My First Ever, Caption the Cartoon Contest!

My recent resolution to stay more positive on this blog is challenged almost every time I pick up a newspaper or turn on the evening news.  Believing that laughter is better than tears, and in keeping with this week’s headlines, I’m announcing a little contest:

Thanks to istockphoto.com for this royalty-free cartoon

I’m guessing that everyone who isn’t living with wolves knows why poor little Mr. Happy is sad. I will award a $10 Amazon gift card to the best caption for this cartoon, submitted as a comment to this post by midnight PST, Saturday, March 10.  Multiple entries are encouraged.

***

If you have been on vacation, or on a media fast, or if you live in a country that still has real political debate, you may not have heard of the controversy over rules that require health-care providers to cover contraception even if it violates the conscience of certain faith-based employers.  Throwing gasoline on the fire, conservative talk show host, Rush Limbaugh, called Sandra Fluke, a third-year law student, a “slut” and “a prostitute” after she testified in favor of insurance coverage of birth control. http://www.sacbee.com/2012/03/03/4307985/contraception-fight-intensifies.html

So now that you know the story, what are you waiting for? Get busy writing your captions!

Life: The Movie by Neal Gabler – A Book Review

In his final movie, Being There, 1979, Peter Sellers plays Chance, a gardener with a low IQ, who becomes an advisor to the president and business tycoons. In one iconic scene, Chance is accosted by a knife wielding youth in Washington, DC.  He pulls out his TV remote control and clicks it to change the channel.  He is puzzled when the assailant doesn’t vanish.

Peter Sellers as Chance in “Being There”

This might be the perfect illustration for Neal Gabler’s, Life, The Movie:  How Entertainment Conquered Reality, (2000).  Gabler quotes historian, Daniel Boorstin, who wrote in the early 60’s that, “We risk being the first people in history to have been able to make their illusions so vivid, so persuasive, so ‘realistic’ that they can live in them.”  Done deal, according to Gabler, who calls us, not just a “post-modern culture,” but a “post-reality culture.”

At times I had to keep my own assumptions in check:  subjects like reality and imagination open onto psychological and spiritual vistas beyond the scope of this or any other single book.  But when Gabler cited concrete examples, I found myself nodding my head on almost every page.

“You know how to brood because you have seen Rebel Without a Cause,” Gabler says, quoting cultural analyst, Louis Menand.  “What better model does the world offer?”

Gabler charts the ascendency of entertainment in America from the early 19th century, where the split between high and low culture was fueled by our democratic suspicion of all elites.  Calling someone “aristocratic” was a serious insult.  During the 1840 presidential campaign, when a man called Daniel Webster an aristocrat, he thundered back that he’d grown up in a log cabin, and anyone calling him an aristocrat was “a coward and a liar.”  ( Sound familiar? )

Nathaniel Hawthorn despaired of the fate of serious writers amid the flood of “trash” being published.  One publisher sold four million dime novels in five years, at a time when the US population was only 25 million.

In 1850, 1% of the population owned 50% of the nation’s wealth and held almost all public offices.  Upward mobility was a myth, since 98% of that wealth had been inherited.  While the one-percent held the power, then as now, culture wars raged, sometimes with a violence that we (thankfully) haven’t seen yet.  One night in New York, rival Shakespearean actors, one British and one American, were both scheduled to perform, the former in an uptown theater, the latter downtown.  Police ejected the rabble who had bought tickets solely to heckle the British actor.  A much larger crowd gathered across the street to throw rocks as the “aristocratic” crowd tried to leave.  The militia was called, a riot ensued, and before the night was over, 22 lay dead and more than a hundred wounded.

In the end, it was movies that won the day for popular culture.  The 1% stayed away from the early nickelodeons, which tended to be crowded and crass.  Later, with middle-class patronage, refined behavior became the norm, but the elite have never fared well in the movies, from the Marx Brothers  Night at the Opera, to the present, where a too-expensive suit is always the mark of a villain.

Three Stooges + high society + pies = disaster

As he charts the history of high vs. popular culture, Gabler makes a telling point.  It isn’t just about high brow and low brow – it’s about the ascendency of entertainment.  Being entertained is easy, and the corollary is that when the goal is entertainment, grabbing and holding audience attention is the supreme value, and “things that do not conform – for example, serious literature, serious political debate, serious ideas, serious anything – are more likely to be compromised or marginalized than ever before.”

Life: the Movie is a complex and disturbing book.  Gabler says in the introduction, it is diagnostic and not prescriptive.  To offer easy answers, he says, would be like the movie illusion where we meet the monster in act one and see it vanquished in act three.  Writing 12 years ago, Gabler said:

“One is almost compelled to admit that turning life into escapist entertainment is a perversely ingenious adaptation to the turbulence and tumult of modern existence.  Why worry about the seemingly intractable problems of society when you can simply declare ‘It’s morning in America,” as President Reagan did in his 1984 reelection campaign, and have yourself a long-running Frank Capra movie right down to the aw-shucks hero?”

I read this book after watching Neal Gabler speak on the fictions that lace the current election campaign on Moyers & Company, as I described in the preceding post. Because of it’s scope, I would recommend Life: the Movie only to those who want to delve into this issue in some depth.

But  I would recommend that everyone watch the ongoing conversation this year between Gabler and Moyers.  The confusions and illusions surrounding the political process are more convoluted than when the book was written, but Neal Gabler remains a reliable guide to pulling back the curtains and helping us draw closer to the truth.

Politicians as Would-Be Movie Stars

James Hillman died last fall at the age of 86.  Even though I only met him twice at lectures, I’ve read his books for decades, and he is one of only a few people who deeply shaped and changed the way I see the world.  Hillman was an influential post-Jungian thinker.  As I said in my “About” page, from Hillman I learned to search for the fantasy in our “realities,” and the reality in our “fantasies.”

James Hillman

Hillman considered literalism one of the great diseases of our time, but one area where I have trouble “seeing through” the illusion of “fact” is election year politics.

On Sunday I got a clue about why so much of the rhetoric sounds like bad dialog in a B grade movie – to a great extent, it is!  A guest on Sunday’s edition of Moyers and Company was Neal Gabler, a film historian, cultural critic, and author of Life the Movie: How Entertainment Conquered Reality (2000). Gabler says our politicians are trying to play movie heroes.  We-the-people demand it, but it makes us cynical because we know it’s a sham:  “we’re…in a campaign season where what we’re really watching is not so much political debate, though it’s called that, as we are watching a movie in which candidates are contending to be our protagonist-in-chief.”

Neal Gabler

Gabler continues:

“There’s a kind of American schizophrenia about our politics. On the one hand we love to sit back and see these people be compelled to seduce us because elections are basically about seduction…But that also gives way to an incredible cynicism about the process…And one of the reasons we’re cynical is because we get it. We get how it works.”

Gabler says now that we have an Occupy Wall Street movement, we need an Occupy Media movement.  We need people fed up enough to say, “I want a real debate on issues.”  Otherwise, “if we don’t start asking those questions we can’t move this forward at all. All we’re going to get is punditry and analysis of who’s winning and who’s losing and a movie. We’ll get nothing but the movie. But the problem is movies don’t answer the pressing questions of America. Policy answers the pressing questions of America and we have to demand to know what these guys are going to do and what choices they’re going to make.”

I personally don’t have much hope that it’s going to happen in this election cycle.  Meanwhile, Gabler’s image of the candidates-as-would-be-actors, trying to be Clint Eastwood or John Wayne, makes their actions intelligible.  There is Hillman’s “fantasy in the reality.”

If this sounds as interesting to you as it is to me, you can watch the 20 minute interview or read the transcript here:  http://billmoyers.com/segment/neil-gabler-on-how-pop-culture-influences-political-culture/

The good news is, Moyers promised to have him back on the show as the election year continues.

Music of Hope: “River’s Gonna Rise,” by Warren Haynes

Last summer, I posted about how much I liked Warren Haynes new solo album, Man in Motion. http://wp.me/pYql4-RV . Haynes, one of Rolling Stone’s 25 Best Guitarists of All Time, is best known for his work with the Allman Brothers and The Dead (that’s the Grateful Dead, minus Jerry Garcia).

I still enjoy the whole album, but lately find myself singing one of the cuts in particular, “River’s Gonna Rise”, almost like an anthem or a mantra of hope.  No accident.  On a youTube clips made last summer, Haynes said, “This is for the Occupy Protestors all over the world.”  Here’s a great clip of him singing it solo in a studio.  Listen and enjoy!

River’s Gonna Rise

Darkness hides the faces
Of we who hold the power
We don’t need to be rich
We only need to be free
Chains of oppression
Never gonna break
But a day will come when we hold the key

Bells will be ringing
Flames reaching to the sky
Higher and higher
Fueled by the winds of change
Sweet taste of freedom
Fresh on the tips of our tongues
And the dust of the past is all that shall remain

Stephen Colbert’s Super PAC is Worth a Million Dollars

Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, the Super PAC started by Comedy Central’s Stephen Colbert, filed papers with the Federal Election Commission yesterday stating that it has raised $1,023,121. “How you like me now, F.E.C? I’m rolling seven digits deep!” Colbert wrote in an addendum. http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/31/news/economy/colbert_super_PAC_filing/index.htm

Colbert, who has been using his show to explore the murky world of campaign finance added, “It’s the way our founding fathers would have wanted it, if they had founded corporations instead of just a country.”

Documents filed by Colbert showed that most contributions were less than $250, but listed some interesting exceptions.  Gavin Newsom, the Lieutenant Governor of California, gave $500.  Newsom said, “I applaud Stephen Colbert exposing the absurdity of our current political financing system. I’m proud to support Colbert’s message with a donation. And I like his haircut.”

It can hardly be an accident that Colbert filed his report on the same day that Mitt Romney completed his purchase of the 50 Florida delegates using Super PAC funds.

I spotted an interesting article in the morning paper, drawn from the Washington Post:  “GOP super PACs may give Obama a run for his money.”  Unusual so early in an election year – no high-sounding phrases about the will of the people or selecting the best candidate.  Just a bare statement of fact that the winner will be the one who buy the most airtime on TV.

On the January 20, Bill Moyers interviewed David Stockman, former budget director for Ronald Reagan, who shared his disillusionment:

“we also have to recognize the pessimism that the public reflects in the surveys and polls is warranted…The Congress is owned lock, stock and barrel by one after another, after another special interest…So how do we turn that around? I think it’s going to take, unfortunately a real crisis before maybe the decks can be cleared.” http://billmoyers.com/

On the same program, Moyers interviewed Gretchen Morgenson, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist for The New York Times and author of the 2011 book, Reckless Endangerment: How Outsized Ambition, Greed, and Corruption Led to Economic Armageddon.

Morgenson agrees that another crisis, worse than 2008 is inevitable, because nothing has changed, and expects it to happen within the next 10 years.  After listening to her sadness and anger, Moyers asked Morgenson if there was anything that gave her hope, and she said yes:

“What makes me optimistic is that people are understanding this now, that Main Street gets it, you know, the thing that I found compelling about the Occupy Wall Street movement was that it seemed to be tapping into this anger. Previous to that there was just this kind of silence, you know, people were maybe too flabbergasted by what had gone on.
…………………………………..
But we still don’t know it all and until we do we can’t really protect ourselves going forward. But I do get a sense that there is anger, that there is rage and that maybe, maybe, just maybe somebody in Washington might pay attention to that.”

Career Suggestion for Newt: Science Fiction Writer

The Republican reality TV show is basically over.  The biggest difference I see between the “debate”/primary sideshow and American Idol is that I don’t think the winner of Idol is predetermined.

While the rest of us bit our nails once or twice as illusion kicked in and it seemed for a moment like Perry, could conceivably get elected, the men behind the curtain had their moment of fear in South Carolina.  You could almost hear Romney and the Republican honchos mutter, like Apollo Creed in Rocky I, “This guy thinks it’s a real fight!”

Don’t get me wrong – I am not a Gingrich supporter, but I am grateful to him for exposing the farce for exactly what it is.  The moment it seemed like he actually had a shot, the machinery kicked into high gear.  Bob Dole and John McCain got dragged in for endorsements.  Untold amounts of superPAC money flowed in to buy the election for the most qualified candidate, the one who appears to check the polls each week to see what he believes.

So Newt has to face the fact that the game was rigged, the status quo wins, and his political career will soon be over.  BUT, I have good news for him – a far greater opportunity is his if he chooses to seize it – rich and famous science-fiction author!

I used to think of Newt as a loose cannon, until I heard of his plan to colonize the moon.  I was delighted!  In this tapioca pudding election year, to hear a “serious” candidate talk of lunar outposts changed my estimation of him.  This man has too much imagination for politics!  He could be the next Ray Bradbury!  Think of it – he has enough name recognition to guarantee publication.  He could either devote himself to learning the craft or hire a ghostwriter.  Heck, if Sarah Palin can “write” a book…

All of us have known defeat in our lives, and it’s hard, but Newt, if you ever find yourself with enough time on your hands to read this blog, just please give it some thought.  And meanwhile, in the words of a very deep thinker, “Live long and prosper, dude.”

Bill Moyers is Back!!!!

On Sunday evening, I was delighted to catch the first episode of the new PBS series, Moyers & Company.  You can view it, and a lot more, on the new website, http://billmoyers.com/.

Moyers interviewed political scientists, Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson, authors of, Winner-Take-All Politics:  How Washington Made the Rich Richer–and Turned Its Back on the Middle Class.

The conversation startled me, as Hacker and Pierson said they were startled during their research.  They found that the current income gap in this country – greater than in some third world countries like Egypt – was not an inevitable consequence of free market dynamics or trends like globalization.  It was politically engineered over the last 30 years.  Hacker and Pierson argue that the current American leadership more closely resembles a third world oligarchy than the democracy our parents knew.

“Who’s the culprit? “American politics did it– far more than we would have believed when we started this research,” Hacker explains. “What government has done and not done, and the politics that produced it, is really at the heart of the rise of an economy that has showered huge riches on the very, very, very well off.”

Bill considers their book the best he’s seen detailing “how politicians rewrote the rules to create a winner-take-all economy that favors the 1% over everyone else, putting our once and future middle class in peril.” – (from billmoyers.com)

Jacob Hacker and Paul Pierson on Moyers & Company

Winner Take All Politics is going into my already overcrowded book-queue, since it appears to be of critical importance.  The first step in correcting a problem is gaining an accurate understanding of its nature.  The fact that the assault on the middle class was created and not fated is good news, according to Hacker and Pierson.  Something done can be undone.  Along with Moyers, they agree that our current national sense of outrage is a positive sign.

Moyers’ work and website are important to bring up today.  On the website you can find an April, 2010 interview with two African American lawyers, discussing what Dr. King would have made of America today. Lawyer Bryan Stevenson said:

“I think in America, the opposite of poverty is justice. I think there are structures and systems that have created poverty, and have made that poverty so permanent, that until we think in a more just way about how to deal with poverty in this country, we’re never gonna make the progress that Dr. King envisioned.”  http://billmoyers.com/content/bryan-stevenson-and-michelle-alexander/

These are important things to consider, especially today.

The News on Page 13

Just some quick notes on a story I have been following, in large part because it is so important and yet so downplayed in the US media. By coincidence (I assume), the latest saber-rattling news was back on page 13 of the Friday the 13th edition of the Sacramento Bee.  The front page headline story involved the closing of a local shopping center.

US carrier in the straits

Thanks to the internet, and especially British news sources, we learn that yesterday, Iranians accused the US of sending one of its ships into the 10 mile “maneuver zone” where the Iranian navy is conducting war games.  In response, Iran threatened to close the straits.  The Obama administration said this would be a “red line act,” that would provoke a military response.

On Wednesday, a top Iranian nuclear scientist died in a bomb blast after a passing motorcyclist attached a bomb to his vehicle.  He was the fourth top scientist to be targeted in the past two years according to a Jan. 12, editorial in the Los Angeles Times, which said, “That’s the kind of clean, covert assassination method favored by Western intelligence agencies.”  Although Secretary of State Clinton denied US involvement, the Iranians don’t believe her, and the Times was skeptical:

“[Clinton] went on to deliver a lecture about the need for Iran to shut down its nuclear program, which we agree with. But we also think the bombing merited something more – a strong statement that the United States decries political assassinations. The U.S. is already on shaky legal and ethical grounds with its own program of targeted drone assassinations of suspected terrorists. But at least we’re at war with al-Qaida. State-sponsored extrajudicial killing is a serious violation of international law, and car-bomb assassination is a tactic little different from the methods used by terrorists. It would be nice to hear Clinton, or President Obama, emphasize such principles.”

The Times editorial went on to say economic sanctions do not appear to be working, but that may depend on who you ask.    I caught an NPR interview with a correspondent in Iran who said, yes, they are working, just not perhaps as we want them to.  He said he went to the store to buy an Oral B toothbrush and there wasn’t even toothpaste available.  The citizenry doesn’t really understand the nuclear issue, but it does blame the US for mounting hardships.  Meanwhile, I’m guessing Iranian leaders are not suffering a lack of toothpaste.

Iranian warship test fires a missile in the Straits, Jan 1

The LA Times noted, you can’t assassinate collective knowledge.  Sooner or later, Iran will have nukes.  Another middle-east war will not close Pandora’s Box.  Yet I still find it hard to believe that this is all about nukes.  I’m thinking of Col. Andrew Bacevich’s 2008 predictions.  http://wp.me/pYql4-1AT.  Until we take the quest for energy independence seriously, armed conflict over oil will be our future.

In 2011, Wikipedia estimated that the price of Tomahawk cruise missile was $830,000.  How many scholarships would that buy for future energy scientists?  How many studies of alternative fuels would that fund?  How many lives and dollars are we prepared to spend trying to push back the river?