Contributors
Saturday, September 30, 2006
You need a series. And your series needs a hook. And here's your hook, you homeschooling moms: a family of ten children, all homeschooled by their brilliant inventor father whose lab is in the basement and their brilliant creative-type mother (a mashup of Martha Stewart, Emily Dickinson, June Cleaver, and Dorothy Parker). Ten kids, ten books, each focusing on a different child. They are all, of course, impossibly literate and sophisticated (though still very much children), and each with a particular talent/gift. You'll make a fortune. I'd do it myself, but...I suck.
Today in Porn, Literary Adaptation Edition
The NYT reviews Little Children:
"That Ms. Winslet is so lovable makes the deficit of love in Sarah’s life all the more painful. She is married to an older man named Richard (Gregg Edelman), whose profession is marketing and whose vocation is masturbating to Internet pornography, pursuits that leave him with little time for his family."
This little detail aside, I'm very much looking forward to this one.
"That Ms. Winslet is so lovable makes the deficit of love in Sarah’s life all the more painful. She is married to an older man named Richard (Gregg Edelman), whose profession is marketing and whose vocation is masturbating to Internet pornography, pursuits that leave him with little time for his family."
This little detail aside, I'm very much looking forward to this one.
Friday, September 29, 2006
Weak
True Confessions: we have a terrible weakness for that run of common terms/Proper Names that Garrison Keillor reels off at the end of his show: Guy Wire, Norman Conquest - does he do Amanda Hugankiss?
Anyway, our Muse, vicious creature that she is, hit us with one tonight: Fay D'Acomply.
Godsbody: rapidly obsolescing...
Anyway, our Muse, vicious creature that she is, hit us with one tonight: Fay D'Acomply.
Godsbody: rapidly obsolescing...
Artist of the Month
Okay, so we're five years late on this one, but art is timeless, right? At any rate, Michael Schrauzer is a local, and a fellow I've been privileged to meet on a number of occasions. Until he finishes his novel, do spend some time contemplating his more visual stuff. I may not know much about art, but I know what I like
Walt Kelly, Last Man Standing?
A propos of the previous post, Mrs. Darwin has a bone to pick with the House of Mouse - specifically, with its handling of Pooh & Co.:
"I have a fondness for Pooh (as who does not?) and I loathe almost everything about the Pooh cartoons -- the simplification of Ernest Shepard's charming illustrations, the reduction of the stories from a form that necessitates adult interaction with a child to a smear of bright colors and noise, the dumbing-down of Milne's delightful prose -- but most of all, the voices. Pooh's querulous hesitancy, Piglet's effeminate stutter, Eeyore's moronic drone, Tigger's hyperactive lisp -- no more!"
(She does take a moment to wonder what sort of accent Kanga should have - am I overly obvious to suggest Australian?)
At any rate - take comfort, Mrs. Darwin: they never got Pogo.
"I have a fondness for Pooh (as who does not?) and I loathe almost everything about the Pooh cartoons -- the simplification of Ernest Shepard's charming illustrations, the reduction of the stories from a form that necessitates adult interaction with a child to a smear of bright colors and noise, the dumbing-down of Milne's delightful prose -- but most of all, the voices. Pooh's querulous hesitancy, Piglet's effeminate stutter, Eeyore's moronic drone, Tigger's hyperactive lisp -- no more!"
(She does take a moment to wonder what sort of accent Kanga should have - am I overly obvious to suggest Australian?)
At any rate - take comfort, Mrs. Darwin: they never got Pogo.
Dept. of License Plates
DZNYLNZ
Disney Lens? Someone with a tendency to see life as operating according to the ethos of Disney films?
Disney Lens? Someone with a tendency to see life as operating according to the ethos of Disney films?
Thursday, September 28, 2006
Wicked
The Wife had a rather brilliant suggestion for a short story - a man who carries on an adulterous affair under cover of going to wee hours Eucharistic Adoration...
Stupid Homilies
Back when we entertained thoughts of actually doing something, we considered starting a new Catholic magazine (Hoo!). Something cheeky - our very own version of Spy. One section was to be titled Ipse Dixit, and would consist of choice morsels uttered from the pulpit and sent in by readers. Stupid Homilies has a rather less oblique title, but seems to be getting at the same thing. The site includes a disclaimer:
"WE ARE NOT HERE TO ATTACK PRIESTS!
We are here to attack and expose some of the ridiculous ideas they foist upon us each week when they preach.
This site exists because we love the Church and believe all Catholics are entitled to the full deposit of their faith. Other sites will insult the insipid liturgical music you are fed. Others will attack the boring modernist architecture you must sit in. This site exists simply to expose deviations from orthodoxy and weak thinking. Send us the story of the horrible homily you endured this week. Send the date, the church, the city, the diocese and the name of the priest along with all the insanity preached in the name of Holy Mother Church. No one will listen to our complaints, so the only weapon we have left is to use the very words these 'shepherds' are misleading their flocks with."
To be honest, I've gotten a bit weary of this war, but I know the fellow behind the site, and know that while he is feisty, he is not rabid. And I respect the jounalistic character of what he's attempting. Rather than a bitchfest, the site could be a factual accounting.
"WE ARE NOT HERE TO ATTACK PRIESTS!
We are here to attack and expose some of the ridiculous ideas they foist upon us each week when they preach.
This site exists because we love the Church and believe all Catholics are entitled to the full deposit of their faith. Other sites will insult the insipid liturgical music you are fed. Others will attack the boring modernist architecture you must sit in. This site exists simply to expose deviations from orthodoxy and weak thinking. Send us the story of the horrible homily you endured this week. Send the date, the church, the city, the diocese and the name of the priest along with all the insanity preached in the name of Holy Mother Church. No one will listen to our complaints, so the only weapon we have left is to use the very words these 'shepherds' are misleading their flocks with."
To be honest, I've gotten a bit weary of this war, but I know the fellow behind the site, and know that while he is feisty, he is not rabid. And I respect the jounalistic character of what he's attempting. Rather than a bitchfest, the site could be a factual accounting.
Mortified
Brian Pessaro has a new piece up at Godspy:
"But if you perform corporal mortification for religious reasons, to achieve some spiritual good, you’re an oddball. To borrow an analogy from Boston College professor Peter Kreeft and give it a twist, if I were to announce at a cocktail party that I just got my tongue pierced, I would be surrounded by an eager crowd of spectators. But if I were to announce that each morning before work I take a cold shower as a religious ritual, I would soon be talking to myself."
"But if you perform corporal mortification for religious reasons, to achieve some spiritual good, you’re an oddball. To borrow an analogy from Boston College professor Peter Kreeft and give it a twist, if I were to announce at a cocktail party that I just got my tongue pierced, I would be surrounded by an eager crowd of spectators. But if I were to announce that each morning before work I take a cold shower as a religious ritual, I would soon be talking to myself."
Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Second Son, Sacred Artist
So Second Son found a rock at the beach yesterday (ah, the beach in late September...) with a nice neat hole near one edge. "I'll make this a necklace!" he proclaimed. Today, he removed the crucifix from an old chaplet, affixed it on a string so that it hung behind the rock, and announced, "It's Jesus in the tomb."
Today in Porn, Children's Classics Edition
The Onion reviews Alan Moore and Melinda Gebbie's Lost Girls, a graphic novel which "which has three heroines of children's literature engaged in explicitly pornographic tableaux." (The review gets a bit graphic in its description.)
Excerpt:
"Moore has said in interviews that he considers Lost Girls to be a healthy, honest examination of what we get out of sex and pornography, and that's probably so. But the brilliance of the book is that it isn't harmless. Moore and Gebbie aren't just doing a giggly porno version of classic children's stories, they're retelling them with the fantasy removed, replaced by the coming-of-age experiences that were previously rendered as metaphor. Dorothy's "tin man" and "scarecrow" turn out to be the farmhands she lost her virginity to, Wendy's "lost boys" are a gang of bisexual street hustlers, and Alice's "white rabbit" is a family friend who molests her. These stories are about three women undergoing a not-always-pretty initiation into sex..."
Interesting conclusion:
The "ending also reduces the central message of the book to a choice between sex and war, and after showing the messy endpoints of unchecked sexuality, Moore and Gebbie have made that a fairer fight then they might have intended."
Excerpt:
"Moore has said in interviews that he considers Lost Girls to be a healthy, honest examination of what we get out of sex and pornography, and that's probably so. But the brilliance of the book is that it isn't harmless. Moore and Gebbie aren't just doing a giggly porno version of classic children's stories, they're retelling them with the fantasy removed, replaced by the coming-of-age experiences that were previously rendered as metaphor. Dorothy's "tin man" and "scarecrow" turn out to be the farmhands she lost her virginity to, Wendy's "lost boys" are a gang of bisexual street hustlers, and Alice's "white rabbit" is a family friend who molests her. These stories are about three women undergoing a not-always-pretty initiation into sex..."
Interesting conclusion:
The "ending also reduces the central message of the book to a choice between sex and war, and after showing the messy endpoints of unchecked sexuality, Moore and Gebbie have made that a fairer fight then they might have intended."
Today in Porn, Halloween Edition
I bought First Son's Flash, Hulk, Spider-Man and Superman costumes at Party City - yeah, they were expensive, but they've been handed down, plus they get plenty of year-round dress-up use. But when the mailer comes into Casa Godsbody featuring a bunch of pre-teen jailbait on the cover (sexy devil, pirate, and cheerleader, bared midriffs all 'round) and Playboy brand costumes inside (schoolgirl, nurse, cop, etc.), I think that might be enough. It's one thing to sell Adult Costumes in one section of the store in a nod to the adultification of Halloween (Hey Honey! How over-the-top, eighth-circle-of-hell horrific can we make our front lawn?). It's another to put blonde porn fantasies into a mass-mailing.
(The Wife adds that it makes a difference when you slap a Playboy logo on your sexy pirate costume - it takes away from the silliness and ties it directly to erotic masturbatory fodder.)
(The Wife adds that it makes a difference when you slap a Playboy logo on your sexy pirate costume - it takes away from the silliness and ties it directly to erotic masturbatory fodder.)
Greene
A propos of Not-Ted's and CM's comments here, and courtesy of Amy, a piece on Graham Greene and his Catholicism. Interesting tidbit:
"Although Greene claimed to dislike the label 'Catholic novelist', he retained his faith, if not his belief, in Catholicism all his life. To his dying day he kept a photograph in his wallet of the Italian stigmatic Padre Pio, whose hands and feet were said to display the wounds of Christ. Whether these lesions were of neurotic origin – psychological rather than supernatural – Greene did not care to know: he wanted there to be a mystery at the heart of life. It may seem incredible that an intelligent man could be awed by the irrationality of stigmatism. But as Greene told the Tablet in 1989: 'There is a mystery. There is something inexplicable in human life.'"
"Although Greene claimed to dislike the label 'Catholic novelist', he retained his faith, if not his belief, in Catholicism all his life. To his dying day he kept a photograph in his wallet of the Italian stigmatic Padre Pio, whose hands and feet were said to display the wounds of Christ. Whether these lesions were of neurotic origin – psychological rather than supernatural – Greene did not care to know: he wanted there to be a mystery at the heart of life. It may seem incredible that an intelligent man could be awed by the irrationality of stigmatism. But as Greene told the Tablet in 1989: 'There is a mystery. There is something inexplicable in human life.'"
Monday, September 25, 2006
Proposed
Pardon the language - gentle readers may wish to skip this...
It is dangerous to for any group to idolize the artist in their ranks, because the first rule of the group is that you don't screw your own. But the artist is tempramentally disposed to call bullshit when he sees it, and eventually, the artist is going to see it somewhere within the group - it's what's most familiar to him/her. And what do you do when the one you idolize turns on you?
Sometimes I wonder what good Catholic folks thought of J.F. Powers back in the day, when the priestly culture he was skewering wasn't a piece of history - when it was the way things were. I wonder if that was part of the reason he never sold many books during his life, despite his acknowledged mastery.
Have at it, people - disagree, mock, object, fulminate...or ignore.
It is dangerous to for any group to idolize the artist in their ranks, because the first rule of the group is that you don't screw your own. But the artist is tempramentally disposed to call bullshit when he sees it, and eventually, the artist is going to see it somewhere within the group - it's what's most familiar to him/her. And what do you do when the one you idolize turns on you?
Sometimes I wonder what good Catholic folks thought of J.F. Powers back in the day, when the priestly culture he was skewering wasn't a piece of history - when it was the way things were. I wonder if that was part of the reason he never sold many books during his life, despite his acknowledged mastery.
Have at it, people - disagree, mock, object, fulminate...or ignore.
Today in Porn, MSM Edition
So Gawker reports (and no, I'm not going to link to it, as there are photos there that I would not want to be responsible for anyone seeing) that Michael Lucas Entertainment, a gay porn company, filmed a rather explicit chunk of their upcoming film La Dolce Vita at the Marc Jacobs store on Bleecker Street. Gawker reports that "Magnolia Bakery brought by cupcakes and the Times was on hand..."
Why am I noting this? Because a couple of people, upon seeing female star Savanna Samson in the accompanying photos, complained in the comments section that the film appeared to be straight porn. A PR person for Lucas jumped into the comments fray to say this:
"We are a gay porn company. Savanna plays a non sex role- there was a ... scene between Michael Lucas and Ray Star in the Marc Jacobs dressing room today. Savanna getting topless was at the encouragement of the Times' photographers who were having fun at the shoot..."
Ah, those fun-loving Times photographers...
Why am I noting this? Because a couple of people, upon seeing female star Savanna Samson in the accompanying photos, complained in the comments section that the film appeared to be straight porn. A PR person for Lucas jumped into the comments fray to say this:
"We are a gay porn company. Savanna plays a non sex role- there was a ... scene between Michael Lucas and Ray Star in the Marc Jacobs dressing room today. Savanna getting topless was at the encouragement of the Times' photographers who were having fun at the shoot..."
Ah, those fun-loving Times photographers...
Dept. of License Plates
So I'm bloviating on the Toyota with the "2B NT 2B" license plate - "Sure, it sounds Shakespearean, but it's about suicide..." - when a boxy little Scion pulls in front of me and silences my nonsense with the astonishing "I (Heart) BOOZE."
Dept. of Getting It On, Academy Edition
Condom companies doing their part to keep the college-educated from breeding:
"So with condom manufacturers eager to mine a ready market, and with administrators happy to receive free or discounted products that will keep students healthy, condom distribution at many colleges around the country has become as fundamental to freshman orientation as buying textbooks and finding the dining hall.
At Oregon State, 'safer sex' kits are filled with condoms, lubricant and Hershey’s Kisses; at Stanford, each student receives 12 free condoms from the student-run Sexual Health Peer Resource Center, which is also beginning its annual educational 'field trips' on which freshmen are escorted from their dorms to the center for an introductory talk."
No, no, no. "Escorted from their dorm rooms to the center for an introductory talk?" Talk is cheap. If they really cared, freshmen would be escorted from their dorm rooms to a three-day toga party, with free drinks for the ladies.
Oh, and by the by:
"Durex also boasts on one of its Web sites that it is 'the world’s No. 1 source for penis outfits' and displays an array of printable paper-doll-inspired cutouts, including a red cape and golden crown, and a tuxedo for sorority and fraternity formals."
I can't top that.
"So with condom manufacturers eager to mine a ready market, and with administrators happy to receive free or discounted products that will keep students healthy, condom distribution at many colleges around the country has become as fundamental to freshman orientation as buying textbooks and finding the dining hall.
At Oregon State, 'safer sex' kits are filled with condoms, lubricant and Hershey’s Kisses; at Stanford, each student receives 12 free condoms from the student-run Sexual Health Peer Resource Center, which is also beginning its annual educational 'field trips' on which freshmen are escorted from their dorms to the center for an introductory talk."
No, no, no. "Escorted from their dorm rooms to the center for an introductory talk?" Talk is cheap. If they really cared, freshmen would be escorted from their dorm rooms to a three-day toga party, with free drinks for the ladies.
Oh, and by the by:
"Durex also boasts on one of its Web sites that it is 'the world’s No. 1 source for penis outfits' and displays an array of printable paper-doll-inspired cutouts, including a red cape and golden crown, and a tuxedo for sorority and fraternity formals."
I can't top that.
Something for the Online Crunchies...
....Here:
The Last Whole Earth Catalog offered "deerskin jackets and potter’s wheels, geodesic domes and star charts, instructions on raising bees and on repairing Volkswagens, advice on building furniture and cultivating marijuana: all this can be found here, along with celebrations of communal life and swipes at big government, big business and a technocratic society.
Can this encyclopedia of countercultural romance have anything to do with today’s technological world, a world of broadband connections, TCP/IP protocol and the Internet?...
Soon after publishing 'The Last Whole Earth Catalog,' Mr. Brand started to write about the computer scene, helped create the 'Whole Earth Software Catalog' and, in 1985, became a founder of the WELL — the Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link — a pioneering online community. 'As it turned out,' Mr. Brand once explained, 'psychedelic drugs, communes, and Buckminster Fuller domes were a dead end, but computers were an avenue to realms beyond our dreams.' By the 90’s, those realms were celebrated by the magazine Wired."
Godsbody, helping to untangle the apparent paradox of an anti-technological mindset embracing the technology of the PC and the Internet since 2006...
The Last Whole Earth Catalog offered "deerskin jackets and potter’s wheels, geodesic domes and star charts, instructions on raising bees and on repairing Volkswagens, advice on building furniture and cultivating marijuana: all this can be found here, along with celebrations of communal life and swipes at big government, big business and a technocratic society.
Can this encyclopedia of countercultural romance have anything to do with today’s technological world, a world of broadband connections, TCP/IP protocol and the Internet?...
Soon after publishing 'The Last Whole Earth Catalog,' Mr. Brand started to write about the computer scene, helped create the 'Whole Earth Software Catalog' and, in 1985, became a founder of the WELL — the Whole Earth ’Lectronic Link — a pioneering online community. 'As it turned out,' Mr. Brand once explained, 'psychedelic drugs, communes, and Buckminster Fuller domes were a dead end, but computers were an avenue to realms beyond our dreams.' By the 90’s, those realms were celebrated by the magazine Wired."
Godsbody, helping to untangle the apparent paradox of an anti-technological mindset embracing the technology of the PC and the Internet since 2006...
Flannery, Graham, Walker, Evelyn (male)...
...no wonder J.F. Powers went with the initials. He lacked the funksome first name of his 20th-Century contemporaries...
So I'm sure everybody here recalls Will Barrett's failed attempt to prove God's existence in The Second Coming:
"My experiment is simply this: I shall go to a desert place and wait for God to give a sign. If no sign is forthcoming I shall die. But people will know why I died: because there is no sign. The cause of my death will be either his nonexistence or his refusal to manifest himself, which comes to the same thing as far as we are concerned...
"Even if worst comes to worst, he thought with a smile, to suicide, it will turn out well. My suicide will represent progress in the history of suicide."
The experiment fails. Barrett gets a toothache. "How does one ask a question, either a profound question or a lunatic question, with such a pain in an upper canine that every heartbeat feels like a hot ice pick shoved straight up into the brain?...There is one sure cure for cosmic explorations, grandiose ideas about God, man, death, suicide, and such - and that is nausea."
Suicide, tinged with grandiosity, foiled by ordinary pain. Imagine my surprise when I arrived at this in Stannard's bio of another Catholic novelist, Evelyn Waugh:
"Then, one night in early July, he walked down to the deserted beach and undressed. He had already prepared his valedictory note, a quotation from Euripides, taking the trouble to verify it from the school text. This he left with the pile of clothes and struck out defiantly into the dark water. We shall never know how serious was his intention to kill himself. He did not know himself. As it happened, this grand gesture ended, like everything else in his life then, in ignominious defeat. He swam into a shoal of jellyfish and was stung back to reason. Returning, shamefaced and shivering to the shore, he tore up the pretentious Greek tag."
Suicide, tinged with grandiosity, foiled by ordinary pain. I thought it interesting.
So I'm sure everybody here recalls Will Barrett's failed attempt to prove God's existence in The Second Coming:
"My experiment is simply this: I shall go to a desert place and wait for God to give a sign. If no sign is forthcoming I shall die. But people will know why I died: because there is no sign. The cause of my death will be either his nonexistence or his refusal to manifest himself, which comes to the same thing as far as we are concerned...
"Even if worst comes to worst, he thought with a smile, to suicide, it will turn out well. My suicide will represent progress in the history of suicide."
The experiment fails. Barrett gets a toothache. "How does one ask a question, either a profound question or a lunatic question, with such a pain in an upper canine that every heartbeat feels like a hot ice pick shoved straight up into the brain?...There is one sure cure for cosmic explorations, grandiose ideas about God, man, death, suicide, and such - and that is nausea."
Suicide, tinged with grandiosity, foiled by ordinary pain. Imagine my surprise when I arrived at this in Stannard's bio of another Catholic novelist, Evelyn Waugh:
"Then, one night in early July, he walked down to the deserted beach and undressed. He had already prepared his valedictory note, a quotation from Euripides, taking the trouble to verify it from the school text. This he left with the pile of clothes and struck out defiantly into the dark water. We shall never know how serious was his intention to kill himself. He did not know himself. As it happened, this grand gesture ended, like everything else in his life then, in ignominious defeat. He swam into a shoal of jellyfish and was stung back to reason. Returning, shamefaced and shivering to the shore, he tore up the pretentious Greek tag."
Suicide, tinged with grandiosity, foiled by ordinary pain. I thought it interesting.
Sunday, September 24, 2006
Fire on the Mountain
My alma mater has been evacuated. Of course, when I was there, we had fires, floods, AND earthquakes.
Saturday, September 23, 2006
Prequels in Waiting
Forgive me if this is an ancient idea - I don't frequent the Star Wars fansites. But as I watch my children's fervor for the myth rise, I find myself wondering, "Why didn't Lucas give us a prequel about Han Solo?"
Friday, September 22, 2006
Remakes in Waiting
Darwin Catholic laments the film version of The Big Sleep, first citing the book:
"The plot centers around a rich general (now near death) who wants private detective to make a blackmail attempt against one of his daughters go away. The investigation soon leads to a peddler of high rent porn books; illegal gambling; several murders; the homosexual sub-culture; nude blackmail photos of the younger daughter and the missing (possibly murdered) husband of the elder daughter..."
BUT:
"Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart go through the motions, and much of the dialogue is lifted straight from the book, but the result of cutting all the can't-be-shown-on-screen content out of the original story is actually a less moral narrative than the original book. The nearly inhuman desperation of many of the underworld characters (desperately trying to get that one break that will provide the money for a ticket out of town to a comfortable retreat somewhere) is lost, as their vices are hidden."
So now we're in a new age - now, no vices are hidden. I know people are afraid of the whole Bogey-Bacall thing, but really - isn't there some genius out there willing to do this story right?
"The plot centers around a rich general (now near death) who wants private detective to make a blackmail attempt against one of his daughters go away. The investigation soon leads to a peddler of high rent porn books; illegal gambling; several murders; the homosexual sub-culture; nude blackmail photos of the younger daughter and the missing (possibly murdered) husband of the elder daughter..."
BUT:
"Lauren Bacall and Humphrey Bogart go through the motions, and much of the dialogue is lifted straight from the book, but the result of cutting all the can't-be-shown-on-screen content out of the original story is actually a less moral narrative than the original book. The nearly inhuman desperation of many of the underworld characters (desperately trying to get that one break that will provide the money for a ticket out of town to a comfortable retreat somewhere) is lost, as their vices are hidden."
So now we're in a new age - now, no vices are hidden. I know people are afraid of the whole Bogey-Bacall thing, but really - isn't there some genius out there willing to do this story right?
Power
This evening, I heard a sound from Second Daughter (age 9 months) that I've never heard from her before. A guttural growl of domination. The occasion: I laid down on the floor and allowed her to attack my head. She was so, so happy.
An honest liberal?
The question mark is because I don't know if the party in question is a liberal or not. But if he is, he sounds like an honest one. This, from my latest reviewer at Amazon:
"While I do not agree with all of his opinions, I give him much credit for articulating his experience and perspective. I found Lickona to have many witty and poignant insights that are food for thought. That said, I also recognize that a good number of his lived experiences are not mine nor will they be reminiscent of the lives of other readers. Perhaps that is ever more the reason to pick this book up."
"He's not like me, and that's a reason to be curious, especially if he presents himself clearly." An honest liberal notion.
"While I do not agree with all of his opinions, I give him much credit for articulating his experience and perspective. I found Lickona to have many witty and poignant insights that are food for thought. That said, I also recognize that a good number of his lived experiences are not mine nor will they be reminiscent of the lives of other readers. Perhaps that is ever more the reason to pick this book up."
"He's not like me, and that's a reason to be curious, especially if he presents himself clearly." An honest liberal notion.
Upstate, Lapsed Born-Again Celebrity Edition
Skaneateles has long had a claim on Hollywood's bumptious Baldwin boys - at the very least, Mom lives there"
"Skaneateles's far-dimmer roster of marquee names includes Tim Green, the Atlanta Falcons' former No. 99; John Walsh of 'America's Most Wanted,'' and the actors Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger, who sometimes stroll through town when visiting Mr. Baldwin's mother nearby."
But while Mom and Dad are (were?) Catholic, at least one of the Baldwins has found Jesus elsewhere:
"I'm not changing God's words, just the delivery method of scriptures and hoping to be a part of a new movement relevant to kids today. It's fun - I want to share the gospel according to Stevie B!"
There's a snarky joke in here about the C-list, but I find I don't have the heart to make it...
"Skaneateles's far-dimmer roster of marquee names includes Tim Green, the Atlanta Falcons' former No. 99; John Walsh of 'America's Most Wanted,'' and the actors Alec Baldwin and Kim Basinger, who sometimes stroll through town when visiting Mr. Baldwin's mother nearby."
But while Mom and Dad are (were?) Catholic, at least one of the Baldwins has found Jesus elsewhere:
"I'm not changing God's words, just the delivery method of scriptures and hoping to be a part of a new movement relevant to kids today. It's fun - I want to share the gospel according to Stevie B!"
There's a snarky joke in here about the C-list, but I find I don't have the heart to make it...
Thursday, September 21, 2006
The Wife
...Whenever I tell her that, while I'm sorry, I've just got to ramble (translation: waste a few hours dithering about on the Internet):
"Okay. I'm going to go feed your child now. From my body."
Don't mess with a nursing mother.
"Okay. I'm going to go feed your child now. From my body."
Don't mess with a nursing mother.
Upstate, Pop Culture Edition
I need to get around to adding Pajiba: Scathing Reviews for Bitchy People to the links list. Not only are they young, feisty, and (to my mind) smart, their ringleader, Dustin Rowles, lives "in a blue house with his wife in a hippie colony/college town in upstate New York." By which he means Ithaca, my home away from home during those heady days of youth.
What's in a name?
"As Jesus passed by, he saw a man named Matthew sitting at the customs post. He said to him, "Follow me." And he got up and followed him. When he was at table in his house, many tax collectors and sinners came and sat with Jesus and his disciples. The Pharisees saw this and said to his disciples, "Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?" He heard this, and said, "Those who are well do not need a physician, but the sick do. Go learn the meaning of the words, I desire mercy, not sacrifice. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners."
Happy feast day to me!
Happy feast day to me!
Wednesday, September 20, 2006
Revelation
I cannot afford my life.
Actually, it's not a revelation. I've known it for years. But somehow, the Wife's financial bailing has managed to keep the SS Godsbody limping along, six inches above the waterline.
Actually, it's not a revelation. I've known it for years. But somehow, the Wife's financial bailing has managed to keep the SS Godsbody limping along, six inches above the waterline.
Well, which is it?
Rex Reed in the NY Observer, lamenting the remake of All the King's Men, and apparently, feeling conflicted about the casting:
"Faulknerian stream-of-conscious can be fascinating in the pages of Southern Gothic literature, but not when it pours out of the mouths of British actors like Jude Law, Kate Winslet and Sir Anthony Hopkins, as lost in the moss-covered muck as alligators in Alaska."
Later in the same paragraph:
"Working without a compass, these impressive all-star principals are easily upstaged by Willie Stark’s stooges— a fat moron named Tiny (James Gandolfini) and a poker-faced bodyguard called Sugar Boy (memorably played by the sinister and chilling Jackie Earle Haley). Mr. Zaillian knows how to cast them, even if he doesn’t know how to direct them."
"Faulknerian stream-of-conscious can be fascinating in the pages of Southern Gothic literature, but not when it pours out of the mouths of British actors like Jude Law, Kate Winslet and Sir Anthony Hopkins, as lost in the moss-covered muck as alligators in Alaska."
Later in the same paragraph:
"Working without a compass, these impressive all-star principals are easily upstaged by Willie Stark’s stooges— a fat moron named Tiny (James Gandolfini) and a poker-faced bodyguard called Sugar Boy (memorably played by the sinister and chilling Jackie Earle Haley). Mr. Zaillian knows how to cast them, even if he doesn’t know how to direct them."
So what are you trying to say?
From the NYT's coverage (I know, I know, do we ever read anything else?) of Rosie O'Donnell's first days on The View:
"On Ms. O’Donnell’s first show Ms. Walters was seated to her left and appeared almost on the verge of being swallowed up by her."
"On Ms. O’Donnell’s first show Ms. Walters was seated to her left and appeared almost on the verge of being swallowed up by her."
Confessional
Over at the Observer, Mr. Sicha takes a look at the upcoming spate of confessional memoirs, a subject of some interest here at Godsbody. He includes this from NYT media reporter David Carr:
"'I decided to do this for two reasons,' Mr. Carr said of his decision to write the memoir. He was at home on Sunday, Sept. 17, in New Jersey. 'One, I have twins going to college and I needed money, and it’s a book I could do while still keeping my job, which I like a lot—that I could report on the margins of my job. And two is that, as I went through everything that I have done—and I’m pretty much kind of a white-boy misdemeanant—and as I went through that and imagined talking about it, there was nothing in that story that I haven’t at some point admitted to someone. But who knows—maybe I’ll come across something that’s too, too either shameful or stupid to own up to. And at that point, the whole conceit of the book is threatened. So I’ve been listening very closely when people talk. One of the things is that—who was it? Shakespeare, somebody; no! I don’t want to go there, I don’t want to quote Shakespeare—we’re all wardens of our own past. There is a tendency to be either the hero or antihero of your own narrative. And in that sense, all misdemeanors become felonies. And random acts of kindness become shimmering examples of the narrator’s own humanity. And I think that’s sort of embedded in people. And I think you gotta watch it. But I say that as somebody who hasn’t typed a word.'"
Food for thought.
Meanwhile, Gawker provides a helpful translation for Fake Confessional Memoirist James Frey's interview with the Guardian. Opening salvo:
"Since the Smoking Gun report, it has been, he says slowly, a 'very surreal six months, very strange. Sometimes terrible, slightly overwhelming. It's been like living in a Camus book, or a Kafka book, or something.'
"Frey means: I am familiar with obvious classics. Also, I'm a murderous cockroach."
It gets bluer from there, but it's an awfully fun read. Frey ends with this little gem:
"I generally try not to go through life regretting things, or playing the what-if game. Whatever I have said I have said, whatever I have done, I have done."
Or, as someone else once said, "What I have written, I have written."
"'I decided to do this for two reasons,' Mr. Carr said of his decision to write the memoir. He was at home on Sunday, Sept. 17, in New Jersey. 'One, I have twins going to college and I needed money, and it’s a book I could do while still keeping my job, which I like a lot—that I could report on the margins of my job. And two is that, as I went through everything that I have done—and I’m pretty much kind of a white-boy misdemeanant—and as I went through that and imagined talking about it, there was nothing in that story that I haven’t at some point admitted to someone. But who knows—maybe I’ll come across something that’s too, too either shameful or stupid to own up to. And at that point, the whole conceit of the book is threatened. So I’ve been listening very closely when people talk. One of the things is that—who was it? Shakespeare, somebody; no! I don’t want to go there, I don’t want to quote Shakespeare—we’re all wardens of our own past. There is a tendency to be either the hero or antihero of your own narrative. And in that sense, all misdemeanors become felonies. And random acts of kindness become shimmering examples of the narrator’s own humanity. And I think that’s sort of embedded in people. And I think you gotta watch it. But I say that as somebody who hasn’t typed a word.'"
Food for thought.
Meanwhile, Gawker provides a helpful translation for Fake Confessional Memoirist James Frey's interview with the Guardian. Opening salvo:
"Since the Smoking Gun report, it has been, he says slowly, a 'very surreal six months, very strange. Sometimes terrible, slightly overwhelming. It's been like living in a Camus book, or a Kafka book, or something.'
"Frey means: I am familiar with obvious classics. Also, I'm a murderous cockroach."
It gets bluer from there, but it's an awfully fun read. Frey ends with this little gem:
"I generally try not to go through life regretting things, or playing the what-if game. Whatever I have said I have said, whatever I have done, I have done."
Or, as someone else once said, "What I have written, I have written."
Paging Barbara Nicolosi
So I'm guessing every Christian screenwriter in America has seen this and read this:
"The home entertainment division of Rupert Murdoch's movie studio plans to produce as many as a dozen films a year under a banner called FoxFaith. At least six of those films will be released in theaters under an agreement with two of the nation's largest chains, AMC Theatres and Carmike Cinemas."
If blogging gets light, it's because I'm trying to figure out how to format a screenplay...
"The home entertainment division of Rupert Murdoch's movie studio plans to produce as many as a dozen films a year under a banner called FoxFaith. At least six of those films will be released in theaters under an agreement with two of the nation's largest chains, AMC Theatres and Carmike Cinemas."
If blogging gets light, it's because I'm trying to figure out how to format a screenplay...
Nothing Special...
...but this does contain the term "radioactive bishop," which counts for something. Plus, very interesting to see The Nation and CNN advertising their top stories on The Onion. Everything's getting blurry...
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
Poetry Corner, Joseph Edition
Friend Joseph sent this along...
In Plague Time
A drop of oil burns the sanctuary lamp
And all fear is absent; substance and accidents
Exhale from appearances. Outside the wall
Of scenery, outside the walls of siege,
The handmade steeples and city spires
Make puncture wounds that bleed with wonder –
And breathing goes on all the same: the scene
Includes a panoply of stiff ordinary time:
Time’s music employs the lute ensemble
Intoning banquet and requiem,
All the while smiling with parti-colored dress.
Deliberation parades ceremony
And judicious talk comes to cats and rats.
It all stinks of poor rhetoric: the death
That clicks a solemn hymn of bone and stone.
The close-knit brick and mortar of streets
Includes a skeletal, academic crow gowned in robes
Of judicial black, loping in morose carnival
Suggesting penitentiary aftermath.
This is how civilization accrues and skews
Its sobriquet: a crow walks in daylight
Unmolested, silent, social as the plague
It blackens with its midnight pall of feathers.
Its obscene beak, a grotesque cone of blooms,
Gives a sense of the crammed and trapped life
Found in the wards, tired postures praying
Before supine monuments, draped with rough linen
Rising and falling between bowls of leeched blood
And splendid water clocks that float and sink
A moment’s bubble on the sharp verge
Of last words. The will dissipates, fades
As a pulse. Morning light streams in,
Extreme in its unction of shadow, night.
A drop of oil turns to vapor, hisses, ignites,
And fearfulness is found in the prayerful quiet,
The absent air.
The spider scurries up the spine
Of Boccaccio, weaving strands
From Dante to Petrarch, pages and pages
Contextual with the autumn of the year.
The shadow of Greece, the residue of Rome,
Forgotten now, and the afterbite of all
That civilized the tongue and calms the heart,
Now found in sudden blinks of light. The pain
Transpires with lesser evils: itching boils;
And crazed and helpless, a child’s lifetime
Lost in the moment his tiny hands would reach
For life he learned to value, too late, too much.
Toxins in the blood turn with the leaf.
The young turn old without the help of age.
Another drop of oil glowers in the sanctuary,
Anoints like a rubric…
Introibo ad Altare Dei…
Crimson tints from the humble baldaccino
Will to tell the bells out in slow breathings
Of dying divinity.
And all absence is feared
As final things and fevers are more thought
Than spoken about; more real than either book
Or spider, trenchant as the web between.
In human rooms, time flows, flushing out
The evicted waters of Babylon,
The weeping sound sounds like a welcomed rain.
In spring, upon each hill, a cloud descends
And farmers and merchants tell their tales
Like daily pilgrimage, squinting sunlight
Between each passage.
Between each passage
The villages and towns remand redress
In a fruitless hush descending from the towers
And over hanging garden walls… balconies
Unpeopled and random as a judgment day.
In human rooms, stillness hisses unbearably.
A drop of oil burns the sanctuary lamp
And place and time are one, accidental,
Appearing as one in substance with life
And death.
Sills and transoms, doors and casements
Are thrown open, yawning empty with passing,
Unlocked with none to keep them, carelessly
Successful, successfully abandoned
As a final febrile breath burning,
Abandoned as everything to a final prayer.
In Plague Time
A drop of oil burns the sanctuary lamp
And all fear is absent; substance and accidents
Exhale from appearances. Outside the wall
Of scenery, outside the walls of siege,
The handmade steeples and city spires
Make puncture wounds that bleed with wonder –
And breathing goes on all the same: the scene
Includes a panoply of stiff ordinary time:
Time’s music employs the lute ensemble
Intoning banquet and requiem,
All the while smiling with parti-colored dress.
Deliberation parades ceremony
And judicious talk comes to cats and rats.
It all stinks of poor rhetoric: the death
That clicks a solemn hymn of bone and stone.
The close-knit brick and mortar of streets
Includes a skeletal, academic crow gowned in robes
Of judicial black, loping in morose carnival
Suggesting penitentiary aftermath.
This is how civilization accrues and skews
Its sobriquet: a crow walks in daylight
Unmolested, silent, social as the plague
It blackens with its midnight pall of feathers.
Its obscene beak, a grotesque cone of blooms,
Gives a sense of the crammed and trapped life
Found in the wards, tired postures praying
Before supine monuments, draped with rough linen
Rising and falling between bowls of leeched blood
And splendid water clocks that float and sink
A moment’s bubble on the sharp verge
Of last words. The will dissipates, fades
As a pulse. Morning light streams in,
Extreme in its unction of shadow, night.
A drop of oil turns to vapor, hisses, ignites,
And fearfulness is found in the prayerful quiet,
The absent air.
The spider scurries up the spine
Of Boccaccio, weaving strands
From Dante to Petrarch, pages and pages
Contextual with the autumn of the year.
The shadow of Greece, the residue of Rome,
Forgotten now, and the afterbite of all
That civilized the tongue and calms the heart,
Now found in sudden blinks of light. The pain
Transpires with lesser evils: itching boils;
And crazed and helpless, a child’s lifetime
Lost in the moment his tiny hands would reach
For life he learned to value, too late, too much.
Toxins in the blood turn with the leaf.
The young turn old without the help of age.
Another drop of oil glowers in the sanctuary,
Anoints like a rubric…
Introibo ad Altare Dei…
Crimson tints from the humble baldaccino
Will to tell the bells out in slow breathings
Of dying divinity.
And all absence is feared
As final things and fevers are more thought
Than spoken about; more real than either book
Or spider, trenchant as the web between.
In human rooms, time flows, flushing out
The evicted waters of Babylon,
The weeping sound sounds like a welcomed rain.
In spring, upon each hill, a cloud descends
And farmers and merchants tell their tales
Like daily pilgrimage, squinting sunlight
Between each passage.
Between each passage
The villages and towns remand redress
In a fruitless hush descending from the towers
And over hanging garden walls… balconies
Unpeopled and random as a judgment day.
In human rooms, stillness hisses unbearably.
A drop of oil burns the sanctuary lamp
And place and time are one, accidental,
Appearing as one in substance with life
And death.
Sills and transoms, doors and casements
Are thrown open, yawning empty with passing,
Unlocked with none to keep them, carelessly
Successful, successfully abandoned
As a final febrile breath burning,
Abandoned as everything to a final prayer.
Good Grief, Part Deux.
All apologies if someone has already said what I'm about to say. But I'm feeling the need to vent.
The stupidity of the "furor" over Benedict's remarks to the Representatives of Science at the University of Regensberg "leaves us astounded" (to borrow Benedict's phrase), and doesn't give much reason for hope in dialogue with Islam. (Amy has, BTW, excerpted an interview with Kaspar on the prospects of dialogue with Islam--and it appears Kaspar's new position of responsibility has contributed greatly to his appreciation of the difficulty of achieving unity with this religion.) For an interlocuter, first of all, has to be able to understand what you're saying. And in this case, the defenders of Islam have demonstrated either a troubling lack of capacity for, or an appalling lack of interest in, understanding.
For one thing, they haven't understood that Benedict was quoting the opinion of someone else, the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, who in 1391 recorded his own dialogue with an equally erudite Persian Muslim. To quote the emporer (as Benedict did) on the unreasonableness of the coercion of religious assent: "Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death..."
For another, they haven't understood why Benedict brought up Islam here at all: He was speaking to a group of scientists about the unity of faith and reason--a unity which Muslims have been famously uninterested in (another bad sign for dialogue with Islam--which religion, BTW, is not even in unity with itself, according to Kaspar). Here is Benedict again quoting someone else on this point:
The objector might reply: "Oh, come on...of all the examples of so-called 'non-rationality' in the world, the Pope just happened to bring up this one? And what about his quote from Manuel II Paleologus prior to the one you've quoted: 'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'? Was that really necessary? It all sounds pretty inflammatory to me."
The obvious response (at least to me) is:
1) There's never been a threat to Western science, or to Western religion vis-a-vis science--i.e., to reason and to faith--like the "two truths" theory of the renowned Muslim scientist-philosopher Averroes, who proposed that one could both hold a religious belief and acknowledge that science (or more broadly, reason) contradicted it. This fact alone makes Islam highly appropriate subject matter when addressing scientists (especially Christian ones);
2) Quite simply, in a scholarly talk (which is what this was), you head off objections, and that includes taking the wind out of possible ad hominem arguments by acknowledging (and even apologizing) for your authority's "warts" (e.g., "Now I know my authority said this...and frankly, his "startling brusqueness" "leaves us astounded" [Benedict's words]...but still he had this other, very wise thing to say..."). It may have been counterproductive to trot out this particular "wart," i.e., may have created objections rather than heading them off, but can anyone honestly (if truth matters) or charitably (if charity matters) suggest that Benedict was "owning" what he claims to be "astounded" by? To seize upon the quote and ignore Benedict's disclaimer seems like so much reading out of context...sort of like a fundamentalist...it even seems a little non-rational...??? (Hm, does that make the MSM a bunch of irrational fundamentalists?...)
Apparently surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion." Is there a surah that reads something like "If you would not be mistaken for an unreasoning fundamentalist, do not act like one"?
The stupidity of the "furor" over Benedict's remarks to the Representatives of Science at the University of Regensberg "leaves us astounded" (to borrow Benedict's phrase), and doesn't give much reason for hope in dialogue with Islam. (Amy has, BTW, excerpted an interview with Kaspar on the prospects of dialogue with Islam--and it appears Kaspar's new position of responsibility has contributed greatly to his appreciation of the difficulty of achieving unity with this religion.) For an interlocuter, first of all, has to be able to understand what you're saying. And in this case, the defenders of Islam have demonstrated either a troubling lack of capacity for, or an appalling lack of interest in, understanding.
For one thing, they haven't understood that Benedict was quoting the opinion of someone else, the Byzantine emperor Manuel II Paleologus, who in 1391 recorded his own dialogue with an equally erudite Persian Muslim. To quote the emporer (as Benedict did) on the unreasonableness of the coercion of religious assent: "Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats... To convince a reasonable soul, one does not need a strong arm, or weapons of any kind, or any other means of threatening a person with death..."
For another, they haven't understood why Benedict brought up Islam here at all: He was speaking to a group of scientists about the unity of faith and reason--a unity which Muslims have been famously uninterested in (another bad sign for dialogue with Islam--which religion, BTW, is not even in unity with itself, according to Kaspar). Here is Benedict again quoting someone else on this point:
The decisive statement in this argument against violent conversion is this: not to act in accordance with reason is contrary to God's nature. The editor, Theodore Khoury, observes: For the emperor, as a Byzantine shaped by Greek philosophy, this statement is self-evident. But for Muslim teaching, God is absolutely transcendent. His will is not bound up with any of our categories, even that of rationality. Here Khoury quotes the work of the noted French Islamist R. Arnaldez [a quote within the quote!], who points out that Ibn Hazm went so far as to state [and now a quote within the quote within the quote!] that God is not bound even by his own word, and that nothing would oblige him to reveal the truth to us. Were it God's will, we would even have to practise idolatry.In my opinion, if there's anything here to take offense at, it's the implication that Islam is non-rational (and it's not even Benedict's implication, but that of his scholarly authorities, one of which is Muslim!). And of course this is not the same thing as saying that Muslims are irrational...although you have to admit, what we're seeing in Britian and the Holy Land right now might very well lead a person to ask: How rational a response to the Pope's supposed condmenation of "bloody Islam" is any threat of violence towards the Pope or acts of violence toward Christian churches? If you don't resemble that (supposed) remark, folks, then don't resemble it. Furthermore, how does it make sense to be infuriated with anyone for suggesting (which Benedict was not suggesting, but rather quoting someone else as observing) that Muslims sanction coercion in matters of religion, when in fact there are some Muslims who do (for Islam is not, according to Kaspar, monolithic, i.e., not every Islamic authority always teaches one and the same thing)?
The objector might reply: "Oh, come on...of all the examples of so-called 'non-rationality' in the world, the Pope just happened to bring up this one? And what about his quote from Manuel II Paleologus prior to the one you've quoted: 'Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'? Was that really necessary? It all sounds pretty inflammatory to me."
The obvious response (at least to me) is:
1) There's never been a threat to Western science, or to Western religion vis-a-vis science--i.e., to reason and to faith--like the "two truths" theory of the renowned Muslim scientist-philosopher Averroes, who proposed that one could both hold a religious belief and acknowledge that science (or more broadly, reason) contradicted it. This fact alone makes Islam highly appropriate subject matter when addressing scientists (especially Christian ones);
2) Quite simply, in a scholarly talk (which is what this was), you head off objections, and that includes taking the wind out of possible ad hominem arguments by acknowledging (and even apologizing) for your authority's "warts" (e.g., "Now I know my authority said this...and frankly, his "startling brusqueness" "leaves us astounded" [Benedict's words]...but still he had this other, very wise thing to say..."). It may have been counterproductive to trot out this particular "wart," i.e., may have created objections rather than heading them off, but can anyone honestly (if truth matters) or charitably (if charity matters) suggest that Benedict was "owning" what he claims to be "astounded" by? To seize upon the quote and ignore Benedict's disclaimer seems like so much reading out of context...sort of like a fundamentalist...it even seems a little non-rational...??? (Hm, does that make the MSM a bunch of irrational fundamentalists?...)
Apparently surah 2, 256 reads: "There is no compulsion in religion." Is there a surah that reads something like "If you would not be mistaken for an unreasoning fundamentalist, do not act like one"?
Monday, September 18, 2006
Overheard at Widow's Haven...
Hey, when did this become a Family Blog? Oh, well...
Third Son was sitting on bed with an English muffin. Second Daughter spotted it, started crawling over.
"She wants a bite of your muffin," observed the Wife.
"Oh. Okay," replied Third Son. But while the Wife indicated Second Daughter's desire as a way of suggesting that Third Son do a little sharing, Third Son interpreted her words as a warning. So he quickly crammed the rest of the muffin into his mouth.
Whereupon, yours truly burst out laughing. The Wife was not pleased. "Well, now - that behavior is completely reinforced, thanks to Daddy."
Sigh.
Third Son was sitting on bed with an English muffin. Second Daughter spotted it, started crawling over.
"She wants a bite of your muffin," observed the Wife.
"Oh. Okay," replied Third Son. But while the Wife indicated Second Daughter's desire as a way of suggesting that Third Son do a little sharing, Third Son interpreted her words as a warning. So he quickly crammed the rest of the muffin into his mouth.
Whereupon, yours truly burst out laughing. The Wife was not pleased. "Well, now - that behavior is completely reinforced, thanks to Daddy."
Sigh.
Today in Porn, Window Dressing Edition
My recent trip to LA took me past the deeply pink storefront of Trashy Lingerie on La Cienega, all bedecked with suggestively posed mannequins dressed in...you guessed it.`But turn in just a block or so off the main drag, and you find yourself in one of those lovely, leafy neighborhoods that remind you that LA is a place capable of sustaining human life. I noted the juxtaposition to my host, and she replied, "Trashy Lingerie is the only way we can tell what season it is around here. They dress the girls in bride costumes in June, witch costumes in October, etc. etc."
When I passed by, it must have been the start of cold and flu season - they were all done up as nurses.
When I passed by, it must have been the start of cold and flu season - they were all done up as nurses.
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Not Cab. Not Pinot. Merlot.
From the NYT account of the NY Giants' overtime win over the Philadelphia Eagles:
Fittingly, the first was as much a blooper as a highlight for the Giants. [Plaxico] Burress caught a pass over the middle, then had the ball stripped by Eagles safety Brian Dawkins at Philadelphia’s 16.
The ball squirted to the end zone, slipping through the hands of safety Michael Lewis along the way, until Giants receiver Tim Carter recovered for a touchdown with 13 minutes 40 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter.
“I told Tim Carter I owe him a steak dinner, lobster, a glass of Merlot — something,” Burress said. He added, “It’s probably one of the best fumbles I’ve ever had.”
Somewhere, someone at Turning Leaf Wine Cellars is prepping a proposal for a Super Bowl ad...
"How does an NFL receiver thank his teammate for saving his keister? With a glass of Merlot."
And the mighty souls at Anheuser-Busch wept and gnashed their teeth.
Fittingly, the first was as much a blooper as a highlight for the Giants. [Plaxico] Burress caught a pass over the middle, then had the ball stripped by Eagles safety Brian Dawkins at Philadelphia’s 16.
The ball squirted to the end zone, slipping through the hands of safety Michael Lewis along the way, until Giants receiver Tim Carter recovered for a touchdown with 13 minutes 40 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter.
“I told Tim Carter I owe him a steak dinner, lobster, a glass of Merlot — something,” Burress said. He added, “It’s probably one of the best fumbles I’ve ever had.”
Somewhere, someone at Turning Leaf Wine Cellars is prepping a proposal for a Super Bowl ad...
"How does an NFL receiver thank his teammate for saving his keister? With a glass of Merlot."
And the mighty souls at Anheuser-Busch wept and gnashed their teeth.
Second Son, Philosopher
"Dad, the darkness is there, but it's not really anything."
- Second Son ruminates on privation, and warms his old man's heart.
- Second Son ruminates on privation, and warms his old man's heart.
What the priest should not have said...
...to Frankie in Million Dollar Baby:
"Leave her to God."
This is utterly contrary to the notion of the Mystical Body, and to the explicit command of Christ. Whatsoever you do to the least of these, etc.
Gad, but it's boring and depressing when people try to depict faith without understanding it.
"Leave her to God."
This is utterly contrary to the notion of the Mystical Body, and to the explicit command of Christ. Whatsoever you do to the least of these, etc.
Gad, but it's boring and depressing when people try to depict faith without understanding it.
What the priest should have said...
...when Frankie, in Million Dollar Baby, said, "She's not asking for God's help; she's asking for mine!"
"Then you bring her God's love. You be Jesus for her. You don't abandon her."
Godsbody, last year's movies today...
"Then you bring her God's love. You be Jesus for her. You don't abandon her."
Godsbody, last year's movies today...
Saturday, September 16, 2006
Upstate
I'm not a huge Edward Burns fan, but will pass this bit of promo along...
"Another witty and humane ode to male bonding, LOOKING FOR KITTY tells the story of Abe (Krumholtz), an upstate New York high school baseball coach, who wakes up to discover that his beautiful wife Kitty has disappeared. Someone sends Abe a photo from a newspaper showing a rock star and his entourage, including a woman who could be Kitty."
Go Upstate!
"Another witty and humane ode to male bonding, LOOKING FOR KITTY tells the story of Abe (Krumholtz), an upstate New York high school baseball coach, who wakes up to discover that his beautiful wife Kitty has disappeared. Someone sends Abe a photo from a newspaper showing a rock star and his entourage, including a woman who could be Kitty."
Go Upstate!
Oh, Good Grief
Amy's been all over the Benedict speech furor, but I couldn't let this go....from a Reuters story...
"How can (the Pope) imply that Muslims are the creators of terrorism in the world while it is the followers of Christianity who have aggressed against every country of the Islamic world?'' prominent Saudi cleric Salman al-Odeh said. ''Who attacked Afghanistan and who invaded Iraq?''
In Libya, the General Instance of Religious Affairs said the ``insult ... pushes us back to the era of crusades against Muslims led by Western political and religious leaders.''
Turkish paper Vatan quoted a member of the ruling Justice and Development Party saying Benedict ``will go down in history in the same category as leaders like Hitler and Mussolini.''
Um. Right.
"How can (the Pope) imply that Muslims are the creators of terrorism in the world while it is the followers of Christianity who have aggressed against every country of the Islamic world?'' prominent Saudi cleric Salman al-Odeh said. ''Who attacked Afghanistan and who invaded Iraq?''
In Libya, the General Instance of Religious Affairs said the ``insult ... pushes us back to the era of crusades against Muslims led by Western political and religious leaders.''
Turkish paper Vatan quoted a member of the ruling Justice and Development Party saying Benedict ``will go down in history in the same category as leaders like Hitler and Mussolini.''
Um. Right.
Friday, September 15, 2006
Overheard at Widow's Haven...
First Son: Hey! Dad's got money!
Second son: Let's get him!
(Scene of brutal violence.)
Where did I go wrong?
Second son: Let's get him!
(Scene of brutal violence.)
Where did I go wrong?
Oh, my dear sweet Lord...
...what else to say at the sight of Third Son, the Destroyer, dressed in a pink tutu and yellow rainboots and demanding that First Daughter teach him to dance?
The Onion Makes Me Cry
This is as astute a piece of media/cultural criticism as they've done in a while - elegant, simple, unostentatious. And with a sweet little off-topic barb down at the bottom.
Thursday, September 14, 2006
Upstate
Upstate New York is forever popping up in relation to interesting people. It happens almost often enough to make it a regular feature on Godsbody. Today's entry, courtesy of Maud: famous writers' homes. I mean, Mark Twain! (But of course, you knew that. So follow the link and find out about the rest.)
Here's Your Pop-Culture Flannery O'Connor Reference for Today
We're thinking the man who once was T-Muffle had something to do with this.
Speaking of the grotesque - I have to journey up to LA today, so it'll be even quieter than usual 'round here. Until tomorrow, then. Toodles!
Speaking of the grotesque - I have to journey up to LA today, so it'll be even quieter than usual 'round here. Until tomorrow, then. Toodles!
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
Here's Your Sandwich
One of the all-time great New Yorker cartoons, and one every writer with a wife would do well to remember.
Is there a child in America who WOULDN'T want to attend The Academy of Dorian Speed?
It's birthday day over at Scrutinies. Once a teacher, always a teacher, but now a homeschooler. Go read. This place is dead, anyway.
Tuesday, September 12, 2006
Thank you for smoking.
So I'm guessing that Camel has had it up to here with the subtle approach to selling smokes.
Hat tip to Copyranter for finding the image, which I noticed on a poster at my local gas station.
Hat tip to Copyranter for finding the image, which I noticed on a poster at my local gas station.
Apologies
...to the source of this little aphorism, as I have completely forgotten where I found it a couple of days ago:
"We spend our youth chasing money, and our money chasing youth."
Case in point. Haven't ordered, don't really need to order, but want to order.
Yeah, yeah, it's so expected as to be trite. Sue me.
"We spend our youth chasing money, and our money chasing youth."
Case in point. Haven't ordered, don't really need to order, but want to order.
Yeah, yeah, it's so expected as to be trite. Sue me.
Memo to the Dude in the Landscaping Truck Ahead of Me
Dude. It's 10:20 in the morning. I know you have a hard job - manual labor in the hot sun. I'm not going to sit here and lecture you about having a morning brewski to help you through. But do you really think it best to drink the thing while driving around town? And then, to advertise your imbibing by tossing the empty can of Mickey's out the window, onto the street?
True confessions: I probably wouldn't be so grumpy if he hadn't been driving so slowly.
True confessions: I probably wouldn't be so grumpy if he hadn't been driving so slowly.
Edumacation
If cereal companies put famous speeches, plus a little of the context surrounding them, on the back of cereal boxes, we'd have kids murmuring snippets of Shakespeare and Lincoln inside of a week.
It's one thing to read about C.S. Lewis' rats in the cellar...
...it's another to discover one, having shed its figurative status and assumed its fleshy guise, wandering up into your foyer. And still another to fail utterly at your extraordinarily involved attempt to flush the thing out and drive it out the front door. It starts you thinking about how you had a chance to actually run the thing through as it nestled in the crevice behind the piano, mess or no mess... Urgh. You, sir, have failed both wife and children. You are no protector of homes. The rats know.
Murphy's Corollary
Sometimes, even the prospect of a windfall is enough to start things breaking down around the house.
Bookmark
"But that life, and what he'd made of it - how could it happen, Erhart wondered as he watched the bonfire catch. How was it possible that such effort, such plain virtue, could overnight be reduced to this smoke, thinning as it rose and was received by the big, annihilating sky?"
- Andy Erhart, thinking to himself as he helps to burn the bloodstained items removed from the Clutter home in In Cold Blood.
Yes, the movie led the Wife and me to get back to the book, reading it aloud before bed. "Great movie. Oh, and there's a book involved! How quaint! How charming! I know! We could READ it!"
- Andy Erhart, thinking to himself as he helps to burn the bloodstained items removed from the Clutter home in In Cold Blood.
Yes, the movie led the Wife and me to get back to the book, reading it aloud before bed. "Great movie. Oh, and there's a book involved! How quaint! How charming! I know! We could READ it!"
Monday, September 11, 2006
Query
A reader asks if anyone out there knows of a good Christian clip art source for a blog in need of adornment.
Anyone?
Anyone?
Jukebox of sorts
I just heard something really bizarre on the radio. Our local corporate rock station, playing Green Day's When September Ends interspersed with some woman commeting on 9/11. Saying things like, "For the first couple of years afterwards, things were really fearful. But I think we've moved on." And, "It was horrible. But people walked away, alive." Also, sounds of news reports: "Apparently, four planes were hijacked..."
When September Ends is off of American Idiot, no? Hardly a pro-America album, as I recall. Holiday was particularly scathing. Is this another case of Reagan trying to co-opt Springsteen's Born in the USA?
What gives? Is this something Green Day actually released to commemorate 9/11?
When September Ends is off of American Idiot, no? Hardly a pro-America album, as I recall. Holiday was particularly scathing. Is this another case of Reagan trying to co-opt Springsteen's Born in the USA?
What gives? Is this something Green Day actually released to commemorate 9/11?
Dept. of Catholic Fiction
Alice McDermott, who won the National Book Award for her novel Charming Billy, and who, incidentally, is also a Catholic, has a new book out: After This. It's reviewed in the NYT here and here. And there is an excerpt here:
"In church she had prayed for contentment. She was thirty, with no husband in sight. A good job, an aging father, a bachelor brother, a few nice friends. At least, she had asked-so humbly, so earnestly, so seriously-let me be content.
And now a slapstick windstorm fit for Harold Lloyd or Buster Keaton.
It was either God's reply or just April again, in the wind tunnel that was midtown Manhattan. The scent of it, the Easter scent of April in the city, all around her, in the cold air itself as well as on the shoulders of the crowd; the smell of sunlight and dirt, something warming at the heart of it all."
Anyone interested?
"In church she had prayed for contentment. She was thirty, with no husband in sight. A good job, an aging father, a bachelor brother, a few nice friends. At least, she had asked-so humbly, so earnestly, so seriously-let me be content.
And now a slapstick windstorm fit for Harold Lloyd or Buster Keaton.
It was either God's reply or just April again, in the wind tunnel that was midtown Manhattan. The scent of it, the Easter scent of April in the city, all around her, in the cold air itself as well as on the shoulders of the crowd; the smell of sunlight and dirt, something warming at the heart of it all."
Anyone interested?
Saturday, September 09, 2006
Powers
Others have noted the bit on J.F. Powers that Mr. Bottum wrote over at First Things:
"His specialty was scenes of clerical life, especially at mid-century, especially in the bleak, wind-swept parish houses of the Midwest. And the major reason for the fading of J.F. Powers is the decline of his topic once the reforms of Vatican II took hold—or rather, once what was perceived in America to be the “spirit” of Vatican II had destroyed the setting of his fiction. Powers had a uniquely talented eye for the little negotiations, compromises, and squabbles of bachelors living together—but such things cannot in themselves carry a story. What gave his fiction its force was the contrast between those little foibles of priestly life and the constantly looming reality of what a priest actually does in the sacraments.
It wasn’t simply an ironic contrast, though in his weaker stories it sometimes devolved to that. It was rather a somewhat narrow, somewhat overspecialized, but extremely efficient device for the fiction writer’s task of showing human life as the intersection of the mundane and the divine. And the catastrophic collapse of religious vocations through the 1970s—together with the defections from the religious life and the failure of nerve with which the American clergy abandoned the clerical authority that had held together the parish system—stripped Powers of a major part of his specialist’s vocation."
Amen, but when a friend gave me a mass-market paperback of Morte D'Urban, it was like being let in on a great secret. Here was a portrait of a vanished age - not simply a historian's portrait, an artist's portrait. Rendered by a man with a vision, and
also a skewer.
"His specialty was scenes of clerical life, especially at mid-century, especially in the bleak, wind-swept parish houses of the Midwest. And the major reason for the fading of J.F. Powers is the decline of his topic once the reforms of Vatican II took hold—or rather, once what was perceived in America to be the “spirit” of Vatican II had destroyed the setting of his fiction. Powers had a uniquely talented eye for the little negotiations, compromises, and squabbles of bachelors living together—but such things cannot in themselves carry a story. What gave his fiction its force was the contrast between those little foibles of priestly life and the constantly looming reality of what a priest actually does in the sacraments.
It wasn’t simply an ironic contrast, though in his weaker stories it sometimes devolved to that. It was rather a somewhat narrow, somewhat overspecialized, but extremely efficient device for the fiction writer’s task of showing human life as the intersection of the mundane and the divine. And the catastrophic collapse of religious vocations through the 1970s—together with the defections from the religious life and the failure of nerve with which the American clergy abandoned the clerical authority that had held together the parish system—stripped Powers of a major part of his specialist’s vocation."
Amen, but when a friend gave me a mass-market paperback of Morte D'Urban, it was like being let in on a great secret. Here was a portrait of a vanished age - not simply a historian's portrait, an artist's portrait. Rendered by a man with a vision, and
also a skewer.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Mea Culpa...
...but not JUST mea...
Granted, much of the fault is mine. I broke down, let First and Second Sons see Episode III. First and Second Sons are nine and seven. Episode III is PG-13, and with good reason. It is not good for children to learn of the cold-blooded slaughter of children, especially by a character (Anakin) with whom they have identified strongly in the past (Episodes I and II, and even the opening of III). I knew this, but I learned it afresh upon seeing both boys in tears, First Son furious at the film for having put that in there. (And it's not like the Jedi children were an integral part of the story, or even any part, up until their slaughter. It's as if Lucas thought to himself, "Hm, how can I show everyone that Anakin is REALLY BAD now, in the least amount of time? I know! Have him kill a bunch of kids!" And so the director picked up his sledgehammer and drove the point home.)
But why did I break down? Lots of reasons, but one of them was definitely the fact that the film was slapped on the side of Happy Meals, turned into kid-friendly video games, merchandized out the wazoo. Whether or not Lucas thought he was making a movie for children, the movie was sold to children, sold hard. Plus, there were five other episodes, all of them much more suitable for kids. (Well, the beheading of young Boba Fett's father wasn't great, either...) They'd seen everything else, and now they wanted to see the story finished. A reasonable desire. But one I should not have indulged.
Granted, much of the fault is mine. I broke down, let First and Second Sons see Episode III. First and Second Sons are nine and seven. Episode III is PG-13, and with good reason. It is not good for children to learn of the cold-blooded slaughter of children, especially by a character (Anakin) with whom they have identified strongly in the past (Episodes I and II, and even the opening of III). I knew this, but I learned it afresh upon seeing both boys in tears, First Son furious at the film for having put that in there. (And it's not like the Jedi children were an integral part of the story, or even any part, up until their slaughter. It's as if Lucas thought to himself, "Hm, how can I show everyone that Anakin is REALLY BAD now, in the least amount of time? I know! Have him kill a bunch of kids!" And so the director picked up his sledgehammer and drove the point home.)
But why did I break down? Lots of reasons, but one of them was definitely the fact that the film was slapped on the side of Happy Meals, turned into kid-friendly video games, merchandized out the wazoo. Whether or not Lucas thought he was making a movie for children, the movie was sold to children, sold hard. Plus, there were five other episodes, all of them much more suitable for kids. (Well, the beheading of young Boba Fett's father wasn't great, either...) They'd seen everything else, and now they wanted to see the story finished. A reasonable desire. But one I should not have indulged.
Colbert Explained
...well, not really. But this is good. He's a Southerner, the youngest of 11. Love the bit about why he doesn't let his kids watch his show.
The Hits Keep Coming
Well, this debate about The Squid & The Whale seems to have reached detente, but like all good things these days, it left room for a tawdry, exploitative sequel. Commentor Kathleen's final comment included this tidbit:
"Sideways' plot was inconsequential, about adults screwing up their lives. screwing up childrens' lives , and a director engineering it so viewers should watch that with disinterest, is entirely different."
Now them's fighting words. I say Sideways was a proper redemption story about two narcissists learning to love someone besides themselves, or at least, learning how desperately they needed redemption. I grant that you have to accept the women as pure grace (at least, Maya and Christine - the gal who marries Jack). Stephanie is a real character, and so she gets ground under the wheels of Jack's narcissism. When Miles goes in after the ring, that's love. When Jack realizes that he is nothing without Christine's love, that's the sinner finding the hole at his center and pleading for mercy.
Meanwhile, Not-Ted says that the film is heavy with snobbery. Again, I'll squawk. Snobbery gets shown to be a lot of nonsense - our biggest wine snob winds up chugging the spit bucket. And if the film looks down on the waitress and her husband, it also looks down on Jack for involving himself in their lives.
I could go on, but I'll wait to see if anybody thinks it worth arguing about.
"Sideways' plot was inconsequential, about adults screwing up their lives. screwing up childrens' lives , and a director engineering it so viewers should watch that with disinterest, is entirely different."
Now them's fighting words. I say Sideways was a proper redemption story about two narcissists learning to love someone besides themselves, or at least, learning how desperately they needed redemption. I grant that you have to accept the women as pure grace (at least, Maya and Christine - the gal who marries Jack). Stephanie is a real character, and so she gets ground under the wheels of Jack's narcissism. When Miles goes in after the ring, that's love. When Jack realizes that he is nothing without Christine's love, that's the sinner finding the hole at his center and pleading for mercy.
Meanwhile, Not-Ted says that the film is heavy with snobbery. Again, I'll squawk. Snobbery gets shown to be a lot of nonsense - our biggest wine snob winds up chugging the spit bucket. And if the film looks down on the waitress and her husband, it also looks down on Jack for involving himself in their lives.
I could go on, but I'll wait to see if anybody thinks it worth arguing about.
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Too easy...
...to pass up:
NYC Unveils 9/11 Memorial Hole vs. Designs Unveiled for Freedom Tower's Neighbors.
From the latter:
"The designs presented this morning by the developer, Larry A. Silverstein, together offered the most comprehensive picture to date of what the finished complex might — just might — look like six years from now."
NYC Unveils 9/11 Memorial Hole vs. Designs Unveiled for Freedom Tower's Neighbors.
From the latter:
"The designs presented this morning by the developer, Larry A. Silverstein, together offered the most comprehensive picture to date of what the finished complex might — just might — look like six years from now."
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Genius, desecrated.
Because the good people at Warner Bros. haven't finished wringing every last dollar out of the veins of Bugs & Co...
Children are watching Looney Toons Stranger than Fiction. I swear it's not the nostalgia talking - not everything Mel Blanc and Chuck Jones touched turned to gold, after all - but this stuff is garbage. The animation looks like a low-grade educational computer game. The jokes are obvious by slapstick standards. The voices - God bless 'em, they really come close, but it only highlights the fact that it ain't the real thing. And the music...the music. You don't know what you've got til its gone, you really don't.
Sigh.
Children are watching Looney Toons Stranger than Fiction. I swear it's not the nostalgia talking - not everything Mel Blanc and Chuck Jones touched turned to gold, after all - but this stuff is garbage. The animation looks like a low-grade educational computer game. The jokes are obvious by slapstick standards. The voices - God bless 'em, they really come close, but it only highlights the fact that it ain't the real thing. And the music...the music. You don't know what you've got til its gone, you really don't.
Sigh.
Bookmark
Because jaded existential angst never goes out of fashion among the young...
"Waugh, in an Isis editorial, 'Wittenberg and Oxford' (14 February 1924), argued that Hamlet was a faithful portrait of undergraduate uncertainty. 'We also know,' he wrote later, 'that when there is a war the fighting people at least have moments of really intense enjoyment and really intense misery - both things which one wants at our age...there is just no chance of any of us being able to earn a living, or at least a living decent enought to allow any sort of excitement or depravity. Here are with bills, over-fastidious tastes, and a completely hopeless future. What can we do but long for a war or a revolution?'"
- Evelyn Waugh, The Early Years 1903-1939 by Martin Stannard
"Waugh, in an Isis editorial, 'Wittenberg and Oxford' (14 February 1924), argued that Hamlet was a faithful portrait of undergraduate uncertainty. 'We also know,' he wrote later, 'that when there is a war the fighting people at least have moments of really intense enjoyment and really intense misery - both things which one wants at our age...there is just no chance of any of us being able to earn a living, or at least a living decent enought to allow any sort of excitement or depravity. Here are with bills, over-fastidious tastes, and a completely hopeless future. What can we do but long for a war or a revolution?'"
- Evelyn Waugh, The Early Years 1903-1939 by Martin Stannard
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Monday, September 04, 2006
Know Thyself
So Hollywood Video was running a buy two used DVDs, get two free thing. I bought Midnight Cowboy for the Wife - she likes 'em harsh and sad and gritty. She loves that one in particular. Something for the hard times - "Honey, I'm sorry I've been a poor husband. Let's watch Midnight Cowboy." For me (well not just for me - she liked these as well): Sideways, Capote, The Squid & The Whale. All for $28 - hoo! It wasn't until I was leaving the store that I noticed - three films, three stories about writers; two failed, and one destroyed by his creation.
You gotta dream.
You gotta dream.
Sigh.
What was that I was saying about contentment? Sigh. Oh, and you can buy the adjoining 15 acres, complete with pond and cottage. Eleven miles from my brother. Double sigh.
Bookmark
“I wonder that all things seem to be from hell these days…dates, jobs, parties, weather. Could the situation be that we no longer believe in that particular place? Or maybe we were all promised heaven in our lifetimes, and what we ended up with can’t help but suffer in comparison.”
- Douglas Coupland, Generation X
...Because after a post about the Boomers, something about GenX is only fitting...
- Douglas Coupland, Generation X
...Because after a post about the Boomers, something about GenX is only fitting...
Ecstasy?
Redeem the Time's Matthew Peterson has a post on the Claremont blog about certain of the Boomers' pursuit of pleasure:
"They have never understood that the argument for traditional morality and the nuclear family, far from being merely the pronouncement of negative rules and conventional constraints, used to be that virtue was what makes human beings happy. 'Happy,' as in truly fulfilled and content as is possible in this life; as in that activity which allows us to develop ourselves into what we are naturally made to become. No one ever had a problem with sex, the problem was with ripping sex out of its human context and rendering it a meaningless distraction—a purely physical, animal exercise for the sake of pleasure alone, signifying nothing.
And this is the way their world ends. We are now left with the pathetic spectacle of 67 year old women writing books patting themselves on the back for acting like prostitutes even as they admit that such actions—besides shattering the lives of those around them—leave themselves utterly unfulfilled and woefully lonely. Notice that while they are certain of their right to pursue whatever they want, they don’t talk about being happy very much. The one thing that their narcissistic literature never directly addresses is the fact that everything they have advocated has made them all miserable."
"They have never understood that the argument for traditional morality and the nuclear family, far from being merely the pronouncement of negative rules and conventional constraints, used to be that virtue was what makes human beings happy. 'Happy,' as in truly fulfilled and content as is possible in this life; as in that activity which allows us to develop ourselves into what we are naturally made to become. No one ever had a problem with sex, the problem was with ripping sex out of its human context and rendering it a meaningless distraction—a purely physical, animal exercise for the sake of pleasure alone, signifying nothing.
And this is the way their world ends. We are now left with the pathetic spectacle of 67 year old women writing books patting themselves on the back for acting like prostitutes even as they admit that such actions—besides shattering the lives of those around them—leave themselves utterly unfulfilled and woefully lonely. Notice that while they are certain of their right to pursue whatever they want, they don’t talk about being happy very much. The one thing that their narcissistic literature never directly addresses is the fact that everything they have advocated has made them all miserable."
Sunday, September 03, 2006
Acting to serve God
A piece in the NYT Magazine on the difficulties facing film actresses, written chiefly as a profile of one Vera Farmiga. Interesting tidbit (though the whole thing is certainly not without interest):
"She took off her wig, exposing her short blond hair. Suddenly, she looked 10 years younger. 'I was raised by Catholic parents, with a profound awareness and reverence for God,' she said. 'And ingrained in me is the idea of service with a glad heart with the talent you were given. We all have the ability to serve God and each other with our talents. I choose roles with that objective. I really think that’s why I act. I’ve never sought out parts where you float around in beautiful dresses and have no character.' Even when Anthony Minghella recommended Farmiga ('I speak about her to everyone,' he said. 'I think she can do anything') to the producers of the new James Bond film, Casino Royale, she needed to find an emotional connection to the character of the Bond girl to justify flying to London to audition for the part. 'The character was Bond’s first love,' Farmiga said. 'He never really got over her, and those emotions started to interest me. And to be honest, the whole process of auditioning for that role was fascinating, like visiting some other acting stratosphere. I flew to London. They took me to a dressing room and gave me the same kind of fake breasts that Angelina Jolie wore in the first Tomb Raider film.' Farmiga cupped her hand and mimed putting on the Lara Croft chest. 'It was kind of fun in the end,' she said, laughing. 'But I also knew I wouldn’t get the part.'"
Oh, and this is fun, too:
"In the grassy land that surrounds Farmiga’s house in upstate New York sits a pile of ashes. 'This is where I burn the scripts,' she said as she circled the scarred earth with her two pet goats. 'I stack up all those crass female characters, all those utterly ordinary women, all those hundreds and hundreds of parts that have no substance or meaning and turn them into a blazing pyre.' She kicked some charred pages that had somehow escaped the flames. 'It’s really cathartic,' she said. 'It’s my revenge on Hollywood insensitivity and greed. The ashes go to the compost. At least the scripts can finally help the world in some way.'"
"She took off her wig, exposing her short blond hair. Suddenly, she looked 10 years younger. 'I was raised by Catholic parents, with a profound awareness and reverence for God,' she said. 'And ingrained in me is the idea of service with a glad heart with the talent you were given. We all have the ability to serve God and each other with our talents. I choose roles with that objective. I really think that’s why I act. I’ve never sought out parts where you float around in beautiful dresses and have no character.' Even when Anthony Minghella recommended Farmiga ('I speak about her to everyone,' he said. 'I think she can do anything') to the producers of the new James Bond film, Casino Royale, she needed to find an emotional connection to the character of the Bond girl to justify flying to London to audition for the part. 'The character was Bond’s first love,' Farmiga said. 'He never really got over her, and those emotions started to interest me. And to be honest, the whole process of auditioning for that role was fascinating, like visiting some other acting stratosphere. I flew to London. They took me to a dressing room and gave me the same kind of fake breasts that Angelina Jolie wore in the first Tomb Raider film.' Farmiga cupped her hand and mimed putting on the Lara Croft chest. 'It was kind of fun in the end,' she said, laughing. 'But I also knew I wouldn’t get the part.'"
Oh, and this is fun, too:
"In the grassy land that surrounds Farmiga’s house in upstate New York sits a pile of ashes. 'This is where I burn the scripts,' she said as she circled the scarred earth with her two pet goats. 'I stack up all those crass female characters, all those utterly ordinary women, all those hundreds and hundreds of parts that have no substance or meaning and turn them into a blazing pyre.' She kicked some charred pages that had somehow escaped the flames. 'It’s really cathartic,' she said. 'It’s my revenge on Hollywood insensitivity and greed. The ashes go to the compost. At least the scripts can finally help the world in some way.'"
Mary, Raised Up...
...no, this is not a post about the Assumption - that might be too Yesterday for even Godsbody. Commentor MCM wrote a bit about Mary here that I thought thoroughly worth hauling up into a post. So, I yield the floor:
"i guess i am sad that he would say that the virgin mother is an aberration....(i do have problems with her 'virginity' but that's my own issue and i won't take it up here). my understanding of mary's role in the church and in salvation is that she is quite powerful, and she is held up by the church as being "necessary" in a way as a conduit of grace. certainly she has shown her power and continues to do so, working constantly to bring souls, often quite fallen souls, to Christ. i recently read a good little book called Looking For Mary by Beverly Donofrio (Riding in the Car with Boys author) this is a book about the power of mary. her personal experience of mary calling her (a sinner) to a relationship...the wonderful thing about Beverly is she is somewhat feminist....not radically so by any means...but that mary would work so hard to call this woman and bring her in and bring this woman who has a problem with the church's patriarchal atmosphere-instead of mary being a problem with this, mary is actually the mediator, the peacemaker, in Beverly's case. i can attest to this same exact feeling about mary. i have my own 'feminist' leanings, but i adore mary. i find she is a perfect example of the role of women in the church (and life i suppose) the only way i can put it into words is it's a feminine power-to soften the heart, to make it ready for God. does that make sense? this to me represents what women should be examples of and it's extremely powerful and necessary. but the power is a passive one. does that make sense...(quietly going about doing it's good work) not an active one, as maybe a priest, actively changing the bread and wine into the body and blood...
"maybe i should go even further than this an make a very personal testimant to her power. my experience with mary is very similar in some ways to beverlys. i am very much a sinner. i won't go into details....but ironically for a somewhat feminist person like myself, mary has been my path to a return to the church and to grace. this i guess is what i love most, she sought me out and i am not so great a person. AND she brought me back. how can i not love her? how can i not attest to her power? and the most important part is the irony...i am not a 'mary' sort of person. i, much like beverly, would originally be the one griping about how 'namby pamby' she seems (sorry mary) BUT BUT BUT how untrue this is!!! i cannot really express it. but her importance and her power have a significance that i am unable and frankly unworthy to try to put into words."
"i guess i am sad that he would say that the virgin mother is an aberration....(i do have problems with her 'virginity' but that's my own issue and i won't take it up here). my understanding of mary's role in the church and in salvation is that she is quite powerful, and she is held up by the church as being "necessary" in a way as a conduit of grace. certainly she has shown her power and continues to do so, working constantly to bring souls, often quite fallen souls, to Christ. i recently read a good little book called Looking For Mary by Beverly Donofrio (Riding in the Car with Boys author) this is a book about the power of mary. her personal experience of mary calling her (a sinner) to a relationship...the wonderful thing about Beverly is she is somewhat feminist....not radically so by any means...but that mary would work so hard to call this woman and bring her in and bring this woman who has a problem with the church's patriarchal atmosphere-instead of mary being a problem with this, mary is actually the mediator, the peacemaker, in Beverly's case. i can attest to this same exact feeling about mary. i have my own 'feminist' leanings, but i adore mary. i find she is a perfect example of the role of women in the church (and life i suppose) the only way i can put it into words is it's a feminine power-to soften the heart, to make it ready for God. does that make sense? this to me represents what women should be examples of and it's extremely powerful and necessary. but the power is a passive one. does that make sense...(quietly going about doing it's good work) not an active one, as maybe a priest, actively changing the bread and wine into the body and blood...
"maybe i should go even further than this an make a very personal testimant to her power. my experience with mary is very similar in some ways to beverlys. i am very much a sinner. i won't go into details....but ironically for a somewhat feminist person like myself, mary has been my path to a return to the church and to grace. this i guess is what i love most, she sought me out and i am not so great a person. AND she brought me back. how can i not love her? how can i not attest to her power? and the most important part is the irony...i am not a 'mary' sort of person. i, much like beverly, would originally be the one griping about how 'namby pamby' she seems (sorry mary) BUT BUT BUT how untrue this is!!! i cannot really express it. but her importance and her power have a significance that i am unable and frankly unworthy to try to put into words."
Here Comes the Flood
Culling embryos to avoid disease.
"Prospective parents have been using the procedure, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or P.G.D., for more than a decade to screen for genes certain to cause childhood diseases that are severe and largely untreatable.
Now a growing number of couples like the Kingsburys are crossing a new threshold for parental intervention in the genetic makeup of their offspring: They are using P.G.D. to detect a predisposition to cancers that may or may not develop later in life, and are often treatable if they do.
For most parents who have used preimplantation diagnosis, the burden of playing God has been trumped by the near certainty that diseases like cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia will afflict the children who carry the genetic mutation that causes them. The procedure has also been used to avoid passing on Huntington’s disease, a severe neurological disease that typically does not surface until middle age but spares no one who carries the mutation that causes it.
Couples like the Kingsburys, by contrast, face an even more complex calibration. They must weigh whether their desire to prevent suffering that is not certain to occur justifies the conscious selection of an embryo and the implicit rejection of those that carry the defective gene."
Why do they call the rejection of the other embryos implicit? Seems to me it's pretty explicit, no matter how complex the calibration.
On a related note, anybody here ever see Gattaca?
"Prospective parents have been using the procedure, known as preimplantation genetic diagnosis, or P.G.D., for more than a decade to screen for genes certain to cause childhood diseases that are severe and largely untreatable.
Now a growing number of couples like the Kingsburys are crossing a new threshold for parental intervention in the genetic makeup of their offspring: They are using P.G.D. to detect a predisposition to cancers that may or may not develop later in life, and are often treatable if they do.
For most parents who have used preimplantation diagnosis, the burden of playing God has been trumped by the near certainty that diseases like cystic fibrosis and sickle cell anemia will afflict the children who carry the genetic mutation that causes them. The procedure has also been used to avoid passing on Huntington’s disease, a severe neurological disease that typically does not surface until middle age but spares no one who carries the mutation that causes it.
Couples like the Kingsburys, by contrast, face an even more complex calibration. They must weigh whether their desire to prevent suffering that is not certain to occur justifies the conscious selection of an embryo and the implicit rejection of those that carry the defective gene."
Why do they call the rejection of the other embryos implicit? Seems to me it's pretty explicit, no matter how complex the calibration.
On a related note, anybody here ever see Gattaca?
Saturday, September 02, 2006
Elsewhere, Genius Edition
Outer Life presents the foundation of a brilliant comic novel. Absolutely nails California high-end real estate. I've been in this world; he gets it exactly right.
Me, my weakness is for old fixer-uppers. Found another one this week. Two acres, right here in La Mesa. Must. Be. Content...
"Love the one you're with," advises the Wife.
Me, my weakness is for old fixer-uppers. Found another one this week. Two acres, right here in La Mesa. Must. Be. Content...
"Love the one you're with," advises the Wife.
Today in Porn, Review Edition
A.O. Scott reviews the film Wicker Man:
"I’m trying to imagine how this movie was pitched. There’s this island, see, and it’s ruled by women. Goddesses! Most of them are blond, and a lot of them are twins, and they have all this honey, and these wild costumes. Porno? What are you talking about? It’s a horror movie. Don’t you get it?"
"I’m trying to imagine how this movie was pitched. There’s this island, see, and it’s ruled by women. Goddesses! Most of them are blond, and a lot of them are twins, and they have all this honey, and these wild costumes. Porno? What are you talking about? It’s a horror movie. Don’t you get it?"
Friday, September 01, 2006
Speaking of sex and celibacy and religious folk...
...Amy's got a report on Fallen Order, a book about the early history of the Piarists. Do go read.
Ecstasy
A few days before Yesterday, Cosmos-Liturgy-Sex noted a story about an upcoming film about St. Teresa of Avila. The director, Ray Loriga, worked with Almodovar (no great fan of the Church) on the script for Live Flesh.
Loriga said he was "prepared for a possible controversy, but said: 'The vision we have been offered of St Teresa is very close to a holy image. So far, everybody has been careful not to touch on certain uncomfortable subjects — her sexuality, her relationship with God, which was so close, nearly skin to skin.'"
I'm not going to defend the film before it's even made - it might be horrible. But he does seem to have a point about the "so close" part. Not for nothing are nuns referred to as "Brides of Christ." From the Catechism: "Virgins who, committed to the holy plan of following Christ more closely, are consecrated to God by the diocesan bishop according to the approved liturgical rite, are betrothed mystically to Christ, the Son of God, and are dedicated to the service of the Church. By this solemn rite (Consecratio virginum), the virgin is 'constituted . . . a sacred person, a transcendent sign of the Church's love for Christ, and an eschatological image of this heavenly Bride of Christ and of the life to come.'" I mean, there's a reason why Bernini's sculpture is called Teresa in Ecstasy, right?
I'm not trying to debase her mystical union, or to imply that there was a physically sexual element to it. (Carl Olson points out that, in counseling a relation who DID become aroused during prayer, she explicitly says otherwise:
"Pay no attention to those evil feelings which come to you afterwards [after his deep prayer]. I have never suffered from them myself, since God, of His goodness, has always delivered me from such passions, but I think the explanation of them must be that the soul's joy is so keen that it makes itself felt in the body. With God's help it will calm down if you take no notice of it. Several people have discussed this with me."
But see - here's why I think such an exploration is worthwhile: there seems to be a strange disconnect between calling arousal during prayer "evil feelings" and explaning those "evil feelings" by saying "the soul's joy is so keen that it makes itself felt in the body." The soul's joy, presumably, is good - this is what's happening during prayer, after all. So how does it produce "evil feelings"? Mysterious stuff. It put me in mind of Mariette in Ecstasy, Ron Hansen's novel about a young nun who also has, or seems to have, mystical visions of Christ, and who DOES get her religious fervor mixed with sexual feeling. Sister Zelie discoveres Mariette at prayer:
"Sister Zelie signs, Why, under, knees, hands?
So, not, sin, against, purity.
You, always, pray, so?
The pretty girl hesitates and shows her agreement. Since, was, child."
If Hansen could make this exploration, why not another? Is it because Teresa of Avila is a historical figure? That's a very differnt argument - the artist's obligations to history. But we do have, do we not, a story about the saint doing a sensuous dance to the sound of castanets, indulging the senses to keep spirits up? Is it because the director is a lapsed Catholic, one who has deep problems with the Church? Hello, Graham Greene - not quite a lapso, maybe, but with a longtime mistress and plenty of grievances against the Church. It could end up a hack job, but until I learn more, I'm curious.
UPDATE: Not that I don't think there's reason for concern. Loriga starts out with what might be a reasonable comment:
"He said he had taken care not to portray the Church as the 'bad guy,' but added: 'I think that the conflict between the Catholic Church and women hasn’t been resolved.'"
Then he takes it a bit over the top, in my estimation:
“So far, they’ve only offered two models to women — The Virgin Mother, which, in my opinion, is an aberration and quite harmful to women, and the redeemed whore symbolised by Mary Magdalene. These role models worry me. The Church hasn’t been able to find a better explanation for women within the context of our relationship with God.”
Well, the Church has also offered us St. Teresa of Avila, hasn't she? And "redeemed whore" is a bit much, but even it it's true, she's not just a model for women, but for all humanity, which has gone astray after other lovers, other gods.
Loriga said he was "prepared for a possible controversy, but said: 'The vision we have been offered of St Teresa is very close to a holy image. So far, everybody has been careful not to touch on certain uncomfortable subjects — her sexuality, her relationship with God, which was so close, nearly skin to skin.'"
I'm not going to defend the film before it's even made - it might be horrible. But he does seem to have a point about the "so close" part. Not for nothing are nuns referred to as "Brides of Christ." From the Catechism: "Virgins who, committed to the holy plan of following Christ more closely, are consecrated to God by the diocesan bishop according to the approved liturgical rite, are betrothed mystically to Christ, the Son of God, and are dedicated to the service of the Church. By this solemn rite (Consecratio virginum), the virgin is 'constituted . . . a sacred person, a transcendent sign of the Church's love for Christ, and an eschatological image of this heavenly Bride of Christ and of the life to come.'" I mean, there's a reason why Bernini's sculpture is called Teresa in Ecstasy, right?
I'm not trying to debase her mystical union, or to imply that there was a physically sexual element to it. (Carl Olson points out that, in counseling a relation who DID become aroused during prayer, she explicitly says otherwise:
"Pay no attention to those evil feelings which come to you afterwards [after his deep prayer]. I have never suffered from them myself, since God, of His goodness, has always delivered me from such passions, but I think the explanation of them must be that the soul's joy is so keen that it makes itself felt in the body. With God's help it will calm down if you take no notice of it. Several people have discussed this with me."
But see - here's why I think such an exploration is worthwhile: there seems to be a strange disconnect between calling arousal during prayer "evil feelings" and explaning those "evil feelings" by saying "the soul's joy is so keen that it makes itself felt in the body." The soul's joy, presumably, is good - this is what's happening during prayer, after all. So how does it produce "evil feelings"? Mysterious stuff. It put me in mind of Mariette in Ecstasy, Ron Hansen's novel about a young nun who also has, or seems to have, mystical visions of Christ, and who DOES get her religious fervor mixed with sexual feeling. Sister Zelie discoveres Mariette at prayer:
"Sister Zelie signs, Why, under, knees, hands?
So, not, sin, against, purity.
You, always, pray, so?
The pretty girl hesitates and shows her agreement. Since, was, child."
If Hansen could make this exploration, why not another? Is it because Teresa of Avila is a historical figure? That's a very differnt argument - the artist's obligations to history. But we do have, do we not, a story about the saint doing a sensuous dance to the sound of castanets, indulging the senses to keep spirits up? Is it because the director is a lapsed Catholic, one who has deep problems with the Church? Hello, Graham Greene - not quite a lapso, maybe, but with a longtime mistress and plenty of grievances against the Church. It could end up a hack job, but until I learn more, I'm curious.
UPDATE: Not that I don't think there's reason for concern. Loriga starts out with what might be a reasonable comment:
"He said he had taken care not to portray the Church as the 'bad guy,' but added: 'I think that the conflict between the Catholic Church and women hasn’t been resolved.'"
Then he takes it a bit over the top, in my estimation:
“So far, they’ve only offered two models to women — The Virgin Mother, which, in my opinion, is an aberration and quite harmful to women, and the redeemed whore symbolised by Mary Magdalene. These role models worry me. The Church hasn’t been able to find a better explanation for women within the context of our relationship with God.”
Well, the Church has also offered us St. Teresa of Avila, hasn't she? And "redeemed whore" is a bit much, but even it it's true, she's not just a model for women, but for all humanity, which has gone astray after other lovers, other gods.
The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
Finally getting back to reading The Wind in the Willows to the elder three children at bedtime, and last night we reached this chapter, about which I had completely forgotten. It reminded me why some people hold this book up as one of the best ever written, children's or otherwise. The writing is achingly beautiful as it describes the dawn breaking upon Rat and Mole as they search for Otter's lost son. And then it gets mystical...
"A wide half circle of foam and glinting lights and shining shoulders of green water, the great weir closed the backwater from bank to bank, troubled all the quiet surface with twirling eddies and floating foam-streaks, and deadened all other sounds with its solemn and soothing rumble. In mid-most of the stream, embraced in the weir's shimmering armspread, a small island lay anchored, fringed close with willow and silver birch and alder. Reserved, shy, but full of significance, it hid whatever it might hold behind a veil, keeping it till the hour should come, and, with the hour, those who were called and chosen."
Rat and Mole are granted a vision of the divine for just a moment. Then it passes:
"As they stared blankly, in dumb misery deepening as they slowly realized all they had seen and all they had lost, a capricious little breeze, dancing up from the surface of the water, tossed the aspens, shook the dewy roses, and blew lightly and caressingly in their faces, and with its soft touch came instant oblivion. For this is the last best gift that the kindly demigod is careful to bestow on those to whom he has revealed himself in their helping: the gift of forgetfulness. Lest the awful remembrance should remain and grow, and overshadow mirth and pleasure, and the great haunting memory should spoil all the after-lives of little animals helped out of difficulties, in order that they should be as happy and light-hearted as before."
I don't care if it's just a story; when I read such an account of why the Divine delcares itself only in whispers; why the Almighty hides His face and makes us guess after Him, picking up an echo here, a stirring there, a confluence of events that seems to show His hand; why it should be harder to believe than not to believe, it brings comfort. I read this and think, "That's the side I want to be on - the side where that kind of beauty and significance is possible."
"A wide half circle of foam and glinting lights and shining shoulders of green water, the great weir closed the backwater from bank to bank, troubled all the quiet surface with twirling eddies and floating foam-streaks, and deadened all other sounds with its solemn and soothing rumble. In mid-most of the stream, embraced in the weir's shimmering armspread, a small island lay anchored, fringed close with willow and silver birch and alder. Reserved, shy, but full of significance, it hid whatever it might hold behind a veil, keeping it till the hour should come, and, with the hour, those who were called and chosen."
Rat and Mole are granted a vision of the divine for just a moment. Then it passes:
"As they stared blankly, in dumb misery deepening as they slowly realized all they had seen and all they had lost, a capricious little breeze, dancing up from the surface of the water, tossed the aspens, shook the dewy roses, and blew lightly and caressingly in their faces, and with its soft touch came instant oblivion. For this is the last best gift that the kindly demigod is careful to bestow on those to whom he has revealed himself in their helping: the gift of forgetfulness. Lest the awful remembrance should remain and grow, and overshadow mirth and pleasure, and the great haunting memory should spoil all the after-lives of little animals helped out of difficulties, in order that they should be as happy and light-hearted as before."
I don't care if it's just a story; when I read such an account of why the Divine delcares itself only in whispers; why the Almighty hides His face and makes us guess after Him, picking up an echo here, a stirring there, a confluence of events that seems to show His hand; why it should be harder to believe than not to believe, it brings comfort. I read this and think, "That's the side I want to be on - the side where that kind of beauty and significance is possible."

