I feel depressed whenever a good band is used to sell anything that isn’t an Apple product. Does it mean that indie music is becoming mainstream? Does it  mean that some of your alt friends actually graduated from design school and are making television ads? Either way, I’m a little sad.

Cold Cave in a Radio Shack commercial.

Passion Pit in a Palm Pixi commercial.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Ken Blackwell

Will Time Magazine Apologize to Glenn Beck?

“Government Distrust and a Dead Census Taker.” That was the headline of a September 25th story in TIME about the death of 51-year old Bill Sparkman. Sparkman’s naked body had been found in a remote area of Harlan County, Kentucky, with the word “FED” scrawled on his chest. Sparkman had been hanged. Immediately, TIME and others began to speculate. Had Sparkman been hanged by anti-government, anti-Obama violent right wingers? TIME led the speculation, taking the opportunity to drag in Glenn Beck:  Will Time Magazine Apologize to Glenn Beck?  Complete Story

I just received my weekly copy of  Time magazine.  The article by Joe Klein caught my attention immediately.  Klein has been a luke warm supporter of President Obama, so I wanted to read what he had to say. Klein makes this assessment:

Over the past few weeks, Barack Obama has been criticized for the following:

He didn’t go to Berlin for the 20th anniversary of the Wall’s coming down.

He didn’t make a forceful enough statement on the 30th anniversary of the U.S. diplomats’ being taken hostage in Iran.

He didn’t show sufficient mournfulness, at first, when the Fort Hood shootings took place, and he was namby-pamby about the possibility that the shootings were an act of jihad.

He has spent too little time focusing on unemployment.

He bowed too deeply before the Japanese Emperor.

He allowed the Chinese to block the broadcast of his Shanghai town-hall meeting.

He allowed the Chinese President to bar questions at their joint press conference (a moment memorably satirized by Saturday Night Live).

 He didn’t come back with any diplomatic victories from Asia.

He allowed Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the other 9/11 plotters to be tried in the U.S. criminal-justice system rather than by the military.

He has dithered too long on Afghanistan.

He has devoted too much attention to — and given congressional Democrats too much control over — health care reform, an issue that is peripheral to a majority of Americans.

Klein then goes on to give his take on the piled on criticism of Barack H. Obama:

As a fully licensed pundit, I have the authority to weigh in here … but I demur. Oh, I could sling opinions about every one of the events cited above — some were unfortunate — but it would matter only if I could discern a pattern that illuminates Obama’s presidency. The most obvious pattern, however, is the media’s tendency to get overwrought about almost anything. Why, for example, is the 20th anniversary of the Berlin Wall demolition so crucial that it requires a President’s presence? Which recent U.S. President has gotten the Chinese to agree to anything big? (In fact, Obama has secured significant diplomatic coöperation from the Chinese on North Korea, Afghanistan and Pakistan.) Was his deep bow indicative of anything other than his physical fitness? (My midsection, sadly, prevents the appearance of obsequiousness in such circumstances.)

(Snip)

So it is way too early to make pronouncements on Obama’s fate. One pattern that can be limned from the recent overseas controversies is that this President has a tendency to err in the direction of respect toward other countries. This is a witting reaction to the Bush Administration’s tendency to diss our allies and insult — or invade — our enemies. It is a long game, which will yield results, or not, over time. After a first year spent demonstrating a new comity, Obama has gained the global credibility to get tough — on Iran, for example — in his second year. But the real evaluation of Obama’s debut must wait for the results of the two biggest problems he’s tackling: his decision on Afghanistan and the congressional attempt to pass health care reform

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1942832,00.html#ixzz0YBhItpPI

Video: Brutales Baby-Casting in dem Kinofilm “Brüno”

Eine der besten Szenen aus der wirklich-nicht-so-schlechten “Borat”-Fortsetzung “Brüno” zeigt den Komiker Sacha Baron Cohen in der Rolle des österreichischen Fashion-Typen Brüno beim Casting potentieller Baby-Models. Es ist eine wunderbar ambivalente Szene (Ist das noch lustig? Ist das schon traurig?), die zu entlarven scheint, wie sehr einige Eltern bereit sind, ihre Kleinkinder absurden Situationen und Gefahren auszusetzen, nur um sie (und sich) als Models berühmt und interessant zu machen: “Könnten wir bei dem Fotoshooting mit ihrem Kind Bienen und Hornissen verwenden?” — “Ja, klar!” — “Was ist mit brennendem Phosphor?” — “Oh, mein Baby liiiebt brennendes Phosphor.” Und so weiter.

Ganz abwegig ist die Idee des brutalen Babyfotoshoots (das im Film am Ende unter anderem ein biblisch inszeniertes Foto eines gekreuzigten Kleinkindes ergeben wird) nicht. Als Beispiel aus dem echten Leben fällt mir dazu als Erstes die Fotografin Jill Greenberg ein, die für ihre Fotostrecke “Crying Babies” (hier als Bildergalerie, hier Greenbergs Website) ihre Models allerdings offenbar nicht schlimmer gequält hat, als ihnen Süßigkeiten oder Spielzeug wegzunehmen und sie so zum Weinen zu bringen. Trotzdem hat sie für ihre dramatischen Porträts der “Crying Babies” einiges an Unverständnis und Widerspruch abbekommen (hier zum Beispiel, in bester Blog-Manier formuliert: “Jill Greenberg is a sick woman who should be arrested and charged with child abuse”).

Es hat Jill Greenberg dabei wahrscheinlich nicht wirklich geholfen, dass einige Fotos heulender Kinder mit Bildunterschriften wie “Four More Years” im Netz kursierten — eine Anspielung auf die Wiederwahl von George W. Bush im Jahr 2004. Und auch nicht, dass sie später Bilder des Republikaner-Präsidentschaftskandidaten John McCain entstellte und den von seinen Anhängern als Helden gefeierten Veteran und früheren Kriegsgefangenen als blutrünstiges Monster darstellte.

(Harmloser ist ihre Abneigung gegenüber konservativen Ikonen in der auf ihrer Website ausgestellten Serie “Shiny Faces” umgesetzt, in der sie den  TV-Moderator Glenn Beck im Stile ihrer “Crying Babies” inszeniert. Der konservative Dampfplauderer Beck ist bekannt dafür, dass er in seiner Sendung aus Liebe und Angst um Amerika schon mal zu weinen beginnt — d.h., wenn er nicht gerade Barack Obama als Rassisten bezeichnet.)

Nächste Frage: Ob man Baby-Models mit der frühen Prominenz wirklich einen Gefallen tut? Spencer Elden, der 1991 als kleiner Junge nackt, gierig und samt Penis auf dem Cover des erfolgreichen Nirvana-Albums “Nevermind” zu sehen war, scheint heute mit der Berühmtheit ganz gut klar zu kommen: “I feel like I’m the world’s biggest porn star”, wird er zitiert. Zehn Jahre nach dem Erfolg von “Nevermind” ließ es sich sogar in der gleichen Pose noch mal fotografieren, diesmal trug er dann allerdings doch lieber eine Hose.

Offenbar ist es jedenfalls so, dass die Artdirektoren dieser Welt von nackten/heulenden/gepeinigten Baby-Models nicht lassen können. Und, dass es genug Eltern gibt, die bei dem Spiel mitmachen. Aktuell ziert das dramatische Foto eines heulenden, kaum begleideten Kleinkinds das Titelbild des TIME-Magazine, das eine kaum weniger dramatisch übertitelte Geschichte bewirbt: Einen Jahrzehntsrücklick 2000–2009 namens “The Decade From Hell”. Ob sich da in zehn Jahren mal ein Teenager drüber ärgern wird?

(Das TIME-Foto ist übrigens gar kein Foto, sondern ein Video-Still. Aber egal.)

 Ray Salomone, Personal Trainer and Wellness Activist 

After John Cloud wrote the now famous article saying that exercise doesn’t help with weight loss, I contacted him and offered a free workout. Here’s his thoughts after an hour in Central Park with me.

 Ray Salomone’s workout was by far the most intense workout of my life. At some point I stopped being able to think clearly, but I know we did lots of pushups in the dirt. By the end, I looked like a high-school football player who needed to puke. But some of the skills I learned in that one workout–boxing moves, doing most sets to voluntary exhaustion, focusing on total-body exercises rather than trying to isolate particular muscles–remain part of my workouts even now. Thanks Ray! You scare me, but in a good way.       John Cloud- Time Magazine

Ray Salomone   Personal Trainer and Wellness Activist

Eat Fresh, Whole Foods. Exercise Intensely

PLAY ROUGH AND LIVE LIKE YOU MEAN IT!!!

Coming Soon to bookstores: The Greco Roman Road to Wellness

by Ray Salomone and Dr. Katina Ioannidis

Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/Greco-Roman-Road-Wellness-Old-World-Times/dp/0982139209/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1243604904&sr=8-1

 During my vast amounts of free time, I am also a fiction writer. My first novel, PEACE BE WITH YOU, a psychological drama of addiction and redemption, was published in 2007.

I have sold over 8,000 copies on the streets of NYC.This is the Amazon link:

http://www.amazon.com/Peace-Be-You-Raimondo-Salomone/dp/142414812X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256656950&sr=8-1

My next novel, CITY WIDE, will be finished soon.

This Time Magazine cover article caught my attention while I was browsing at Barnes and Noble bookseller tonight.

Helicopter Parents: The Backlash Against Overparenting – TIME.

Nancy Gibbs details a shift in parenting style–from helicopter to free range parents. Some are rebelling against our current penchant for over-managing and over-protecting every arena in a kids life.

One dad remarked on his epiphany after his son confronted dad’s determination to find his son an art tutor to help him draw even better: “He looks at me like I’m from outer space,” Honore says. “I just wanna draw’ he tells me. ‘Why do grownups have to take over everything?’” A significant part of growing up is learning, through discovery and mistakes, how to own the responsibility for our own choices.

Our generation of parents tend to miss the needs of kids in two extremes. One is to leave them alone way too much while we tend to our own agenda. The other is to micro-manage and over-control. Both result in a sort of abandonment of not only our core role as parents but of the child desperately needing our guidance and leadership toward their own autonomy.

Launching kids into adulthood happens naturally when we stay accessible through two way communication, flexible negotiation, and warm relationships.

    I consistently contend that liberals are hypocrites and that the contemporary, predominantly liberal, Democrat Party, possesses a hypocrisy based ideology.

Hypocrisy is so ingrained in liberalism that it seeps into everything from the way they do business to the policies they promote and the double standards they operate under.

For example. A $400 million dollar deficit after 8 years of President G.W. Bush drew repeated public denunciations by the left and cries of irresponsibility (which is actually true) but an epic $1.85 trillion deficit in 10 months under President Obama is seen as a good thing by liberals now.

Liberals claimed that Clarence Thomas was unfit for the Supreme Court because a comment he made about pubic hair on a can of coke inspired one Anita Hill to accuse him of sexual harassment. But according to these same liberals, the dozens of sexual harassment charges against President B.J Clinton, including those settled out of court, had no bearing on how fit he was to be Commander-and-Chief.

The list is endless, but recently I was struck by a group of liberal, civilian, conscientious objectors who oppose our national security interests and the war against the enemies confronting us.

WarTaxBoycott.org proudly promotes their “2009 War Tax Boycott” and they even ask you to participate in their 2010 War Tax Boycott. I was floored by the message this site offered. What shocked me was not their total refusal to understand why we are at war, or their unwillingness to accept the fact that what we are in the middle of is borne out of necessity (as President Obama admits). No. What made my eyes pop out was the utterly ridiculous level of hypocrisy they confirmed.

Here is some of what the site explained:

“$141,696 redirected from war to projects that serve humanity!

Half the signers to the 2009 War Tax Boycott refused to pay federal income taxes to the IRS and are giving the money to Direct Aid Iraq, Common Ground Health Clinic, or hundreds of other projects of their choice.”

Here’s the kicker…………….

“Other signers have chosen to reduce their income so that none of their money will go to war — with the added benefit of less consumerism.”

I was astonished by the liberal admission of the fact that less income in the pockets of individuals results in “less consumerism”.

Now in the case of this Brooklyn based pit of hypocrisy, they see less consumerism as a good thing because the reduced purchase power and lack of profit in America, in their small, warped minds, is an added sign of protest against our national security.  However; the bottom line is that these liberals clearly connect less money in the pockets of taxpayers with less consumerism. So another words if one were to be allowed to keep more of the money they earned, they would spend more and their would be more of that much hoped for consumerism.

Is this not the exact same point they argue against when they denounce tax cuts?

In the meantime, while you have a portion of the Democrat Party refusing to pay their taxes because of our defense efforts, you have a leading liberal, Congressman David Obey, demanding that we create a “war tax”.

Are liberals actually this confused or are they really as stupid as they sound and act?

But just to accentuate the undeniability of liberal hypocrisy, I should mention that people like Congressman David Obey and Joe Klein, the liberal, so-called journalist of Time, are currently trying to argue that a “war tax” is patriotic, yet, at the same time, do they call it unpatriotic when  liberals refuse to pay any taxes, as demonstrated by the 2009 War Tax Protest group?

The endless hypocrisy of the left is painfully obvious and incredibly obscene.  But if you really want to blow a gasket,  check out what Joe Klein had to say about Congressman Obey’s war tax.  Not only does it add to my point, it also demonstrates the blatant level of political insincerity that liberals possess.  Klein’s brief opinion of the war tax reveals the real reason behind it. 

It is an attempt, on the part of the left, to exploit the war effort and turn it into a wedge issue to attack Republicans with.  And we all know it!  After all, do any of us believe that the same government which claims that stimulus dollares are creating jobs in Congressional Districts that do not exist , is actually going to insure us that their war tax goes to the war effort?   Absolutely not! 

These hypocrites really need to stop the lies and put an end to the games they’re playing.

*Jakarta Globe, 13 December 2008

It is noon when Christine Hakim makes an entrance on the staircase of a hotel on Bali Island. The weather is balmy and the air has a faint smell of salt. Hakim wears a batik shirt with a cloud pattern and a jade-green lizard-skin tote bag slung over her shoulder. Her signature streak of green hair is barely noticeable when pulled tightly back.
Hakim runs into Trade Minister Mari Elka Pangestu, who has just addressed a conference, at the reception desk.
The press immediately swarm around them. “Mbak Christine!” the photographers and journalists call out.
Hakim answers questions with good humor and the poise that comes from being in the public eye for more than three decades.
“There is still no one in the film industry who can rival her,” whispers a journalist.

Since Hakim launched her acting career in Teguh Karya’s “Cinta Pertama” (First Love) in 1973, barely an unkind word has been written about her in the media.
It is not hard to see why. “As I age, my maternal side develops. I treat them like they are my children, even the older journalists,” Hakim says. “I jest with them, pretending to be difficult. They in turn try to coax me, as a child would coax their mother for a treat, to give them an interview,” she adds with a wink.
After the press conference, Hakim heads for the airport. The appearance of her very famous face — the vermilion lips, the warm eyes under darkened lashes, the beauty spot — causes many people to do a double take.
Besides being a screen icon, Hakim was the first Indonesian to be invited to sit on the jury of the prestigious Cannes International Film Festival and she also graced the cover of TIME magazine as one of their Asian heroes of 2004 for her contributions to film and society. Yet it is with a deep sigh that she sums up her life in the limelight in one word: “heavy.”
“It was my never my intention to end up this way. I just wanted to be a good person,” she says, referring to her humanitarian work.
“These are the consequences of the decisions I have made throughout my life. So I have to be consistent with my choices,” Hakim says. “In a way it is a moral burden — if I choose to let go of my commitments — because at times they involve the livelihoods of others.”
Hakim’s compassion for others and her nationalism are evident in the roles she has chosen to play in films such as “Daun Di Atas Bantal” (Leaf on a Pillow), about the lives of street children; “Serambi” (Verandah), about the aftermath of the tsunami in Aceh; and “Cut Nyak Dhien,” about an Acehnese freedom fighter.
Hakim is also an advocate for public education and children’s welfare. “If I can help someone who is in need — and release them from their troubles — that is what makes me smile,” she says. “When I am in trouble and help comes my way, it is an incredible feeling. Because I have felt that, I want others to feel the same.”
In 2008, Hakim was appointed by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, or Unesco, to be a Goodwill Ambassador for Teacher Education in Southeast Asia.
Her own foundation, The Christine Hakim Foundation, provides nutrition for malnourished children in West Java Province. “We [as public figures] do not always have to contribute to the community, but perhaps I want to give meaning to my own life. I feel if I do things only for myself then my life is less meaningful. But if my life can give meaning to others, then it has more purpose.”
A friend decides to fly back to Jakarta with Hakim and takes the last available seat — in economy. Without a second thought, Hakim gives up her business-class seat to her friend.
“I much prefer sitting in the back of the plane,” she says, waiting patiently for the crowded line to move forward. “Besides, it is the safest place in case of a crash.”
At lunchtime, Hakim takes out a brown paper package of rice from her favorite street stall in Bali. She politely refuses a stewardess’s offer of utensils.
Her down-to-earth attitude — sitting in economy, eating rice with her hands — appears to puzzle the other passengers, who watch her constantly. “Acting is a profession, just like any other. Life does not only encompass acting,” Hakim says. “The gist of life is not there [in film] but comes back to my existence as a human being. There is no difference between one person and another. We all have pluses and minuses. I do not feel I am better than anyone else.”
Arriving at Jakarta’s Soekarno-Hatta airport, Hakim sails through immigration, past a sea of officials’ smiles. “The kindness of others makes my life easier, but it has also become a burden for me. People are nice to me because they appreciate, respect and believe in me. In that sense, I have to tread carefully so as to not disappoint anyone.”
The arrival hall is almost empty — aside from a film crew on break. Their camera and sound rigs are strewn around the area. Hakim recognizes a few of the crew members and stops to chat. They discuss a movie that is currently in production in Jakarta. The verdict is not good. Hakim shakes her head sadly.
“That film has been rife with problems from the start,” she says.
Once in her car, Hakim sinks back into her seat, clearly travel-weary. “On three occasions I wanted to stop making films” she discloses, pausing for thought. “But my soul is in film. As humans, we all have a calling. We all have our own duties to fulfill — of that I am convinced. Whenever I face a major predicament, in other aspects of my life positive things, such as recognition for my work, appear. So how can I stop?”
These awards symbolize people’s hopes and appreciation — their support. And so I continue,” Hakim says.
Back at her office in South Jakarta, Hakim rolls out a mat and begins to pray. The soft recitation of bismillah — in the name of Allah — resonates throughout the room. After praying , she changes into a boldly patterned top and a ruby-red Spanish-style tiered skirt.
Hakim says she does not find it hard to be a woman working in a patriarchal culture.
“I do not want to be a man. My femininity has become my strength. It sets me apart from men. It is an asset,” she says.
“In life, you have to be able to be tender and hard. I can be hard, believe it or not,” she says.
Darkness hangs over the capital as Hakim makes her way to a gallery opening, where she is guest of honor.
“In the end, it is my life,” she says. “But when people already respect and believe in me, they only want to see me as that person [they see onscreen]. They need to understand that I am also human and can also make mistakes. “
She reaches her destination and glides out of the car with a grand smile for the wall of photographers who greet her. Then Christine Hakim disappears into the throng.

(photo: AFP/Mychele Danau)

In 1951, Iran’s first democratically elected leader, Mohammad Mossadegh, was recognized by Time Magazine and the world. He led his life based on the ideals of democracy and Iran’s sovereignty. Now, another Iranian who gave her life striving for freedom and justice needs to be recognized.

Her name is Neda.

Time Magazine awards the title to the person who “most affected the news and our lives, for good or ill, and embodied what was important about the year.” Neda moved us to tears, gave us hope and moved millions to take action – all without uttering a word.

Her impact is undeniable. She has come to symbolize the struggle for democracy in Iran.

The campaign to nominate Neda for Time’s Person of the year began by ordinary people in Iran. NIAC wants to amplify their voice and enable you to do the same.

The Iranian government has done their best to quell her impact – calling her murder staged and refusing to let people visit her unmarked grace. Her life was ended by a single bullet, but you can make her live forever through a single email.

Tell Time Magazine’s Managing Editor, Richard Stengel to recognize Neda’s impact by making her the Time Magazine’s 2009 Person of the Year.

Time magazine has just produced its list of what it regards as the top 50 inventions of 2009.

Ares rocket off to the stars

No doubt the first of many top list for the year and for the decade,its top of the hit parade is NASA’s Ares rocket which the magazine describes as

The best and smartest and coolest thing built in 2009 — a machine that can launch human beings to cosmic destinations we’d never considered before — is the fruit of a very old family tree, one with branches grand, historic and even wicked.

Editor’s Note: This is part III in a series  of posts on The Exorcist and Rosemary’s Baby.  For part I of the series, scroll down or click here.  For part II, scroll down or click here.  As mentioned before the first post: I reveal many plot points from these films, so please watch them before reading.

In my previous posts on Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist, I touched upon some of the ways in which these films exploit the uncanny feelings we experience in relation to our own bodies, as well as how these films may have a comment on the ways in which contemporary power structures terrorize and appropriate the female body.   In this continuation of the larger discussion on Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist, I am interested in investigating how these films might also be mining some horror from the inherently uncomfortable disconnect we all have between our minds and our bodies.

In support of this notion, I will posit that the eeriest things in life are not often the things prowling around outside your home at night, nor are they the things coming down from outer space to apprehend unsuspecting sleepers, and certainly they are not pitchfork-wielding goblins reveling in a fiery orgy of sin below the earth.  On the contrary, the eeriest things in life often originate within the confines of our own skulls.  Throughout our history, we humans have made a habit of projecting the weird things going on in our own psyches outwardly, thereby attributing anomalous or unsavory behavior or phenomena to demons, witches and the like.  For instance, Mary Beth Norton makes a compelling argument in her 2002 book In the Devil’s Snare, that the Salem Witch Trials toward the end of the 17^th Century can be largely attributed to the anxieties and other psychological ramifications of frontier life, and specifically the fear of Native American attacks on European settlements.  The dark-skinned men lurking in the unfamiliar forests, along with the constant bloodshed that was inherent to that time and place, created a fear that was coupled with an already-present collective belief in witches, demons and unknown evils lurking in the shadows.  While these settlers did have actual danger prowling outside their homes, they were not aware that the reach of Native American influence reached through the walls of their homes into their minds, leading to irrational behavior and decision-making.  Those weren’t demons in the woods, those were people tired of being slaughtered and otherwise molested by strangely-dressed white people.

The point is that our own minds are the source of our greatest terrors.  And historically, as with the Salem Witch Trials example above, it has been  much easier to explain away the most uncomfortable or undesirable aspects of our lives with a little bit of supernatural belief and magical thinking.  The most powerful of these supernatural belief systems are the monotheistic religions which, although they are very much thriving to this day, are much more difficult to accept absolutely than they were, say, 500 years ago.  Magical thinking was a pat way to explain away events and circumstances that otherwise were baffling or anxiety-provoking.  With scientific knowledge skyrocketing in the latter half of the 19^th Century and through the 20^th Century, it became much more difficult to blame everything on witches, angels, demons and god(s).  In this vein, both Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist share a subtheme of religious faith and the loss thereof.  Father Karras, the central priest character in The Exorcist (although not the “Exorcist” referred to in the title), is wrestling with his own loss of faith.  Father Karras resides in a slummy area of Washington DC, with poverty and squalor constituting his day-to-day world and, along with this, he shares his small apartment with this ailing mother, who eventually is forced to move into a mental institution brimming with the psychologically anomalous.  Karras finds it difficult to rectify these realities with his Catholic beliefs and the demon possessing Regan exploits this fact.  In Rosemary’s Baby, one scene has the camera conspicuously linger on the April 8^th, 1966 cover of Time magazine.  The cover simply features the question “Is God Dead?” in bold red letters over a black background.  This was an actual cover of Time that was attached to an article that stated that the age of religion was essentially out the door.  Rosemary herself, when asked by Roman if she is religious, states, “I was brought up Catholic, but now I don’t know”.

Both films take as their setting a 20^th Century backdrop that is turning more toward medical, scientific and psychological knowledge to assist with problems of the body and mind instead of relying upon supernatural paradigms.  Until recent modern history, many of us have told ourselves stories about the ethereal soul and its dominion over the base, corrupted body.  The soul is said to be made of otherworldly material that is unfortunately tainted by the fleshy, gooey spaceship that it must possess in order to traverse through our inherently dirty world.  If one begins to accept the idea that we – every part of us – are of this world and then supplants the soul idea with this way of thinking, then the means by which one thinks of oneself and the world becomes dramatically altered.  This paradigmatic shift would be seismically uncomfortable, and it is my contention that Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist place themselves firmly in the fault line created from just such a shift.

In his wonderfully entertaining 2007 film The Pervert’s Guide to the Cinema, Slavoj Zizek shares some of his thoughts on modern cinema from a philosophical perspective that is rooted in the ideas of famed French psychoanalytic thinker Jacques Lacan.  In his film, Zizek pontificates on Ridley Scott’s Alien and claims that this film derives its power, particularly regarding the iconic scene in which an alien baby hatches from the stomach of its human host, from the idea that humans are essentially alien intelligences with a human body as a host.  We humans are uncomfortable in our own skins because of a fundamental disconnect; we tolerate our bodies, but we must also misrecognize our bodies as something different from ourselves in order to get by.  This disconnect is much easier to handle when one has, for instance, the Christian notion of the soul which advises comfortingly that there is no need to worry, that it’s right to fear your body, and that it’s really okay that you will die someday, for everything will be taken care of because your personality is actually not of this world to begin with.  For psychoanalysis as well as for Christianity, we are essentially ghosts inside a machine, or aliens inside of spaceships.  Christianity tells us that our alien souls will someday rejoin the Mothership (Fathership?)  in the sky, whereas psychoanalysis offers no such happy ending.  For psychoanalysis, life is weird and then you die.

Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist generate some wonderful creepiness by interjecting antiquated notions of Soul/Body and Good/Evil into a modern, scientifically-advanced setting.  One can have every priest and psychologist on call, but life will never cease to be strange.  It’s unfortunate that this basic concept is lost on many contemporary horror filmmakers.  These filmmakers spend too much time on computer graphics and convoluted story lines and not enough time looking into the mirror and contemplating the stranger staring back.

Note: I’m thinking there’s one more post on these two films on the way.  I’m thinking the next post will be about domestic spaces and antagonistic furniture in Rosemary’s Baby and The Exorcist.

Last week, I attended a networking event hosted by Fusion Detroit. Hoping to walk away with some new connections, and another professional development organization…what I found was much more interesting than I could have expected.

Why is TIME magazine in Detroit?

Steven Gray of Time Magazine was the guest speaker for Fusion’s meeting this month. He is the only full-time staff writer living in Detroit over the course of the next year reporting on Detroit for Time. First, I want to take you through his question and answer series highlighting very interesting points made by Gray and Fusion members. Then, I will ask a series of questions regarding my reaction to Time’s presence here asking for your opinion.

Just before July 4, 2009, Gray’s editor apporached him with the Detroit project, and he said that his first question was, “Why?” This is when the assignment began: Why is Time in  Motown?”

The project idea came from two editors visiting Detroit on ad calls on separate occasions. They saw something that shocked them, things they had never seen before, things they thought America should know about. It wasn’t long before Gray was here living in the Time house noticing shocking things for himself.

One of his first stories was on personal protection patrols instead of Detroiters trusting their police force. This was something he had never seen before. In the neighborhood of the Time house, programs like the neighborhood watch had employed security to patrol the streets and watch their homes. Appalled, he began to write. This story came from living in the middle of a particular happening.

Another instance, Gray mentioned was disturbing to him was when he called 911. There was a small incident by the Time house and he called the police. He said it took two phone calls and 45 minutes before the police arrived. Expressing his disgrace with some of his neighbors he noticed that they were shocked that he was shocked.

While he said that some of his stories have come from just being a resident of Detroit, he mentioned that he finds his other stories by staying informed. That is when the question arose that made this discussion take a turn. “What is a normal day like for you?”

His answer:

• 5 a.m. Wake Up
• 5 – 7:30 a.m. read local newspapers, blogs and workout
• 7:30 a.m. figures out the story for the day and begins to hit the phones, carry out some field reporting and writes the story
• 6:30 – 7:30 p.m. he finishes up his story if it takes one day (did mention that some stories may take a week or even a month to get all of the pieces together) and then goes to sleep

This timeline was my first red flag for a number of reasons. One reason is that he is living here, getting the facts and reporting what is going on in Detroit, however, he goes to sleep before some people even get off of work. Oh and as you can see, this doesn’t leave much time for socializing, going to bars, enjoying Detroit’s entertainment sector. So if you are not getting the stories from real people who live and work in Detroit, who are you getting your story from?

Later, another questioned asked by another Fusion member: “How do you stay unbiased waking up reading the local media everyday?”

He answered, “I am still a journalist, I do my own reporting. And I don’t believe in objectivity.”

Having a journalism degree, this bothered me. Objectivity was always instilled in journalism students. Otherwise, you form an opinion then find ways to back that opinion up with certain facts. How dare an outsider come to a city like Detroit, and form an opinion, find facts to support that opinion, then share his feelings with the whole world?

Now while I did have problems with some of the things that he said, there were also some very interesting quotes that I took away from Gray.

• “America is not concerned with what is happening in society.” He was explaining that the Detroit project isn’t a profit-driven project and in no way did the Detroit cover of Time sell like if they put Britney Spears or Barack Obama on the cover.
• “What is happening in Detroit is a possibility in other cities” and other cities should be paying more attention. The context surrounding this quote steered from Fusion members asking if all he was covering was negative stories. His spin on this answer included him saying repeatedly that he wasn’t here to “cover positive or negative stories,” he was here to report the truth. And he saw the truth as sort of a framework for other cities to see the possibilities of something like self-destruction.

In no way am I bashing Time magazine for being in Detroit. One Time writer actually covered a very positive story in Detroit. Karen Dybis spent a day on The Salvation Army of Southeast Michigan’s Bed and Bread Truck reporting on how this truck feeds people in some of the most impoverished neighborhoods of Detroit. More positive articles may be found at Times Detroit Blog. I just don’t know how Gray, in particular, is going to be able to get real stories when he isn’t talking to real people.

However, this Fusion meeting did give him the forum to meet some very positive, passionate, successful people in Detroit. Here are some of the reasons Fusion members gave to him as to why people stay in Detroit despite all of these negatives that he was talking about:

• People leave Detroit because they don’t have a purpose here.
• People stay here because they want to build. They are connected here with family, the future (see benefit in building here and see that the resources needed to build begins here), etc.
• Detroit is an open landscape where people are looking for innovation–community will support new, creative ideas.
• “A great place to fail.” Other places you start a business and it fails and you are written off by that community. Here, in Detroit, you fail and people say get up and try again.
• There is a creative, pure, collaborative energy here that is contagious.
• The final reason was something that they close every Fusion meeting with. Detroit was always the first place to do something–from escape from slavery to hear good music. This country may not be where it is if it weren’t for Detroit.

As you can see from my previous posts, I am a lover of Detroit, so when I hear negative things about Detroit especially from people from outside of the city, it really gets under my skin. So I have a series of questions for you that I hope to get your feedback on:

1. Am I being too hard on Steven Gray? Is he just doing his job? Or do you agree with me when I say that he is a biased, misinformed writer that has too large of an audience to not be presenting the most accurate information?
2. Why do you think people stay in Detroit? Why are you still here? Or why did you leave?
3. Have you seen any of the Time articles? Which one stuck out to you?

Other than that, I would love to hear your feedback on anything you have read. The Fusion Detroit meeting was one of my first, and it is not my last. Until next time…

Many people questioned my criticism of sign language for infants in my last post. Let me try to reframe my statements so that my intentions are interpreted as I mean them to be. Sign language is a skill that is encouraged by well-intentioned parents. Their children may very well be enriched by the experience. Signing will most certainly not harm children (other than possible language delay), but the evidence is mixed as to it’s overall benefit [abstract].

While those parents who point to the potential value of signing  are certainly valid, their disagreements are not relevant to my argument that baby signing for children who are not deaf is an unnecessary skill that has been marketed to parents who are eager to nudge their children toward success.

I am no more disapproving of parents who sign with their offspring than they are of me for not signing. Different parents try different things for different reasons, so my comments were not meant to judge others for making their choices. Put simply, I’m questioning whether parents are being pressured to sign, whether signing has become a marketing scheme, and whether it’s optimal to teach an insular language before a community language. For instance, a man recently spent three years teaching his baby Klingon. One could argue that teaching a fictional alien language is his choice, that Klingon may benefit his child’s intelligence, but even still, I would be annoyed if story time were to be rephrased in the insular language of Klingon (and yes, I know the analogy is slightly unfair, but I’m using it anyway).

All this brings me to the latest edition of Time Magazine, which has a feature article about helicopter parenting, which reminded me of other well-intentioned parenting choices in which I have differed; choices that would have me contradicting the good intentions of school districts, parents, friends, and family.

For example, why are kids being denied recess? Isn’t play an important skill that prevents academic stagnation? Time Magazine mentioned the National Institute for Play as an advocacy group for recreation and recess, and I really want to echo their agenda here. Let the students out for play!

Time Magazine also mentions Lenore Skenazy,  of the Free-Range Kids blog, who makes it her mission to question the stifling culture of over-protection that has smothered many children in a layer of bubble wrap, despite the evidence that our communities are safer than ever. Some parents are worried about giving their children the freedom and responsibility to ride their bikes a few blocks to school. I would never overtly judge the individual parents who wish to keep their children safe by driving them, but I would question the culture of concern that has branded pedestrian school traffic as dangerous and unsafe.

Time Magazine has even given space to authors, John Buell and Etta Kralovec, who advocate in their book The End of Homework that children need less work to take home and more time to be kids. I happen to agree with this, but I wouldn’t use my opinion to judge my friends who spend several hours every night helping their children by reviewing and assisting with the massive amounts of homework they bring home.

It’s hard to strike a balance between questioning of parenting choices and hating on those choices. I know that this blog has crossed that line in the past, but that will inevitably happen when writing about parenting. I don’t apologize for taking a hard line in favor of vaccines, but there are other times when people have rejected my entire blog because one post challenged their lifestyle (see spanking article). I feel bad about the times when controversial topics have turned readers away, but the feedback and dialogue provided by you are always welcome, even if we passionately disagree.

For a more hard-lined opinion on the topic, see George Carlin’s take:

From the home office in the restarted Cern Large Hadron Collider along the French-Swiss border…

#1: What Shaun White & Snowboarding Can Teach You About #Innovation http://ow.ly/E8h7 Get exposure for ideas early, so others can digest impact

#2: Managing Employee Innovation Communities (via Spigit blog) http://bit.ly/3SREBr #innovation #e20

#3: City of Manor’s “citizens’ innovation” project (using Spigit) is featured on WhiteHouse.gov blog: http://ow.ly/DURl #gov20

#4: RT @CarolineDangson #IDC Social Survey: workers say they use IM for ‘collaboration’ & social networks for ’sharing’ – thinking about diff

#5: RT @rotkapchen: RT @wimrampen Social Media Disrupts Decision-Making Process http://bit.ly/2KTUIz (via @GrahamHill)

#6:  RT @tjkeitt Starting the process of researching #e2.0 technology pushed into business processes (CRM, ERP, project management, etc.). This is the future.

#7: RT @kevinmarks says @Caterina “Google never got social software – Knol means you have to write a whole article; wikipedia combines tiny contributions” #w2e

#8: Pitching Sequoia? They want to know which deadly sin your company lets customers indulge in http://ow.ly/DGn1 by @glennkelman

#9: Checking out: The Awesomeness Manifesto http://ow.ly/DmID by @umairh Much to love in that one #innovation

Friday, 6:42pm: Breaking News Twitter FV
http://twitter.com/fredvidal
BEVERLY HILLS Decision #1: FV Beginning Tomorrow Organizes His HEADQUARTERS In Beverly Hills 4 TIME FRAMES (Think Smart Club) OF HOLLYWOOD!!

B.H. Decision #2: Fred VIDAL Headquarters In BEVERLY HILLS Conceived 4 NETWORKING About TIME FRAMES After FV Not Anymore CEO FRENCH COP LLC

B.H. Decision #3: Next Week Begins On MONDAY By Important Text TIME FRAMES About The HOLLYWOOD 2010’s On WordPress FV = Economy PROSPECTIVE!

TIME FRAMES: Club 2 Think About HOLLYWOOD, Fred Is forever In Post-Doctoral Studies, IT’S LIKE THAT, WON’T CHANGE, Needs That 2 RELAX & HELP

TF In BH? Sounds Familiar! MONTHLY EVENT, NEWSLETTER, WEB MESSAGE: Time 2 Prepare 2010. FV was Producer, Needs To Share His Experience NOW!!

1st PRESS RELEASE ON TWITTER

TIME FRAMES Press Release: HOLLYWOOD is in The Middle Of A GOOD CRISIS, The One For ITS DEVELOPMENT. It’s What We Believe in 2009-2010.

TIME FRAMES PR: If It’s Confirmed The Country’s Economy Is Recovering, Fast Now, It Will Take 2 YEARS To The Movie Industry To BE OUT CRISIS

TIME FRAMES PR: During This Time, We Hope That Our System Of NETWORK & THINK SMART CLUB Will Increase Communication & Studies In Hollywood!

Friday, 2:36pm: ROMEO & JULIET 2010 Lyrics
(on This Post, See Below)

BREAKING NEWS (11am, Friday): Official Website BARACK OBAMA Joins Fred VIDAL Official On Youtube!
www.barackobama.com
www.youtube.com/bramstocker77

Before An Important Weekend With The Songwriting Of The Song BLAKE, Dedicated To Blake LIVELY, Fred VIDAL, PhD Informs Of The Release Monday Of A SILLY DVD-4 Songs For The Majors (Warner, Sony, Universal, EMI)!

After He postponed also his 2nd Speech TIME FRAMES On His Youtube Official Channel to this Weekend, Fred VIDAL decided to wait until Monday (not After) to call the Management Of Actress Blake LIVELY:
“You never know, If my song is not good, why do you want me to call? I have to check lyrics, music, verses, chorus, bridge, everything, must be perfect, I will send them a CD during the week and I hope to meet Blake in December for a (good, I hope!) FEEDBACK!!”
(Fred, Midnight, from Thursday to Friday)

BRAMSTOCKER Release In West Coast Discotheques (LA, Santa Monica and Now San Francisco scheduled) of Controversial or Not Song JE HAIS LA FRANCE is now boosted by An Invitation to French Model Laetitia Casta (see Our Blog Young Celebrities Post) for a Featuring In Video/Art Work when Commercialization after Test-Time 2 Months.

LETTER To Laetitia CONTENT THIS MORNING.

Fred Vidal Informs that He’s Releasing a DVD Of His YOUTUBE Songs For Free Promotion In LA and Diffusion to A&R of 4 Major Music Business Companies, Warner, Universal, Sony and EMI. Tracklisting: the Single SILLY (Fred Vidal – ASCAP) and Fred Covers of Here Comes The Night (Van Morrison), Hush (Joe South), Indian Summer (The Doors). Objective: To sign a Production and Distribution contract In January-February 2010, if everything works as necessary.

INFO: French model Laetitia Casta is French like was the previously French Fred Vidal, Now US Citizen. She is expecting her third child. Time magazine placed Laetitia among the ten most influential people of the year 2008. BRAMSTOCKER  Choice Is A Sign To Show That The Band Likes France As Much As Her!!!

Laetitia CASTA! The French Model Is The Symbol Of FRANCE, According To Mike FULLER, Fred VIDAL, PhD!

BREAKING NEWS: Fred VIDAL, PhD Dedicates Song ROMEO & JULIET 2010 To Stars KRISTEN STEWART and ROBERT PATTINSON, Songwriting this Morning At Starbucks, Vermont in Los Feliz.

On Twitter http://twitter.com/fredvidal

M.I.-ROCK: ROMEO & JULIET 2010, Lyrics Screenwriting This Morning On VERMONT, foR A LATTE (And A FReNcH Croissant, Fred?). BEV. Hills After?

Fred VIDAL World VISION Specialist: 4 Fred VIDAL PhD, Romeo & Juliet, It’s A SucceSS STORY, Shakespeare (OR Whatever!) WAS WRONG, Happy End!

LYRICS OF THE DAY (3rd new Song)

ROMEO & JULIET 2010 (Fred Vidal – ASCAP)

Verse 1

In a bed of tenderness
I will give you
the key to my wisdom
that is already yours

In a time that we know and share
like a sting

Verse 2

In this time of love and share
I will be outside this world
but really close to our life
on planet Earth

Outside there is a path
to include our book
of dreams reality

Verse 3

I, and not only me, you
we sound like being
diplomats to network
with a letter if sent
beyond the train
and with a jet, jet

Cheers to the ones
who include their story
in our visionnary print

Chorus

ROMEO AND JULIET 2010
ten plus ten equals twenty
ROMEO AND JULIET 2010
one plus one equals lonely

If you know what I mean
I am alone when I’m not happy

Sure, it can’t happen with you, baby

Bridge

I do promises sometimes
but I forget about them
and I apologize if I was
a mistake in your brain
before to focus on some
good song to understand

Why and only
could be my story line
when I’m with you and out you

Just out today, it’s already making the rounds as Time magazine’s most e-mailed story, its new cover piece: Can These Parents be Saved?

” … We just wanted what was best for our kids”, Nancy Gibbs’ piece begins, before detailing the ways in which extreme, fear-based safety practices, and efficiency models best left at the corporation door began infecting childhood. She writes:

We were so obsessed with our kids’ success that parenting turned into a form of product development.

The backlash against overparenting has come, she says, in part driven by changes in the economy:

…  a third of parents have cut their kids’ extracurricular activities. They downsized, downshifted and simplified because they had to — and often found, much to their surprise, that they liked it.

The article is a fascinating snapshot of the conundrums many parents face. We want to protect our children and give them opportunities, yet for some this has come with the dawning realization that many children are overcoddled, over-directed, and robbed of down time, free play, exploration, and the confidence and mastery that can come with making ones own discoveries and mistakes. In short, it’s the realization that, for all the attention, we are not doing our kids any favors.

Gibbs quotes Slow Movement pioneers Carl Honore and the Slow Family Living workshop folks, whom I have blogged about at length, as well as Lenore Skenazy, whose book, Free-Range Kids, is a tome of common-sense parenting in an often hysterical age.

Last weekend, I attended a lecture by Dr. Kenneth Ginsburg, author of A Parent’s Guide to Building Resilience in Children and Teens, which I highly recommend, as it walks parents through the set of tools children need to grow and prosper. Ginsburg cautioned against the perfectionistic streak in many parents who unwittingly add stress to their children’s lives by trying to professionalize their activities, and by being involved in harmful, rather than fruitful, guiding ways — including attempting to eliminate stress, rather than teach children ways to cope with inevitable stress.

I was struck, too, when Ginsburg said that creativity was a component many young adults now lacked. This was exhibiting itself in an inflexibility in the workplace and in relationships, no matter the field. How to foster creativity in the young? Play with them, encourage them to play on their own or direct the play (if you’re involved). In short, have fun and get out of the way.

For more Slow Family Online pieces about children, slow (joyful) parenting and play, see:

Gopnick: Babies Learn by Playing

Why Can’t She Walk to School?

An End to Overparenting?

Huffington Post Book Club Pick: In Praise of Slowness

About Slow Family Online

Photos: Miika Silfverberg, Susan Sachs Lipman

Marcus Buckingham has done it again. In this week’s HuffPo installment, Buckingham gets started by citing Time magazine’s special on the State of Women as saying that the gender war is over, and it was a tie. But Buckingham takes it one step further:

I’m not so sure. In a war, no matter the outcome of a certain skirmish or battle, the winner is the party whose attitudes, behaviors and preoccupations come to dominate the postwar landscape. By this measure, the outcome of the gender wars, if wars they were, is clear: women won.

He makes his case by saying that “men’s attitudes more and more resemble women’s attitudes”, citing the fact that fewer men now believe that men should be the breadwinners, women the caretakers, than did in 1977. He says that “men’s behaviors are becoming more and more like women’s”, using the fact that men now do more housework than they did in 1977 as evidence. He even cites popular culture:

Even our entertainment heroes have lost their masculine muscle. Arnold, Bruce, and Stallone are long gone from the screen, but even the flirty, flaky, funny adolescents–Tom, Brad, Jim, and Will–no longer charm us quite as much as they once did. Instead our leading men are the likes of Zac Efron who, though he can still “Michael Jordan” it on the court, now has to sing and dance charmingly to earn our affection.

Um, okayyyy. But here’s where it gets interesting:

The war is over. Women won. And, as ever, to the victor go the spoils.

And what are the spoils of this particular war?

The spoils are choice. Women have more choice than ever before in their work, home, and lifestyles. And yes, men are becoming more like women, and so men are starting to face the same multitude of choices that women tackle.

Today, with many companies offering paternal leave, men now have the choice to stay at home after the birth of their newborn… But they also have the choice to take advantage of this leave and stay at home wondering whether or not this absence will hurt their careers.

Men have the choice to stay at home even longer and assume the chief caregiver role… But they have to face the fact that, in making this choice, their skills might become obsolete and their wages, when they re-enter the workforce, will wind up reflecting their out-of-date proficiency.

Men have the choice to arrange their schedules so they can pick up the kids from school twice a week. And they have the choice not to, and then to feel guilty about this choice.

The choice-filled world that women have bestowed on men is a tough world. Tough on women; even tougher on men. At least that’s what the data reveal. In 1977, 41 percent of women reported feeling some level of work/life conflict, whereas only 35% of men did. Today, about the same percentage of women report work/life conflict, but 59 percent of men are now similarly torn.

Buckingham, Buckingham, Buckingham. Welcome to our world. While what he has to say about our choices is interesting (as is his use of self-reported statistics to back up his points), what’s more interesting is what he doesn’t say. Like this:

A study in the current issue of The Academy of Management Journal reveals that bosses generally perceive women workers to have more family-work conflict than men, even though this isn’t the case. And this belief, mistaken though it is, leads supervisors to take a negative view of women employees’ suitability for promotion.

Or this, from the Economix blog at the New York Times‘ web site:

In most jobs, the gap between men’s and women’s earnings narrows greatly when you adjust for factors like career path and experience. But at the top of the income scale–jobs paying more than $100,000–the salary gap between equally qualified men and women is still vast.

Or this, which Laura Liswood, co-founder of the Council of Women World Leaders, wrote yesterday:

In its annual measurement of global progress in the lives of women and girls, released October 27, 2009, the World Economic Forum reported some major improvements in surprising places. The 2009 Global Gender Gap Report–which, country by country, examines data indicating the resources and status of women compared to men–ranks Lesotho, for example, in the top 10, a marked improvement from its place at 16 last year and 43 in 2006. By contrast, the United States moved down three slots last year and now ranks 31st.

In terms of why you might be a little irritated by that, feel free to pick your poison: that the U.S. is ranked 31st, or that we moved down three slots last year. I myself am having a little of both. Liswood spells out the characteristics of our grouping thus:

Group III Gaps in these countries (including the United States and United Kingdom) have been almost completely closed in education and health; progress is occurring on economic and political participation. What is lagging is women’s presence at the highest levels of power be it management of a business or head of state or government or parliament. Countries that adopt quotas for business or politics often see an immediate jump in their standing once these mechanisms kick in.

Ooh, quotas. Scary. But why should we be so opposed? As Latoya Peterson notes in her Jezebel piece about the report:

Norway has legislation that demands all public institutions “promote gender equity, and these efforts are to be documented each year.” The top ranking country, Iceland, passed this type of legislation back in 2000 as the Act on Equal Status and Equal Rights of Women. Finland employs an “Ombudsman for Equality, the Gender Equality Unit, and the Council for Equality” in its pursuit of gender parity. And in Sweden, there is an Ombudsman on Discrimination, as well as measures taken in schools and workplaces to ensure women do not face bias.

Why should we care what goes on in Iceland, Finland, Norway, and Sweden? They hold the top four spots in that report. The one where the U.S. ranks 31st.

Let’s read just a little more from Liswood:

Data are a necessary component to start the process of resource allocation and policy shift. Data collection alone can’t make the sea level rise, but many political and business leaders hide behind the excuse that women must ‘make the case’ for change. The case can rarely be made without information that proves what women may intuitively already know. And looking at a gender gap that has been indexed should give leaders pause if they are not fully utilizing 50 percent of their talent.

It certainly should. The thing is, if we were to proactively address the measurable inequities, like Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, then–if Buckingham’s right–everyone would stand to benefit. But where Buckingham–where the very United States–has fallen short, is in viewing it as a personal issue, an issue of behavior, or attitude, or whether Zac Ephron is cashing in at the box office… In choosing to look at such heavy decisions merely as personal dilemmas, left to each of us to handle on our own, in our own way, we are missing the point. Yes, we have choices in our lives, and it stands on each of us to make them. But they’re made harder by the lack of institutional support. The war may be over, but the battle has just begun.