Thursday, May 8, 2008
Woooooooo!
Particularly apt, as our modern political discourse resembles nothing so much as professional wrestling. There are heels (Hillary and the Dems in general), faces (McCain and any Rep who runs for president), and referees (the media) whose real job is to entertain the rubes by always looking the wrong way at the wrong time.
Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Eight Years
Stumbled across this. That smirk, the idiot expression on that idiot face -- God, has it been only seven years of this fuckup? It seems like forever. If you compare the America of 1992 with the America of 2000, they were essentially identical. DVD movies were replacing VHS movies, more people had cell phones, but those were the types of things that changed: the country itself was pretty much the same it had always been, with the same value system, the same expectations. The sorts of changes we saw from when Clinton took office to when he left were like new clothes being put on the same dressmaker's dummy. Compare the world of today with the world of 2000, though, and while you can still see it's the same dummy, it's starting to look a little bit worn and haggard. Well, a lot worn and haggard. OK, fuck it: it looks deformed, like it's been through a fire and someone pissed on it to douse the flames.
It's tempting to blame it all on 9/11, and that had a lot to do with it, but it's also tempting -- more than tempting, it's required -- to blame it on Bush. A more capable person in office would have resisted the calls from the insane right to invade Iraq, wouldn't have over-reacted to the threat of terrorism by trying to break down our democratic institutions, wouldn't have tried to politicize the government: in short, wouldn't have behaved like Bush. It's a little lesson on the value of competent leadership, although I don't have much confidence that lesson will be learned and then retained all that well.
It's tempting to blame it all on 9/11, and that had a lot to do with it, but it's also tempting -- more than tempting, it's required -- to blame it on Bush. A more capable person in office would have resisted the calls from the insane right to invade Iraq, wouldn't have over-reacted to the threat of terrorism by trying to break down our democratic institutions, wouldn't have tried to politicize the government: in short, wouldn't have behaved like Bush. It's a little lesson on the value of competent leadership, although I don't have much confidence that lesson will be learned and then retained all that well.
Welp,
While respecting her right to stay in, I would prefer Hillary drop out. If she had won big in Indiana and held it close in NC, I'd say her case was makable, even made; instead the votes came out the other way around, and now it isn't. Obama is going to be the nominee, and while I think he's weaker than she is in a general, it's too late now. This primary has been a disaster to any thinking person who's been paying attention to the political-media axis of this country for the past dozen+ years, but that's a post for another day.
On the bright side, McCain's press coverage seems to have been a little less adulatory lately, although that might be because few people have been paying attention to him in the wake of the Obama - Hillary matchup. With Wright essentially disposed of, I wonder what kind of Swift Boat-style thing the right is going to try to spring next. There has to be something; it's how the Republicans campaign. Both the Dem convention and the general election are going to be fascinating events.
On the bright side, McCain's press coverage seems to have been a little less adulatory lately, although that might be because few people have been paying attention to him in the wake of the Obama - Hillary matchup. With Wright essentially disposed of, I wonder what kind of Swift Boat-style thing the right is going to try to spring next. There has to be something; it's how the Republicans campaign. Both the Dem convention and the general election are going to be fascinating events.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Audrey Hepburn
Today would have been Audrey Hepburn's 79th birthday. I've always thought she was the most beautiful woman in the history of film -- equal parts sexy and classy to a degree no one else has managed to attain. Both Keira Knightley and Natalie Portman bear a strong resemblance to her, but neither is as, umm, well, the word "hot" comes to mind.
Anyway, Hepburn led an amazing life, the details of which many people know: lived through the Nazi occupation of the Netherlands, fashion model, international film star, humanitarian aid worker. She probably did more than 99 percent of us ever will to make the world a better place. And yet, she came from that sordid den of iniquity and antithesis of everything good and right in American life, Hollywood. A similar statement could be made about George Clooney, or Kirk Douglas -- in fact, many actor-producers who decided to do more than pull in easy paychecks -- or any of the many producers who, behind the scenes, got socially important films covering vital topics in front of the masses, sometimes at great financial cost to themselves. Clooney didn't need to make Good Night and Good Luck; Douglas didn't need to make Spartacus, or at least, didn't need to make it the way he did; nobody needed to make Guess Who's Coming To Dinner? or In The Heat Of The Night, but people in crazy Hollywood put themselves on the line and got those films made.
Yet Hollywood is derided and marginalized as the land of the liberal, lunatic fringe while upstanding, civic-minded people like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Michael Savage and Ann Coulter are paid millions to shout out angry, hateful noise. It isn't done to criticize such people as Coulter, no matter how hateful her rhetoric, and when she is mentioned by a non-fan, it's usually to excuse and/or defend her. There's a baneful, lunatic fringe in America, and it can be found in a lot of places besides Hollywood. But nobody's lookin'.
As an aside, one of the great mysteries of life to me is that Hepburn was divorced. Twice. Who in the world could walk away from that? Maybe them Hollywood people are crazy, after all.
Noodlin'
I keep reading things about how unpopular poetry is these days, and it inevitably ends up pissing me off. Poetry, in my view, is more popular than ever; it's just the kind of thing that some people consider poetry that's become unpopular. Here's a perfectly good poem that many people will recognize, from Kris Kristofferson:
It isn't Waste Land, there are no obscure literary or biblical allusions, it isn't written in iambic pentameter using high flown language, but it does what poetry is supposed to do: capture a part of the human experience and express it in a distilled, immediate way. There are lots of songs like this -- McCartney's "Yesterday", Lori Lieberman's "Killing Me Softly", and Bill Withers' "Ain't No Sunshine" come to mind -- that are highly poetic, and that will be being recorded in fifty or a hundred years, which are certainly well known to the same people who will then complain that nobody appreciates poetry these days.
In many ways, the period between about 1920 - 1960 was the worst in history for poetry. Yes, you had Eliot and Pound and Plath and so on; Yeats was still productive in the first half of this period, but poetry was becoming more and more alien to the mainstream of the populace. Poetry like that found in Houseman's Shropshire Lad (published in 1896), which many common people could relate to, disappeared, and was replaced by something like Eliot's Waste Land (1922), which requires an educational foundation held by very few to truly understand. And then came the revolution of rock&roll music, which restored poetry to the masses, where it remains to this day. Poetry isn't just in books or classrooms: poetry is wherever you find it, and today, you can find poetry by turning on your radio.
Busted flat in Baton Rouge, headin' for the train,
Feelin' nearly faded as my jeans.
Bobby thumbed a diesel down, just before it rained;
Took us all the way to New Orleans.
I took my harpoon out of my dirty red bandanna,
And was blowing sad while Bobby sang the blues.
With them windshield wipers slappin' time,
And Bobby clappin' hands,
We finally sang up every song that driver knew.
Freedom's just another word for nothing' left to lose:
Nothin' ain't worth nothin' but it's free.
Feeling good was easy, Lord, when Bobby sang the blues.
Feeling good was good enough for me;
Good enough for me and Bobby McGee.
From the coal mines of Kentucky to the California sun,
Bobby shared the secrets of my soul.
Standin' right beside me, Lord, through everything I've done,
Every night she kept me from the cold.
Then somewhere near Salinas, Lord, I let her slip away,
Lookin' for the home I hope she'll find.
And I'd trade all my tomorrows for a single yesterday,
Holdin' Bobby's body next to mine.
Freedom's just another word for nothing' left to lose:
Nothin' left is all she left for me.
Feeling good was easy, Lord, when Bobby sang the blues.
Buddy, that was good enough for me;
Good enough for me and Bobby McGee.
La da da la la na na na
La da da na na.
La la la da, Me and Bobby McGee.
La la la la la da da da
La la la da da.
La la la da, Me and Bobby McGee.
La la la la la na na na
La la la da da.
La da da da, Me and Bobby McGee.
La la la la la da da da..............
It isn't Waste Land, there are no obscure literary or biblical allusions, it isn't written in iambic pentameter using high flown language, but it does what poetry is supposed to do: capture a part of the human experience and express it in a distilled, immediate way. There are lots of songs like this -- McCartney's "Yesterday", Lori Lieberman's "Killing Me Softly", and Bill Withers' "Ain't No Sunshine" come to mind -- that are highly poetic, and that will be being recorded in fifty or a hundred years, which are certainly well known to the same people who will then complain that nobody appreciates poetry these days.
In many ways, the period between about 1920 - 1960 was the worst in history for poetry. Yes, you had Eliot and Pound and Plath and so on; Yeats was still productive in the first half of this period, but poetry was becoming more and more alien to the mainstream of the populace. Poetry like that found in Houseman's Shropshire Lad (published in 1896), which many common people could relate to, disappeared, and was replaced by something like Eliot's Waste Land (1922), which requires an educational foundation held by very few to truly understand. And then came the revolution of rock&roll music, which restored poetry to the masses, where it remains to this day. Poetry isn't just in books or classrooms: poetry is wherever you find it, and today, you can find poetry by turning on your radio.
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Madeleines and tea
I've been out of the ghetto for more years than I care to remember; with the exception of a few friends I have little contact with the black community any longer, but reading this confirmed something I knew deep down: that community will always be who I am; I will always understand it, always be in sync with it, the way a musician who hasn't played his instrument in years can pick it up and get out the reasonable facsimile of a tune. The skills might not be perfect, but the understanding of what the instrument is, what it will do, and in response to which actions, will remain. That comes at some cost, which I won't go in to here, but it is who I am, and I have to pay that cost like it or not (usually I don't like it).
A couple of months ago I used the Google neighborhood thing to look at the place where I grew up. It was a satellite view, but I could still recognize the area, knew the corner store, the park, the hospital where I was born, the elementary school I went to, all within a couple of square miles (someone should write an academic paper on the immobility of the poor. It has to have a huge impact on the cycle of poverty). The only things I couldn't see were the people still stuck there, leading stunted, 70% lives. At least, I couldn't see them on the satellite image. But in my mind they are there, and always will be, long after those streets and buildings themselves are demolished in the name of progress.
A couple of months ago I used the Google neighborhood thing to look at the place where I grew up. It was a satellite view, but I could still recognize the area, knew the corner store, the park, the hospital where I was born, the elementary school I went to, all within a couple of square miles (someone should write an academic paper on the immobility of the poor. It has to have a huge impact on the cycle of poverty). The only things I couldn't see were the people still stuck there, leading stunted, 70% lives. At least, I couldn't see them on the satellite image. But in my mind they are there, and always will be, long after those streets and buildings themselves are demolished in the name of progress.
Just legalize it.
What a waste. And for what? What does society get from all the millions of dollars and energy it spends hounding people like this? Legalize it, regulate it, and re-focus all that attention on real social problems.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
