One of my readers left a great link in the comment about Eugene Oregon. It is funny, and I did like Airplane.
But the thing is, that the officials in Eugene seemed to miss, is that the joke is that Black people don’t speak like this. That this is a parody.
I’m sure that the Eugene officials were to busy trying to find this woman to run their program to realize the joke. There should be a check to see if they were trying to get Murphy Brown to run the program as well.
I’m still pissed off that they are so lost that they believe that African Americans can’t speak English and can't be dealt with like any other human being. That they are so isolated and apparently ignorant that they deemed there to be a problem that does not exists and is insulting in every manner.
By the way, if you would like to make a comment – or just send a copy of one of my posts - to the Mayor of Eugene Oregon here is the information for the Mayor’s site.
The Honorable Kitty Piercy
777 Pearl Street, Room 105
Eugene, Oregon 97401
Phone: (541) 682-5010
Email: kitty.piercy@ci.eugene.or.us
Saturday, March 29, 2008
Thursday, March 27, 2008
LeBron James, Gisele Vogue cover controversy hides a lot - 3.27.2008.2
LeBron James. Gisele Bundchen. King Kong and the blonde or success and good looks?
The cover of Vogue does not make a preference. Beyond saying both look good and are in shape there is nothing more said. But in America, images of Blacks and Whites together always evoke issues older than the nation itself. This is no different.
How you see the cover has a lot to do with what you want to see, and I think what race you are. I would guess that most African Americans will either see nothing or a Mandingo image. Most Whites will see nothing or the stereotypical sexual image of a Black male, or a taboo that far too many Black men have died over for centuries. And that is perhaps the problem.
Not that some see anything, but that so many see something more. And that was exactly what Vogue wanted. Ads and images for companies are important. They promote sales, and bring profit. They make your brand memorable. In a nation that is obsessed with sex, yet repressed from having it the residual suggestion is enough to get some into an uproar.
I personally did not see anything wrong with the photo at first glance. My next thought was, couldn’t LeBron have worn something more classy or professional? Then I saw the sexual insinuation. Note that I had to work to that conclusion.
But there is no lack of people who go to that 3rd thought first. Whether it’s an African American that thinks the Black race is being breed out of the world (which considering the numbers in Africa I doubt), or a White seeing visions of Slavery rape fantasy/fears. We are a nation that has yet to resolve our initial circumstances, and companies that recognize this seek the profit out of it.
I’ve read many that say the photo is one thing or another. Actually I think it’s both. It is meant to be on the edge, allowing deniability and thus feeding a frenzy that happened with too much ease. And the real question to me is if this was so easy to cause uproar, how can we ever believe that all the issues and baggage since 1619 no longer exists?
While on an individual level I’m sure many are not racist or tied to prejudice, just as LeBron did not envision this as being a negative portrayal of him. But as a nation that cannot be said. The first day of 2007 I commented on the interracial couple that made headlines with their proposal on national television. Later that same year I discussed the lesser covered news of their wedding marred by death threats and violence at the wedding.
Barely a week ago Senator Obama had to discuss race, and the racism of his own grandmother. 2 weeks ago Rev. Wright was often taken out of context as a group of 10 second soundbites from 5 sermons were strung together to form polispeak against Senator Obama’s campaign; to the delight of the Clinton campaign that had been using race as an issue since October 2007 at least.
If there is anything more at issue in America than sex (who’s having it and with whom) it is absolutely race. Neither issue is one that gets an honest or open conversation.
What is the real thing the cover is saying that is not being dealt with in the media? That several successful Black entertainers and businesspeople, like Kimora Lee Simmons or Sean Combs (aka P Diddy), never got attention on the cover of Vogue though they had successful and popular clothing lines for a decade. That holding up a question about an entertainer completely obfuscates the real issues of poor educations for our children, skyrocketing drop-out and teen pregnancy rates, unequal legal sentencing policies, and the proliferation of drug in low income communities to name a few.
Magazines about women’s clothing lines are about sex. A cover is meant to exemplify that fact. Sex sells in America (if not the world). And this cover absolutely attacks the American precepts of sex appeal and sexuality. It dives right into the unspoken and still held belief in restricting or preventing interracial couples. It swings the door open to the learned fears and fantasies and questions that have plague this nation since the first African slave was sold in America and a White woman gave him a second glance.
Is this image troubling? Maybe in some respects. But more troubling is what this cover is attempting to distract from. That is what we really need to pay attention to. At least that’s what I think.
The cover of Vogue does not make a preference. Beyond saying both look good and are in shape there is nothing more said. But in America, images of Blacks and Whites together always evoke issues older than the nation itself. This is no different.
How you see the cover has a lot to do with what you want to see, and I think what race you are. I would guess that most African Americans will either see nothing or a Mandingo image. Most Whites will see nothing or the stereotypical sexual image of a Black male, or a taboo that far too many Black men have died over for centuries. And that is perhaps the problem.
Not that some see anything, but that so many see something more. And that was exactly what Vogue wanted. Ads and images for companies are important. They promote sales, and bring profit. They make your brand memorable. In a nation that is obsessed with sex, yet repressed from having it the residual suggestion is enough to get some into an uproar.
I personally did not see anything wrong with the photo at first glance. My next thought was, couldn’t LeBron have worn something more classy or professional? Then I saw the sexual insinuation. Note that I had to work to that conclusion.
But there is no lack of people who go to that 3rd thought first. Whether it’s an African American that thinks the Black race is being breed out of the world (which considering the numbers in Africa I doubt), or a White seeing visions of Slavery rape fantasy/fears. We are a nation that has yet to resolve our initial circumstances, and companies that recognize this seek the profit out of it.
I’ve read many that say the photo is one thing or another. Actually I think it’s both. It is meant to be on the edge, allowing deniability and thus feeding a frenzy that happened with too much ease. And the real question to me is if this was so easy to cause uproar, how can we ever believe that all the issues and baggage since 1619 no longer exists?
While on an individual level I’m sure many are not racist or tied to prejudice, just as LeBron did not envision this as being a negative portrayal of him. But as a nation that cannot be said. The first day of 2007 I commented on the interracial couple that made headlines with their proposal on national television. Later that same year I discussed the lesser covered news of their wedding marred by death threats and violence at the wedding.
Barely a week ago Senator Obama had to discuss race, and the racism of his own grandmother. 2 weeks ago Rev. Wright was often taken out of context as a group of 10 second soundbites from 5 sermons were strung together to form polispeak against Senator Obama’s campaign; to the delight of the Clinton campaign that had been using race as an issue since October 2007 at least.
If there is anything more at issue in America than sex (who’s having it and with whom) it is absolutely race. Neither issue is one that gets an honest or open conversation.
What is the real thing the cover is saying that is not being dealt with in the media? That several successful Black entertainers and businesspeople, like Kimora Lee Simmons or Sean Combs (aka P Diddy), never got attention on the cover of Vogue though they had successful and popular clothing lines for a decade. That holding up a question about an entertainer completely obfuscates the real issues of poor educations for our children, skyrocketing drop-out and teen pregnancy rates, unequal legal sentencing policies, and the proliferation of drug in low income communities to name a few.
Magazines about women’s clothing lines are about sex. A cover is meant to exemplify that fact. Sex sells in America (if not the world). And this cover absolutely attacks the American precepts of sex appeal and sexuality. It dives right into the unspoken and still held belief in restricting or preventing interracial couples. It swings the door open to the learned fears and fantasies and questions that have plague this nation since the first African slave was sold in America and a White woman gave him a second glance.
Is this image troubling? Maybe in some respects. But more troubling is what this cover is attempting to distract from. That is what we really need to pay attention to. At least that’s what I think.
Eugene Oregon can't speak to African Americans - 3.27.2008.1
If anyone from Eugene Oregon is reading my blogs, I hope that you have a dictionary handy. If not I suppose you can ask a White person from at least 110 countries around the world what my blogs say. I mention this because I just learned that for some reason the city does not seem to know how to speak to Black people.
Seriously. On Fox News at approximately 6:35pm, Dan Springer made a report about the City mandating training to be able to speak with African Americans. Somehow the less than 2% of the population that is Black seems to speak some language that the Americans in Eugene Oregon cannot comprehend.
Ok, I can’t hold it back. You dumb bas****s.
I can believe the insult. Somehow officials there think that English is not enough to allow for communication between Americans in America? Is it because the White Americans in Eugene failed to get an education of any kind? I doubt that. To my knowledge there was no transplanting of an African nation into the town. I am unaware of a Zulu tribe doing a mass immigration into the area. So what is the problem?
I am left with the thought that some White elitist pseudo-intellectual liberal with more money than brains decided that African Americans in the town were being treated unfairly, and the cause was that the White population didn’t know how to speak to them. Were some person to come up to me, and ask ‘How should I speak to you. Do you understand English?’ I would hit them.
I have to believe that the same liberal mentioned above has watched too much BET (Black Entertainment Television) – the music videos, saw Soul Plane once to often, and recently saw Birth of a Nation. Somehow that same person came to understand that Snoop Dogg was the representative of all Black people. I would guess that the same person also probably has never lived in a bigger city nor ever actually been around Black people.
If Savannah Georgia, or Houston Texas, or New York City decided to create a program to teach non-Whites to speak to Whites there would be a riot. The concept is ludicrous it would be claimed. It would be called insulting and stupid. The fact that everyone speaks (or should at least passingly understand) English makes the thought incomprehensible. Equally the converse is true. Except in Eugene.
Somehow my writing, which is actually less evocative than my speaking, is an alien language in Eugene Oregon. Or so their program indicates.
I have to wonder what happened when Senator Obama was speaking in the town. When he spoke about
Did the rest of those at McAuthur court understand? Was the officer nodding his head to stay awake, did he think he was watching some kind of new rap group?
When Senator Obama said
Did the reportedly massive crowd know he wasn’t speaking about EPMD or did his White heritage somehow provide a encryption key for their ears?
Well let me tell those that find this program neccesary a little secret that only the entire nation should know, and the rest of the world (at least those from the 110 countries that view this blog each month) seems to understand, and every English speaking human being I have ever met understands – even those that I spoke Russian with. You speak to African Americans like a person with respect and you will get respect and a conversation. Speak to us like some dimwitted creature that can’t understand it’s native language and I assure you that you won’t like the results. Especially if you are in arms reach of me.
Seriously. On Fox News at approximately 6:35pm, Dan Springer made a report about the City mandating training to be able to speak with African Americans. Somehow the less than 2% of the population that is Black seems to speak some language that the Americans in Eugene Oregon cannot comprehend.
Ok, I can’t hold it back. You dumb bas****s.
I can believe the insult. Somehow officials there think that English is not enough to allow for communication between Americans in America? Is it because the White Americans in Eugene failed to get an education of any kind? I doubt that. To my knowledge there was no transplanting of an African nation into the town. I am unaware of a Zulu tribe doing a mass immigration into the area. So what is the problem?
I am left with the thought that some White elitist pseudo-intellectual liberal with more money than brains decided that African Americans in the town were being treated unfairly, and the cause was that the White population didn’t know how to speak to them. Were some person to come up to me, and ask ‘How should I speak to you. Do you understand English?’ I would hit them.
I have to believe that the same liberal mentioned above has watched too much BET (Black Entertainment Television) – the music videos, saw Soul Plane once to often, and recently saw Birth of a Nation. Somehow that same person came to understand that Snoop Dogg was the representative of all Black people. I would guess that the same person also probably has never lived in a bigger city nor ever actually been around Black people.
If Savannah Georgia, or Houston Texas, or New York City decided to create a program to teach non-Whites to speak to Whites there would be a riot. The concept is ludicrous it would be claimed. It would be called insulting and stupid. The fact that everyone speaks (or should at least passingly understand) English makes the thought incomprehensible. Equally the converse is true. Except in Eugene.
Somehow my writing, which is actually less evocative than my speaking, is an alien language in Eugene Oregon. Or so their program indicates.
I have to wonder what happened when Senator Obama was speaking in the town. When he spoke about
“The Oregon election is a chance to make change a reality, Obama says. A police officer with a shaved head nearby me nods his head in approval. Come to mention it, there are a lot of cops standing around.”
Did the rest of those at McAuthur court understand? Was the officer nodding his head to stay awake, did he think he was watching some kind of new rap group?
When Senator Obama said
“Obama says he wants a head of the Environmental Agency to actually protect the environment, including Oregon rivers, oceans, forests and skies.”
Did the reportedly massive crowd know he wasn’t speaking about EPMD or did his White heritage somehow provide a encryption key for their ears?
Well let me tell those that find this program neccesary a little secret that only the entire nation should know, and the rest of the world (at least those from the 110 countries that view this blog each month) seems to understand, and every English speaking human being I have ever met understands – even those that I spoke Russian with. You speak to African Americans like a person with respect and you will get respect and a conversation. Speak to us like some dimwitted creature that can’t understand it’s native language and I assure you that you won’t like the results. Especially if you are in arms reach of me.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
If you want to be a bank robber - 3.25.2008.1
Have you ever needed money and dreamt of robbing a bank for the money? Maybe you needed an operation for your family, or your kids were hungry. Maybe you don't like working. Maybe you just wanted to go to the mall and get your hair and nails done. And if you were blonde, white and young, you could.
I’m speaking of the affectionately named “Barbie Bandits” out of Atlanta. About 1 year ago I wrote on the robbery these 2 young girls committed, stealing $11,000 from Bank of America – giggling all the way. They were caught after casually leaving the bank, spending money and then going to the mall the next day and discussing the robbery with a hairdresser.
For this crime, one girl was given the harsh penalty of 10 years probation, the other 2 years in jail and 8 years probation. Let my heart be still. Keep in mind that this was an inside job, one of their accomplices was a Black man. He received 10 years.
Now if you think this is appropriate, note that a bank robber in Surprise Arizona – who walked away with no money – had a 5 ½ hour manhunt after him. He was Hispanic/Latino and 41. Another man Paul Carman, of unnamed race, age 31 robbed Citizens Bank of $3,500 was arrested 8 ½ hours after the robbery. He is charged with robbery, theft and receiving stolen property.
There were no cute nicknames for the male robbers. There were no casual attempts at catching the men. No delay was spared in searching for them. And the charges were both multiple and likely to involve everything but probation. Of course they were not blonde, young and White girls.
My problem? That this is another example of the skewed enforcement of the law that occurs. Senator Obama may not have wanted to say it, but Rev. Wright was alluding to it. And White Americans receive the advantage without thinking about it. If you are White you have an advantage at every step even while you break the law. And I can’t get the same treatment even if I deserve it.
The “typical White person” in America probably won’t see the problem with the young girls getting probation. They were dumb, and were not violent in their actions. They have lives in front of them. They deserve the chance to get their lives on track. Such are the comments that might be said.
Yet I have never heard such comments made of African Americans or people of color when a crime is committed. Nor have I seen a similar criminal penalty handed out. It reminds me of the Delorean fiasco. He was caught with a kilo of cocaine. Only because there were huge sums of money devoted to finding an entrapment by the DEA, did he avoid jail. Of course the general consensus of the country was, ‘He couldn’t have done that?!’ But if I was similarly entrapped do you honestly think I’d get the same monetary and public support? Do you think I’d have avoided a huge jail term?
If you can even hesitate in your answer then you know the answer is that I’d be in jail for a decade or more. The same thing would happen if I were involved in a robbery like the ‘Barbie Bandits’, as the Black male in this case received.
How can any American be aghast at the comments of Rev. Wright, Rev. Al Sharpton, or any other African American while our legal system skews the legal punishment of Whites right in our faces? And the media conveniently avoids coverage of these events in favor of negative portrayals of people of color? Avoiding questionable or downright barbaric events like Megan Williams torture, rape and kidnapping, or the murder of Sean Bell and others.
I love my country, but I hate the schism in legal enforcement and the presumption of guilt I face because of the color of my skin. This ‘Barbie’ case just highlights the facts. It is in no way an extreme as I have seen in the news.
These women are criminals. They broke federal laws, and committed high crimes. They flaunted their crimes and were laughing about the crime. Were they not idiots, who knows how long they would have gotten away with their actions, since there was no manhunt as every other similar case has. And as a deterrent to other young, White girls and boys they received probation while the African American received 10 years. What message do you think is being made?
So the next time you need money, especially if you are in the South and specifically if you are in Cobb County, rob a bank. That is if you are White with blonde hair. Being a girl is a bonus too. Because the time is easily worth the crime, if you are White it seems.
I’m speaking of the affectionately named “Barbie Bandits” out of Atlanta. About 1 year ago I wrote on the robbery these 2 young girls committed, stealing $11,000 from Bank of America – giggling all the way. They were caught after casually leaving the bank, spending money and then going to the mall the next day and discussing the robbery with a hairdresser.
For this crime, one girl was given the harsh penalty of 10 years probation, the other 2 years in jail and 8 years probation. Let my heart be still. Keep in mind that this was an inside job, one of their accomplices was a Black man. He received 10 years.
Now if you think this is appropriate, note that a bank robber in Surprise Arizona – who walked away with no money – had a 5 ½ hour manhunt after him. He was Hispanic/Latino and 41. Another man Paul Carman, of unnamed race, age 31 robbed Citizens Bank of $3,500 was arrested 8 ½ hours after the robbery. He is charged with robbery, theft and receiving stolen property.
There were no cute nicknames for the male robbers. There were no casual attempts at catching the men. No delay was spared in searching for them. And the charges were both multiple and likely to involve everything but probation. Of course they were not blonde, young and White girls.
My problem? That this is another example of the skewed enforcement of the law that occurs. Senator Obama may not have wanted to say it, but Rev. Wright was alluding to it. And White Americans receive the advantage without thinking about it. If you are White you have an advantage at every step even while you break the law. And I can’t get the same treatment even if I deserve it.
The “typical White person” in America probably won’t see the problem with the young girls getting probation. They were dumb, and were not violent in their actions. They have lives in front of them. They deserve the chance to get their lives on track. Such are the comments that might be said.
Yet I have never heard such comments made of African Americans or people of color when a crime is committed. Nor have I seen a similar criminal penalty handed out. It reminds me of the Delorean fiasco. He was caught with a kilo of cocaine. Only because there were huge sums of money devoted to finding an entrapment by the DEA, did he avoid jail. Of course the general consensus of the country was, ‘He couldn’t have done that?!’ But if I was similarly entrapped do you honestly think I’d get the same monetary and public support? Do you think I’d have avoided a huge jail term?
If you can even hesitate in your answer then you know the answer is that I’d be in jail for a decade or more. The same thing would happen if I were involved in a robbery like the ‘Barbie Bandits’, as the Black male in this case received.
How can any American be aghast at the comments of Rev. Wright, Rev. Al Sharpton, or any other African American while our legal system skews the legal punishment of Whites right in our faces? And the media conveniently avoids coverage of these events in favor of negative portrayals of people of color? Avoiding questionable or downright barbaric events like Megan Williams torture, rape and kidnapping, or the murder of Sean Bell and others.
I love my country, but I hate the schism in legal enforcement and the presumption of guilt I face because of the color of my skin. This ‘Barbie’ case just highlights the facts. It is in no way an extreme as I have seen in the news.
These women are criminals. They broke federal laws, and committed high crimes. They flaunted their crimes and were laughing about the crime. Were they not idiots, who knows how long they would have gotten away with their actions, since there was no manhunt as every other similar case has. And as a deterrent to other young, White girls and boys they received probation while the African American received 10 years. What message do you think is being made?
So the next time you need money, especially if you are in the South and specifically if you are in Cobb County, rob a bank. That is if you are White with blonde hair. Being a girl is a bonus too. Because the time is easily worth the crime, if you are White it seems.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Review - Brookwater's Curse - 3.24.2008.1
In between creating 25 blogs for a client in the past few days I had a bit of time to wind down. In that time I became aware of a new author and his first published book. Actually a friend of mine became aware of this, and due to the fantasy nature of the book, I was told about it. It’s about Vampires. But it has a perspective that really has not been addressed before. The lead character is an African American.
The book, Brookwater’s Curse, is a trip through American history via the diary of the titular character, written by Steven Van Patten. We get to experience America through the eyes of one of our Ancestors and his growth in that time. It’s a unique view. And overall is done well.
This is a self-published book. I need to mention this because there are a few edges to the book that are rough. The graphic image on the cover of the book looks a bit cartoonish and might lead some to overlook the book thinking it is something for kids or teens. That would be a mistake. Throughout the book there are points where a historical event, or a new character/species, is mentioned and the fonts change as if there was a hyperlink. And there is the occasional typographical error. All of these things are minor and infrequent issues. None are enough to take you out of the story or breaking the spell that is being woven.
What the reader will get is that Mr. Christian Brookwater was a man born in a horrible time in America that tried his best to endure. His problems were not only the Slavery that existed but his own birthright. And then things go downhill in his life. Until he is “rescued” which leads to even more pain. Brookwater is a man that gains many achievements, and at each crest he tumbles. I really felt bad for him. And then you are lead to his real challenge, which is the issue the book starts with.
I found this book interesting because, like other novels in this genre, there are other monstrous peoples. There are werewolves, rachasas, and ghosts. Each is dealt with and explained in time and with an explanation that flows with the story and makes sense in the world presented.
Let me pause, I hate when a book or movie gives you a world with certain rules – and then breaks them. A quick example is Alien vs. Predator. It sucked, mostly because they broke the rules. The molecular blood that can go through floors of metal did nothing to a woman’s face. People exposed to the Antarctic weather in a t-shirt aren’t cold. And the rule breaking goes on and on. It ruins the story. The best movies and books create a world that has rules and sticks to them, no matter how illogical or fantastic they may be. Like the Lord of the Rings or Blade Runner.
But as I was saying, not only do we get to learn of these other peoples we get to understand other cultures as well. The ancient samurai are as vital to this story as is Harlem, and Africa.
In every step we get to learn of Brookwater as he deals with events in the nation from a unique perspective and an appreciation that is seldom conveyed in other books even in this genre. And as you read through the story you come to understand that it has not been discussed before. That a void has existed, and was completely ignored like the existence of people of color on Friends.
But don’t think that the inclusion, actually emphasis on, people of color is the only asset of this story. It is a well thought out, and researched story. No matter the race of the characters the story would be involving, but the inclusion of race adds an aspect that makes it both unique and accented.
But the book does have problems.
The first 2 chapters are probably the worst of the whole book. It’s rushed and feels forced. The detail and pacing seem rushed. In a few points in the book you want to learn more about an era or event. At others you question other factors. One thought for me came about money. Mr. Brookwater always seems in need of cash, either due to his generosity or his manner in resolving certain situations, and I wonder why he never opened a bank account, as say characters in the Highlander series did. And in certain events the flow of action seems somewhat fuzzy. As I mentioned earlier there are also the typos and font changes.
Perhaps the main issue I have is the end of the story. It doesn’t actually end a trend that is more common these days, and that annoys me. We are literally brought to a conclusion of certain events while leaving a huge vacuum in others. It is obvious that the story will continue in another book, which I look forward to reading. But there is nothing that makes me more annoyed than being invested in the characters and then having to stop just as the major plot is being expanded on.
Of course this is a smart way to launch a second book. As I mentioned, I will get the next book and read that as well. I would expect most who read this first book will want to continue the story. Because I think the investment in the characters is too involving not to continue.
I have avoided discussing any of the specifics of the characters and events in the story for a reason. They are worth reading about. My favorite characters are Christian Brookwater, Lord Tanata, and Melody. I expect them all to have much more emphasis in the next book. The potential is strong for each.
The author of the book, Steven Van Patten, has done a great job of making a world that is fresh and interesting in a genre that has become formulaic. His perspective on the strengths, weaknesses, and personal struggles of the characters is endearing. His style of writing is engrossing and generally quite good. His attention to details of history, and cultures, adds to the depth of the story and its base in reality.
I recommend Brookwater’s Curse to fans of vampires, fantasy, and afrocentric stories. Even if you are not a fan of these, but enjoy reading a good book I would say you should give this a read. And I expect that most of those that read the first book will be glad to hear that the second book is near its publishing date and will be available shortly.
Do let me know your thoughts when you read this.
The book, Brookwater’s Curse, is a trip through American history via the diary of the titular character, written by Steven Van Patten. We get to experience America through the eyes of one of our Ancestors and his growth in that time. It’s a unique view. And overall is done well.
This is a self-published book. I need to mention this because there are a few edges to the book that are rough. The graphic image on the cover of the book looks a bit cartoonish and might lead some to overlook the book thinking it is something for kids or teens. That would be a mistake. Throughout the book there are points where a historical event, or a new character/species, is mentioned and the fonts change as if there was a hyperlink. And there is the occasional typographical error. All of these things are minor and infrequent issues. None are enough to take you out of the story or breaking the spell that is being woven.
What the reader will get is that Mr. Christian Brookwater was a man born in a horrible time in America that tried his best to endure. His problems were not only the Slavery that existed but his own birthright. And then things go downhill in his life. Until he is “rescued” which leads to even more pain. Brookwater is a man that gains many achievements, and at each crest he tumbles. I really felt bad for him. And then you are lead to his real challenge, which is the issue the book starts with.
I found this book interesting because, like other novels in this genre, there are other monstrous peoples. There are werewolves, rachasas, and ghosts. Each is dealt with and explained in time and with an explanation that flows with the story and makes sense in the world presented.
Let me pause, I hate when a book or movie gives you a world with certain rules – and then breaks them. A quick example is Alien vs. Predator. It sucked, mostly because they broke the rules. The molecular blood that can go through floors of metal did nothing to a woman’s face. People exposed to the Antarctic weather in a t-shirt aren’t cold. And the rule breaking goes on and on. It ruins the story. The best movies and books create a world that has rules and sticks to them, no matter how illogical or fantastic they may be. Like the Lord of the Rings or Blade Runner.
But as I was saying, not only do we get to learn of these other peoples we get to understand other cultures as well. The ancient samurai are as vital to this story as is Harlem, and Africa.
In every step we get to learn of Brookwater as he deals with events in the nation from a unique perspective and an appreciation that is seldom conveyed in other books even in this genre. And as you read through the story you come to understand that it has not been discussed before. That a void has existed, and was completely ignored like the existence of people of color on Friends.
But don’t think that the inclusion, actually emphasis on, people of color is the only asset of this story. It is a well thought out, and researched story. No matter the race of the characters the story would be involving, but the inclusion of race adds an aspect that makes it both unique and accented.
But the book does have problems.
The first 2 chapters are probably the worst of the whole book. It’s rushed and feels forced. The detail and pacing seem rushed. In a few points in the book you want to learn more about an era or event. At others you question other factors. One thought for me came about money. Mr. Brookwater always seems in need of cash, either due to his generosity or his manner in resolving certain situations, and I wonder why he never opened a bank account, as say characters in the Highlander series did. And in certain events the flow of action seems somewhat fuzzy. As I mentioned earlier there are also the typos and font changes.
Perhaps the main issue I have is the end of the story. It doesn’t actually end a trend that is more common these days, and that annoys me. We are literally brought to a conclusion of certain events while leaving a huge vacuum in others. It is obvious that the story will continue in another book, which I look forward to reading. But there is nothing that makes me more annoyed than being invested in the characters and then having to stop just as the major plot is being expanded on.
Of course this is a smart way to launch a second book. As I mentioned, I will get the next book and read that as well. I would expect most who read this first book will want to continue the story. Because I think the investment in the characters is too involving not to continue.
I have avoided discussing any of the specifics of the characters and events in the story for a reason. They are worth reading about. My favorite characters are Christian Brookwater, Lord Tanata, and Melody. I expect them all to have much more emphasis in the next book. The potential is strong for each.
The author of the book, Steven Van Patten, has done a great job of making a world that is fresh and interesting in a genre that has become formulaic. His perspective on the strengths, weaknesses, and personal struggles of the characters is endearing. His style of writing is engrossing and generally quite good. His attention to details of history, and cultures, adds to the depth of the story and its base in reality.
I recommend Brookwater’s Curse to fans of vampires, fantasy, and afrocentric stories. Even if you are not a fan of these, but enjoy reading a good book I would say you should give this a read. And I expect that most of those that read the first book will be glad to hear that the second book is near its publishing date and will be available shortly.
Do let me know your thoughts when you read this.
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Update by Michael Vass
Just a quick update. I've been slowed down a bit as I'm finishing a major project for a client involving a couple of dozen sites, working on the final touches of a press release (involving TV One who I am working with on Presidential election coverage), and developing a new side project that may become a book.
On top of that I have just finished a book for review, involving vampires, and reading about the release of documents by Senator Hillary Clinton on her time as First Lady. I'm also watching and reviewing the latest news about Senator Obama in the wake of this Rev. Wright matter and recent interviews by Rev. Al Sharpton.
And of course there is the preparation for my birthday, the donation to Don Cheadles Darfur charity, and occasionally I try to get a game of pool inbetween all that.
So I'm not forgetting the site, I'm just trying to clear up a few things so that I can write unfettered for all of you my readers.
Please be patient, I should have a few things up later tonight.
Michael Vass
On top of that I have just finished a book for review, involving vampires, and reading about the release of documents by Senator Hillary Clinton on her time as First Lady. I'm also watching and reviewing the latest news about Senator Obama in the wake of this Rev. Wright matter and recent interviews by Rev. Al Sharpton.
And of course there is the preparation for my birthday, the donation to Don Cheadles Darfur charity, and occasionally I try to get a game of pool inbetween all that.
So I'm not forgetting the site, I'm just trying to clear up a few things so that I can write unfettered for all of you my readers.
Please be patient, I should have a few things up later tonight.
Michael Vass
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Race in politics - 3.18.2008.1
I’m insulted and angered. State that I can’t get a cab in NYC and I’m told I’m in a rude city, or was dressed wrong, or was in the wrong part of time. Every reason except that I’m Black and the fact is it is harder for me. In fact, put any minority (White women are not a minority in my view) on national television and say that anything is different than the lives they see on television (which is just 2% filled with people of color) or they live and they retreat as if it were silver to a werewolf.
Race is the one means by which it is possible to get the majority of Americans to stick their heads in the sand. Once any aspect of race and prejudice is brought up, everything else before and after that is forgotten. This isn’t the past I’m talking about, it’s right now.
Rev. Wright has helped the poor, the oppressed (in South Africa – before it was popular), gays and lesbians, and yes African Americans. He has defended this nation with his life as a Marine. He is a religious leader in a faith whose major tenants include loving thy neighbor. [Which does not preclude criticizing thy neighbor] But all that is being focused on is that he is Black and speaking up.
I am reminded by the 1970’s program Good Times. I generally disliked the show and watched it infrequently as a child. At first that was because the younger son, Michael was so outspoken. It made me uncomfortable to a degree. Quickly I realized that in fact it was not what he said, but how the other characters were reacting to him. And I never liked the buffoonery required at the time to mask the serious race issues of JJ, the oldest son.
But that was because I was trained to react like this. To shun dealing with race. To avoid mentioning that I was a Black Puerto Rican and that my life was unlike those of the White Americans around me. Much like why there can be no discussion of anything relating to slavery, reparations, an apology, or Affrimative Action (even the Civil Rights Movement) without either the speaker or those spoken to drifting off. And I don’t mean in the 70’s I mean now. It’s part of the reason that Roots has never been on television since it aired once.
Let me ask this.
What is wrong with a President that is aware of the fact that he is an American that has had to live a lifetime of being better than those around him to be treated as average? What is wrong with a President that knows how it feels to be persecuted, and looked down upon because he entered a room?
Why is it so bad that a potential President can know someone that says ‘I’m a proud American that demands to be seen for my actions and accepted as anyone else’? What is wrong with knowing someone that says I will stand a speak out about the failures I see in this nation, a failure that affects millions, and I have given blood and endangered my life to protect the right to say this.
Because I guarantee that Senator Obama has heard those that see Blacks as second-class, drug-addled, ignorant, violent sub-humans throughout his entire life and up to today.
Yet there is no video clips of that - still I bet you had no problem envisioning such a comment being made did you? Yet that is not considered a benefit for his ability to deal with the issues of America. But the converse is seen as a negative.
I don’t care if people voted for or against Senator Obama, when it was about him and his record. But I care a lot about people not voting for him because he is Black. I care that votes will be held back because he knows African Americans that hold views that are honest (at least to a degree), not friendly or pleasing to White Americans.
Obviously Civil Rights did not go far enough, and we are not so far from the days of Slavery or Jim Crowe as we thought and some hoped.
Race is the one means by which it is possible to get the majority of Americans to stick their heads in the sand. Once any aspect of race and prejudice is brought up, everything else before and after that is forgotten. This isn’t the past I’m talking about, it’s right now.
Rev. Wright has helped the poor, the oppressed (in South Africa – before it was popular), gays and lesbians, and yes African Americans. He has defended this nation with his life as a Marine. He is a religious leader in a faith whose major tenants include loving thy neighbor. [Which does not preclude criticizing thy neighbor] But all that is being focused on is that he is Black and speaking up.
I am reminded by the 1970’s program Good Times. I generally disliked the show and watched it infrequently as a child. At first that was because the younger son, Michael was so outspoken. It made me uncomfortable to a degree. Quickly I realized that in fact it was not what he said, but how the other characters were reacting to him. And I never liked the buffoonery required at the time to mask the serious race issues of JJ, the oldest son.
But that was because I was trained to react like this. To shun dealing with race. To avoid mentioning that I was a Black Puerto Rican and that my life was unlike those of the White Americans around me. Much like why there can be no discussion of anything relating to slavery, reparations, an apology, or Affrimative Action (even the Civil Rights Movement) without either the speaker or those spoken to drifting off. And I don’t mean in the 70’s I mean now. It’s part of the reason that Roots has never been on television since it aired once.
Let me ask this.
What is wrong with a President that is aware of the fact that he is an American that has had to live a lifetime of being better than those around him to be treated as average? What is wrong with a President that knows how it feels to be persecuted, and looked down upon because he entered a room?
Why is it so bad that a potential President can know someone that says ‘I’m a proud American that demands to be seen for my actions and accepted as anyone else’? What is wrong with knowing someone that says I will stand a speak out about the failures I see in this nation, a failure that affects millions, and I have given blood and endangered my life to protect the right to say this.
Because I guarantee that Senator Obama has heard those that see Blacks as second-class, drug-addled, ignorant, violent sub-humans throughout his entire life and up to today.
Yet there is no video clips of that - still I bet you had no problem envisioning such a comment being made did you? Yet that is not considered a benefit for his ability to deal with the issues of America. But the converse is seen as a negative.
I don’t care if people voted for or against Senator Obama, when it was about him and his record. But I care a lot about people not voting for him because he is Black. I care that votes will be held back because he knows African Americans that hold views that are honest (at least to a degree), not friendly or pleasing to White Americans.
Obviously Civil Rights did not go far enough, and we are not so far from the days of Slavery or Jim Crowe as we thought and some hoped.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Fox News spends day attacking Rev Wright, I get angry - 3.14.2008.4
Today I spent the day, from 9am and continuing thru my writing of this, watching Fox News. That is something I do 5 days a week normally. Its part of how I do my work and one source that keeps me informed on breaking news. And throughout the day I have gotten angrier and angrier.
Before I explain why I have anger today, let me share a moment in my life. Back when I was in high school, in the mid-80’s, I was a solid student but not due to my effort. The material being presented, as well as could be done by teachers that actually cared, was dated and in some cases blatantly inaccurate. But several of my teachers saw something in me and challenged me separate of the planned coursework.
Part of one of those challenges led me to a discussion about Malcolm X in a history class. It was my position that he was worthy of recognition and I wanted to know why he was not being discussed while Dr. Martin Luther King was. In my eyes at the time I felt Malcolm X had done more and made possible more than had Dr. King.
I was told directly, he wasn’t a good person. I was told directly that he had made statements that were vicious and mean. That he was un-American. That he was dangerous and should not be looked up to.
The teacher stating this to me is a friend and I respect him. He went out of his way to help me, in high school and college, even going out of his way to do so. He respected me and gave me responsibilities beyond my age. Through his direct influence I was entered into the Mr. Bronx competition, an advanced college program, and a job. He was white and Jewish if that matters to anyone.
I was annoyed that day because I had read the Autobiography of Malcolm X years earlier and found it inspirational. Not because of the negative speeches or stance against White Americans, but because of his ability to overcome racism and bias, to become educated in a culture that did not value it, and his ability to lead and learn throughout his life. I think all of those reasons are positive and admirable in anyone.
So to flatly disavow the accomplishments of the man because of a focus on the negatives he had, which we all have had at some point in our lives, was unfair.
Today I see the same thing happening, mostly from individuals that do not have the best interest of the American people at heart. Senator Obama is being railroaded, and this is the means to viably deter his chance at the presidency.
For hundreds of years, hundreds, White ministers and pastors decried Jews and Blacks as sub or non-human beings. White ministers for centuries defended the right to slavery. Fro decades White ministers organized lynchings and Jim Crow laws. Right up to the recent actions at Bob Jones college that had rules forbidding interracial dating – not in the 1800’s or 1950’s but in the 80’s during the Reagan Presidency.
I have heard White ministers call AIDS God’s punishments on gays, and other similar comments. I have read and refuted a minister that wrote to defend a murderer, who killed an abortion doctor, because of his political beliefs. And I have seen these preachers and others like them on their pulpits on Sunday espouse these political beliefs. Even in this election cycle, Senator John McCain recently distanced himself from a religious leader that was making a racial attack on Senator Obama while introducing and supporting McCain (though McCain waited for the press to start to question the event before making a move).
But this is all ok.
I listened today to Sean Hannity as there was a replay of an interview with Rev. Wright, in which Hannity asked,
“If there was a church that advocated Black business, Black schools, and a Black focused society but the word used was White instead of Black, what would you call it?” – Paraphrased
I did not have the full quote, forgive me if I have the exact wording wrong. But I noticed the nature of what I have seen all day. White pundits universally condemning a 30 year span spent spreading his religion, supporting his community, and standing up for the rights of people of all walks of life in this nation and abroad. (Rev. Wright was a leading advocate against Apartheid, and gay/lesbian rights)
By the way, the answer to Hannity’s question
“I would call it a church. The White is assumed.”
I got angry as 10 second soundbites from an unknown number of sermons of unknown length, that have been available since the moment Senator Obama announced his run for Presidency, were used to condemn this man. Yet I heard nothing about the fact that Rev. Wright is a former Marine, or an acknowledged theological scholar.
The context of these soundbites were picked to scare White people. They were meant to inflame White people. They are by design intended to kill the chance of Senator Obama being elected as President, I believe.
Let me pause again. I am a Republican. I like Obama, but disagree with his political objectives. He is an inspired speaker, but has no experience. I believe he could be good for the nation, and I prefer him over Hillary everyday of the year. But I am not an Obama supporter. Currently I have not picked between Obama and McCain.
As I was saying, suddenly there is all this attention. Just as the Democratic race was reaching a critical point. While Obama is leading in delegates, popular vote and state count.
Now there is nothing that connects the worst, or any of the comments of Rev. Wright to political decisions of Senator Obama. I have yet to see anything connecting the 2, and I have not heard anyone alleged that they are connected. Yet Senator Obama is being held by these statements as if there was a connection.
And not one other Presidential candidate has had their religious leader taped, soundbites made, or interviewed. None have had their sermons recorded or questioned. Thus there is no way anyone can claim that similar or worse is not being preached to the other candidates.
And like my experience in high school I have to ask why? Why is this so blatant, and so sudden. After 14 months of campaigns there is suddenly all this attention. After all the racial attacks now there are the questions and anger. All in 24 hours. And I mean 24, in the more than 12 I have watched Fox News today I have seen Rev. Wright more than I have seen any African American on any on series of programs or programming with the exceptions of BET and TV One. The soundbites of his sermons have been played more often than coverage of the death of President Ford. That is the degree of the statement trying to be made.
And there is another point. Several of Rev. Wrights statements are true. I reviewed one 3 minute video clip of Rev. Wright, and 90% of what he said was true and fine. But of the 10% I disagreed with I’ve seen 2 10 second soundbites that have been played so much that I would guess it’s had 2 hours of airplay. And I’m to believe that this is not biased?
In one 24 hour period Fox News has succeeded in bringing race and religion into this election in a manner that Senator Hillary Clinton was both unable and probably gleeful to see. And the only reason I can come to why this is happening is because Senator Obama is Black.
Black Pride has been made a fearful thing. And yes, Rev. Wright has made statements that are objectionable. But how many times has he made these statements in 30 years? In what context were they made? Do we know if he later corrected himself or apologized for some of these statements? Did he, like Malcolm X, later recognize he was wrong in some statements? Fox News and all the major media have never bothered to mention it if he has.
So again I saw why?
If there was any connection to the political actions of Senator Obama, I could understand all of this. But none has been presented. If every candidate’s pastor, priest, or religious leader was given this same scrutiny I would be ok – but they are not. And if any of the comments made by Rev. Wright were any worse than what I’ve heard in churches in the Bronx, California, New York City, across America in Black churches I’d be concerned. But the honest answer is that while I disagree with some statements they are not new, or isolated to Rev. Wright.
And just like Senator Obama, all those that have heard those words have the ability to chose and interpret what they have heard.
Ok, I have to stop. I’m tired and angry. Maybe I’ll discuss more tomorrow. But you can see my comments on the video at www.mvass.com
Before I explain why I have anger today, let me share a moment in my life. Back when I was in high school, in the mid-80’s, I was a solid student but not due to my effort. The material being presented, as well as could be done by teachers that actually cared, was dated and in some cases blatantly inaccurate. But several of my teachers saw something in me and challenged me separate of the planned coursework.
Part of one of those challenges led me to a discussion about Malcolm X in a history class. It was my position that he was worthy of recognition and I wanted to know why he was not being discussed while Dr. Martin Luther King was. In my eyes at the time I felt Malcolm X had done more and made possible more than had Dr. King.
I was told directly, he wasn’t a good person. I was told directly that he had made statements that were vicious and mean. That he was un-American. That he was dangerous and should not be looked up to.
The teacher stating this to me is a friend and I respect him. He went out of his way to help me, in high school and college, even going out of his way to do so. He respected me and gave me responsibilities beyond my age. Through his direct influence I was entered into the Mr. Bronx competition, an advanced college program, and a job. He was white and Jewish if that matters to anyone.
I was annoyed that day because I had read the Autobiography of Malcolm X years earlier and found it inspirational. Not because of the negative speeches or stance against White Americans, but because of his ability to overcome racism and bias, to become educated in a culture that did not value it, and his ability to lead and learn throughout his life. I think all of those reasons are positive and admirable in anyone.
So to flatly disavow the accomplishments of the man because of a focus on the negatives he had, which we all have had at some point in our lives, was unfair.
Today I see the same thing happening, mostly from individuals that do not have the best interest of the American people at heart. Senator Obama is being railroaded, and this is the means to viably deter his chance at the presidency.
For hundreds of years, hundreds, White ministers and pastors decried Jews and Blacks as sub or non-human beings. White ministers for centuries defended the right to slavery. Fro decades White ministers organized lynchings and Jim Crow laws. Right up to the recent actions at Bob Jones college that had rules forbidding interracial dating – not in the 1800’s or 1950’s but in the 80’s during the Reagan Presidency.
I have heard White ministers call AIDS God’s punishments on gays, and other similar comments. I have read and refuted a minister that wrote to defend a murderer, who killed an abortion doctor, because of his political beliefs. And I have seen these preachers and others like them on their pulpits on Sunday espouse these political beliefs. Even in this election cycle, Senator John McCain recently distanced himself from a religious leader that was making a racial attack on Senator Obama while introducing and supporting McCain (though McCain waited for the press to start to question the event before making a move).
But this is all ok.
I listened today to Sean Hannity as there was a replay of an interview with Rev. Wright, in which Hannity asked,
“If there was a church that advocated Black business, Black schools, and a Black focused society but the word used was White instead of Black, what would you call it?” – Paraphrased
I did not have the full quote, forgive me if I have the exact wording wrong. But I noticed the nature of what I have seen all day. White pundits universally condemning a 30 year span spent spreading his religion, supporting his community, and standing up for the rights of people of all walks of life in this nation and abroad. (Rev. Wright was a leading advocate against Apartheid, and gay/lesbian rights)
By the way, the answer to Hannity’s question
“I would call it a church. The White is assumed.”
I got angry as 10 second soundbites from an unknown number of sermons of unknown length, that have been available since the moment Senator Obama announced his run for Presidency, were used to condemn this man. Yet I heard nothing about the fact that Rev. Wright is a former Marine, or an acknowledged theological scholar.
The context of these soundbites were picked to scare White people. They were meant to inflame White people. They are by design intended to kill the chance of Senator Obama being elected as President, I believe.
Let me pause again. I am a Republican. I like Obama, but disagree with his political objectives. He is an inspired speaker, but has no experience. I believe he could be good for the nation, and I prefer him over Hillary everyday of the year. But I am not an Obama supporter. Currently I have not picked between Obama and McCain.
As I was saying, suddenly there is all this attention. Just as the Democratic race was reaching a critical point. While Obama is leading in delegates, popular vote and state count.
Now there is nothing that connects the worst, or any of the comments of Rev. Wright to political decisions of Senator Obama. I have yet to see anything connecting the 2, and I have not heard anyone alleged that they are connected. Yet Senator Obama is being held by these statements as if there was a connection.
And not one other Presidential candidate has had their religious leader taped, soundbites made, or interviewed. None have had their sermons recorded or questioned. Thus there is no way anyone can claim that similar or worse is not being preached to the other candidates.
And like my experience in high school I have to ask why? Why is this so blatant, and so sudden. After 14 months of campaigns there is suddenly all this attention. After all the racial attacks now there are the questions and anger. All in 24 hours. And I mean 24, in the more than 12 I have watched Fox News today I have seen Rev. Wright more than I have seen any African American on any on series of programs or programming with the exceptions of BET and TV One. The soundbites of his sermons have been played more often than coverage of the death of President Ford. That is the degree of the statement trying to be made.
And there is another point. Several of Rev. Wrights statements are true. I reviewed one 3 minute video clip of Rev. Wright, and 90% of what he said was true and fine. But of the 10% I disagreed with I’ve seen 2 10 second soundbites that have been played so much that I would guess it’s had 2 hours of airplay. And I’m to believe that this is not biased?
In one 24 hour period Fox News has succeeded in bringing race and religion into this election in a manner that Senator Hillary Clinton was both unable and probably gleeful to see. And the only reason I can come to why this is happening is because Senator Obama is Black.
Black Pride has been made a fearful thing. And yes, Rev. Wright has made statements that are objectionable. But how many times has he made these statements in 30 years? In what context were they made? Do we know if he later corrected himself or apologized for some of these statements? Did he, like Malcolm X, later recognize he was wrong in some statements? Fox News and all the major media have never bothered to mention it if he has.
So again I saw why?
If there was any connection to the political actions of Senator Obama, I could understand all of this. But none has been presented. If every candidate’s pastor, priest, or religious leader was given this same scrutiny I would be ok – but they are not. And if any of the comments made by Rev. Wright were any worse than what I’ve heard in churches in the Bronx, California, New York City, across America in Black churches I’d be concerned. But the honest answer is that while I disagree with some statements they are not new, or isolated to Rev. Wright.
And just like Senator Obama, all those that have heard those words have the ability to chose and interpret what they have heard.
Ok, I have to stop. I’m tired and angry. Maybe I’ll discuss more tomorrow. But you can see my comments on the video at www.mvass.com
Christian Slater to get TV show - 3.14.2008.2
Well television may just get a bit more interesting soon. It’s not because American Idol is about to get canceled (I can only dream of that day so far). The reason is that there may be a new television program starring Christian Slater.
Now I am a fan of Slater. His work in Heathers and Broken Arrow were good. He has done many roles with a Nicolson-eque flair and a dark demeanor. It works, on the big screen and small. Similar qualities were brought to his work on The West Wing, a show I really enjoyed and virtually the last network television program I followed.
The new program is described as a Bourne Identity meets Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde. Now I’m not exactly sure how that can work. From what I understand the main character has an alter-ego that is a spy, and that he is unaware of. From what I can gather he is not playing a comical role but more in line with a 24 style.
I’m not sure this can work. But I want to give Mr. Slater the benefit of doubt. I look forward to seeing what this program might be like. Look for this in the fall.
Not much else to say about that.
But I know many people are hearing a lot of different things about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor of Senator Obama. For those that don’t normally follow politics but want to know my review of one of the speeches of Rev. Wright as opposed to the 5 and 10 second soundbites in the major news media you can go to www.mvass.com
Now I am a fan of Slater. His work in Heathers and Broken Arrow were good. He has done many roles with a Nicolson-eque flair and a dark demeanor. It works, on the big screen and small. Similar qualities were brought to his work on The West Wing, a show I really enjoyed and virtually the last network television program I followed.
The new program is described as a Bourne Identity meets Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde. Now I’m not exactly sure how that can work. From what I understand the main character has an alter-ego that is a spy, and that he is unaware of. From what I can gather he is not playing a comical role but more in line with a 24 style.
I’m not sure this can work. But I want to give Mr. Slater the benefit of doubt. I look forward to seeing what this program might be like. Look for this in the fall.
Not much else to say about that.
But I know many people are hearing a lot of different things about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the former pastor of Senator Obama. For those that don’t normally follow politics but want to know my review of one of the speeches of Rev. Wright as opposed to the 5 and 10 second soundbites in the major news media you can go to www.mvass.com
Star Wars Friday - 3.14.2008.1
Now as some of you may know, I am a big fan of Star Wars. I even liked the second trilogy – well really just the 3rd movie but you get the point. So when I heard about another movie I was a bit confused.
George Lucas has made it clear that he won’t go into the 3 chapters of the Star Wars that follow from the end of Return of the Jedi. There have been numerous books detailing everything that has happened to Han Solo and his wife Leia, Luke Skywalker and his wife Mara Jade, the death of Chewbacca and all of their respective kids. If you haven’t read any of them yet, you really should.
But there is going to be another movie later this year in August. And that will be followed by a television show on Cartoon Network. As you might imagine both are to be animated.
The premise of all of this is that we will be able to get an understanding of the relationships of the major characters inbetween the fall of Anakin Skywalker and the start of the Clone wars. As a bonus we are going to get to also learn of a few new characters too - like the rare almost fabled female Jedi. [Which is fine as long as we never see another Jar-Jar character unless it’s while they are being tortured and then die!]
Now I do find aspects of this to be of interest. There just wasn’t enough on the Clone wars, and there was a lot they could have done. Plus I love the double lightsaber battles. There needed to be more of that. Obviously I was not alone in these thoughts, and we are going to see a lot on this.
But as a bonus I did a bit of searching the net to get a preview for you my readers. And I found it, and something else.
It’s Friday, raining where I am and a bit cold. So on this dreary day for me I instead offer this video clip that made me laugh. I hope you at least chuckle too.
George Lucas has made it clear that he won’t go into the 3 chapters of the Star Wars that follow from the end of Return of the Jedi. There have been numerous books detailing everything that has happened to Han Solo and his wife Leia, Luke Skywalker and his wife Mara Jade, the death of Chewbacca and all of their respective kids. If you haven’t read any of them yet, you really should.
But there is going to be another movie later this year in August. And that will be followed by a television show on Cartoon Network. As you might imagine both are to be animated.
The premise of all of this is that we will be able to get an understanding of the relationships of the major characters inbetween the fall of Anakin Skywalker and the start of the Clone wars. As a bonus we are going to get to also learn of a few new characters too - like the rare almost fabled female Jedi. [Which is fine as long as we never see another Jar-Jar character unless it’s while they are being tortured and then die!]
Now I do find aspects of this to be of interest. There just wasn’t enough on the Clone wars, and there was a lot they could have done. Plus I love the double lightsaber battles. There needed to be more of that. Obviously I was not alone in these thoughts, and we are going to see a lot on this.
But as a bonus I did a bit of searching the net to get a preview for you my readers. And I found it, and something else.
It’s Friday, raining where I am and a bit cold. So on this dreary day for me I instead offer this video clip that made me laugh. I hope you at least chuckle too.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Not On Our Watch, Cheadle and Clooney, donate $500,000 - 3.13.2008.1
Unlike the major news media, or the Government of the U.S., I have spoken about Darfur and what is happening there. For years there has been little said about the genocide, and even less done in Congress. An example of that inaction is HR 180 IH.
But there are individuals that have done a great deal. One of the most notable and famous is entertainer Don Cheadle. Mr. Cheadle, along with George Clooney, producer Jerry Weintraub, entertainers Brad Pitt and Matt Damon created Not On Our Watch. Through this non-profit organization attention and aid has been given to Darfur and the 200,000 African that have been murdered and the 2.5 million men, women, and children that no longer have homes.
It is Not On Our Watch that again did something our nation seems incapable, or unwilling, to do. Today they gave $500,000 to the World Food Program (WFP) of the United Nations. The WFP has been providing food and support people in Darfur for years, in fact 70% of it’s aid goes to this area alone.
As much as half-a-million dollars is, it does not compare to the $77 million needed in 2008 alone.
Don Cheadle, George Clooney and the others in Not On Our Watch need to be commended on their actions and support to date. Congress, including Presidential candidates Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama, and President Bush need to be admonished for their failures to address this issue.
America has not take a stance against what is happening in Darfur. When Apartheid needed to be stopped, America stood up and refused to do business with the nation. We placed pressure on that government and helped to improve the lives of millions of South Africans including former political prisoner and now leader Nelson Mandela. [For those that weren’t alive in the 1980’s, Apartheid was the rule of the White minority in South Africa over the African majority. Think of it as a couple of steps above slavery and segregation on crack.]
If America as a government is unwilling to end the support of the Sudan, which Darfur is within, perhaps the people of America are willing to step up. Already the entertainers mentioned above have done so, and no one would consider entertainers political leaders. Yet they have done more to lead this cause than all of the politicians in America so far, in my opinion.
Darfur may be in Africa, and Africans are not as important to America as other parts of the world. That is apparently factual based on what our nation has done, or failed to do, over the last 5 years. But I see no difference in the lives of children in Darfur than in Iraq. If there can be such huge support for helping Iraq (whether through leaving the area or staying and winning the fight against Iran and terrorists) I cannot see how we cannot want to support those in Darfur.
If you agree with me, and Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon and so many other regular everyday Americans you have never heard of then please go to Not On Our Watch and make a donation. Today this organization sent $500,000 because of what they believe and the families and children they wish to help, and amount few of us have. But I have to believe that we normal Americans can afford $1 or $5.
I will even make it easier if you can’t afford that. Every dollar and cent donated to any of my blogs or sites, as recorded in my donation widget above, since the beginning of this year until my birthday on April 6th will be donated to this organization. In addition I will make a donation on that day beyond the funds collected.
So if you can only afford .50 cents, or $1.50, or even .05 cents, I will send it along with ever other donation I receive.
One person probably won’t be able to come up with $77 million or a solution. But all of us together can easily do so.
But there are individuals that have done a great deal. One of the most notable and famous is entertainer Don Cheadle. Mr. Cheadle, along with George Clooney, producer Jerry Weintraub, entertainers Brad Pitt and Matt Damon created Not On Our Watch. Through this non-profit organization attention and aid has been given to Darfur and the 200,000 African that have been murdered and the 2.5 million men, women, and children that no longer have homes.
It is Not On Our Watch that again did something our nation seems incapable, or unwilling, to do. Today they gave $500,000 to the World Food Program (WFP) of the United Nations. The WFP has been providing food and support people in Darfur for years, in fact 70% of it’s aid goes to this area alone.
As much as half-a-million dollars is, it does not compare to the $77 million needed in 2008 alone.
Don Cheadle, George Clooney and the others in Not On Our Watch need to be commended on their actions and support to date. Congress, including Presidential candidates Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama, and President Bush need to be admonished for their failures to address this issue.
America has not take a stance against what is happening in Darfur. When Apartheid needed to be stopped, America stood up and refused to do business with the nation. We placed pressure on that government and helped to improve the lives of millions of South Africans including former political prisoner and now leader Nelson Mandela. [For those that weren’t alive in the 1980’s, Apartheid was the rule of the White minority in South Africa over the African majority. Think of it as a couple of steps above slavery and segregation on crack.]
If America as a government is unwilling to end the support of the Sudan, which Darfur is within, perhaps the people of America are willing to step up. Already the entertainers mentioned above have done so, and no one would consider entertainers political leaders. Yet they have done more to lead this cause than all of the politicians in America so far, in my opinion.
Darfur may be in Africa, and Africans are not as important to America as other parts of the world. That is apparently factual based on what our nation has done, or failed to do, over the last 5 years. But I see no difference in the lives of children in Darfur than in Iraq. If there can be such huge support for helping Iraq (whether through leaving the area or staying and winning the fight against Iran and terrorists) I cannot see how we cannot want to support those in Darfur.
If you agree with me, and Don Cheadle, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon and so many other regular everyday Americans you have never heard of then please go to Not On Our Watch and make a donation. Today this organization sent $500,000 because of what they believe and the families and children they wish to help, and amount few of us have. But I have to believe that we normal Americans can afford $1 or $5.
I will even make it easier if you can’t afford that. Every dollar and cent donated to any of my blogs or sites, as recorded in my donation widget above, since the beginning of this year until my birthday on April 6th will be donated to this organization. In addition I will make a donation on that day beyond the funds collected.
So if you can only afford .50 cents, or $1.50, or even .05 cents, I will send it along with ever other donation I receive.
One person probably won’t be able to come up with $77 million or a solution. But all of us together can easily do so.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Speaking of prostitution...
While the focus of New York, and perhaps the nation, is turned towards former-Governor Eliot Spitzer there is some other news on a famous (or infamous) john. Lesser know for his strong political views, Danny Bonaduce, had some news of his own today.
Now there is no question that Bonaduce is less than perfect. In fact he is a prime example of how child stars can go very wrong in their lives. A fact that he has always been one of the first to admit. But in recent years he has made strong efforts to improve his life, getting clean and sober, and avoiding the pitfalls his fame allowed him to fall into often.
But while scandal is no stranger to Bonaduce, his most recent claim to fame is not really his fault in my opinion. You may not recall the event I’m speaking of, since it occurred on the ‘reality’ cable television network. So for those of you unfamiliar here is the video.
Because of this event, Bonaduce is currently being sued. Now I don’t think there is a case here. The guy at the mike called a somewhat inebriated (apparently) Danny Bonaduce over as he was going to leave, jumped on him, and started to gyrate on him. Were I in the same situation I’d have done the same thing.
No malice was intended, no plan that I could see. The outcome could not be predicted. And the guy started the problem by legally assaulting Bonaduce. Why is there a lawsuit? Why is Superior Court Judge Michael C. Solner even bothering with this?
Unlike some politicians, Danny Bonaduce has never denied the ill-formed ideas he has had. He has suffered the consequences of these actions, personally and professionally. He is without question an example of what not to do in Hollywood.
But if there is a choice between Bonaduce and Eliot Spitzer for who deserves to be punished by law, I think there should be no question. Yet there is a good chance that Spitzer may walk away from this current scandal and crimes without serious penalty. Or so the pundits are stating the rumors have said.
Sometimes things just don’t make sense to me.
Now there is no question that Bonaduce is less than perfect. In fact he is a prime example of how child stars can go very wrong in their lives. A fact that he has always been one of the first to admit. But in recent years he has made strong efforts to improve his life, getting clean and sober, and avoiding the pitfalls his fame allowed him to fall into often.
But while scandal is no stranger to Bonaduce, his most recent claim to fame is not really his fault in my opinion. You may not recall the event I’m speaking of, since it occurred on the ‘reality’ cable television network. So for those of you unfamiliar here is the video.
Because of this event, Bonaduce is currently being sued. Now I don’t think there is a case here. The guy at the mike called a somewhat inebriated (apparently) Danny Bonaduce over as he was going to leave, jumped on him, and started to gyrate on him. Were I in the same situation I’d have done the same thing.
No malice was intended, no plan that I could see. The outcome could not be predicted. And the guy started the problem by legally assaulting Bonaduce. Why is there a lawsuit? Why is Superior Court Judge Michael C. Solner even bothering with this?
Unlike some politicians, Danny Bonaduce has never denied the ill-formed ideas he has had. He has suffered the consequences of these actions, personally and professionally. He is without question an example of what not to do in Hollywood.
But if there is a choice between Bonaduce and Eliot Spitzer for who deserves to be punished by law, I think there should be no question. Yet there is a good chance that Spitzer may walk away from this current scandal and crimes without serious penalty. Or so the pundits are stating the rumors have said.
Sometimes things just don’t make sense to me.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Tropic Thunder draws questions of racism - 3.12.2008.1
I find it interesting that the question over the movie Tropic Thunder is quickly becoming an issue of whether or not a White man can play a Black man. How this became the case is not really the issue I expected, rather I was considering the question of whether this would be a funny portrayal and a decent movie.
I feel that Robert Downey Jr. is a great actor. I think he is dedicated to his roles. So I believe he will try to make this role as positive as possible. But a bad director and/or writer can kill a great film and performances by entertainers. That’s a fact. Thus I am concerned about what Ben Stiller is going to do, in his role as director. Because I think he is the weak link of every film he has ever been in.
But around the web I’m seeing the argument become, ‘Why can’t a White man play an African American?’
Some comments on it include
and
and
I can agree with the concept that acting ability is not limited to any one race. I have no doubt that a qualified and professional entertainer, with the proper tools can portray any race with respect.
At the same time I realize that there is a double edged sword in America. In the name of humor and jokes African Americans have long been ridiculed and minimized. The white actors portraying Amos n Andy, blackface, C Thomas Howell in Soul Man, and so many more are examples of bad representation. And there are those that are sensitive to this fact.
What’s the difference?
A Black entertainer making a bad portrayal of Whites is seen as a failure on the entertainer’s part. A White entertainer in the reverse position (for most of the history of Hollywood) had been seen as making an honest attempt at portraying Negroes, which were considered below them. That’s the history of the situation.
So I agree there is a double standard, and it is a matter of sensitivity. The double standard wasn’t created today, but is based in the past. While many Americans today don’t want to address or acknowledge the openly racist past (nor the quietly racist current day) of America, it does not change the wound that is there or its effects. To be aware of that is not to be alarmist, though some to go to that extreme.
The past cannot be ignored if one wants to make this movie a discussion or comparison of what race can or should play another. And the character that Jack Black has in this movie sounds exactly like a take on Eddie Murphy, so I do see that concern.
But I don’t think that should be the point.
Based on the storyline, and the roles that Robert Downey Jr. has had, I don’t think the intent is bad. But as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Still the movie deserves to at least present its trailers before any conclusions are made.
The question here should simply be are they making a funny movie without degrading to laughter based on, or built upon, stereotypes. Without seeing what has been done, none of us can say.
Yet, to argue that other movies having an entertainer portraying another race and were done well means that all movies with such a device are ok is ludicrous. American memories are very short, and at times willfully so. But everyone remembers pain, and often there are questions asked that are embarrassing.
Like why in almost all westerns were the roles of Native American Indians played by Whites? In older movies Whites also played Asians too. And none of those roles were positive. Is that ok?
I recall when the movie Remo Williams came out. There was a huge outcry when the lead character of Chiun was given to Joel Grey (who was nominated for a Golden Globe for his portrayal). Chiun was supposed to be an old Korean and Grey made the character realistic and was respectful in his portrayal. I see no reason why Robert Downey Jr. cannot do the same thing.
If this film becomes an equivalent of Soul Plane, then all involved deserve to be ostracized. If it is the equivalent of Remo Williams they should be lauded. But to simplify the big issue no one wants to talk about, the elephant in the room so to speak, to they did it so we can too and it’s all ok is to say that Iran should be allowed to have nuclear weapons because France has them.
Not the best analogy but you get my point.
I feel that Robert Downey Jr. is a great actor. I think he is dedicated to his roles. So I believe he will try to make this role as positive as possible. But a bad director and/or writer can kill a great film and performances by entertainers. That’s a fact. Thus I am concerned about what Ben Stiller is going to do, in his role as director. Because I think he is the weak link of every film he has ever been in.
But around the web I’m seeing the argument become, ‘Why can’t a White man play an African American?’
Some comments on it include
“I can totally see the outrage over this, I mean with all the white, young blonde actresses trying to get a break in Hollywood, how could these guys possibly be so racist as to take work away from who could be the next two big starlets of Tinseltown? I mean... um, what?... You mean this isn't all about White Chicks? There was no outcry over the race reversal in that movie?”
and
“How about Eddie Murphy playing an old white man in the excellent Coming To America? Or Eddie Murphy going undercover as a white man for Saturday Night Live? Both classic cases of just having fun, both some of the funniest films or TV moments from Murphy's career. (He was ROBBED at last year's Oscars!!)”
and
“Typical nonsense, the usual double standard. It's the same thing with black comedians ripping on white people, total acceptable, but lets see a white comedian tear into black people and listen to the out-cry. Eddie Murphy has made a career out of playing stereotypes for humor and no one says a word. Whether they be fat, white, Jewish, Asian, whatever, he has done it all and nothing is said.”
I can agree with the concept that acting ability is not limited to any one race. I have no doubt that a qualified and professional entertainer, with the proper tools can portray any race with respect.
At the same time I realize that there is a double edged sword in America. In the name of humor and jokes African Americans have long been ridiculed and minimized. The white actors portraying Amos n Andy, blackface, C Thomas Howell in Soul Man, and so many more are examples of bad representation. And there are those that are sensitive to this fact.
What’s the difference?
A Black entertainer making a bad portrayal of Whites is seen as a failure on the entertainer’s part. A White entertainer in the reverse position (for most of the history of Hollywood) had been seen as making an honest attempt at portraying Negroes, which were considered below them. That’s the history of the situation.
So I agree there is a double standard, and it is a matter of sensitivity. The double standard wasn’t created today, but is based in the past. While many Americans today don’t want to address or acknowledge the openly racist past (nor the quietly racist current day) of America, it does not change the wound that is there or its effects. To be aware of that is not to be alarmist, though some to go to that extreme.
The past cannot be ignored if one wants to make this movie a discussion or comparison of what race can or should play another. And the character that Jack Black has in this movie sounds exactly like a take on Eddie Murphy, so I do see that concern.
But I don’t think that should be the point.
Based on the storyline, and the roles that Robert Downey Jr. has had, I don’t think the intent is bad. But as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Still the movie deserves to at least present its trailers before any conclusions are made.
The question here should simply be are they making a funny movie without degrading to laughter based on, or built upon, stereotypes. Without seeing what has been done, none of us can say.
Yet, to argue that other movies having an entertainer portraying another race and were done well means that all movies with such a device are ok is ludicrous. American memories are very short, and at times willfully so. But everyone remembers pain, and often there are questions asked that are embarrassing.
Like why in almost all westerns were the roles of Native American Indians played by Whites? In older movies Whites also played Asians too. And none of those roles were positive. Is that ok?
I recall when the movie Remo Williams came out. There was a huge outcry when the lead character of Chiun was given to Joel Grey (who was nominated for a Golden Globe for his portrayal). Chiun was supposed to be an old Korean and Grey made the character realistic and was respectful in his portrayal. I see no reason why Robert Downey Jr. cannot do the same thing.
If this film becomes an equivalent of Soul Plane, then all involved deserve to be ostracized. If it is the equivalent of Remo Williams they should be lauded. But to simplify the big issue no one wants to talk about, the elephant in the room so to speak, to they did it so we can too and it’s all ok is to say that Iran should be allowed to have nuclear weapons because France has them.
Not the best analogy but you get my point.
Michael Vass annual medical exam - 3.11.2008.2
Once a year I take a moment to speak about health, particularly mine. That time has come again this year.
I cannot emphasize enough the need to be sure of your medical health. Often it’s because men, especially African American and Hispanic/Latino men, rarely go to the doctor when we are sick it’s normally a very bad situation. Far too common is the fact that a little prevention like an annual checkup is all that is needed to catch a cancer in its early stages.
This is even more important if you have family history that makes you at higher risk. In my family I have had a sister, who is younger than me, diagnosed with early stage cancer. That was found by luck during an exam. My father had cancer of the tongue, high blood pressure, and diabetes. My grand-mother died of a heart attack in her 60’s. None of these things are unusual in Black families. In fact I had my best friend lose his father to Prostate cancer that was not detected until late stage of the disease. And it killed him. He was only in his 50’s. As was my father.
So yes I take this serious. And so should you. I don’t like doctors any more than anyone else. And as a small business owner I don’t have health insurance so the cash coming out of my pocket is huge. Yet it’s money worth it.
But I recently learned from my doctor that 15% of men that have normal results from the PSA test may still have prostate cancer. Thus at the ripe age of 39 years 11 months and 27 days to go I had my first prostate exam. It was not something I was looking forward to, but was long overdue.
Because of the prevalence of Black men getting and dying from prostate cancer it’s recommended that we start getting checked at 35. My best friend started at 33 because of his father. And if you think, like I did, that a normal PSA means you don’t need the exam, remember this. My doctor knows a man that had a normal test and upon the exam was found to have early stage cancer. Because it was found the cancer was removed and the guy is living a normal life. Had he not, the PSA may not have found anything until far too late.
And as men of color, who don’t like tests and doctors as is, do you really want to risk missing a cancer that we are in the highest risk group for? Especially since the exam does not cost anything extra?
Now I won’t tell you the exam was pleasant. It wasn’t. And as embarrassing as it was I will tell you this, it was not as bad as you imagine it to be. Maybe 30 seconds of feeling highly unpleasant, but not extreme pain. But it confirmed that I have no signs of this killer disease among people of color.
I rarely see any bloggers, especially blogs by men of color, which discuss this. It needs to be talked about a bit. It will save lives.
Get an annual physical. Check for diabetes, AIDS, prostate cancer. Check your cholesterol levels and other tests. Even if you don’t think you need it. Because like insurance, you only will be concerned after you find out that you need it.
I cannot emphasize enough the need to be sure of your medical health. Often it’s because men, especially African American and Hispanic/Latino men, rarely go to the doctor when we are sick it’s normally a very bad situation. Far too common is the fact that a little prevention like an annual checkup is all that is needed to catch a cancer in its early stages.
This is even more important if you have family history that makes you at higher risk. In my family I have had a sister, who is younger than me, diagnosed with early stage cancer. That was found by luck during an exam. My father had cancer of the tongue, high blood pressure, and diabetes. My grand-mother died of a heart attack in her 60’s. None of these things are unusual in Black families. In fact I had my best friend lose his father to Prostate cancer that was not detected until late stage of the disease. And it killed him. He was only in his 50’s. As was my father.
So yes I take this serious. And so should you. I don’t like doctors any more than anyone else. And as a small business owner I don’t have health insurance so the cash coming out of my pocket is huge. Yet it’s money worth it.
- My total cholesterol was at 128. Which is highly desirable and means a lowered risk of heart disease.
- My blood pressure is 102/94 which is also good.
- My heart rate is about 78, which is ok.
- My AIDS test was negative. I get that checked every year, and have been since I was in the military at age 18. It’s always good to know.
- My PSA, a prostate cancer test, was .7, down from .97 the year before. This is an excellent report.
- But a potential negative is that my C-protein test was high, and up by 100%. While still in low range, it is a forward indicator of potential heart disease. Thus I need to stop (or at least cut back under the 1 pack a day I’m at) my smoking, eat vegetables (which I despise), work out, and learn how much fat I eat and cut it to 30%. Drinking is also a factor in this I’m told.
But I recently learned from my doctor that 15% of men that have normal results from the PSA test may still have prostate cancer. Thus at the ripe age of 39 years 11 months and 27 days to go I had my first prostate exam. It was not something I was looking forward to, but was long overdue.
Because of the prevalence of Black men getting and dying from prostate cancer it’s recommended that we start getting checked at 35. My best friend started at 33 because of his father. And if you think, like I did, that a normal PSA means you don’t need the exam, remember this. My doctor knows a man that had a normal test and upon the exam was found to have early stage cancer. Because it was found the cancer was removed and the guy is living a normal life. Had he not, the PSA may not have found anything until far too late.
And as men of color, who don’t like tests and doctors as is, do you really want to risk missing a cancer that we are in the highest risk group for? Especially since the exam does not cost anything extra?
Now I won’t tell you the exam was pleasant. It wasn’t. And as embarrassing as it was I will tell you this, it was not as bad as you imagine it to be. Maybe 30 seconds of feeling highly unpleasant, but not extreme pain. But it confirmed that I have no signs of this killer disease among people of color.
I rarely see any bloggers, especially blogs by men of color, which discuss this. It needs to be talked about a bit. It will save lives.
Get an annual physical. Check for diabetes, AIDS, prostate cancer. Check your cholesterol levels and other tests. Even if you don’t think you need it. Because like insurance, you only will be concerned after you find out that you need it.
And down will come Spitzer, craddle and all - 3.11.2008.1
Well there is no end to the buzz about Eliot Spitzer. I was in New York City yesterday as the news about his involvement in the prostitution ring was announced. The Dow Jones Index dropped an extra 40 points on the news before rebounding a bit. And there were several mixed emotions circling the city.
Essentially, the overwhelming thought was ‘what a shame, couldn’t happen to a nicer guy’. I did not hear from a single person that believes he will not resign. In fact one individual, at Conway’s next to Grand Central, guaranteed that Spitzer will resign. He was already told that by someone in the administration, and they are just biding time now. For whatever positive moment they expect I don’t know.
Personally I can’t see how he can’t resign. He is a lawyer, an officer of the court. And he admitted breaking the law, thus he must be disbarred. He also has lost all ability to avoid claiming his innocence, thus he will be punished by the law. A Governor cannot be in jail, and disbarred and maintain office. He has to go.
What I have not seen so far are reactions of people throughout the City and state. What I have noted are the following:
Support and a hope for him to recover from this by a Hispanic professional.
Glee from White financial professionals.
Good riddance from a White guard.
Jumping for joy (not literal) from a Black delivery man.
Anger from an Irish bartender.
Sorry I didn’t get a reaction from any women. These were all reactions that I observed or heard within the first half-hour of the breaking news.
One thing I did not hear or see was the question of how this might affect the political machinations of Senator Clinton. She has long allied herself with the Governor, and his 2nd in command was preparing to take on her seat in the Senate if she attained the Presidency. Both were involved in the fiasco that was Senator Hillary Clinton’s answer about supporting Spitzer’s proposed Driver’s liscences for illegal aliens.
Yet so far there is no connection at this moment.
What do you think about this? Will it affect Hillary, should he resign, are Republicans wrong for holding him to the oath of office and laws he has long ago committed to?
Essentially, the overwhelming thought was ‘what a shame, couldn’t happen to a nicer guy’. I did not hear from a single person that believes he will not resign. In fact one individual, at Conway’s next to Grand Central, guaranteed that Spitzer will resign. He was already told that by someone in the administration, and they are just biding time now. For whatever positive moment they expect I don’t know.
Personally I can’t see how he can’t resign. He is a lawyer, an officer of the court. And he admitted breaking the law, thus he must be disbarred. He also has lost all ability to avoid claiming his innocence, thus he will be punished by the law. A Governor cannot be in jail, and disbarred and maintain office. He has to go.
What I have not seen so far are reactions of people throughout the City and state. What I have noted are the following:
Support and a hope for him to recover from this by a Hispanic professional.
Glee from White financial professionals.
Good riddance from a White guard.
Jumping for joy (not literal) from a Black delivery man.
Anger from an Irish bartender.
Sorry I didn’t get a reaction from any women. These were all reactions that I observed or heard within the first half-hour of the breaking news.
One thing I did not hear or see was the question of how this might affect the political machinations of Senator Clinton. She has long allied herself with the Governor, and his 2nd in command was preparing to take on her seat in the Senate if she attained the Presidency. Both were involved in the fiasco that was Senator Hillary Clinton’s answer about supporting Spitzer’s proposed Driver’s liscences for illegal aliens.
Yet so far there is no connection at this moment.
What do you think about this? Will it affect Hillary, should he resign, are Republicans wrong for holding him to the oath of office and laws he has long ago committed to?
Friday, March 07, 2008
Ramón Gerardo Antonio Estevez awarded Laetare Medal - 3.7.2008.1
It’s Friday, raining, and I have a headache from my friend’s birthday party last night. The Dow Jones Index is below 12,000 (as I expected would happen) and the Democratic Presidential candidates are throwing sticks, stones, and names at each other. On such a fun day I decided to look for a positive item to discuss. And I found one.
Like what I have often found, the major media missed discussing this but it is on the net. Martin Sheen was honored with the Laetare Medal for his humanitarian work by Notre Dame this week. The medal is awarded to a Catholic “whose genius has ennobled the arts and sciences, illustrated the ideals of the church and enriched the heritage of humanity."
Ramón Gerardo Antonio Estévez, Sheen’s real name, is a well known activist. Anti-war, advocate of the homeless and poor, he has stood by his convictions with money and action. Whether or not you agree with his positions, and I don’t on several, his commitment deserves respect. So I’m not surprised at his receiving this award, which in the past was given to President Kennedy among others.
Why has this gotten so little attention? Is it because he is a pacifist, an older actor, or not in the celebrity trash magazines and television programs? Or is it because he is Hispanic and virtually all news of African Americans, Hispanic/Lationos and other minorities are framed and discussed in negative tones by major media?
Either way this deserves to get more attention. Like the fact that Patrick Swayze has pancreatic cancer, and thus more attention is being focused on this disease more attention should be given to the causes that Ramón Estevez stands by. [And I do wish Swayze the best in his fight against this horrible cancer. He faces tough odds, but a strong will is one of the best tools in fighting it.]
I salute Martin Sheen on his award, and his convictions. I hope that this award will help him bring more light to his causes. And I am sure that even without it, he would continue his efforts.
Like what I have often found, the major media missed discussing this but it is on the net. Martin Sheen was honored with the Laetare Medal for his humanitarian work by Notre Dame this week. The medal is awarded to a Catholic “whose genius has ennobled the arts and sciences, illustrated the ideals of the church and enriched the heritage of humanity."
Ramón Gerardo Antonio Estévez, Sheen’s real name, is a well known activist. Anti-war, advocate of the homeless and poor, he has stood by his convictions with money and action. Whether or not you agree with his positions, and I don’t on several, his commitment deserves respect. So I’m not surprised at his receiving this award, which in the past was given to President Kennedy among others.
Why has this gotten so little attention? Is it because he is a pacifist, an older actor, or not in the celebrity trash magazines and television programs? Or is it because he is Hispanic and virtually all news of African Americans, Hispanic/Lationos and other minorities are framed and discussed in negative tones by major media?
Either way this deserves to get more attention. Like the fact that Patrick Swayze has pancreatic cancer, and thus more attention is being focused on this disease more attention should be given to the causes that Ramón Estevez stands by. [And I do wish Swayze the best in his fight against this horrible cancer. He faces tough odds, but a strong will is one of the best tools in fighting it.]
I salute Martin Sheen on his award, and his convictions. I hope that this award will help him bring more light to his causes. And I am sure that even without it, he would continue his efforts.
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Is Robert Downey Jr funny as an African American? - 3.5.2008.1
On March 17th America will have its first chance to decide on what may become one of the largest bets made in the entire year. I don’t mean a Democratic Primary race. But it does cut along similar lines. What is it? Tropical Thunder.
Name doesn’t ring a bell? Me either. Until I saw a post at Slashfilm.com. Then I found out something I’m still not sure how I feel about.
Tropic Thunder is a film, directed and starring Ben Stiller. Generally I don’t like his films. Starsky and Hutch was a flop, Zoolander was ignorant, and so on. He isn’t funny and constantly plays the same dumb character in each film. Perhaps the only film I liked him in was The Royal Tanembaums, which I recommend, and he was the worst actor in the film.
The film is a spoof/satire on Hollywood actors. Specifically the prima dona set. A remake of Apocalypse Now stars several major actors that all have issues. Thus the director and writer place them in a real war scenario that they don’t realize is real. Cue the laugh track.
There are 2 things that may work for the film, and several that work against it. The biggest negative is Ben Stiller, as I mentioned. But on the positives there is the fact that Jack Black and Robert Downey Jr. are in the film. Both can be great comedic characters and are quite successful at it. They are entertainers that usually get it right.
But Jack Black is playing a character that
Sound familiar? That actor is Eddie Murphy. So we know that Stiller is directly taking on an Oscar nominee, an acclaimed stand-up comedian, and an actor that has more successful films than Stiller has been in. Now the fact they are making fun of Eddie Murphy is not necessarily a bad thing. Given the ability of Jack Black, it may even be a funny and well-done send up. But there is another component to the film that changes the tone of this characterization.
Robert Downey Jr is a great entertainer. He commits well to his roles and is able to play a huge range of roles. He dedicates himself to his character and makes them authentic. That’s the good thing. It makes me pause when I understand that his character is faking being Black. Not Jack Black, but African American.
Look at the photo. The person in the circle is Downey. He is not in black face, but in full make-up. His character in this film
So we have a White man, playing as an African American, in a film making fun of actors. This is the razor’s edge indeed.
Can this be funny? Maybe. Some audiences so far have seen portions of the film and it is testing well, they say. Given the commitment of Downey, I can see the satire in it. But I don’t trust Stiller’s ability to direct or act. I’m not confident in the writing.
Most of all, I’m not sure how I feel about it.
This could be like the absurdity of Gene Wilder in Silver Streak. Or it could be Al Jolson. When you add in the nudge against Eddie Murphy, the undertone is not quite so positive.
On the 17th video clips and trailers will be released. Already Robert Downey Jr. has said
So given that we have yet to see more than the above picture, I wonder what you think.
Name doesn’t ring a bell? Me either. Until I saw a post at Slashfilm.com. Then I found out something I’m still not sure how I feel about.
Tropic Thunder is a film, directed and starring Ben Stiller. Generally I don’t like his films. Starsky and Hutch was a flop, Zoolander was ignorant, and so on. He isn’t funny and constantly plays the same dumb character in each film. Perhaps the only film I liked him in was The Royal Tanembaums, which I recommend, and he was the worst actor in the film.
The film is a spoof/satire on Hollywood actors. Specifically the prima dona set. A remake of Apocalypse Now stars several major actors that all have issues. Thus the director and writer place them in a real war scenario that they don’t realize is real. Cue the laugh track.
There are 2 things that may work for the film, and several that work against it. The biggest negative is Ben Stiller, as I mentioned. But on the positives there is the fact that Jack Black and Robert Downey Jr. are in the film. Both can be great comedic characters and are quite successful at it. They are entertainers that usually get it right.
But Jack Black is playing a character that
“portrays a comedian known for performing multiple roles in a single film — his latest is called The Fatties: Fart 2.”
Sound familiar? That actor is Eddie Murphy. So we know that Stiller is directly taking on an Oscar nominee, an acclaimed stand-up comedian, and an actor that has more successful films than Stiller has been in. Now the fact they are making fun of Eddie Murphy is not necessarily a bad thing. Given the ability of Jack Black, it may even be a funny and well-done send up. But there is another component to the film that changes the tone of this characterization.
Robert Downey Jr is a great entertainer. He commits well to his roles and is able to play a huge range of roles. He dedicates himself to his character and makes them authentic. That’s the good thing. It makes me pause when I understand that his character is faking being Black. Not Jack Black, but African American.
Look at the photo. The person in the circle is Downey. He is not in black face, but in full make-up. His character in this film
“Kirk Lazarus, a very serious Oscar-winning actor cast in the most expensive Vietnam War film ever. Problem is, Lazarus's character, Sgt. Osiris, was originally written as black. So Lazarus decides to dye his skin and play Osiris, um, authentically.”
So we have a White man, playing as an African American, in a film making fun of actors. This is the razor’s edge indeed.
Can this be funny? Maybe. Some audiences so far have seen portions of the film and it is testing well, they say. Given the commitment of Downey, I can see the satire in it. But I don’t trust Stiller’s ability to direct or act. I’m not confident in the writing.
Most of all, I’m not sure how I feel about it.
This could be like the absurdity of Gene Wilder in Silver Streak. Or it could be Al Jolson. When you add in the nudge against Eddie Murphy, the undertone is not quite so positive.
On the 17th video clips and trailers will be released. Already Robert Downey Jr. has said
“At the end of the day, it's always about how well you commit to the character," he says. "I dove in with both feet. If I didn't feel it was morally sound, or that it would be easily misinterpreted that I'm just C. Thomas Howell in [Soul Man], I would've stayed home."
So given that we have yet to see more than the above picture, I wonder what you think.
Tuesday, March 04, 2008
Dungeons & Dragons greatest Dungeon Master loses the ultimate battle - 3.4.2008.1
I have some very sad news to report today. While some of you may not recognize the name, others will be quite familiar with Gary Gygax. I hate to say it, but he has died at the age of 69.
Now I know gamers, most of us that are now a bit older and many are creating our own games, should be familiar with this man. For those that are not, he is one of the co-creators of the most popular gaming system possibly ever. Dungeons & Dragons. Along with JRR Tolkein he was responsible for sci-fantasy and RPG style gaming.
In fact I think you can draw a direct line from JRR Tolkein to Gary Gygax to Vampire: The Masquerade to The Witcher to MMO’s (Massively Multiplayer Online games). Without D&D there is no Everquest, or World of Warcraft. There is no Final Fantasy. There is no Resident Evil or any other game. And thus no movies either.
Some may think that D&D was simply a bad movie made by some Hollywood guy that was made into an MMO. In fact the universe of Dungeons & Dragons is enormous and highly profitable. From huge tomes regarding how to play in the 1980’s, a cartoon in the late 80’s, video games, trading cards, books, and movies the genre encompasses 3 decades and continuing.
The original game system was a real first. Before there were computers, groups of friends (yes some were a bit geeky, but it was hugely popular with the military too) would gather to pull out pieces of paper and become a Dwarven Thief or Elven Paladin or Human Mage for a few hours. Without the need of more than pencil paper and a set of 3-, 4-, 6-, 10-, and 20-sided dice entire worlds were created and enjoyed. Today those same types of worlds require years of programming and sometimes servers connected to the world.
The legacy of Gary Gygax is immense when you consider not only what he created for his friends to enjoy, but what became a multi-national conglomerate. You may not be a computer geek, but every time you play a FPS (First Person Shooter), RPG (Role Playing Game), or fantasy MMO you are living an extension of the mind of the greatest mage this side of Merlin.
Few are so creative, and touched so many. My condolences to his friends and family. He will be missed by this Dwarven Thief and many others I am sure.
Now I know gamers, most of us that are now a bit older and many are creating our own games, should be familiar with this man. For those that are not, he is one of the co-creators of the most popular gaming system possibly ever. Dungeons & Dragons. Along with JRR Tolkein he was responsible for sci-fantasy and RPG style gaming.
In fact I think you can draw a direct line from JRR Tolkein to Gary Gygax to Vampire: The Masquerade to The Witcher to MMO’s (Massively Multiplayer Online games). Without D&D there is no Everquest, or World of Warcraft. There is no Final Fantasy. There is no Resident Evil or any other game. And thus no movies either.
Some may think that D&D was simply a bad movie made by some Hollywood guy that was made into an MMO. In fact the universe of Dungeons & Dragons is enormous and highly profitable. From huge tomes regarding how to play in the 1980’s, a cartoon in the late 80’s, video games, trading cards, books, and movies the genre encompasses 3 decades and continuing.
The original game system was a real first. Before there were computers, groups of friends (yes some were a bit geeky, but it was hugely popular with the military too) would gather to pull out pieces of paper and become a Dwarven Thief or Elven Paladin or Human Mage for a few hours. Without the need of more than pencil paper and a set of 3-, 4-, 6-, 10-, and 20-sided dice entire worlds were created and enjoyed. Today those same types of worlds require years of programming and sometimes servers connected to the world.
The legacy of Gary Gygax is immense when you consider not only what he created for his friends to enjoy, but what became a multi-national conglomerate. You may not be a computer geek, but every time you play a FPS (First Person Shooter), RPG (Role Playing Game), or fantasy MMO you are living an extension of the mind of the greatest mage this side of Merlin.
Few are so creative, and touched so many. My condolences to his friends and family. He will be missed by this Dwarven Thief and many others I am sure.
Sunday, March 02, 2008
Prepare for Doomsday - 3.2.2008.1
So what do you do if you are in Hollywood, you don’t have a remake available, no ‘revisioned’ classic television shows on the table, and nary a comic book (even an unpopular one) in site? You make up a movie with bits of other films, no name actors, and a low budget.
That is how I would describe the previews of Doomsday. A bit of several good money-making clips with a pro-feminist twist for good measure. I mean the while thing reminds me of 5 sci-fi films (not counting low budget films). Those movies are Escape from New York, 28 Days Later, Mad Max, Transporter (ok, not a sci-fi but action), and Alien.
From what I can tell we start with 28 Days Later, because some virus is released killing a good part of the world, or threatens to. A last bastion of humanity is secluded in a walled off city (Day of the Dead/Aeon Flux/Waterworld/Resident Evil). Out in the badlands surrounding the city is a crazy chaotic new society of (probably) post-apocalyptic mutants/survivors. So an adventurer/loner that travels the wasteland (Mad Max) is given a mission because a cure was identified and lost or otherwise unattainable. The Loner/adventurer needs to get whatever it is and bring it back. The loner has a souped up vehicle (Transporter/Knight Rider/Ghost Rider) to help do this. Of course the Item is held in the stronghold of the mutant/survivors (Escape from New York) that have their own barbaric society based on brutality. I’m sure they throw a timeframe ticking away too.
Oh. Where does Alien come in? Like in that movie we have a heroine, because that sells really well these days.
Seriously, this all does not bode well for the film. Besides being formulaic, when was the last time you saw a film that blatantly stole ideas from better films well? Excluding, in fact, including spoofs. The low budget aspect virtually ensures that the below-the-line costs of the film were spent on the special effects. Probably a good bit of the above-the-line too.
So the net of it all is what? A less than entertaining mash-up of ideas done better previously. My suggestion is to skip spending the $20 or so per person to see this in the theater. Wait 6 months and get the DVD for $10 - 15 and watch it on a rainy/snowy night when the car is busted.
Could I be wrong? Sure, but the odds of this being good are about the same as television suddenly realizing the world is made up of more than just White people. I’d sooner bet on Britney Spears making a comeback and/or being named mother of the year than this movie being a hit. The only real positive for it is that the female lead is good looking, and there isn’t another action or sci-fi film out to compete with it. [Jumper is so bad as to not count.]
If you are masochistic enough to see this film in theaters, do let me know how close I’ve come.
That is how I would describe the previews of Doomsday. A bit of several good money-making clips with a pro-feminist twist for good measure. I mean the while thing reminds me of 5 sci-fi films (not counting low budget films). Those movies are Escape from New York, 28 Days Later, Mad Max, Transporter (ok, not a sci-fi but action), and Alien.
From what I can tell we start with 28 Days Later, because some virus is released killing a good part of the world, or threatens to. A last bastion of humanity is secluded in a walled off city (Day of the Dead/Aeon Flux/Waterworld/Resident Evil). Out in the badlands surrounding the city is a crazy chaotic new society of (probably) post-apocalyptic mutants/survivors. So an adventurer/loner that travels the wasteland (Mad Max) is given a mission because a cure was identified and lost or otherwise unattainable. The Loner/adventurer needs to get whatever it is and bring it back. The loner has a souped up vehicle (Transporter/Knight Rider/Ghost Rider) to help do this. Of course the Item is held in the stronghold of the mutant/survivors (Escape from New York) that have their own barbaric society based on brutality. I’m sure they throw a timeframe ticking away too.
Oh. Where does Alien come in? Like in that movie we have a heroine, because that sells really well these days.
Seriously, this all does not bode well for the film. Besides being formulaic, when was the last time you saw a film that blatantly stole ideas from better films well? Excluding, in fact, including spoofs. The low budget aspect virtually ensures that the below-the-line costs of the film were spent on the special effects. Probably a good bit of the above-the-line too.
So the net of it all is what? A less than entertaining mash-up of ideas done better previously. My suggestion is to skip spending the $20 or so per person to see this in the theater. Wait 6 months and get the DVD for $10 - 15 and watch it on a rainy/snowy night when the car is busted.
Could I be wrong? Sure, but the odds of this being good are about the same as television suddenly realizing the world is made up of more than just White people. I’d sooner bet on Britney Spears making a comeback and/or being named mother of the year than this movie being a hit. The only real positive for it is that the female lead is good looking, and there isn’t another action or sci-fi film out to compete with it. [Jumper is so bad as to not count.]
If you are masochistic enough to see this film in theaters, do let me know how close I’ve come.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
What Black Men Think: Youtube videos - 3.1.2008.1
A friend of mine made me aware of a video that I think deserves to get far more attention. You can find it on YouTube under the title "What Black Men Think PSA".
Several of these ideas and issues I have covered here and at VASS. But some things can never be said enough. Especially with the major media making a point of portraying every negative they can, as often as they can.
But don't stop with this video or my blog. Seek out the information for yourself. Learn and revel in the fact that we are all more than the music videos present. We are not limited to just being entertainers and athletes.
And then there is this video for those of you that like spoken word and probably hip-hop. In checking out the above video I found the following. What it says about gangsta rap is near and dear to me.
I warn you all that it contains profanity, the N-word (which I still hate, but if it is the means to convey it's true meaning I will acquiesce), and fully concieved thoughts. But I expect all my readers can handle that.
[This video was found at What Black Men Think]
Several of these ideas and issues I have covered here and at VASS. But some things can never be said enough. Especially with the major media making a point of portraying every negative they can, as often as they can.
But don't stop with this video or my blog. Seek out the information for yourself. Learn and revel in the fact that we are all more than the music videos present. We are not limited to just being entertainers and athletes.
And then there is this video for those of you that like spoken word and probably hip-hop. In checking out the above video I found the following. What it says about gangsta rap is near and dear to me.
I warn you all that it contains profanity, the N-word (which I still hate, but if it is the means to convey it's true meaning I will acquiesce), and fully concieved thoughts. But I expect all my readers can handle that.
[This video was found at What Black Men Think]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)