A Drumroll That Grew Louder

Okay. I finished the bomb book. It was okay. My expectations for it were tepid and limp, at best. It met it. Then another book. And so forth.1

Highlighted from a book:

Somewhere a drummer began a drumroll that grew louder, rough-ins overlapping faster and faster as the fuse burned every shorter – Lew, in the grandstand, was far enough away to see the box begin to explode a split-second before he heard the blast, time enough to think maybe nothing would happen after all, and then the front of that compression wave hit. It was the end of something – if not his innocence, at least of his faith that things would always happen gradually enough to afford time to do something about it in.2

Which knocked my socks off. Beautifully constructed. And for me, instructive, provocative, loaded, etc. Partly, the premise that a split-second, even then, and by the dude who set the explosive and sees the denotation no less, is sufficient time to think nothing would happen, or in essence, anything could happen. Partly, the premise that a split-second may not be enough time for nothing to happen, or obviously, for anything to happen. And then, is it innocence or faith to hold that belief? Is holding such belief good or bad? If a split-second would not afford enough time, then a second? a day? a year? etc.

Implied is even with traditionally regarded longer period of time, things may not happen at a pace to afford time to do something about it in. To do something about it in: it - love? reconcile? forgive? whatever? Then suggesting, perhaps, an imperative (instead of innocence or faith) to step up and act sooner, rather than see whether time can heal some wounds? Anyway, I'm sockless.

Moving on.

Do I hate Barack because he's gay? It really does suck that my feelings toward Barack teeters at or about hate. Part of it is that he crushed the presidential hopes of my dream girl. Another part of it is that discovering Barack more has lead to, overall and more, disappointment. On Barack's site, you know what is not really highlighted much/at all? - his position on gay marriage and the death penalty.3

I'll lay it out there that I'm against the death penalty and any candidate that does not speak in direct or substantial opposition to it has to otherwise re-win my vote. I should add that Hillary don't mind death penalty too much.4

Which still does mean Barack likes lethal injections, or however the s.t.a.t.e. prefers to institutionalize murder. In his audacious book about his audacious life and audacious ideas, Barack comes down to saying (and let's half ignore his own understanding that the death penalty does little to deter crimes) that a limited range of heinous crimes deserves it, such as mass murder or the rape and murder of a child.5 You know, that bad shit that gets folks so riled up that they just gots to kill someone back.6 Anyway, the buzz not too long ago was that the super-est court in the whole super country, the SCOTUS, handed down a narrow decision blocking the execution of a child rapist.7 Barack comments that he sides with the four bad Justices (Alito, Thomas, Roberts and Scalia).8 Which, even while he understands that the death penalty does not deter crimes, and the crime in question does not fit in the heinous death penalty worthy crimes list he previously described (common theme: a prerequisite is homicide), and he understands that capital punishment cases often are rife with errors, questionable police tactics, racial bias (Patrick O. Kennedy is a black dude), and shoddy lawyering (and generally, sexual assault are often the toughest because it relies on circumstantial evidence and shaky testimony, which is not meant to speak to Kennedy's actual guilt or innocence), Barack, in collision with the progress to limit - if not eliminate - the death penalty, speaks in support to broaden the state murder apparatus.9 Holy fuck!

A turning point moment, folks claim and perhaps believe, was Dukakis' poor response to a death penalty question asked in a debate.10 Dukakis had a long anti death penalty stance. Anyway, the famous part was that the question asked was probably over the line, based on the hypothetical rape and murder of his wife. My preferred reply would be, "Dude, if one of my family member raped and murdered someone in your beautiful family, absolutely, I would not want you to seek the death penalty." However, the other famous part was Dukakis' actual reply, described as more or less dispassionately stating he would not seek the death penalty and that his opposition was a life long thing. Famously resulting in a long line of chickenhearted Dems fearing to speak against the death penalty. It's purely a political thing for them now, based on a perceived necessary to demonstrate that they must blindly, irrationally and mercilessly hate evil and crime doers (oppose to actually, like you know, doing something about it). And I have to be resigned to the sad fact that a majority of my (national) political hero/ine likely will be severely compromised individuals from the get go.11

But Barack's view, and his recent criticism on the Supreme Court, is flat out vile. There is shaky or little evidence that the death penalty deters crime, Barack understands and accepts it. He endorses the death penalty primarily as a tool for revenge. In a debate, and to a question on whether the death penalty is a deterrence, GW Bush stated: "I do, that's the only reason to be for it. I don't think you should support the death penalty to seek revenge. I don't think that's right. I think the reason to support the death penalty is because it saves other people's lives."12 Rather, in a sort of flip flop fashion, in criticizing the recent Supreme Court decision, Barack championed expanding its (barbaric and fault-ridden) application beyond the narrow range of crime he formerly found to deserve the death penalty. Ok. Whatever, I do not mean to labor through a death penalty discussion. But Barack's position speaks multi-volumes of him as a candidate.

Barack, as far as I know, and aside from what it imports for his family I would otherwise not care one way or another, is not a homosexual. I asked anyway because would my "hate" be justified for his stance against gay marriage if he was gay as evidence of, I don't know, some sort of self loathing? Convoluted and strained? Eh, whatever. He's against gay marriage. That said, so is Hillary (ditto Kerry).13 That said, a devastating civil rights abuse and violation is effectively off the table.

Instead, do I hate Barack because he's black? Or differently, should, or do, I hold Barack to a higher/different standard because he's very, very, very not pale? What does skin color have to do with understanding the fundamental inequality in denying certain people marital status? Something? Nothing? How about John Barrow?

Georgia Congressperson John Barrow is one of those Blue Dog Dems type who despite party affiliation kneels over to suck GW Bush's Texan cock, regularly; he's been described as one of Bush's worst enablers in Congress.14 Anyhoo, this year, his seat was challenged by a legitimately progressive Democrat, Regina Thomas. Barack, in a slightly unusual move - due to the rarity of a presidential candidate endorsing anyone in the primary, let alone in a surefire Democratic district - did a Barrow ad recently, in effect against Thomas. Quick and dirty, black Barack sides with white sleaze Barrow over black queen Thomas: is there a black question? should there be? For that matter, a gay question: based on his own voting record and endorsements of Lieberman and Barrow, when it comes to GW, does Barack swallow?

I have no problems, by the way, with flip flops despite guiltily and sensationally dropping that phrase to describe Barack's death penalty thing. Folks learn and evolve, and change, and so forth. Maybe it is what they flip flop to/from that matters more. Maybe. That's a different, and not to be delved into, matter. More precisely, it wouldn't be fair to say Barack flip flopped because his death penalty worthy offense list certainly wasn't exhaustive or definitive; even though, at the same time, I would pretty much say that homicide seem to be a requisite component. His different position now, if different, and how the change should matter to voters, if it matters at all, I'll leave up to the voters. But flip flop wise, there is more, and more Barrow.

I first took Barack's endorsement of Barrow as fair indication that he is not the "change" candidate some folks probably believe or hope him to be, rather more of the same staid status quo, professional politicking that folks rail against. It hardly seems to me that you can speak authoritatively as the get-us-the-fuck-outta-Iraq candidate when you endorse a pro war, Bush rubber-stamping candidate; does/should not action speak more than rhetoric? I guess, in some circles, the endorsement, among other things, has raised enough eyebrows to start a fuller reassessment of the Obama phenomena; of which, it's about fucking time.

Yet, while Regina Thomas, one would think, matches Barack's (supposed or perceived) platform better, she ran a crappy campaign.15 Or, let's say, she should and could have ran a more robust campaign, versus whatever grassroots pipe dream she lit. Barrow burned over $500,000 of a $1.5 million plus war chest for his Barack-aided primary win July 15.16 Uh, Thomas topped out her entire contribution intake below $30,000. Sure, let's assume that it's a fairly strong Democratic district, even super mega strong, but is a candidate who raises a mere $30,000 a viable candidate? Donna Edwards over in crab state Maryland scored a Democratic primary victory over long incumbent Albert Wynn earlier in Feb this year.17 Donna is fairly regarded as a legitimate progressive candidate, and she neck-to-necked Wynn in fund raising.18 You got to have ciz-ash if you want to be taken serious, kind of, no? Do I hate Barack because he's black and to my knowledge has not endorsed any black candidates, but continues to, and loudly so, endorsed shitty white Congresspersons like Lieberman and Barrow? Flip flopping-like, I cannot fault too badly Barack's maneuvers, on a pragmatic level at least. Hopefully Thomas pulls her shit together next election cycle, and otherwise keeps on keeping on with what she is doing in the Georgia state legislature.

Barrow had been an adamant supporter of a recent controversial piece of legislation, namely, FISA, and within it, an extra controversial issue: retroactive civil immunity for telecom companies. You have to look up about FISA yourself - shouldn't be too difficult - and why it represents another damn betrayal from Barack.19 I didn't intend to go into the de/merits of death penalty, gay marriage, privacy rights, etc., because, well, do I matter? And I don't care too much about swaying the views of others. If someone wants to be stoopid and favor, or callously be indifferent about, government sanctioned murder, then that someone can freely be stoopid. Nobody's perfect. Whatever. And I don't know, what does it mean that I think the death penalty is outdated concept? I hate Barack but adore child rapists? Well, I don't hate child rapists. I was raised in the Catholic Church and the Cub/Boy Scouts, twin institutions that explain it's more a function of good and bad timing than anything else.20

The immediate thing with FISA is that at first blush the obvious and traditional Democrat position is clear, no way in hell. It attacks constitutional/4th Amendment rights, and legitimizes Bush administration's 1/2 decade long plus of violations. Barack voted for FISA.21

The other thing about FISA, disregarding the legislation's pervasive ugliness, is that Barack explicitly stated he would filibuster against retroactive immunity provision. That did not happen. I would not say Barack flip flopped, because that would be a disservice to the meaning of flip flop. Barack mislead or broke his word, plain and simple; neither of which can, or should be seen as, a good thing.

Before continuing, I should add one more thing, the Congress had been controlled by the Democrats for the past two years. Barack had stated prior that his pathetic legislative record was ham strung by a Republican dominated legislature, what the fuck about the past two years? Where had the "change" been, where had the "leadership" been? Rather, the past two years had seen capitulation by Barack, and the Democrats generally, on a series of bad legislation, Republican favored legislation, specifically Bush favored legislation, as exemplified by FISA, and, otherwise, omissions (not to load this down more than necessary but since it is a hot topic, non oversight on the Anthrax investigation, though I prefer non Bush/Cheney impeachment proceedings).22 Fair enough, why the singling out of Barack Obama?

What does Barack's reversal of his stated filibustering of retroactive immunity mean? Does it reward your trust? Does it encourages you to entrust more? Should it be, should it be the end of something, if not innocence, then some type of faith? You decide for yourself.

Surprisingly, I found out that I still have the ability to surprise (certain) folks. Or at least my threat of /interest in supporting/voting for a third party candidate over the presumed Democratic candidate was unexpected, to some. 2000 and 2004 were heart breaking. And still I don't blame Nader, my third party candidate of choice now. The president wins an election, and the candidate that loses does not win the votes. I didn't vote Nader in 2000 because I thought Al Gore was decent enough, though I wouldn't hesitate to say Gore was mainly a party line vote for me at that time. I didn't vote Nader in 2004 because I found Kerry to be a good candidate. But even then, during both national election cycles, Nader brought something vital to the table that the main party candidates could or dare not. In 2000 and 2004, I don't lament that I/we/Americans did not hand over our votes to the Democratic candidate. I lament that Gore and Kerry did not win the votes, or, to be precise, did not win votes sufficiently to clear Supreme Court misdealings.23

I don't hate child rapists because I hate not-quite-yet babies? Fine, Barack will presumably safeguard abortion rights, a profoundly big position Barack seems to be sort of clear on. I don't want to minimize the abortion fight by saying that it's mainly a state issue, a legislative issue, and any resulting new administrative driven policy/initiative likely will be short lived and term in office based, because, on the federal level, the president does direct the budget, sets the moral tone, and un-minimizeably possibly realigns the Supreme Court. But my point is this, even if a certain group of voters have low-ass expectations and are willing to settle, a lot of other people aren't. The ability to draw and hold those single issue voters, the abortion right votes, the anti-Iraq votes, the as-long-as-it's-not-McCain votes, the least worst votes, ain't no asset, but a deadly liability for the candidate. Mainly, it signifies the candidate has no message, a cluttered message, a weak message, or some combination of the three. So.

I don't want to spend all my time hating on Barack, if that is what it seems I am doing, and if so, then contrary to the above, because I do not hate him.24 What I see instead is that Barack's attraction is premised on a cloudy rhetoric of change, principled, or intertwine-ness, and beyond that, it's more standard political buzzword bullshit posturing. What scratching the surface reveals is hardly encouraging, the aforementioned anti gay marriage, pro death penalty, and what the fuck pro corn based ethanol?25 Lingering in Barack's backyard, the not rosy picture only gets thornier: now it's okay to off shore drill, a twisted mandate-less health care scheme, endorsement of pro-Bush/war Barrow and Lieberman, an unstable position with public campaign financing, and spinning flashing sirens for the FISA votes.

Oh crap, this is like the never fucking ending story. The bottom line is that I do not see Barack attempting to win my vote, and by too presumptive extension, the votes of core Democratic voters. In contrast, Barack has emphasized emphatic courting of the marginalia in the center, or the center right, and corporate interest. To me, and I wouldn't hesitate to state solely to me, this puts Barack in a position of not winning the votes on November 4. What Barack has been doing or has revealed as his campaign runs deeper, I feel is immensely alienating; fine, others might not be whiners like me, but whatever Barack has been doing, not much offers reasons to energize the Democratic base. The failure to substantively excite Americans, many who starve for transformation in government, is, I think, super stupid bad.

Then again, you know, I've been on the loser's end enough with my pick for which candidate to support to say I don't know anything about these things. I tend to see Barack as an empty shill/shell, but apparently he's the world's biggest celebrity. Maybe that carries the election day after all. Okay, concluding along, assuming a Democratic victory, what then, roses? Barack never promised a rose fucking garden! Instead he has made many indications of a right and corporate ward shift. Who or what then should have reasons to hold Barack accountable, or who or what would Barack be accounting to? Those tree hugging suckers, or the money grubbers in energy whose vote and campaign contribution may have been purchased by Barack's hint of off shore drilling compromise?

What remains is what to do. I'm totally fine with those who abstain or side by party line despite ever diminishing expectations. I've expressed before the reasonable futility for whatever change a new administration will likely and typically bring.26 And this, after all, comes when typically less than 1/2 of the population votes anyway. But let's say naivety rules and a prospective voter sincerely believes in some type of governmental transformation, what options? Support a third party candidate that better aligns with a progressive platform. Or, vocally and vehemently criticize the perceived wrongward slide of the Democratic candidate/party. Either is more likely to compel Barack to try to win my/your vote. Let him know your vote and/or support comes at a price. Whether Barack becomes a stronger, more viable candidate, or - assuming a foregone Democratic victory - a Barack administration more accountable to a progressive agenda, criticism is a sharper tool than blunt/blind support.

Awhile back, I considered an intriguing challenge might be to identify three measly issues that a particular voter might care about and to see where Barack lands on that ledger. I'd wager probably off target. Someone countered: "but people oftentimes only need one." So let's go with that, a different someone voiced that a Democratic candidate/Barack needs to be supported if only to get out of Iraq. Now, a 2-year Democratic controlled legislature had not shutdown Guantanomo, had not responded to charges of torture, had not impeached Bush Cheney, had not withdrawn budgetary support for the ongoing war, had not conditioned that budgetary support, had not overseen the botch Anthrax investigation, and had not moved any closer to withdrawal, while celebrity candidate Barack had endorsed pro war and pro Bush congressional candidates and had (I'll kindly describe as) equivocated on "the surge", troop withdrawal, and timelining. That is an anti-war candidate/party? Or more pointed, that is an anti-war candidate/party to place trust in? Let's say there is criticism over Barack's doughy stance on Iraq, that is a surer bet for a clearer and more forceful message on Iraq that may electrify the electorate and may actually, assuming a Democratic victory, and even assuming not if the anti-war cry is obstreperous enough, result in positive policy changes. Otherwise, there is nothing to hang on before or after the elections from Barack's grand statement, "I'm sure I'll have more information and will continue to refine my policies."27 Oh gee, thanks Mr. Obama.

This has got to be enough already.28 See you at the debates bitches.29

Or, let's end like this. Days ago, waking, pulling clothes on, the hygiene thing, pocketing loose change, phone, and such, I left my apartment and apartment building. Noontime, my cousin called asking that I go with him to Ikea to pick up some Ikea things.

"I'll be free after two," I decided.

"Pick me up at the office at two:thirty," he ended the call with.

As things turned out, I was busy past two, but made it to my cousin's Seaport area office building on time. Seatbelting himself in, he asked, "I wonder whether the New Jersey Ikea is closer."

"No," I thought; and otherwise pedaled to the metal it to Red Hook Ikea.

Easy traffic going in, and Google Maps saved us from my cousin's odd directions - if I remember correctly, something something "take the Belt," he said, which is most definitely not the way. Yet, he said it so confidently. Like above, as if New Jersey Ikea could actually possibly be closer than Red Hook Ikea

Anyway, we got there. We parked. We entered. Climbed the Ikea stairs. Then, my cousin pronounced, "Oh, I need to get some water," and turned for the dining area, asking on the way if I had lunch yet.

I replied to him no and that I didn't want anything. I looked ahead at my steps as I walked, at my new-ish kicks that were already streaked with smudge marks. I needed to do something to clean them soon, or those smudges will be impossible to remove. If ever possible. Then, my field of vision caught the bottom hem of my t-shirt, the stitching was showing. I thought my hem had bent outward which bothered me because it reminded me that my clothes may not be fitting properly, or that it required pressing of some sort. Or that my belly unduly stressed the integrity of my t-shirt. I proceeded to fold it back. Or tried.

I worried my fingertips were playing tricks on me as they glided half way round the bottom hem of my t-shirt. Nothing was mis-folded over. I quickly turned to my shoulder, the stitching showed there too. I reached behind along the outside collar. Phew, no tag. "Oh wait," as I sought along the collar inside, and found, "Oh drats, no tag!"

It was a tag-free shirt.

"I'll meet you here, have to go to the bathroom," I told my cousin as we approached the queue to the food counter. Inside the men's room. I tugged my t-shirt off, which educed no staring. Either what they say about the docks/retail bathrooms are completely false or my flab checked the curiosity of the rough traders.30 Reversing the shirt and then slipping it over my head again, I alternated between wondering, "Dang, how long was I wearing this inside out?" and, "Geez, hope no one noticed."31

--------------------------------------------------------

1. If I refer to a book or a writer or a movie or whatever, as I have done in the past, it's not because I believe my reading list or my movie watching list or my listing ability is particularly interesting.
2. Against the Day, Thomas Pynchon.
3. There might be a slight footnote issue. The way this piece was put together, I was careless in keeping track my sources, and I had to re-find them. Some times I hit Google pay dirt and got the exact url. Other times, I had to settled with a substitute where at least the information in question matched. There were also times, as with this, that I opted for the substitute regardless as it offered an one omnibus-like stop for a variety of information. And I'm okay with Wiki as a source. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama and www.barackobama.com/issues.
As well, another footnote problem is the laid back application. For example, this footnote is meant to encompasses a pretty substantial portion of Obama's other described-within positions.
4. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton.
5. The Audacity of Hope, Barack Obama.
6. But not all the bad shit, like gang violence, which Barack finds too disproportionately hurting young black youths. Did I mention the arbitrariness of applying the death penalty?
7. Kennedy v Louisiana, 554 US __ (2008).
8. blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/06/25/obama-condemns-supreme-court-decision-in-child-rape-case.
9. For the record, it's been over 40 years since anyone has been executed for a crime that did not involve murder. lethal-injection-florida.blogspot.com/2008/06/obamas-draconian-new-death-penalty.html.
10. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Dukakis#Views_on_capital_punishment.
11. Kerry, despite slight backpedaling for post 9/11 terrorists was firmly against state sponsored execution. www.washingtontimes.com/news/2004/mar/28/20040328-115812-7206r.
12. www.debates.org/pages/trans2000c.html. Which makes me wonder what Obama might say regarding Medellin and his execution.
13. Pretty much, and gutlessly, all three have stated some language of tolerance, supported the pseudo shame status of civil unions, viewed it to be primarily a state matter, and want the federal government out of the equation. Small consolations. Kerry: www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0506-05.htm.
14. firedoglake.com/2008/06/19/obama-supports-blue-dog-barrow-over-progressive-in-georgia-primary-why.
15. www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=6969.
16. The dollar amounts are a bit roughly estimated, but the proportion is the thing.
17. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donna_Edwards#2008_campaign.
18. www.huffingtonpost.com/howie-klein/a-progressive-herione-in-_b_22930.html.
19. tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/obama_fisa.php. If you don't want to bother, or you aren't on top of your Googling game, write me, I can direct you to a few places for more 411 regarding FISA.
20. I hope it doesn't have to be said that not executing child rapists is not the same as not punishing him or her. And not hating child rapists is not the same as not believing that child raping should be done and that the people who do it should be caught and punished. And imprisonment, specifically life imprisonment, is punishment. And obviously, I don't mean to belittle the child victims, and apologize if it seems that way.
Also, an obvious, massive and certain difference with my casual jokey reference and the Kennedy case is that he was a stepfather. The degree of association and level of caretaking responsibility elevates the crime to a much more atrocious matter.
21. www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/21/obama.
22. www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/29/center/index.html. Congressperson Chris Murphy can be added to the list that includes Donna Edward, it seems.
23. www.thenation.com/doc/20010205/bugliosi.
24. news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7529015.stm.
25. This will seem awfully more shallow and trite (if possible, given what you have or may continue to read) but a driving factor for my annoyance with Obama is his appropriation of buzzwords of responsible, principled, change, etc; then act or be contrary to those words intended meaning or spirit. I don't mind flip floppery, but is there such a thing as a principled flip flopper. I imagine how poorly educated a generation of kids in social studies class will be if took their semantic/linguistic lesson from politicians/Obama. Obama also loves to use "pragmatic" which he seems to have a better handle in using, but I don't think it speaks as well of him as he (should) thinks.
26. Haha, no citing of myself. But it should be little trouble to find.
27. hotair.com/archives/2008/07/03/obama-im-willing-to-refine-my-policies-on-iraq.
28. Overall my criticism probably tracks the standard Nader narrative on what is wrong with the major parties and their candidates. At the same time, I don't intend this to be an endorsement of Nader. I should add, while Nader has worthwhile ideas, and I do support him, I'm kind of puzzled or worried on where or how he stands on the economy. And that Nader is running as an independent rather than propping up a third party group, to possibly sustain a third party alternative, that tempers my enthusiasm a bit.
Many of the links within (or material I have otherwise read) which are critical of Obama are, in fact, by Obama supporter/voters (at least as of today).
29. Loves it: www.funnyordie.com/videos/64ad536a6d. Except lame-o on a policy level. No way, no offshore drilling.
30. Or is it a matter of good or bad timing again? Also, for the record, I have no position on not-quite-yet babies, as I am not gravid-able. That kind of defaults me to the pro-choice camp, which I wouldn't dispute.
31. Anyway, this was suppose to counteract/balance whatever perceived ad hominem quality, if any, in my writing about Obama. You know, something not positive reflective from my personal experiences. This doesn't quite rise to the same level, but I'm no perfectionist either. Also it is difficult/depressing/exhausting to equate my petty personal trauma/comedies with what goes on in politics.

Then

Then what? Whee, a question.

Playing at the local theater is Reprise. I want to see it.

Reprise played, earlier, in the New Director New Films series, in 2007.1 There had since been another NDNF series, for 2008. Natural conclusion is that I did not see Reprise in 2007. Also featured in NDNF 07 was Once that I did/have not seen.

Hey, I didn't see anything from the 08 series.

What else?

There is the thing that, in fact, I have not caught much from most past NDNF series. Probably not since 02, if even. So. But. Okay, there goes my bitching about my slipping cool credentials for missing out on the good movies before they even blip on Joe/Joan Pleb's radar. I was never part of the cool crowd. NDNF is certainly probably as hit or miss as the majority of other film festivals/series. But there seems always, year in and out, to be significant hits based on movies I eventually got the chance to see because they got distribution or were screened at later festivals, or based on subsequent movies from directors that NDNF gave noticed to. To drop names: Wong Kar Wai's Days of Being Wild in 91, Hou Hsiao Hsien's A Summer at Grandpa's in 86, Michael Haneke's Seventh Continent in 90 and Atom Egoyan's Family Viewing in 88.

As for Reprise, I also do not think I ever saw a Norwegian movie. Cool crowd or not, who has?2 Anyway, breaking another cherry is always exciting.

Oh, my friend, recently, when I think I was describing to him my evening with some friends, said. Or before that evening, earlier that afternoon I went with some people, including the aforementioned friend, let's call him S, to the Cai Guo Qiang exhibition at the Guggenheim.3 The exhibition was decent, in some ways too over the top and too obvious/pretentious, in other ways showcasing the vibrancy and potential in contemporary art: exploding Chevys, 99 wolves, gunpowder paintings, I dig it. Anyway, flashforwarding a bit, we eventually met with some one, let's call this just-met person T, who was pals with another person in our museum visiting crew, closer back around my downtown comfort zone. Then S left because of family commitment, and the rest of us got drinks and snacks, and so forth.

So S's questions the next days pertained to events following his exit. Maybe he didn't ask, maybe I offered to retell that past evening's adventure with those friends. So either it was S asking, in paraphrase, "how was it afterwards?" or it was me recapping, "after you left..." Regardless of the starting point, it was essentially, "dang, T was nonstop with the questions yesterday." T, like I said, was someone else's friend, let's call that someone else person L, and so I didn't really know T and T didn't really know me. To help keep track, so far me, S and L, and one more person, let's call that person P, went to the exhibit, and afterwards, we met with T, who is L's friend.

I do not really know T but had met T once, and not said much to T at that meeting, other than, probably, "hi" or some salutary derivation. Which is kind of what I'll be getting at with this bit. The thing is that I am - despite my obsession with word count in blogscape - very, very uncommunicative.4 Or antisocial. Or shy. Or obnoxious. Or disinterested. And so forth. So.

That evening, for the record, S, as previously stated, is a dude, as is P. L and T? Why, they don't bother with the y's; they gals. That evening, we were taking advantage of happy hour. My drinks were wee-eak, sake-based, but I was dead tired already, too hungover from last night to properly spend a day hiking round Guggenheim's infamous ramp. Strangers for the most part - me and P were old-ish friends, L and T were old friends, me and L were sort of okay-ish friends, P and L were brand spanking new-ish friends, and P and I with T were new friends, S is bounced from these equations because he already split; phew! - there were all that goes into getting better acquainted. Except.

Except, I had a really wacked out dream some nights ago.

Except, love is friendship caught fire.5

Except, something else.

Something else. Clearing my book shelf, you know what I have a lot of? Journals and scrapbooks and other bound blank sheets. Gifts from folks who imagine that I need spare scrap paper to capture inspiration. You know what century we are in? The paperless e-century. Moreover, do you know what white sheets of paper stir in me? Inadequacy.6

Else. Also playing locally this weekend is Joint Security Area. Back when Korean movies mattered, JSA was a suppose high mark. I am not crazy about current hype-darling director Chan Wook Park, but, I assume, this earlier movie will not be over the top with his stylized/fetishized nihilism. But I am loco about the fun cast which gots the reliable Kang Ho Song, the interesting enough Byung Hun Lee, and I can't wait to watch Yeong Ae Lee. Hopefully I will have someone to watch this movie with, which might be tough, as... I don't know, I have no one to go with.

Scheduled to run this year in Subway Cinema's annual Asian movie survey is Happiness.7 Subway Cinema throws one of the hoppingest movie party, to speak of a festival to come as oppose to one that has already concluded, like NDNF. This year's announced lineup thus far is steroid strong. Anyway, Yeong Ae Lee was crazy good in Jin Ho Hur's movie titled One Fine Spring Day. Jin Ho Hur newest, which if unclear is Happiness, should be a return to... oh, I don't know, better than average form? I rather keep expectations low and down. Supposedly, terminal illnesses are crucial elements of the melodrama plot, but hey, ain't like originality has to be squeezed out from every single corner of a movie. The Asian Film Festival normally draws a crowd of friends, or at least one or two others; relatively speaking and these days, 1 + I is a crowd. And, the festival is plenty-of-fun packed. And.

And. Send me stationary to make me horny.8

The cool part is I am pretty into this band called Los Campesinos! that forums/blogs perusing had guided me toward. They are ok, kind of like Natalie Portman's Shaved Head with less synths. Or, does that make them pretty much unlike NPSH? They both got youth, heightened playfulness and a sort of irreverence. Which seems slight foundation for a reference. Okay, maybe this helps: Los Campesinos! are from Wales, signed in America to Wichita Recordings and Arts and Crafts, and dance punk-ish.9

Or, I am as pretty into Los Campesinos! as I can be streaming off the internet, without having bought any of their albums, even though lack of on hand wifi access is the only thing keeping me from hitting iTunes Music Store for the new long play album titled Hold On Now, Youngster. NPSH do not have a proper album out just yet, reportedly July, so I'm psyched for glistening July's pleasures. You know what, I've used MySpace much more than I ever imagine I would. I've also used YouTube much more than I ever imagine I would. Does this mean I'm ready to accept the 21st century? Anyway, if you surf, the My Year in Lists video on the Los Campesinos! website, not awful.10 5!

5!

5!

5!11

The not cool part is that, see, at their MySpace page, NPSH do not have NYC down for a tour stop so I may not be watching them. Speaking of that, no, the not cool part is that the e-perusing that led me to Los Campesinos! was earlier this week, like probably on May 20th or so, which is mere days ago (2-ish) as of this sentence's composition, and then of course, once they seem okay, I wanted to see if perhaps they would be visiting my area while/if touring. Checking, it didn't look like NYC was part of their dates. Do bands hate NYC? Do bands hate my attendance? Checking more, guess what? Los Campesinos! had in fact performed locally, pretty much kicked off their new US tour at Hoboken's Maxwells, a magical place that involves bridges or tunnels, with included stops at Williamsburg's Music Hall, a magical place that involves Brooklyn, and just. May. 19th. Monday. at. Bowery Ballroom, a magical place that involves within walking distance for me. Regardless of whether the show(s) would have been sold out, I curse god/destiny/karma/luck/irony/randomness the same. And/or, perhaps, somethings cannot be forced.

What this means, by the time Los Campesinos! or NPSH come round again, you know who will be filling the crowds? Ho hum dwebs Joe/Joan Plebs. Elbow rubbing in the cool crowd party? Stalled.

So. S said my expression when people ask me questions is, apparently, one of constipation. Constipation is a word that I am uncomfortable using, writing, speaking, etc. Maybe it is the imagery or memory's vestiges, or its somewhat vividness, but "constipation" has a harsh sound which is a certain factor for why I poo poo on that word.

So. L, T, P and I were sitting at the Saint Mark Place hangout, drinking off the happy hour specials. Unfamiliarity compelled T to ask, ask, and ask questions of me, and P: how did this, when did that, how was this, repeat, and more as ways to get acquainted. I paused, then sort of answered. Constipation like? The thing is I am never persuaded that blitzkrieg quizzing equates to getting better acquainted. Instead, it is more a game to fill dead time.12 Shy. Obnoxious. Uncommunicative. Disinterested. So forth. And stubborn.

Except that is the thing. I do not like to talk about myself. And I lack all sorts of curiosity. And I do not like to talk about myself. Add in my belief that most casual conversational inquisitions are deadly and seriously inane, what choice left when asked, "so what do you do?" A pinched, strained sour expression? Oh, play along, it's not more than harm-free social vacuity ping pong. Oh but, no thanks. But constipated so?13 There is perhaps a taking oneself too seriously? Seriously, that seriously? And yet, 1720-ish words of this? This? Loosen that grip. And/or pretend better. May, be. I guess there is a difference between something that I more (or less) realize about myself versus something one of my friend, S in this case, points out about me. Guess? What exactly is the difference? Uh, okay. Well. Then. Introspection is an ongoing business. Let's on-go!

Or not. Don't think. Listen. Reply. Repeat.

... everything you think and everything you feel is alright, alright, alright, alright, alright.14

T has red, ruddy cheeks. Like, blooms from constant, severe avuncular pinching. Or she rouged herself in a too dark room. She is plenty cute. And nice enough. Her kid brother skateboards, Reprise is directed by Joachim Trier.

S has no qualms using the word constipation. Nary such expression on his genteel puss however. He skateboarded in his youth.

P has a broken nose proximately caused by me. Which, under the all's well ends well tenet, I find endlessly amusing. No trace of nasal kink.

L has sexy legs. Or, if she every wore a skirt or dress, and better yet thigh high, we would find out. Someday.

Myself? I have a ways to go and on-go; at times, a ways less too, I suppose.

----------------------

1. www.filmlinc.com/ndnf/ndnf.html, with a link to past series.
2. Tough in cheek, other Norwegian flicks have played in past NDNF and other festivals, and have enjoyed distribution.
3. NY Guggenheim. I Want to Believe.
4. 560+ words at this point.
5. Taken from The Perfect Man, a Hillary Duff vehicle directed by Mark Rosman, and quoting an unidentified someone.
6. To the gift givers: thank you, if I haven't already.
7. www.subwaycinema.com.
8. Taken from My Year in Lists, by Los Campesinos!. And you must confess that at times like these / Hopefulness is tantamount to hopelessness. 4!
9. Arts & Crafts is famed for being Broken Social Scene's label. Wichita is more diverse, starting with Bright Eyes but have landed scores of interesting bands/performers. Both labels attract a certain "sound," which, if familiar, gives a lazy shorthand to explaining the band.
10. www.loscampesinos.com; and there is always YouTube if the band site updates.
11. See 8.
12. My pet evocation from Antoine de Saint Exupery's Little Prince: When you tell them that you have made a new friend, they never ask you any questions about essential matters. They never say to you, "What does his voice sound like? What games does he love best? Does he collect butterflies?" Instead, they demand: "How old is he? How many brothers has he? How much does he weigh? How much money does his father make?" Only from these figures do they think they have learned anything about him.
13. Let's include the consideration that S saying constipated could even be a nice way of putting it.
14. Taken from Deceptacon by Le Tigre. In Reprise, there is a party scene that seems de rigueur to its genre. Could have been sustained a touch longer or in greater detail, but quite well done nonetheless. Which is to say, since initiating this: I saw it. Pretty good. YouTube housed trailers here and, if you think Miramax is lame-o, there. Also, learned from the movie: Norway might not be as cold or snow-blanketed as first guessed. ... linoleum floor, linoleum floor / Your lyrics are dumb like a linoleum floor.

Fuck Obama

I have a fairly limited range of political issues that I care about, and most of the time these issues rarely are in play during an election, or, are in play but separated by many degrees. For example, abortion. A president can't overturn Roe v Wade (or O'Connors undue burden formulation, or whatever the present reformulation is) no matter how much he hates women or atheists.1 So voting for a president because of a pro-choice stance is sort of like, well, voting for someone who is a Yankee fan, he'll root for the same team but ain't going to take the field. An example of a sometimes "in play" political issue might be, let's say, Supreme Court nominees. 2004's disaster yielded the ascension of 2 spanking new replacement justices to the highest court. Back then, I was deathly afraid of what could be; today, I live in constant, deathly fear. 08 likely will see at least one Supreme Court seat unseated, because you know good ole JP Stevens probably is waiting for this Nov's election before announcing his retirement; he old. But the Democrats look to be a lock this time around - and worse case, McCain seems to goose-step less to an ultra conservative agenda - so whatever possible makeover in the Supreme Court seems kind of safe.

Anyway, pretty much the only issue I give a shit about this national election cycle is health care. I would not instantly say health care typically is an issue the President has a lot of sway over - standard disclaimer of the primacy of the legislature, the federal bureaucracy, big business and so forth. Yet, and never mind that the USA is way overdue for a comprehensive reassessment of her health care policy, Clinton's quest for the nomination lifts health care to be an issue above the standard campaign MO of over-promise-ignore-delivery.

Or, I should say the only thing I hope to see is universal health care. Mandated universal health care. Which means, for me: Hillary or bust. The other top candidates - and being politically unsophisticated I will describe as thus - approach health care from chiefly the affordability angle. McCain does not care about expanding/universal coverage; and controlling cost is sufficient for him, and his voters. Key buzzword includes "market competition." Which I assume is self explanatory, but if not: status quo.

Obama-wise. First, audacity of hope. Hope, like opium, is religion for the masses.2 I cringe whenever I hear that empty word. And then, it is especially incongruous that Obama shits on small town folks for their refuge in guns and religion, when his calling card to national attention, the 04 Dem Convention warm up keynote, is first "hope" and now with his campaign, another false idol, "change."3 Yeah, you miserable unemployed small town sons and daughters of bitches, gather round the fire and sing your employment spirituals: I get no kick from champagne, mere alcohol doesn't thrill me at all... That's hope in the face of difficulty, in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope! Oh, de doo da day.4

I understand "hope" or "change" are standard political doubletalk, all candidate steep in that rhetorical bullshit, but much of the Obama phenomena springs from or is premised on it. Obama tells that the least fortunate, the most oppressed, the legions of hopeless should/need to look to a belief of things unseen or a belief that better days are ahead; that they should not expect government to solve all their problems; that people can/should rely instead on mysterious deep in the bones sense that a slight change in government priority could lead to a decent shot at life with doors of opportunity staying open - that, to me, is wholly repellent, and makes Obama a complete letdown. Most people are being crushed to hopelessness. Most Americans are being crushed to hopelessness. Hoping is not audacious. Which is probably to say that I am colored against Obama from the get go and generally.

Anyway, fine, it is unfair to cherry pick apart Obama's statements. Let's cut to the chase. Obama pays lip service to universal health care but he ain't down with mandated universal health care.5 As criticism, Obama implies that mandated universal health care, and of course Clinton, somehow stinks because it "force[s] people who don't have health insurance to buy it."6 Obama mysteriously contends universal health care means anyone who wants it can get it. Again, affordability. Let's assume the hope Obama was referring to was not some stupid blind optimism but he is talking about something more substantial. Oh wait, at least in this instant, we can't. You can pick it: disingenuous, naive, dumb, delusional, weak, mental ill, out of touch, elitist, simple; regardless, it's not good for Obama. People do not have and will not get health insurance for a variety of reasons. Affordability may be one part of it; but even if health insurance was affordable, without a mandate, the rest of the varieties may, and in fact does(!), prevail in folks staying uninsured. And while I would not mind letting those who have different priorities suffer when they confront their health crisis, unfortunately their suffering bear adversely against those responsible minded health insurance enrolled folks.7 Dude, let's eradicate the slander that says a sick person with no health care does not want health care.8

There it is. Obama as of recently had been front running the Democratic nomination process.9 It is a fair perception that Clinton's admission that a possible enforcement mechanism for mandated health care would be wage garnishment would hurt her chances, because wage garnishment - just the words itself - is scary, unpopular and confusing. Back in the what would be the eventual dark days of 2004, I expressed admiration for Kerry speaking out for minimum wage hikes and increased fuel economy even when it put him in a more difficult position with the general electorate and his traditional democratic base, because despite the political risk he stood behind his belief. I feel the same way for Clinton in this instance. It is mandated universal health care or bust for her too. I accept that political reality that compromise based government and big business pressure would sap some of the teeth from Clinton's health care plan. But a discussion that initiates from Obama's watered down starting position, those bitter small town losers will stay wallowed in their frustrations. A Obama nomination win would be the ruin of a beautiful dream/hope of universal health care, a dream that Clinton has fought on behalf of and urged the hopeless to expect and demand.10

Now, saying/writing "fuck Obama" might seem extreme or hyperbolic.11 But as mandated universal health care is the only thing I care about this national election cycle and a nomination of Obama is going to fuck up a fundamental step forward for America and Americans: in seriousness, fuck Obama.12


-----------------

1. (Masculine because, so far, the top seat has been all dudes.)
2. (Whee! Which really, in terms of scope and length of detrimental effect, is the more accurate order of relating things.)
3. (http://thepage.time.com/transcript-of-obamas-remarks-at-san-francisco-fundraiser-sunday/ has the small town snafu, which I feel was overblown but a legitimate criticism against Obama. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/vote2004/demconvention/speeches/obama.html has the keynote speech. The breaks aren't the best with the keynote link but google on your own if you want a more natural formatting.)
4. (Blazing Saddles.)
5. (Never mind that a significant piece of his health care scheme is mandated (for the kids) and the penalties associated with preventing people from scamming under his system sounds mandate-esque.)
6. (From Jan 2008 debate between Clinton and Obama I believe, but probably repeated in some variation in one of the hundreds of other debates since. Which ain't saying I don't want more debates, because I do. And yes, that's a shot at Obama.)
7. (Okay, I assume none of you are as disingenuous, naive, dumb, delusional, weak, mental ill, out of touch, elitist, simple, etc. and can figure out the non affordability reasons and how the non insured would severely strain the system for the insured. Of course, if the answer is not coming too easy for you, no prob, ask and I will reply.)
8. (Modesty aside, I so wish Clinton would say something like this somewhere.)
9. (Ha. Recently = as of three week or so ago, which was, like, when I started this, I don't mind if you characterize this as such, screed.)
10. (By the way, despite favoring Clinton on the health care thing, single payer health care should be the way to go. And yes, go left! HR 676.)
11. (Though not the motley racists, radicals, political saboteurs, simpletons, and everyday, common sensed or not, folks who have already gotten i-mileage from the phrase, as I googled.)
12. (I'd be open if you have dirt on Clinton too. Or counterpoints for some Obama loving. Though at this point, I'm ready to go third party.)

Venge, Then Revenge

Treat time. Olivier Assayas will be getting the retro treatment soon at the Anthology Film Archives.*1 Starting in February most of his big old movies will be screened. L'Eau froide or Cold Water is just about my most favorite movie and I catch it as best I can whenever the flick gets locally shown. First, Virginie Ledoyen is the blistering awesome-est. I gots this huge cinematic hard on for her, or for her in her good roles which probably comprises of her roles with the late Ed Yang and Chabrol too. Which more or less centers on her playing somewhat teen roles - does that point too much to a pedophile leanings? Yikes. Why has she taken so many shit roles for the past roughly 10 years is the better question. And Ledoyen was around the 20 years range and acted younger.*2

Cold Water has claimed the highly privilege/envious top spot in a couple of years for my most favorite flicks of particular years list. And it will not be much limb testing to say it will pole position again this year too, if I catch it. Yeah, that's how meticulous my favorite movie list are compiled. But there are a couple of movies that I am keen on seeing, such as Late August, Early September and which I have resisted watching for the longest on DVD only because I want to see it in the soul-growing, silvery-imaged darkness.*3 Alice and Martin, written by Assayas for Andre Techine, a director who I do not mind keeping up on. And Les Destinees sentimentales, this one directed by Assayas, which is for more residual interest than any heightened expectation of a masterpiece. I happen to hold some hope for Olivier Assayas as spearheading the future of French movies.*4 But Assayas is hit or miss enough to play it cool for his period epic escapade Les Destinees. I really like Irma Vep, his - for now - best known work, but I am not crazy about it. But maybe that betrays more of a so-so attitude toward Maggie Cheung than much else. Which means I have not seen Clean, and will likely skip unless my arm gets twisted.

Cold Water - if this needs to be said, and probably it does not - is more tales of alienated turbulent youth goodness. The movie was made as part of a commission by French television for directors to shoot something about teen living set during the directors' teen years.*5 There is a boy who likes a girl, seriously out of touch parental units/authority figures, and more other youths copiously reveling or overindulging (depending on your prude-ar) in that brief window of teen freedom. The boy – I will say if you promise not to read too much into it - can be a sort of Assayas stand in with the substantial autobiographical elements in the movie. More, there is sensational hand held camera work and fabulous of-the-period popular tunes. And Virginie is out of the world hot.

Yet, most recently I was critical after my last screening Cold Water. My slam is essentially the too neat way scenes and the music sync. Say a scene would commence, an anonymous dude tokes up, just as the needle drops for another perfectly picked touchstone song, that pokes me as a challenge to the documentary-like or naturalistic quality Assayas seemed to shoot after. Nitpicking me, that bit of directorial decision making/editing felt artificial, or over staged. And this even with my emotions memory still unhinged years later by the bacchanal rawness from the swirling party that is the movie's centerpiece.

Okay, this, and I assume for the, holiday, H (for a hip happening cat) sent me a book, The Prophet written by Kahlil Gibran. Here is more than a mite quibble: progressively, I found the book bothersome. A passage:

And then a scholar said, "Speak of Talking."
And he answered, saying:
You talk when you cease to be at peace with your thoughts;
And when you can no longer dwell in the solitude of your heart you live in your lips, and sound is a diversion and a pastime.
And in much of your talking, thinking is half murdered.
For thought is a bird of space, that in a cage of words many indeed unfold its wings but cannot fly.

Uh... wha?! Slim as the book is, it is all this prophet dude floating prose poetics to the local village rubes on subjects such as love, giving, pain, the above scholar's choice talking, and more. I mean, if the prophet cannot stop yammering, even as he more or less cautions against it, that is a major disconnect. Do not do as I do, just do as I say: ain't that always the truth.

The Prophet of course is set up by common folks requesting: "speak to us and give us of your truth." Which I do not buy, prescribing somewhat to the "if I tell you, your half attention will half learn" school.*6 So there's that discontent for the villagers' perspective. And my views of the prophet is as wintry. Polonius comes to mind. Often played for laughs that overshadows Shakespeare's more or less practical mindedness and poetry, including gems "neither a borrower or a lender be" and "to thine ownself be true", Polonius is the out of touch, know-it-all windbag. Though the prophet is not quite Polonius. But protracted advice/truth dispensing done with a sort of preachy over seriousness/sincerity teeters closer to Polonius doddery the deeper I got into The Prophet.

Here's the deal. Of love: "When love beckons to you, follow him, / Though his ways are hard and steep." Love. What happens if you aren't sure if it is love or not that beckons? I can imagine that to be a better question to many. Or of marriage: "You were born together, and together you shall be forevermore. / You shall be together when the white wings of death scatter your days. / Ay, you shall be together even in the silent memory of God." Except for when you get a divorce!

Anyway, I won't belabor the less than positives except for this one last thing. The Prophet with the poetic styling and drawings had me thinking about Will Blake, a dude who believed he had a bit of a prophet in him. In turn, Will Blake leads to Stephen Crane. Crane wrote a poem which goes:

In heaven,
Some little blades of grass
Stood before God.
"What did you do?"
Then all save one of the little blades
Began eagerly to relate
The merits of their lives.
This one stayed a small way behind,
Ashamed.
Presently, God said,
"And what did you do?"
The little blade answered, "Oh my Lord,
Memory is bitter to me,
For, if I did good deeds,
I know not of them."
Then God, in all His splendor,
Arose from His throne.
"Oh, best little blade of grass!" He said.

Out of the few possessions of mine I have given away, the only regret is passing along my collection of Stephen Crane poems. First, I love his poetry. Then, I think he's a crucial figure in American poetry, the third leg of the Whitman and Dickinson trinity.*7 Last and mainly, it's not easy to get hold of another copy of his out-of-print Complete Poems. And I bet, I'm going to use a bad word but I mean it only in the most gentle and affectionate manner, that bitch who has my copy don't read or care about it.*8 In addition, I do not know why it is (any more than a child might), but grass is a key component to the 1800s American poetry landscape, as Whitman and Dickinson also make prominent use of those narrow fellows in prominent pieces.

But to me, the lessons of truths, whatever that means, especially as expressed through poetry, is some sort of dialog. Yeah, the words are fixed once written or published or whatever, but at the same time the words and meanings take life of their own, shifting with time, the reader's experience/intuition, and so forth. Once read, a reader comes away with something (good or bad), yet something new or different will come out (gooder or badder maybe) if the piece is read again, or even merely remembered. A conversation, a give and take, a something. Crane says something about humility that I think is kind of cool, - if I were to wildly guess at the above poem. But what happens if there is, in fact, no good deeds to be remembered, does that still warrant praise to that ashamed blade? What is precisely so less best about relating the merits of one's life? As well, does modesty ruin a job interview? And somehow my experience - thus far - teaches: humility is the worst laid plan for getting laid. Not to mention a certain beauty to the composition, if your definition of poetry includes free verse. The Prophet, on the other hand, is too laid out or coerced, or too much of a closed system. Which is not saying that what the prophet tells is not complex, but maybe more: if it is complex, then it is complex, with little wiggle room for the reader to find for him/herself.*9

Which also does not mean I do not like or appreciate The Prophet. Pretty much a couple of pages in, my immediate thought was that it was wonderful and perhaps this or that person would dig as much as I am enjoying Gibran's prose work. My hangups aside, it was, first page to the end, fun and effective enough. "For even as love crowns you so shall he crucify you. For even as he is for your growth so is he for your pruning." Nice. I love this: "Dreaming of the person you want to be is wasting the person you already are." Except Kurt Cobain said it.

But what I meant to say is that I will forward the book to a buddy of mine, and for the most part, I (re-)gift things only if I am more or less wild about them. And also, so I'll always know where it is.*10

This weekend I caught Techine's newest, The Witnesses. One critic - who I normally avoid and more or less loathe - offered this on Techine and Assayas, respectively: classical humanism vs cliquish elitism.*11 As well, this diss: "Cold Water indulged adolescent confusion in a coming-of-age story that fetishized small-town kids’ alienation." And know what? I don't disagree. I will say there is a bit of a narrower scope/focus issue when it comes to the Techine I have seen, but he's easily and way more accomplished than Assayas.*12 Assayas has (perhaps more, and perhaps too much) ambition, but he has (perhaps) not removed himself from his movies, there is a certain look-at-me-ness, to the point where his movies are not quite there just yet. Yet Cold Water still amazes/impresses me, and hopefully I can make time to see it again. But yeah, Witnesses is, qualifications free, pretty good.

Weep time. Manoel de Oliveira will get the primo retro treatment at the Brooklyn Academy of Music soon. In March, a pinata full of Oliveira sweets and toys will be busted open. I am probably a latecomer to the Oliveira show, but in another sense, underdistributed and ignored, I'm as caught up as probably anyone else. The first movie I saw of his, Inquietude, was directed when he was at or near his 90th year of age. That's star star star star star star star (representing an expletive) old! Inquietude could probably be described as a fairly full or complete expression of the Oliveira's style, and for me when I saw it, holy, it opened a totally new and different type of movie making/language. A twisted blend of theatricality, fable, magic, politics, literalism, literature, jokes, history, modernity and more that is stunning/daring/timeless/timely/fun/etc.*13 And if lots of talking and sustained stretches of boredom is your thing? - hey! will you ever love Oliveira's movies. And if pretentious is your thing? - less luck, no one will have a clue or a care about what you are talking about if you bring up this old Portuguese master. Kind of like now?

Inquietude = unbelievable. I'm Going Home = nice. A Talking Picture = wow! Magic Mirror = I so wish I was not so utterly trashed when I saw this, but also da bomb.

I have been waiting for a chance to see his earlier stuff (his youthful shit, like when he was in this 70s, ha!) for the longest time, and ta-da, presto, eureka, BAM.... .org. Except I will not be in NY for most of March, nor will I be in NY when many of the Oliveira classics I hope to see will be screened. The Past and the Present and Benilde or the Virgin Mother, and perhaps Christopher Columbus, The Enigma will be all I have time for, if I have time for it. The rest? Teardrops.

Let's "the end" this with what The Prophet has to say about this matter:

• The deeper that sorrow carves into your being, the more joy you can contain.

• When you are sorrowful look again in your heart, and you shall see that in truth you are weeping for that which has been your delight.

• Your pain is the breaking of the shell that encloses your understanding.

----------------------------------------------------------

*1 Is.
*2 So it's not necessarily that I want to get with teenage lasses, just teenage looking women. And oops, apparently Virginie gives a performance in La Fille seule, directed by Benoit Jacquot, that is supposedly highly regarded (which also sounds sort of Varda's Cleo From 5 to 7 ish).
*3 I did see Late August, and it is alright.
*4 Though the director that I think is "the one" is Claire Denis.
*5 Tous les garcons et les filles de leur age.
*6 Nobel Literature medal winner Steinbeck. That enough or you need to know from where?
*7 The first two reason is mainly why I connect a more or less big name poet like Blake with a less appreciated poet like Crane. Crane's poems also commonly have some kind of moral / value lesson dressed in a somewhat religious/strange/haunted style, which I think is Blake-esque. It is most likely a piss poor analogy though. Output-wise, Crane is minor, but what he does innovation-wise with imagery and symbolism is major. Especially if you see some of the most important poetry movements in the 1900s drawing out of the Crane tradition. Which I more or less do.
*8 And she is unequivocally not that bad word. Or, not in a way that is different from how people are that bad word generally.
*9 Here is The Prophet's take pretty much on the same subject, you decide:

There are those who give with joy, and that joy is their reward.
And there are those who give with pain, and that pain is their baptism.
And there are those who give and know not pain in giving, nor do they seek joy, nor give with mindfulness of virtue;
They give as in yonder valley the myrtle breathes its fragrance into space.
Though the hands of such as these God speaks, and from behind their eyes He smiles upon the earth.

*10 Harold and Maude. Harold. and. Maude. =. Great. And of course, thanks H for the book.
*11 Search in NY Press, if you want.
*12 A different critic describes Techine: first-rate second-rater, within a rave for the new movie. (House Next Door link) And yeah, there is some of that too. I'll just sort of defend: for French directors like Techine who came out right after the nouvelle vague blast, it is tougher to keep pushing things forward. And that is thinking Wild Reeds (Techine contribution to *5) and Thieves are straight up sensational.
*13 So new and different, I haven't figured the less-than-a-lot-of-words way to describe it.

not so soon

One not surprising thing is that Failan is a great movie. Very moving stuff.

Recently, truth be told, I have been in less than tip top mood, often. Nothing too big of a deal. Just perhaps feeling a smidge emotionally fatigued, from being always shit on and so forth. The tough part here is that I'm no saint, I probably (certainly) fit most of the invectives lobbed my way, ie the asshole that people have said or thought I am. I totally get that, because I am fairly not friendly and not social. So I do my part by not seeking social activity. I do not call people just so I can be not friendly and just so, in the end, they can say I'm a jerk (for my not friendliness). It's a tad lonesome type of existence but not as unbearable as may be suggest by first blush.

The part I totally do not follow is other folks call me for one thing or another, and my being asked, I try to comply with that requested one thing or another, and I still (still) get slammed, in the end, for being a jerk. Stop writing me, stop texting me, stop, just stop. I don't ask to be contacted so that I can do a favor or so that I can "listen" or so that I can do whatever, and then still, in the end, get... hmm... I am repeating myself here. Anyway, stop calling me if you can't be fucking nice: is sort of what I want to say.

That's the smidge emotional fatigue part. And I don't mean to be a whiny bitch, because technically (in verifiable elevated degrees) I am a jerk/asshole/degenerate/etc, but I am not jerk/etc to a person who asks me for help and I actually help (or try to) when asked. And then, to make matters worse, these days, often, when most all is said and done, I apologize, too.

I should say that I do not do good apologies: I do not do apologies well. Another not surprising thing is I like James Joyce (though I only read his excellent earlier stuff). Here is a bad example why, from Portrait, Stephen talking:

"But I will tell you also what I do not fear. I do not fear to be alone or to be spurned for another or to leave whatever I have to leave. And I am not afraid to make a mistake, even a great mistake, a lifelong mistake and perhaps as long as eternity too."

Cannot say whether those lines articulated my sentiment or instead shaped it. Came across the novel so long ago that I do not remember. Pretty badass way of putting things, either way. I am not afraid to make a mistake. Do not be afraid to make life long, as long as eternity mistakes. And shouldn't the natural progression be something like: "I give bad, if any, apologies"?

Interestingly, one critic found in addition to evoking the defiance of a young artist, the quote hints of desperation and pride. Which is perfect! I may never have considered it that way, but I do gots way too much pride. Maybe I just connected to that aspect of the lines subconsciously. As I remember it, the quote was motivated by the protagonist/Stephen's refusal (which would make it a rejection) to take Easter Duty, which is sort of like going to church for Easter (and therefore rejecting the Catholic Church).

James Joyce notwithstanding, of late, what else should I be but all apologies. There is a not so attention grabbing story behind my change that will wait for another day - an evolution that I am not sure is for the best, but seems to be how the tide of my life wants to flow for now. So I say or write my awful, unsatisfying sorries to this or that person. Kind of humiliating but thank goodness for deep ingrained and well-reinforced low self-esteem. The apologies, coincidentally, never works. Well, an awful, unsatisfying apology has much less of a wagering chance to work. So maybe it's my bad, aqua seafoam shame.

Less widely quoted from Portrait is the parts that come right after the above quoted quote:

Cranly, now grave again, slowed his pace and said:
-Alone, quite alone. You have no fear of that. And you know what that word means? Not only to be separate from all others but to have not even one friend.
-I will take the risk, said Stephen.
-And not to have any one person, Cranly said, who would be more than a friend, more even than the noblest and truest friend a man ever had.
His words seemed to have struck some deep chord in his own nature. Had he spoken of himself, of himself as he was or wished to be? Stephen watched his face for some moments in silence. A cold sadness was there. He had spoken of himself, of his own loneliness which he feared.
-Of whom are you speaking? Stephen asked at length. Cranly did not answer.

A cold sadness. What a peculiar sadness that must be. Grave again Cranly should have answered, or be more direct, if he was referring to himself. Anyway, I love Portrait. Though what or how I may, if at all, identify with the novel is inapplicable to the extent that I am not an artist, I do not have a larger or greater calling/purpose in life. I read, that is about it. So what benefit would be gain from following hero Stephen's defiant words? Cannot think of any, aside from stoking my already bad attitude.

An ineffective apology and then what, - I sometimes figure that'd be the end of that. The other person doesn't accept it, stays steamed, and oh, then those divergent roads in the woods. Yet forked roads habitually recross, or inevitably, at times, it seems. A brand new call or text or email asking me to do this or that, again. Deeply ingrained and well-reinforced low self-esteem, of course, I do it. I totally want to add: sure, I did what you mentioned, so go ahead, get your rocks off, tell me that I'm an asshole. But I totally do not do that.

Not denying that I got me some reserved bitterness still, but for the most/whole part I let it drop fairly quick. Which however I may rationalize probably spells all sorts of seeded psychological issues that I (also) ain't getting into. I ain't much of a lover, unfortunately neither am I much of a fighter. What much am I? Anyway, I play along like we always get along.

Not speaking of Letter from an Unknown Woman, the Ophuls version, I did catch it recently. While there is a ton to be impressed with in Ophuls' super movie - if this is not an injustice - I will simply add that Joan Fontaine was kind of foxy in it, or as foxy as a in black and white, over 30 year woman can be. Joan was Lady Miriam's baby sister, or Olivia De Havilland for you Robin Hood haters, with their sisterly bond ruined, or perhaps ruined that much more, by some kind of Hollywood rivalry. Hopefully it was highly exaggerated. Cecilia Cheung was (and still is) a stone cold fox in Failan as Failan.

Who I do not know is a hottie or not is the actress in Once. I completely suck because I missed this movie when it was playing locally. According to the W.W. web, it now only plays in:

Market Square (Madison,WI)
Magic Latern Theater (Spokane,WA)
Laurelhurst Theater (Portland,OR)

None of which qualifies, in my case, as throwing distance local, Northeast lad I am. Anyway, I'm especially regretful as: 1) I like musicals (which this is) and would be interested to see how that cinematic forms adopts (or doesn't) with the jaded modern sensibilities; 2) I like new faces in casting, which so far the Once names are alien; 3) I like romances, which, come on, who doesn't? 4) the songs are reportedly toe tapping catchy; and 5) John Carney seems to be a hot (hot in the unknown-and-likely-never-be-known sense) director/writer worth looking out after. I missed it because for whatever reason when it played in probably the closest freaking theater (or second closet) to my tenement shit hole home this summer I could not find friends/people to tag along to the theater with, or specifically not find anyone to catch a Celtic romantic musical. I should have so caught a screening solo if no one else would go. Anyway, ignoring that it is out on DVD (I believe out already; feel free to go get the DVD and let me know if it is worth my hype), and ignoring I'm so hating Madison, Spokane, and Portland at the moment, and ignoring it's probably a quite modest and well-tread girl and boy meet to fall in love type flick, I'm holding out fingers-crossed hope that Once will get a revived playing prior to the big movie industry award season. I hope.

The whole point in mentioning Failan again is that one of the big lines in the movie is the heroine Failan writing to the not-exactly-hero Kangjae, "every one here is kind but you are the kindest of all." Which, depending on your cynicism comfort level, is not as simple as it sounds. For one, Kangjae had no kind intentions behind the perceived kindest of all act. In time or by the end (naturally perhaps), Failan's words trigger a (re)new(ed) awareness in Kangjae. Then, a Failan-like line for me came weeks ago (by now) as, "you are too sweet and kind. Thanks so much for this," for a really trifling thing I did for some person. And while my actions were backed by a helpful intention, sweet and kind would be a hardly on target characterization. Yet, I'm grateful, which as far as considering my often unappreciative and self deprecating nature, is as close to renewed awareness of self appreciation as it may get. Too sweet and kind, that someone said that, even certain offhanded hyperbole, at least the words itself, now expressed, exist. Not that I do not hear compliments often (well, maybe I - fittingly - do not), but in this case, it surprised.