Hey, friends:
While I'm going to leave this blog available (like, archivally) on the Interweb (because it would feel like a bratty gesture to nuke it), this will be my last post on DOI.
This site has already been "repurposed" twice -- more recently, and less intentionally, as a place for me to vent my spleen (or simply to express my despair) about politics. Lately, however, I've been losing my interest in politics -- and am coming to see how noted poet Mark Leidner might be on to something with his Commitment to Non-Voting. That doesn't mean that I won't show up in November to pull the lever for Obama (or, if Clinton is nominated, McCain): just that I'm coming to think that politics is sort of a personal dead-end (or maybe just a personal end).
I never wanted to be one of those bloggers who turned his friends into "loyal readers," or maintained what amounted to a public diary. Since I don't want to talk about politics, and since I already have a (mostly masturbatory) site where I post my reactions to the films I watch, there isn't much reason to continue here.
In the next year, I'm going to try to re-commit to my retarded fantasy of becoming an actual fiction writer . . . and these blog posts have been siphoning off a lot of the energy that might otherwise be directed into something more significant.
Finally, I just feel like I'm running out of things to say.
Aki Kaurismaki, whom I discussed in two recent posts (here and on the other blog) captures something like my present feeling in many of his films; these days, I'm a bit of a stunned sheep: not convinced that anything in my life is worthwhile or can be, but not particularly troubled by that perception. For the last couple of years, I've been failing in most of my endeavors, but the endeavors have been so empty and trivial that the failures haven't much stung. Emotionless, directionless, interestless, thing-to-say-less . . . should such a person really keep a blog?
Thanks, all of you, for reading and commenting. For the next little while, at least, our relationships will have to continue through different media.
Sunday, May 4, 2008
Friday, April 25, 2008
Friday, April 18, 2008
I need a smoke.
Jeff Stier argues -- these words, again -- non-jokingly, unironically, that Obama's past history as a smoker may disqualify him from office:
"The fact that Sen. Obama was a smoker is old news, since he quit. Right? Think again.
"The stories that have explored this issue all missed the point: Obama's history of smoking raises questions about his current and future health.
"It's not as if once you quit smoking, all of the health effects immediately disappear. In fact, after enough smoking, some health effects are irreversible. Consider just the arteries and lungs.
"How long and how much one smokes makes a difference. A 1998 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that the amount of fatty deposits in the carotid artery depended on total pack-years of tobacco exposure, not whether the patient currently smokes. And a smoker's excess risk of a stroke doesn't return to that of nonsmokers until at least five, or as long as twenty years after quitting. Sen. Obama would have to serve a hypothetical four smoke-free terms before his stroke risk returned to normal.
"So how long and how much did Sen. Obama smoke? The information has not been officially released, and the campaign has not returned calls or emails posing this question. But he smoked a lot over his life.
"He admits to having smoked up to ten cigarettes a day, but usually closer to five or six. Most people underestimate how much they smoke, but let's take him at his word. Let's also assume he really did quit when he said he did, in February 2007 (although he admits to having fallen off the wagon). That's about twenty-six years, given that we know he was smoking by the time he was a freshman at Occidental College. That's more than 55,000 -- maybe 70,000 cigarettes! Has this aspect of Sen. Obama's ability to serve really been explored?"
Most alarming of all is the last line of this editorial:
"The public deserves to know how long and how much Sen. Obama really smoked. Does he have other risk factors for heart disease? Compared to whites, for instance, African-Americans are more likely to die of a stroke, according to the American Heart Association. This, in fact, is probably the only time race is a legitimate question to raise this campaign season -- and just one of several health question on voters' minds."
"The fact that Sen. Obama was a smoker is old news, since he quit. Right? Think again.
"The stories that have explored this issue all missed the point: Obama's history of smoking raises questions about his current and future health.
"It's not as if once you quit smoking, all of the health effects immediately disappear. In fact, after enough smoking, some health effects are irreversible. Consider just the arteries and lungs.
"How long and how much one smokes makes a difference. A 1998 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that the amount of fatty deposits in the carotid artery depended on total pack-years of tobacco exposure, not whether the patient currently smokes. And a smoker's excess risk of a stroke doesn't return to that of nonsmokers until at least five, or as long as twenty years after quitting. Sen. Obama would have to serve a hypothetical four smoke-free terms before his stroke risk returned to normal.
"So how long and how much did Sen. Obama smoke? The information has not been officially released, and the campaign has not returned calls or emails posing this question. But he smoked a lot over his life.
"He admits to having smoked up to ten cigarettes a day, but usually closer to five or six. Most people underestimate how much they smoke, but let's take him at his word. Let's also assume he really did quit when he said he did, in February 2007 (although he admits to having fallen off the wagon). That's about twenty-six years, given that we know he was smoking by the time he was a freshman at Occidental College. That's more than 55,000 -- maybe 70,000 cigarettes! Has this aspect of Sen. Obama's ability to serve really been explored?"
Most alarming of all is the last line of this editorial:
"The public deserves to know how long and how much Sen. Obama really smoked. Does he have other risk factors for heart disease? Compared to whites, for instance, African-Americans are more likely to die of a stroke, according to the American Heart Association. This, in fact, is probably the only time race is a legitimate question to raise this campaign season -- and just one of several health question on voters' minds."
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Next week: Larry Bird's Marxist reading of Ratatouille.
Up to now, I hadn't dedicated five brain cells to contemplating the recent film adaptation of Horton Hears a Who! My eye was drawn, though, to this piece -- a blistering critique by, er, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar:
"How can a beloved Dr. Seuss story do so much harm? Well, the original book by Dr. Seuss is just fine, a timeless tale that has been delighting children since it was first published in 1954. The story of the brave elephant that is willing to endure the harshest condemnation from his friends and community in order to protect those in need is a wonderful lesson for children.
"But then along comes the movie. To make the story long enough for a full-length movie, a sub-plot was added about the mayor of Whoville who has 96 cheerful daughters and one brooding son. This is where things take a nasty turn. Basically, the mayor ignores his 96 daughters in order to groom his uninterested son to become mayor. Why doesn't he groom one of his much more enthusiastic daughters? And, of course, it is the brooding son who, in the end, saves the entire world of Whoville. The daughters? They get to cheer from the sidelines. While it's true that in the book a 'very small shirker named Jo-Jo' does add his tiny voice to the din and thus saves Whoville, that promotes the idea that we all have our part to play in our community, not that sons are smarter than daughters.
"'Hey, it's just a cartoon,' you might say. But this particular cartoon will be seen by millions of children around the world. And they will come away with a clear impression that a single son is worth more than 96 daughters. That boys are inherently more valuable than girls, and more likely to be successful (in this case, in saving the world) than girls.
"What's especially insidious here isn't just that the subplot was written and approved and filmed, but that since the movie has come out, there hasn't been a popular outcry about it. That we don't even ask why, in the years it took to make the movie, no one along the line said, 'This isn't a good message to send to our kids.' Is it because sexism is so ingrained in our society that we don't even flinch at it when it's shoved in our faces? . . .
"[If] our society is willing to tolerate any form of social injustice and discrimination toward any single group, then they have created a breeding ground for injustice throughout society. If we allow sexism, ageism, homophobia, religious intolerance, than racism can only flourish as well. We expose our impressionable children to funny cartoons about wacky animals voiced by famous actors and what do we think is going to happen? Will a little girl step out of Horton feeling empowered and motivated, or just slightly less capable than the little boy walking beside her?"
Retired athletes leading the way to critical analysis of pop culture? Whatever works.
"How can a beloved Dr. Seuss story do so much harm? Well, the original book by Dr. Seuss is just fine, a timeless tale that has been delighting children since it was first published in 1954. The story of the brave elephant that is willing to endure the harshest condemnation from his friends and community in order to protect those in need is a wonderful lesson for children.
"But then along comes the movie. To make the story long enough for a full-length movie, a sub-plot was added about the mayor of Whoville who has 96 cheerful daughters and one brooding son. This is where things take a nasty turn. Basically, the mayor ignores his 96 daughters in order to groom his uninterested son to become mayor. Why doesn't he groom one of his much more enthusiastic daughters? And, of course, it is the brooding son who, in the end, saves the entire world of Whoville. The daughters? They get to cheer from the sidelines. While it's true that in the book a 'very small shirker named Jo-Jo' does add his tiny voice to the din and thus saves Whoville, that promotes the idea that we all have our part to play in our community, not that sons are smarter than daughters.
"'Hey, it's just a cartoon,' you might say. But this particular cartoon will be seen by millions of children around the world. And they will come away with a clear impression that a single son is worth more than 96 daughters. That boys are inherently more valuable than girls, and more likely to be successful (in this case, in saving the world) than girls.
"What's especially insidious here isn't just that the subplot was written and approved and filmed, but that since the movie has come out, there hasn't been a popular outcry about it. That we don't even ask why, in the years it took to make the movie, no one along the line said, 'This isn't a good message to send to our kids.' Is it because sexism is so ingrained in our society that we don't even flinch at it when it's shoved in our faces? . . .
"[If] our society is willing to tolerate any form of social injustice and discrimination toward any single group, then they have created a breeding ground for injustice throughout society. If we allow sexism, ageism, homophobia, religious intolerance, than racism can only flourish as well. We expose our impressionable children to funny cartoons about wacky animals voiced by famous actors and what do we think is going to happen? Will a little girl step out of Horton feeling empowered and motivated, or just slightly less capable than the little boy walking beside her?"
Retired athletes leading the way to critical analysis of pop culture? Whatever works.
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Laff Riot Too: The Laffening.
A short from Finnish miserablist Aki Kaurismäki, who's quickly becoming an obsession of mine. This is a treat, especially, for those who've seen Rocky IV several dozen times.
And here's another international treat. If you were wondering how Rocky IV could possibly be more awesome than it already is . . . well:
And here's another international treat. If you were wondering how Rocky IV could possibly be more awesome than it already is . . . well:
Laff riot.
It's that laugh at the end of this video that chills me -- so Bushian. To quote the old Sinead O'Connor lyric: "They laugh 'cause they know they're untouchable -- not because what I said was wrong."
What clearer statement of contempt for the electorate could Hillary Clinton make than to laugh -- that hoarse, fake laugh -- when challenged with serious, respectful questions about her support for needless wars in Iraq and Iran (remember Gravel in that debate last year?) and her husband's prostitution to the free-trade lobby she condemns from the stump. As the reporter in this video politely -- almost timidly -- points out, lobbyists for the Colombian trade deal she opposes are literally financing her campaign.
Hyuk hyuk hyuk!
From The Jed Report:
What clearer statement of contempt for the electorate could Hillary Clinton make than to laugh -- that hoarse, fake laugh -- when challenged with serious, respectful questions about her support for needless wars in Iraq and Iran (remember Gravel in that debate last year?) and her husband's prostitution to the free-trade lobby she condemns from the stump. As the reporter in this video politely -- almost timidly -- points out, lobbyists for the Colombian trade deal she opposes are literally financing her campaign.
Hyuk hyuk hyuk!
From The Jed Report:
Monday, April 14, 2008
WSS: Three4Him.
In honor of American Idol's brave decision to come out of the closet with last week's evangelical extravaganza . . .
. . . here's a Very Special Installment in the World Series of Shit.
None of these lines should ever have been addressed to The Christ -- but all of them were.
Now: imagine, for a moment, that you're The Christ. Which one of these lyrics makes you most uncomfortable? (By the way: all of these songs -- well, all but the last one -- were huge hits.)
1. Yoda, Blowjob Queen:
"I can only imagine what it would be like
When I walk by your side
I can only imagine what my eyes will see
When your face is before me.
"I can only imagine.
"Surrounded by your glory, what will my heart feel?
Will I dance for you, Jesus, or in awe of You be still?
Will I stand in Your presence? On my knees will I fall?
Will I sing hallelujah, will I be able to speak at all?
"I can only imagine."
-- Jeff Carson, "I Can Only Imagine"
2. Spoilin' Daddy:
"Whatever happened to a passion I could live for
What became of the flame that made me feel more
"I was made to love you
I was made to find you
I was made just for you
Made to adore you
I was made to love
And be loved by you
"I'm reachin out, reachin up, reachin over
I feel a breeze cover me called Jehovah
And daddy, I'm on my way.
Cuz I was made to love"
3. ...
"Body of Christ!
Sleek swimmer's body, all muscled up and toned!
"Body of Christ!
O, Lord Almighty, I wish I could call it my own!
"Body of Christ!
Oh, Lord Almighty, I’ve never been so enticed!
"I wish that I could have the body of Christ!"
Faith + 1, "Body of Christ"
. . . here's a Very Special Installment in the World Series of Shit.
None of these lines should ever have been addressed to The Christ -- but all of them were.
Now: imagine, for a moment, that you're The Christ. Which one of these lyrics makes you most uncomfortable? (By the way: all of these songs -- well, all but the last one -- were huge hits.)
1. Yoda, Blowjob Queen:
"I can only imagine what it would be like
When I walk by your side
I can only imagine what my eyes will see
When your face is before me.
"I can only imagine.
"Surrounded by your glory, what will my heart feel?
Will I dance for you, Jesus, or in awe of You be still?
Will I stand in Your presence? On my knees will I fall?
Will I sing hallelujah, will I be able to speak at all?
"I can only imagine."
-- Jeff Carson, "I Can Only Imagine"
2. Spoilin' Daddy:
"Whatever happened to a passion I could live for
What became of the flame that made me feel more
"I was made to love you
I was made to find you
I was made just for you
Made to adore you
I was made to love
And be loved by you
"I'm reachin out, reachin up, reachin over
I feel a breeze cover me called Jehovah
And daddy, I'm on my way.
Cuz I was made to love"
3. ...
"Body of Christ!
Sleek swimmer's body, all muscled up and toned!
"Body of Christ!
O, Lord Almighty, I wish I could call it my own!
"Body of Christ!
Oh, Lord Almighty, I’ve never been so enticed!
"I wish that I could have the body of Christ!"
Faith + 1, "Body of Christ"
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Oh the, ironey,
Hmm . . . I tried to copy a banner ad and paste it into this post, but apparently "BoostUp.org" uses some fancy software that prevents that.
The ad I wanted to show you -- which may still be prominently placed on the front page of Slant -- includes this copy:
"We gave cameras to 10 students, 4 of them might not graduate."
Did you graduate, you fucking moron?
I followed the link, and the site itself is no better; it's basically a festival of bad grammar.
Copywriter illiteracy aside: let's quit wasting money on silly websites and ad campaigns like "BoostUp." No kid in danger of dropping out of high school is conceivably going to be interested in this shit. These are programs that exist only to create resume items for the people who produce and fund them.
UPDATE: Whoa -- I didn't realize "BoostUp" was created by the U.S. Army. That makes sense: if you're only trying to usher disadvantaged kids through a few pro forma tests so that you can send them off to kill and die for the Bushes, it doesn't much matter whether they ever learn the difference between a comma and a period. In fact, teaching them to use commas properly might undermine the Army mission; it could land them in college! (Thanks to cj for the tip.)
The ad I wanted to show you -- which may still be prominently placed on the front page of Slant -- includes this copy:
"We gave cameras to 10 students, 4 of them might not graduate."
Did you graduate, you fucking moron?
I followed the link, and the site itself is no better; it's basically a festival of bad grammar.
Copywriter illiteracy aside: let's quit wasting money on silly websites and ad campaigns like "BoostUp." No kid in danger of dropping out of high school is conceivably going to be interested in this shit. These are programs that exist only to create resume items for the people who produce and fund them.
UPDATE: Whoa -- I didn't realize "BoostUp" was created by the U.S. Army. That makes sense: if you're only trying to usher disadvantaged kids through a few pro forma tests so that you can send them off to kill and die for the Bushes, it doesn't much matter whether they ever learn the difference between a comma and a period. In fact, teaching them to use commas properly might undermine the Army mission; it could land them in college! (Thanks to cj for the tip.)
Aw hell$ yeah, it's da NEW KIDS, boooooy!
You really must read this hilarious Hater piece on the New Kids on the Block reunion. The short version: they're back, and they're street.
Here's the first single, which is every bit as awesome as you hoped it might be:
And here's this, which may be new or may be some of their older material; I can't tell:
Here's the first single, which is every bit as awesome as you hoped it might be:
And here's this, which may be new or may be some of their older material; I can't tell:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
