity beyond the hair and some things sticking out of her chest beneath a shirt.
At any rate the point is only here to arrive back at the number 3. The Three Musketeers, for example. Except that they soon acquire a 4th one, a sort of leader/kid, who then rather messes the whole thing up from the point of view of 3s. But the modern structure is, like the Sandwich, fundamentally one of 3 parts. Reflecting the Sandwich the perfect grouping is, it would suggest, perhaps one woman (the filling), and two men (the bread). Once established they can of course swap positions, and it may turn out that one man is more often the filling and he has the woman and the man at either side of him.
This may sound like innuendo, but the concern is with creative and adventurous threesomes rather than with sexual ones per se. It might of course be the case that a sexual threesome is both creative and adventurous, but I digress. The point is that, in the modern world, if 3 people cannot ride out together, into the world, like a Sandwich, to create, live, be, explore, together, and if there cannot be at least one woman, as an equal, in that party, then they might as well forget it; 3 men is like some kind of Cowboy movie, dick-heavy and smoking the guns, making chit-chat about girls, guns and gangster movies whilst secretly dreaming of an end to their loneliness. 3 women is like some sort of witches' cavern, hippy moon-cup brigade or 1990s Sex and the City Lad-Woman horror show. And Duos are like being stuck in an endless Rom-Com or Socio-pathic, 20th Century relationship, neurotically sucking the life out of each other whilst pumping romance-steroids into the dying carcass. Beyond 3 and you've got the makings of some kind of adolescent gang, political party, football crowd, or church, and the least said about all of those the better.
Viva the 3 Amigos! And Viva the Sandwich, fundamentally a thing of 3.
SJ (Sandwich John)
John Montagu- the Genesis of the Sandwich
The Sandwich was, as far as we know, invented by 18th Century Statesman, Toff and general chancer John Montagu- 4th Earl of Sandwich, Postmaster General, First Lord of the Admiralty, Secretary of State for the Northern Department, gambler, love cheat, and music lover. Despite the number of important posts that he held during his career, Sandwich's incompetence and corruptness inspired the suggestion that his epitaph should read: "Seldom has any man held so many offices and accomplished so little."
He also seems to have been a minor wit, know mainly for being outdone in a now famous exchange with the actor Samuel Foote- Sandwich declared, "Foote, I have often wondered what catastrophe would bring you to your end; but I think, that you must either die of the pox, or the halter." "My lord", replied Foote instantaneously, "that will depend upon one of two contingencies; -- whether I embrace your lordship's mistress, or your lordship's principles."
Regardless of his incompetence, lack of quick wit or otherwise there exist three main schools of thought in relation to the Genesis of the Sandwich:
The first that he did not have time to have a meal during the regular gambling play, and so he would ask his servants to bring him slices of meat between two slices of bread during his long hours at the card table. This habit became well known among his gambling friends and thus the ‘sandwich’ was born. Because Montagu also happened to be the Fourth Earl of Sandwich, others began to order "the same as Sandwich!"
The second, a more sober alternative, is provided by Sandwich's biographer, N. A. M. Rodger, who suggests Sandwich's commitments to the navy, to politics and the arts mean the first sandwich was more likely to have been consumed at his desk.
The third, a more exotic alternative, suggests that Sandwich's Grisons Republic born brother-in-law, Jerome de Salis, taught him about sandwiches. The Grisons is known for its dried meat, Bündnerfleisch, while its then subject territory the Valtelline, where De Salis also grew up, is known for Bresaola.
We can see, in these three, somewhat different, Genesis Stories the roots of how the culture of the Sandwich has developed, or been confused, in the present day. The first theory suggests the Sandwich as a snack to be eaten whilst busy- but a busyness that is both social, and playful, as well as potentially a bit louche. It is the snack of choice of the gentleman who is so committed to his pointless, sociable pastimes that food becomes only a way to sustain him in his habit. The Sandwich is thus minimal, as well as functional, maintaining a very simple BFB structure, or BMB structure- Bread, Meat, Bread, but never the less presumably of a high quality. Its purpose is to sustain, and not interrupt or divert the attention from, the game in play.
The second theory of the Genesis of the Sandwich manifests in the present day as the 'Work Sandwich'. This is of course the complete opposite of the 'Game Sandwich'- it is a workman like snack to sustain someone who is tied to their administrative desk whilst pouring over and scribbling papers to the navy, parliament, or the arts. It is the grandfather of the now ubiquitous 'Office Sandwich', relegated from the rank of incompetent, but high ranking Statesman to the average corporate plod. It is, arguably, not the Sandwich of the playful Free Man or Man of Leisure, as the Game Sandwich is, but the Sandwich of the Slave, or 'Slave Sandwich'.
The third theory, and its modern development, can be seen in the contemporary trend towards the 'Continental Sandwich' where dried or cured meat is involved- be it German, Italian or some Germo-Italio French region. In parts of central London that tend towards such 'delicatessen culture'- be it in a shop or as part of a tourist\weekend middle class escapist market such as Broadway or Borough- one cannot move for Ciabattas, Cured/Dried meats of different varieties, and at times Panninnis. The average, parochial, middle class English-person of course confuses foreign/continental/exotic with 'posh' or 'interesting' and so is a sucker for this kind of thing regardless of its true quality.
Of the three beginnings, and related contemporary trends, I would argue that 2 and 3 have done the most damage, or reflect the most damage, to our culture. Theory 2 reflects all that is wrong with modern Britain, and the modern world- over-working, under-producing, administration obsessed, un-sociable, over-busy, and prone to a snack food minimalism/functionality in culinary taste. Theory 3 reflects an empty, and related, fetishising of the foreign/exotic/continental as some kind of bourgeois 'taste' to be enjoyed as one strolls around an over priced, over attended, leisure market. This is not to suggest that I have anything against cured meats, foreign or otherwise, or indeed Ciabatta. These things can of course be enjoyed as perfectly good things, but not in this manner.
Theory 1 is not any great recommendation of British culture, given that it suggests a louche, addicted, leisured pursuit of gambling and other pointless games. But at least it reflects a certain sociability, playfulness, and a freedom and life beyond work or fetishising the continental. For these reasons I would endorse Theory 1, the Sandwich as sustainer of obsessive interests, for the person so en-wrapped in their project of curiosity that they simply do not have time, nor space, nor inclination, to make a proper meal.
What each Sandwich has in common though, in these founding myths, is a simplicity, and a quality of ingredients- Bread, Meat, Bread. And importantly cold meat, either cured, or not. It is not something to be fetishised, cut into little cucumber Sandwich squares- it is not something to be drawn attention to, or commented upon- it is something to be made quickly, out of simple ingredients, and eaten whole heartedly, whilst engaged in something else that is more important. It is not to be consumed as part of some social ritual of 'the meal', but as part of some other more engrossing activity.
The Genesis of the Sandwich also sheds some light on the problem of the possible 'Hot Sandwich'- the Pork Roast Sandwich, Hamburger, or Hot Dog. Whilst these might seem to be within the family of the Sandwich we at Sandwich Theories would argue that they are not, and in part I would refer to the Genesis stories- All of these kinds of possible Sandwich require the cooking and heating up of a meat filling, and also tend to require some sort of sauce to make them palatable- the straight Bread, Pork, Bread, or B, Burger, B, or B, Dog, B, can be done but it is not the norm, not the fundamental form. The Genesis of the Sandwich, in any form, suggests that the Sandwich was always a cold thing, made out of immediately available ingredients which did not require cooking, heating, or sauce. For this reason I would argue that none of the above- the Pork, Burger, or Hot Dog, are actually Sandwiches.
I would also go further and argue that, whilst there is nothing per se wrong with any of these things in themselves, they exist in a contemporary cultural confusion which such Sandwich Theorisings can help to decipher- namely that in the present day the Hamburger in particular, but to an extent the Hot Dog and also Pork Bun, have got way above themselves, to a level of almost bizarre pretension. The confusion of the Hamburger, for example, is whether it is in fact Sandwich like, if not a Sandwich- i.e. something to be consumed quickly, cheaply, whilst doing something else, or on the move, or whether it is in fact a form of cuisine, a meal in its own right. The increasing number of Gourmet Style Burger Bars in central London, with high, restaurant prices and low lighting, apparently well attended by the average corporate plod in search of nourishment after a hard day at the office, is a worrying development. It suggests that the Hamburger has now gone beyond 'fast food', and is trying to portray itself as a valid part of a sit down, even restaurant, experience. In the opinion of Sandwich Theories this is an error, and the Hamburger, like the Hot Dog, is better kept in a Street Food, Sandwich like, place.
Finally we must mention, in this regard, the Club Sandwich. This is a ridiculous creation, with its tendency towards toast, warm bacon, warm chicken, lettuce, tomato, and sauce etc. It is a great culinary mistake, and as always one is tempted to blame the Americans, in the same way that the Hamburger, that great American creation, has got increasingly above its real value; Like so much of American culture it is over sold, over priced, and over here. John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich, would not have recognised the Club Sandwich, in any shape or form, as a Sandwich, and neither should we. It transgresses all of the laws of the Sandwich, with its hot multiple fillings, fussy salad and sometimes sauce, its long preparation time, the difficulty of eating it, and above all its pretentious arrival on a plate as if it is some great meal to be savoured.
No comments:
Post a Comment