Reheated (73)
Some items from the archives:
On pronouns, politeness, and the strange mental rumblings of Ms Laurie Penny.
Regarding rudeness, I’m generally polite by default, at least in person, and don’t go out of my way to needlessly put a kink in someone else’s day. I’ve had perfectly civil chats with people who regard themselves as transgender or gender-non-conforming or whatever. Nobody got upset. But what is often being asked – or demanded – is not a small thing, not in its implications.
Taken broadly, we are being asked to affirm, wholesale, a bundle of phenomena that includes not only actual gender dysphoria, whether the result of developmental anomalies or childhood molestation, but also autogynephilia, serious personality disorders, adolescent pretension, and assorted exhibitionist and unsavoury compulsions. The expectation seems to be that we should take these different phenomena, with very different moral connotations, as being one and the same thing, and then defer to them, habitually and uncritically. Which is asking rather more than can readily be agreed to.
At Middlebury College, woke piety erupts. A 74-year-old scholar is quite literally chased off campus.
Note that the rather animated protestors don’t seem too familiar with Dr Murray’s research and commentary, and as one of Middlebury’s sociology professors noted, “few, if any” of the protestors had ever read Murray’s books. Evidently, he’s nonetheless someone to be othered and to whom the students can attach the usual out-group labels – denouncing him as “sexist,” “racist,” “anti-gay,” and a “white nationalist.” (As even the briefest use of Google would reveal, Murray married a Thai woman while in the Peace Corps, has mixed-race children, has tutored inner-city black children for free, and was an early advocate of gay marriage – hardly the most obvious markers of a supposedly anti-gay white nationalist.)
But Why Aren’t People Rushing To Buy My Art?
Deep thoughts, shifting paradigms, and heads wrapped in meat.
For those who may be confounded by the profundity of the piece, a handy walk-through guide is available. Said guide points out that the performance will encourage among onlookers “a deeper level of critical thought.” Of the many ruminations that will doubtless be inspired is the following: “After seeing someone wrap their head in meat twice, does it still hold the same weight as it did the first time?”
The guide notes, rather earnestly, that the first attempt, by Mr Carvalho, to envelop his head in bread, string, and assorted meat products, prompted more amusement from the tiny audience than the subsequent repetition of it by Ms Cochrane. This is presented as an invitation to “a fundamental shift in paradigm” and some allegedly profound insight into gender politics. Or, how “different actions are read on different bodies.” Our artistic deep thinkers are seemingly unaware of the concepts of novelty and diminishing returns.
There’s more, should you crave it.
Also, open thread. Share ye links and bicker.
That’s the thing, surely?
Yes. We are discussing two different things here. As a film composer I hadn’t really had much negative opinion of him and probably (waaay back then) liked his work, as much direct attention I may have paid to it. But his taking over the Boston Pops, there was a significant change in that institution’s product. The crisp, distinct nature of the productions was turned into a kind of smoothy-blended, almost over-produced kind if thing. Similar to some of what turned my off about corporate rock like REO Speedwagon, Supertramp, (spit) Journey, etc. I recall a production of Gershwin that JW did, and I don’t think it was with the BP but I think his own (?) orchestra that was rather much in the same saccharine way. I suppose if he stuck to film scores, which is a big, big job itself, I would have a better opinion of him. But his bringing that style to the BP led me to pay a bit closer attention to his reputation in film as well. Especially in comparison to the classic film scores of Morricone or Steiner or Elmer Bernstein or any number of those whom I know but have to look up just to remember their names. And so when I google “famous film scores” I have to wade past John Williams, John Williams, and John Williams just to find them.
To be fair also, I don’t want to pretend to be some sort of classical music aficionado, nor one to discuss specific details of film scoring. But I know what I like. I (unfortunately) have only been to three or four true symphony live performances. Seeing (well hearing) quality stuff turned to syrup grates on me.
Likewise, as a feat of composition, the main theme of Superman: The Movie won’t turn heads
John Williams is a victim of the habit of directors shooting to public domain classical music, and then needing the actual score to match the beats from the proxy since otherwise the visuals are out of sync. This makes any John Williams score a fun little treasure hunt for the original work he’s adapting.
Seeing (well hearing) quality stuff turned to syrup grates on me
Rather a lot grates on you, I gather.
But in context, in the film, or as a mental revisiting of the film, it’s totally effective, quite giddying, and very much part of what made Wee Seedling Me enjoy that night at the cinema, many moons ago.
That’s a great scene from a great film. Made me smile.
That’s a great scene from a great film. Made me smile.
It does have some wonderful scenes. The music lesson – the “first day of school” – is a neat way of expressing – in a way that even children can grasp – what it is that’s happening. The visitors mimicking the constellations. And Roy’s mashed potato breakdown: “This means something… This is important.” It’s absurd and pathetic… and absolutely true.
Rather a lot grates on you, I gather.
There’s a room in Hell in which Kenny G’s rendition of John Coltrane’s arrangement of My Favorite Things is being played…
“This means something… This is important.” It’s absurd and pathetic… and absolutely true.
Heh. Yeah. I get that a lot.
I must say I am a bit unfair to JW in that I had forgotten he did one of my favorite film scene pieces, the main theme from Jaws which I nearly used as an example of such a thing perfectly done. When that movie came out I bought the soundtrack (on 8-track tape, donchaknow). Though I remember finding the other pieces on that film…again…kinda syrupy. But that is out of context of the film which really isn’t fair. In the context of a film you are working to make someone else’s major effort good. Your value is secondary. But then that’s the thing about what happens when you are free to do your own thing. I wonder if maybe it wasn’t after Star Wars that his ego was enabled to the degree that he felt the films were becoming a venue to push his career objectives. Apparently he took over the Pops in 1980. In my memory it was a bit later than that but that does coincide with my “wait a minute, who is this guy?” factor.
I must say I am a bit unfair to JW in that I had forgotten he did one of my favorite film scene pieces, the main theme from Jaws which I nearly used as an example of such a thing perfectly done.
I can’t speak to your point about Williams’ influence on other musical institutions. But I’m now trying to imagine, say, Star Wars or The Empire Strikes Back without that music.
But I’m now trying to imagine, say, Star Wars or The Empire Strikes Back without that music.
Cole Porter? Scott Joplin? Mozart? Dave Brubeck? Maybe surf rock? Pink Floyd? Nirvana?
Incidentally, there’s a pretty decent documentary about the making of Close Encounters. Including the famous one-take child reaction shot, and an attempt to make an orangutan wearing Lycra look like an alien.
Worthy of P.T. Barnum’s sideshow, a mental contortionist tries answering “a really important question”.
Worthy of P.T. Barnum’s sideshow, a mental contortionist tries answering “a really important question”.
I wonder how she would explain away the Classical Greek ideals of beauty, given that they were neither Christian nor racist and they lived millennia before modern capitalism.
I have a theory about fat: the female middle-aged figure is most often the result of having had several children. For the male sex drive, you do NOT want a woman who has already had her children, you want a woman who will have YOUR children. The round figure is a grandma figure. Not sexy.
For women, the round male doesn’t matter so much because they crave security (financial & emotional). Older (and rounder) men provide more of both.
the making of Close Encounters
Thanks for that, I’ll be watching it.
piercefilm productions has some good mini-clips of miniature effects if you’re into that sort of thing.
I wonder how she would explain away the Classical Greek ideals of beauty…
That, and the message that it is racist because blacks are generally fat*, which to one untutored in CRT would think is a tad racist in itself.
*(Our explainer said without ever having seen many actually Africans, apparently)
Thanks for that, I’ll be watching it.
If you remember enjoying the film, it’s definitely worth a peek. I did laugh at the mention of roller skates.
For women, the round male doesn’t matter so much because they crave security (financial & emotional). Older (and rounder) men provide more of both.
There is some truth to that, in the Before Times in another land it was explained to us why, much to their dismay, our younger, tanned, and buff colleagues were not having much luck with the local women was that young, tanned, and buff = field hand, pasty and fat meant rich guy.
I wonder how she would explain away the Classical Greek ideals of beauty…
What makes you think logic and reason have anything to do with any of this? When Devo put flower pots on their heads they were trying to tell you something. Consciously or not.
What makes you think logic and reason have anything to do with any of this?
Oh, I have no illusions about that. But the attempted explanations might be entertaining.
And oooh, what ccscientist and Muldoon said. That. Though I would throw rich daddy/family in there for the men. Not so much for the womens. Rich being a very relative term.
Community-based violence intervention program.
further on flat stomachs: this is what you get when you separate the very concept of having children from your sexuality, when you can’t even see the obvious about the male/female dichotomy. So many traits of women can only be understood by noting that for 2 million years many children died of disease so women were pregnant for decades just to prevent extinction. Now when birth control is there and people are not getting married, they think all these things are just arbitrary. They are not.
The attempted explanations might be entertaining
In the Era of Lowered Expectations, yeah.
So many traits of women can only be understood by noting that for 2 million years
Once you understand evolutionary psychology, much of human behaviour becomes very, very simple.
As for the “women prefer old, rich and pasty to young, buff and tanned”….no. No, they don’t. That’s a social construction. Take away the need to find a secure provider – say, by providing generous child and social support benefit payments – and what you get is rampant hybristophilia.
Community based violence intervention…
But…why is there video of this, starting before anything interesting happened?
hybristophilia
I am not familiar with this word. Does it mean “friendship with bounders” or something like that?
OED, s.v. hybris: Themis is the servant or companion of Zeus… Her opposite is Hybris (ὕβρις), insolent encroachment upon the rights of others.
OED, s.v. -philia comb. form: Ancient Greek words in -ϕιλία are used to denote friendship of a type characterized by the first element (as in λυκοϕιλία a wolf’s friendship, i.e. false friendship, χρηστοϕιλία friendship of good men), or to denote the state of having friends, characterized by the first element (as in ὀλιγοϕιλία fewness of friends, πολυϕιλία abundance of friends). There is an isolated example, as a variant reading, in Hellenistic Greek, of a word in this form denoting ‘love of’ something specified by the first element: χωροϕιλία love of a place or country.
Question for U.K. residents: does autocorrect there change bounders to blunders? It does here in Yanksia. Maybe more truth than poetry.
As for the “women prefer old, rich and pasty to young, buff and tanned”….no. No, they don’t.
The operative words were “other land” which was not a first world country, and yes, there they do. Many such cases.