My blood runs cold
My memories
Have just been sold
My angel is a centerfold
- Shwayze
- Shwayze
Sunday, September 9, 2012
Sunday, August 19, 2012
I AM SCOLDED IN SERIOUS OFFICIAL TERMINOLOGY THAT IT DOESN'T COST ANY MORE
The other day at Albertson's supermarket I was imagining I might get out for under a hundred dollars, but that was so foolish of me. You see, I'd somehow forgotten it was 2012 and not 2011. The cheapest house brand cheddar cheese chunk was up $2 dollars over what I paid last year. The pack of sticks of string cheese was up from $6.99 to $9.99. The turkey Keilbasa, on sale for $3.99 looked like it was only up about a dollar until I realized it was a little light in the hand--the same 16 ounce package now only weighed 12 ounces. This new technique, designed to soften the blow of much higher prices, is popular with snacks like Triscuits and Wheat Thins, as well. Cereals, on the other hand, appear in so many different sizes that they hide their inflated prices in a bewildering flurry of choices. Rye bread that used to be $2.50 for the half loaf, went up to $3.50 and now is over $4.00.
(I guess that last one deserves an exclamation point, but let's say the rye crop was eaten by pests or outer space aliens, so disregard the abnormal surge in rye bread.
The mood is, if not jovial, at least calm, and prices on items are engineered to seem as they are not: For instance, at Pavillions, a branch of VONs supermarkets, the savings on the various cuts of beef are astounding. It is sometimes possible to buy T-bone steaks, bone in, at 4.99 in the economy pack. Since they print the "REGULAR PRICE" on the label, it is easy to see that five pounds of steak, regularly priced at $50, can be had for $24.95, not counting tax, which is nearly ten percent in Los Angeles, where I live and buy my food. Astounding, but confusing at the same time. If memory serves (and in this case it does) a slim year ago, the econo-pak price was $3.99 per pound. My salary didn't go up by 25% and my social security (that I contributed into for 40 plus years and am supposed to be ashamed to accept) didn't go up at all.
I suppose I would shuffle along with the rest of the sheep, but something has been puzzling me, and I find myself out of step, confused, looking for a simple answers to questions that shouldn't be all that difficult: If the prices on fundamental foodstuffs keep jerking up, up, up month after month after month, then why has the government you and I elected declared there was no inflation in the 2nd quarter of 2012? And why did they claim inflation was way, way below 10% in all of last year? And why did they declare there was no increase in the cost of living in the two years before that?
I think something is wrong, but we both have to admit I am just a sample of one little lamb who has lost his way. Perhaps my math is wrong, or perhaps I am just buying food on expensive days or shopping at the wrong stores. Perhaps there are cheaper ways to buy food and the government is adding those into the mix. Maybe spoiled or tainted food counts in the official tally. Surely such food would be cheaper. No, seriously, I heard that for some time now the official federal calculations have been allowing a substitution of cheaper grades and cuts of meat, rather than the old fashioned idea that cuts of meat are defined as this or that because they are different in taste, texture and so on. For instance, if a pound of hamburger meat has the same calculated amount of nutrition as a pound of filet mignon, our trusty inflation fighters can switch to the cheaper ground meat in their calculations, and hence squeeze the flation formula back down to zero. I know, 'flation' is not a real word. But when inflation is not a true figure or a real calculation, I think we the sheeple should try to find other words to describe the process. After all, in the direction our society is being shepherded, what is the real value of mutton, anyway?
(I guess that last one deserves an exclamation point, but let's say the rye crop was eaten by pests or outer space aliens, so disregard the abnormal surge in rye bread.
The mood is, if not jovial, at least calm, and prices on items are engineered to seem as they are not: For instance, at Pavillions, a branch of VONs supermarkets, the savings on the various cuts of beef are astounding. It is sometimes possible to buy T-bone steaks, bone in, at 4.99 in the economy pack. Since they print the "REGULAR PRICE" on the label, it is easy to see that five pounds of steak, regularly priced at $50, can be had for $24.95, not counting tax, which is nearly ten percent in Los Angeles, where I live and buy my food. Astounding, but confusing at the same time. If memory serves (and in this case it does) a slim year ago, the econo-pak price was $3.99 per pound. My salary didn't go up by 25% and my social security (that I contributed into for 40 plus years and am supposed to be ashamed to accept) didn't go up at all.
I suppose I would shuffle along with the rest of the sheep, but something has been puzzling me, and I find myself out of step, confused, looking for a simple answers to questions that shouldn't be all that difficult: If the prices on fundamental foodstuffs keep jerking up, up, up month after month after month, then why has the government you and I elected declared there was no inflation in the 2nd quarter of 2012? And why did they claim inflation was way, way below 10% in all of last year? And why did they declare there was no increase in the cost of living in the two years before that?
I think something is wrong, but we both have to admit I am just a sample of one little lamb who has lost his way. Perhaps my math is wrong, or perhaps I am just buying food on expensive days or shopping at the wrong stores. Perhaps there are cheaper ways to buy food and the government is adding those into the mix. Maybe spoiled or tainted food counts in the official tally. Surely such food would be cheaper. No, seriously, I heard that for some time now the official federal calculations have been allowing a substitution of cheaper grades and cuts of meat, rather than the old fashioned idea that cuts of meat are defined as this or that because they are different in taste, texture and so on. For instance, if a pound of hamburger meat has the same calculated amount of nutrition as a pound of filet mignon, our trusty inflation fighters can switch to the cheaper ground meat in their calculations, and hence squeeze the flation formula back down to zero. I know, 'flation' is not a real word. But when inflation is not a true figure or a real calculation, I think we the sheeple should try to find other words to describe the process. After all, in the direction our society is being shepherded, what is the real value of mutton, anyway?
Monday, March 5, 2012
CHICAGO AND THE WORLD'S UNIQUE ARTIST/REPORTER
The great Chicago Artist Franklin McMahon Sr leaves behind a legacy that is both lasting and one-of-a-kind. How do you evaluate the importance of this uniquely talented man whose artistic triumphs cross from illustration to fine art to motion pictures? It is easy to see Franklin’s genius in any of the thousands of sketches, drawings and paintings he created over his long career. More difficult, perhaps, to understand the scope of his influence not only in the fine art world, but the effect he has had on us all through his thought-provoking magazine illustrations and prize winning documentaries that leave us with a living record of the way we were as a society and as a people, not only here in the U.S, but as his visual interpretation of how societies and peoples globally have been adapting to changing times over the last half century, a body of work that goes beyond mere recording into imagery that is always illuminating and even magical.
From the time when he set out to create his first documentary, “The Artist as a Reporter”, Franklin himself was aware of the marvelous power motion pictures possess to convey social and political ideas. A creative innovator, he pioneered the use of camera moves on artwork to present ideas about the world around us. Not only social changes came under his keen eye; he could create memorable nostalgic portraits, as beautifully illustrated in his documentary on the wonder of a Chicago Christmas, a show of his that became a perennial television classic.
Franklin McMahon Sr. perfected “The Ken Burns Effect” of bringing still pictures to life through carefully designed camera moves well before Burns, a highly skilled documentary maker in his own right, used such techniques in his popular films. The first of Franklin’s first great series of political documentaries, a 90 minute television special outlining the events of the U.S. Presidential campaign in 1968, won him an EMMY award, the first of three EMMYs he would earn for his work recording and preserving the details and the flavor of national political campaigns over the generations from the 1960s through the end of the millennium. Other documentaries include his special on the Chicago Seven, and “The World of Vatican II” and “World Cities” which recorded for future generations the worldwide movement of people from rural areas to the cities in every region of the globe in the latter half of the 20th century.
In the haut world of fine art, Franklin is recognized as having similarities with French artist Honore Daumier (1808-1879). Both were painters and sketch artists of consummate skill, both produced not only fine paintings but sketches and lithos capturing the mood and shape of their societies, and each produced a prolific body of irrefutably the finest artistic work.
As a pioneer in the filmmaking art, Franklin was experimenting in areas where few artists before him had gone, and only with limited success. One is reminded of Walt Disney’s attempt to bring life to Salvador Dali’s work in the seven minute limited animation film short Destino or some of the artistic qualities of Walt’s full length feature Fantasia. But more than an experimental filmmaker, Franklin surpassed the Disney efforts in his own direction, with his own unique filmic techniques and artistic style—The McMahon Way—as he became a master at the storytelling art of blending his work into smoothly moving pictures. This was a time-consuming process in those pre-computer generation days, and yet the outcome provides today’s viewers with vivid images of the places and times of his life—as well as a decades-long record of the major events of his era.
Franklin’s film projects often provided rewarding moments for him, as when a camera pan or a zoom in or pullback would highlight or reveal some area of his work that he came to realize some viewers might not otherwise experience ‘what he was trying to get at’, as he would say. But they could be painful to the artistic side of him, as well. There were times when, upon seeing a painting he’d spent a great deal of time to create, that entire painting would slide by on the screen in perhaps ten seconds, and he would say something regretful like, “That took me a lot of work, you know…”, his voice trailing off as if maybe a bit more lingering on the scene was in order.
A friend of some of the most influential creative people of the time, on his travels to the West Coast Franklin liked to drop in on architect and designer Charles Eames and Charles’ wife Ray at their famous 901 studio office in Santa Monica, a place that was a popular hangout for famous post-World War II artists and musicians like Elmer Bernstein. The deal was, Franklin would screen one of his documentaries and Charles and Ray in turn would run one of their film shorts like “Powers of Ten” or “Toy Trains”. By that time, the Eames had made waves in the multi-media area for their exhibits at the 1959 Moscow and the 1964 New York World’s Fairs and were working on inter-active exhibits, and they were intensely interested in and enthusiastic about Franklin’s ability to fuse fine art and social commentary in his documentaries.
Today, Franklin McMahon Sr’s legacy lives on not only in his art and films, but in the work of his children, talented artists, sculptors and photographers all, perhaps most particularly in the work of his son Mark, who seems to have captured the essence of his father’s genius but with his own unique flavor. And this is as it should be, for didn’t Mozart have a talented father as well?
John Klawitter is a writer and film director living in Los Angeles. He co-produced and directed several of Franklin McMahon Sr’s documentary films, including “McMahon’s Politicians” and “World Cities”. His fond memories of Franklin include their trips together to screen their films for Charles & Ray Eames and the work Franklin did for his documentary “The Navajos Water the Desert”. John Klawitter’s recent writing includes TINSEL WILDERNESS, 2009 Epic Author Award winner for Best Non-Fiction Book, which contains a chapter titled “Tenacity In Art” the story their adventures in Manhattan pitching the first hour of “McMahon’s Politicians” to the networks.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
DARK LANDING #9 is now live
A murderous park rangerette, the defects in divine communications, and disenfranchised dumpster ducks. Were I you, I should not wish to miss any of that.
http://johnklawitter.podomatic.com/entry/2012-02-26T08_44_28-08_00
http://johnklawitter.podomatic.com/entry/2012-02-26T08_44_28-08_00
Should God Let Women Drive Cars?
A BIT OF BACKGROUND: I wrote this brief rant in response to a troubled woman's rights website. Apparently in Saudi Arabia there is some serious sentiment backed by religious arguments (!) against women driving cars. Now I've from time to time teased my wife about this subject, ever since she backed into that tree (she claims it maliciously jumped over a few feet and smacked our car). Still, it is no joking matter in Saudi Arabia, and though I don't live there, I felt compelled to side with these women, who can never experience the thrill of zipping along with the convertible top down and the wind in their hair, much less the ordinary convenience of driving to the market rather than walking, which, in my own personal value system, certainly should be their right.
Looking around me, from what I see, the 'will of God' appears to be everywhere and in every case subject to human interpretation. To my mind this raises the probability that it is not the actual, undiluted will of Almighty God but rather, at least in part, the subjective (even if at times well-meaning) will of the less-than-almighty interpreters.
A belief system that mandates that "all things are by the will of God" is a good one for maintaining the positions of those who are in the perhaps relatively comfortable positions to interpret the Eternal Will; to cite an analogy, their situation is a bit like that of a small select bunch of happy minnows who have somehow convinced the rest of the minnows that they alone have interpreted the will of the great whale.
Laying 'the way things are' on 'the will of God' is one way to set aside the challenges of human growth. If one judges that all good will always be good and all evil will always be evil and there is nothing a person can do, then of course the next leap is to presume the will of God is to have it so. I personally do not think like that. That is not humility. That is supreme vanity far beyond what is allowed a human being, to presume to have absolute knowledge of the will of God in all things.
Now if it is the interpretation of some 'official interpreters' that God has mandated women should not be the lawful equals of men, then of course they should not drive cars. But I am suspicious of this interpretation. And further, in a world where the will of God once was that there were no cars, and now there are cars, how can it be that God willed that only men, the possibly fallible interpreters of God's will, men only may have the privilege to drive them? Forgive my suspicious nature, but this sounds terribly self-serving. Next, are we to believe males only can gather together at will to drink wine and gamble and lust and do other happy things that God has supposedly dictated that only men may do? Are we to believe men, no matter how individually stupid, are to be the masters of women? Why, minnows, why?
I don't think that we are straying from the question of everywoman's right to get behind the wheel of a Ford or a Ferrari, but rather that we are inquiring as to the heart of why things are as they are, half the world living in societies where women are treated less than as equals to men, subject to unspeakable atrocities, and even where some women are forced to seek justifying doctrines for why this must be so.
As for me posting here, I do not think you should put too much faith in my thinking. I am just a simple person, a moderately educated man, true, but just a simple person who looks for common sense solutions to everyday problems. This world we share is not as confusing as it seems, but it is a very difficult time made dangerous by the shrinking globe and the clash of cultures. We are all on a journey of exploration into the unknown. I say to you all, as I do at the end of my radio show, Be thoughtful, be kind, be patient, be true...and be safe comrade travelers...
Looking around me, from what I see, the 'will of God' appears to be everywhere and in every case subject to human interpretation. To my mind this raises the probability that it is not the actual, undiluted will of Almighty God but rather, at least in part, the subjective (even if at times well-meaning) will of the less-than-almighty interpreters.
A belief system that mandates that "all things are by the will of God" is a good one for maintaining the positions of those who are in the perhaps relatively comfortable positions to interpret the Eternal Will; to cite an analogy, their situation is a bit like that of a small select bunch of happy minnows who have somehow convinced the rest of the minnows that they alone have interpreted the will of the great whale.
Laying 'the way things are' on 'the will of God' is one way to set aside the challenges of human growth. If one judges that all good will always be good and all evil will always be evil and there is nothing a person can do, then of course the next leap is to presume the will of God is to have it so. I personally do not think like that. That is not humility. That is supreme vanity far beyond what is allowed a human being, to presume to have absolute knowledge of the will of God in all things.
Now if it is the interpretation of some 'official interpreters' that God has mandated women should not be the lawful equals of men, then of course they should not drive cars. But I am suspicious of this interpretation. And further, in a world where the will of God once was that there were no cars, and now there are cars, how can it be that God willed that only men, the possibly fallible interpreters of God's will, men only may have the privilege to drive them? Forgive my suspicious nature, but this sounds terribly self-serving. Next, are we to believe males only can gather together at will to drink wine and gamble and lust and do other happy things that God has supposedly dictated that only men may do? Are we to believe men, no matter how individually stupid, are to be the masters of women? Why, minnows, why?
I don't think that we are straying from the question of everywoman's right to get behind the wheel of a Ford or a Ferrari, but rather that we are inquiring as to the heart of why things are as they are, half the world living in societies where women are treated less than as equals to men, subject to unspeakable atrocities, and even where some women are forced to seek justifying doctrines for why this must be so.
As for me posting here, I do not think you should put too much faith in my thinking. I am just a simple person, a moderately educated man, true, but just a simple person who looks for common sense solutions to everyday problems. This world we share is not as confusing as it seems, but it is a very difficult time made dangerous by the shrinking globe and the clash of cultures. We are all on a journey of exploration into the unknown. I say to you all, as I do at the end of my radio show, Be thoughtful, be kind, be patient, be true...and be safe comrade travelers...
Sunday, September 18, 2011
Begging The Choosers
I suppose all candidates for public office pitch for pennies one way or another. It's just that I find the continuing stream of Send Money Right Now! emails from Ron Paul particularly annoying. You want me to vote for you--and for some undefined reason I'm also supposed to give you money? Mr. Paul is a particularly erudite man on constitutional matters, has America's interests at heart, and is doing better than he's ever done before. But it would be foolish to send him money, for he is not going to get the Republican nomination to run for President, and he can blame no one but himself. It's his personality, you see, or rather, his lack of it. Ron Paul has an eerie resemblance to William H. Macy in The Cooler. All he has to do is open his mouth and he sucks enthusiasm out of the room. And he doesn't stop talking until you've forgotten the question. With the sheer force of his non-personality, he overpowers you to change the channel.or head out into the parking lot to find your car. The Grand Old Party wouldn't dare put Mr. Paul in a Presidential Debate with President Obama; it would be like throwing some noble stag in tight quarters with a hungry wolf. Hey, give Obama that--he may not have any real ideas and certainly doesn't have your back, your front or your sides, but the fellow sounds his big, empty drum with all the smug confidence of a black Alex Baldwin, if you can imagine. Why do I blather on about my petty annoyance? Time is short and you already know these things.
Monday, September 5, 2011
Progressive or regressive thinking?.
Talking politics with a liberal is like trying to discuss religion with a bull-headed Baptist or a rabid Muslim. Believe me, working in show biz, one tires of it. I've come to realize nobody can make a true believer think logically or clearly. Emotional thinkers argue from feelings, not reality. They will insist their feelings are the reality. Since there is no evidence to back such claims, their voices rise, their comments become personal and belittling, and eventually they wander off to find someone of like mind to bind their wounds. Sometimes the need for survival will provide them a clarifying knock on the head, and occasionally a wandering progressive or religious follower may make it out of the swamp of pure blind empathy, recognize how badly they have been duped, and wander off, completely insane, to howl at the moon. This new state of mind is an improvement, for it allows hope back in the equation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
