Communication By Symbol

O.O. Top 10 Amendment

2012-02-10T13:15:00.000-08:00

As testament to my recent comment about critiquing your own work being nearly impossible, I am compelled to make an amendment to the C.B.S. Top 10 from Oakland. After a minor shake-up at the bottom of the list, this shot now holds the #9 slot:

The image has skyrocketed to the top of my list of shots ranked by most views on my Flickr page. My first thought is that Susie Cagle's featuring it along with a few of my other shots in her recent Truthout.org piece likely has a lot to do with that, and I'm sure it does, but of the other three she used, the next highest sits at #9 on my Flickr views list with less than one fourth the hits of the "front-line" shot above. The previous #1 in my Flickr views rank is this shot, which has less than two thirds the views of the above shot but still has a stranglehold on the #2 slot:

After these two, there's a big drop-off with shots 3 through 10 all having relatively similar hit-counts in the range of 25% of #1.

So, there must be something special about the front-line shot. I knew it was good, but not that good. I'm sure many photographers are this way: At first I thought, hey, that's great. After that, all I could do was find the faults in it. It's good to be that way, though. I figured that, all things considered, the double peace-sign, double-bandana shot was the best one I got all day. I guess ya never can tell, now, can ya?

Hotel Workers' Strike

2012-02-09T13:53:00.000-08:00

The goal of this shoot was to avoid sameness, capture emotion, and show it wasn't a "silent protest." Stepping away from the set for a couple weeks made it somewhat easier to assess. It's very similar to writing in that it can be very difficult, if not impossible, to accurately critique your own work.

.

Anarchists' Influence on Occupy Oakland

2012-02-08T16:59:00.000-08:00

I would like to thank Susie Cagle for featuring my photography in her Truthout.org piece today on Anarchists' influence on Occupy Oakland...

Activists and Anarchists Speak for Themselves at Occupy Oakland

.

Occupy SF G.A. Pics

2012-02-08T12:55:00.001-08:00

Occupy San Francisco held their semi-weekly General Assembly meeting last night at 6:00pm. It was a great opportunity for a photography exercise. When I got there, it was overcast and dusk, but still light enough to go without a flash and and get realistic looking shots. Then at some point, I had to start using a flash, which made for a great exercise in addition to getting decent establishing/wide shots and a variety of angles.

Click on this photo for my Flickr page:

What the hell is that dark spot at the bottom of some of these shots? My hand blocking the flash? Also, I'm thinking that while using a flash would be a great time to experiment in A-mode but I didn't think to do it. It was a good exercise overall, though. I learn something every time I go out. I was good to see what the on-board flash will and won't do. There were only so many people there, so I thought the challenge was getting shots that don't look sparse.
(Also, in the 6th shot on the far right there's a guy wearing a black jacket, gray pants, with a black back-pack standing between two women. Someone tell him he needs to stop following me around.)

.

What I Learned about Photojournalism at Occupy Oakland (I Think)

2012-02-05T21:49:00.000-08:00

The most common problem in my shots is shallow depth offield. It was this close-up that madethat evident:

The subject’s bandanas arein excellent focus, but the tips of the fingers of his glove are pretty blurry. I'm guessing that must be because of a very shallow depth of field. It couldn’t take much of an adjustmentto remedy that in that shot. Greater depth of field may have me this shot better as well:

Myguess is that in glorious sunlit conditions, as were present most of the dayin Oakland, many photojournalists primarily use A-mode. Just a hunch.

_________________

Confrontation and/or fire and smoke is the money shot, seen here (scroll down to the second photo), at such an event. Stay at the front of theparade.

I got a few decent shot mingling about half-way back, but the moneyshots happen at the front of the parade which is where confrontation is mostlikely to happen and where the most fervent protestors will be. In certain situations, there is one idealangle and its opposite parallel, illustrated by Stephen Lam's incredible shot linked above and this great shot by Glenn Halog:

Also, the best wide “crowd/march”shots will generally be shot from the front at a high angle:

_________________

Be ready to use fill-flash when the sun starts going down. I’m very proud of this shot, but a flashmight not have hurt it. This isn't the greatest example, but you know what I mean:

_________________

If there is a photographer or a bunch of photographers inyour shot, you got at least a bad, but likely a worthlessshot:

Gotta love the helmet. I'll admit, I did not consider the distinct possibility that all hell would break loose that day. Naaaaa--it's just Oakland. Silly me, right? If the photog in your shot isangling perpendicular to your angle, you probably don’t have a greatangle. However, in many situations, ifthere is a photographer on the opposite side of the action looking directly atyou or close to it, you probably have a pretty good angle. I think this is a fine angle for this shot and there is a camera way on the other side looking almost directly at me as there is, oddly, in the top shot above. (As far as I know, there was nothing interesting behind me at that point. He really does look like he's taking a picture of me.)

_________________

Keep AF-Area Mode on “Single Area” and centered for shooting through/over a crowdor anything else, really. I know this is a really obvious one, but I had the camera for 10 days at this point. It should bedefault in every mode if you ask me. This must bestandard among photojournalists. I didn't get a decent shot of this gentleman who got arrested before the rally, mainly because my camera wouldn't focus and therefore wouldn't shoot at all on many of these attempts which were in a crowd, of course. I think I got one that wasn't blurry and I wasn't happy with it. If my camera was on center-focus, I'd have gotten at least couple good shots here, and probably a few better ones during the tear-gas, etc:

_________________

All those super sexy mind-bending shots, like this one and maybe this one, must be achieved, I presume, byusing a wide-angle lens with a short focal length and getting very close to the subject or, in a wide shot, having someoneor something/s in the very near foreground.

_________________

It’s ok to chop off the very top of someone’s head to ensurethey’re not too low in the frame. Better put, it's better to have too little head-space than too much, particularly in a horizontal shot:

How bad is it to have a TV station's mic in the shot, btw? Nobody else would use it, right?

_________________

In regard to left-to-right composition, my shots from theday are pretty strong for the most part. Manyof my shots could have been better if the camera was aimed a little lower or alittle higher:

_________________

Am I in the ballpark on these things?

Best of the Rest from O.O.

2012-02-05T03:55:00.000-08:00

Since I'm up...

Somebody walked by and shouted something in my window at exactly 3:00 am (the standard time used to be 3:30), so, since I'm up, I figured I'd toss up a post with a few bonus pics. Here are the Top 5 Occupy Oakland photos that didn't make the Top 10, in the order they were taken:

________________

In regard to police shots, I wrote the intro in the Top-10 post not realizing that I did have one police shot in the group. It was such a no-brainer for the Top 10, though, that I forgot it was a police shot! Isn't that interesting? Other than that, this was probably the best shot I got. It's really, really close to being great, but it just doesn't hit right.

Are we having fun yet?

.

C.B.S. Top 10 from Oakland

2012-02-04T22:20:00.000-08:00

From The Final Cut Dept.

In attempt to better understand photography, I've narrowed my shots from Occupy Oakland Move-In Day last week to what I see as the Top 10. It occurs to me that it's virtually impossible for me to do this accurately, though I think I'm pretty sure about maybe 6 of these. After that, it's nearly impossible. I made it a point to not just use a bunch of thought-provoking close-ups, which are relatively easy to get. Getting great wide-shots is the challenge, which I didn't really do. Also, I didn't include any of my police shots because, quite frankly, I'm not really that happy with any of them. There are too many out there that just blow mine away (no pun intended), starting with this one. This is how I see it from 10 to 1:

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Despite what I said about close-ups at the top, I think this is an exceptional shot.

Occupy Marching

2012-02-04T19:18:00.000-08:00

I can't believe nobody used this one. I haven't seen another one like it:

Photo Post-Work

2012-01-31T18:15:00.000-08:00

I was lucky enough to get some priceless feedback from a few professional photojournalists on Linkedin regarding some shots I took at a recent Pro-Life Rally in San Francisco. One of them mentioned that my shots looked "flat." My shots weren't great overall, but I had no idea how effectively a minor tweak could fix that specific problem. I see some shots out there that I think are adjusted too much, usually overly darkened to add drama. Just my opinion. I want my shots to look completely realistic, so my changes will always be the absolute minimum.

I had one shot from this weekend's events in Oakland in particular, seen above, that made a great candidate for a little tweak. When I first looked at it in my camera, I thought, "Hey, that's a pretty cool shot." Then I got "home" and looked at it on my computer, and it dawned on me what the pro on Linkedin was talking about when he said "flat." So I worked with a couple other shots from the weekend before I got to this one. Sure enough, it became obvious that the image adjustments add depth. And it's definitely not the same for every shot, but I've already got a good idea about the different ranges for certain different kinds of shots. This shot is not re-cropped and it will remain my intention to never re-crop my shots. (Somebody else can do that if they want to.)

.

Candidate for Official Occupy Theme Song?

2012-01-31T12:03:00.000-08:00

I like "listening to shitty music to make myself feel better," right? Did I hear that on the train Saturday night? I think the guy sitting in front of that guy may have said something about a dog off leash, too. Okay...

(I meant that.)

.

Greatest Muzak Song Ever?

2012-01-30T22:15:00.000-08:00

Did I Mention I Bought a Camera?

2012-01-29T15:14:00.000-08:00

"Why This Ad?"

2012-01-29T15:06:00.000-08:00

In a g-mail account, at the top of the inbox there are little ads that pop up simply in the form of a line of text. It starts with a heading that's a link which is followed buy a brief blurb. They change when you go from one folder to another or when you open or close an e-mail. As ads go, they're rather innocuous--no warm-n-fuzzy pictures of families standing outside their mini-vans or of a brightly smiling woman holding a bottle of facial cleanser very close to her face, such as the one I saw in an ad that inexplicably showed up on my Yahoo sign-in page a few minutes ago. It's just a line of text. Again, though, sometimes they're a bit, um...a-hem...incongruous. Google is so awesome and civic-minded, though, that they offer the option to opt out of seeing certain ads. Off to the right of the sentence, is the question, "Why this ad?" When you click on it, a little dialogue box pops up, containing this message:

This ad is based on emails from your mailbox. Visit Google’s Ads Preferences Manager to learn more, block specific advertisers, or opt out of personalized ads.

How interesting--the above link, pasted directly from that dialogue box, doesn't work. That's a little odd. Well, it just so happens I've got a couple screen-shots. When you click on that link, I believe this is what you're actually supposed to see:

In the bottom portion of the page, under "Why these ads?," you will notice that the option to block that advertiser is offered with the link, "Block this advertiser." Fair and square, right? Thanks for lookin' out for my mind, Google! I mean, if I was paranoid-schizophrenic or something, I might be compelled to think it's the federal government sending me a message meant to mess with my head in response to a recently sent e-mail or blog post or something else I did that may have wubbed dem da wong way. But that's particularly ridiculous because I highly doubt that, if that was the case, they'd want me to expand my web presence, right? Then again, while I still go by John in person (though I rarely talk to any people), I've changed my moniker to J Paul in print and in my signature. It's even in my g-mail address. So I see an ad offering to help me expand my web presence from a company called "JStokes" and have to scratch my perfectly insane little head for a minute. How many companies are out there helping people expand their web presence, do ya think? Thousands, maybe? But being the humanitarian organization that Google is, they provided the option to blow that advertiser out of the pool of those available to pop up in my box.

Then one day I clicked on "Ads Preference Manager" in the little dialogue box and a slightly different page opened:

You'll notice that the portion of the page that once included the option to block the advertiser is replaced by a video about Google Ad Preferences. I looked and looked, but nowhere on the page could I find the link. Then I thought, "Well, maybe if I watch the video to the end, at that point the link to block the advertiser I wanted to in the first place will magically pop up and, of course, Google will cookie my computer and I'll never have to watch the video again." That would be a fair deal, right? Well, I watched the video from start to finish. It was very friendly and informative. But at the end, no matter how many times I dragged the slider back to a point about 10 seconds before end and let it play out, the link never appeared.

I looked and looked for a way to contact Google regarding this and was unable to find a contact-us link that would actually let me send them a personal message. I found one that I thought might be close to the right department, but I got reply directing me back to Ad Preferences, which is where I'd been digging around in the first place. You might call it the run-around. So, I looked into the policy regarding blocking links in Ad Preferences. It indicated I can opt out of getting personalized ads all together, but if I did that, I would no longer have the option to block any advertisers, and so many of the ads I see now are--you guessed it--incongruous to my personal biometric profile that I'm guessing it wouldn't make much of a difference. Plus, I'm inclined to think that if I surrendered complete control over it, my paranoia and schizophrenia would get the best of me and I would become nearly incapacitated by suspicion of most if not all of the ads I then saw. The policy also indicated I can block up to 500 ads which prompted me to find out how many ads I'd already had blocked, information they do provide. The number that day, which was within the last 2 weeks, was 25. Today it's 34.

I guess what bothers me is the frequency at which I see the page with the video and without the "Block this advertiser" link. A conservative estimate would be that it shows up for about half of my attempts to block a link. I liberal estimate would be 3 out of 4. The estimate I would call most accurate would be 2 out of 3--which is way too many. I watched the damn video. I should never see that page at all.

.

Privacy from Google Delivered to Your Door

2012-01-27T21:25:00.000-08:00

"Report: Nutritional Value of U.S. Dollar Now Greater than its Monetary Value." --Hilarious!

Brilliant. The whole thing is brilliant and perfectly executed.

.

By the way... (Passport Fun)

2012-01-26T14:31:00.000-08:00

This is going to play out right here on C.B.S., step by step. It's news-worthy to a degree.

I recently applied for a passport. I have no privacy whatsoever and various occurrences in my life over the past few years make it abundantly clear that there is nothing the United States federal government doesn't know about me. I applied with an official copy of my Ohio Birth Certificate and a California Driver's License a Post Office Clerk made a photocopy of. Nevertheless, I received this reply:

I should have used a flash, but you can read it. This came with it:

The mailing also included a 5-page "Supplemental Worksheet" asking for every place I've ever lived, worked, or gone to school, and for my immediate family memebers' names. I already started filling it out, so I'm not going to post it. When I got it, I called the number provided and the kid who answered acted like he wasn't familiar with the letter and asked me to read it aloud to him. I did. Obviously, they record these calls and can use that recording as proof that I received the letter should the need to do so arise. Why else would he ask me to read it? Somehow, the friendly folks at the U.S. government got my name wrong, too. Of course, it's easy to see how a C can be mistaken for a G, but I think the name was on the application 4 or 5 times including my parents' names in addition to being very clearly printed out on the birth certificate and the driver's license. And, of course, I know damn well they know my name. Maybe this is all quite normal, but the day before I got it, some guy lookin' all sharp and acting slightly nervous (He must be new.) walked by me and made the comment, "Sorry to cut you off." Once in a while, people stand behind me somewhere and make comments about how great my life could be and of course, occasionally threaten to prevent me from obtaining employment. Fascinating. Just fascinating.

Stay tuned.

.

John's Consecutive Essays

2012-01-26T13:45:00.000-08:00

I usually post these things on my other blog, but this is one is definitely appropriate for C.B.S.

I bought a Digital SLR camera recently--a Nikon D40x. It came with an 18-55mm lense and a 55-200mm lens. It also came with a bag, a filter, all the caps, a double battery pack that attaches to the bottom, two batteries, a charger, and a strap. I did a lot of research before I settled on going after a used D40x. I read on line that's it's common for the model to go beyond 100,000 shots, though there are exceptions. I saw mention of one that went beyond 150-k. I bought mine from a retiring professional photographer from Oregon who told me the camera "has about 7,500 clicks." The camera arrived in the mail last Wednesday. I just checked the last photo I uploaded to Flickr, which extracts and makes available "shutter count" and other info from the file one would otherwise need to download software to obtain. The number on that shot is 7,919. I've taken a few shots since then, but we aren't really going to nitpick like that, I hope. With a good chance of hitting 100-k, it hardly matters, now does it? The gentleman I purchased from also told me the model has the same something-something as the D90. I'll have to find out what that is at some point. I checked prices on line for buying my package brand new and my math tells me I paid less than half price. Good for me.

In my research, I also learned that the electronic sensor, which does what film used to do, can get dust on it during lens changes. At certain aperture settings such dust will create clearly visible blemishes in your photos and at some it won't. Today I finally figured out the aperture controls in the camera and did a little exercise I found on-line. (I'll need a tripod to do it right.) Sure enough, while studying my shots, I noticed a few flecks and shadows appearing in the same spot in each frame, thought the subject-matter was moved slightly from shot to shot, thus indicating dust on the sensor. I looked back at some of my previous shots and, sure enough, found very faint traces of the worst of the blemishes.

So, I did some research on Flickr--an incredible source of free photography knowledge which even has a group dedicated specifically to the D40x--and found that a little hand-held blower called a Giottos Rocket is the best option for cleaning the sensor before resorting to actually wiping it with special cloth and solution. I watched a short DSLR sensor-cleaning tutorial on YouTube and started shopping on-line for the Rocket. I found one on Amazon for a mere $8.95. The Rocket and ones like it are specifically designed for cleaning cameras and other electronics because they have a hole at the opposite end of the nozzle, so it only blows one way, instead of blowing the same air in and out of the nozzle. It's like a vacuum.

I was about to check out when I noticed a feature on Amazon I hadn't before, called, "Express Checkout with PayPhrase." In the little slot it makes a suggestion for what the user might use as his Express PayPhrase. Those things are usually pretty generic, right? Like a common pet's name or something like that. Immediately underneath is the link, "What's this?" You've seen those. When I clicked on that, a window popped letting me know that my--oh--I'm sorry--I mean the suggested phrase is still available. Check it out...

It's a good camera, I think...

Focal Length: 200mm / No Tripod

Focal Length: 155mm / Not sure if these were before or after I turned Vibration Reduction off that day.

Gung Hei Fat Choi!

2012-01-19T12:45:00.000-08:00

May Prosperity be with You

I see a number of different spellings on line, so I can't tell you for sure if that one's right, but what it is, is a standard Chinese Happy New Year greeting. I heard someone say it means to wish the person a "big" year. Apparently, the most direct translation is "May prosperity be with you." The first time I heard it was at the yearly press conference announcing the Lunar (Chinese) New Year celebration here in San Francisco. Lunar New Year's Day is this coming Monday, January 23rd. By coincidence, I happened to be near the main gate to Chinatown at the just the right time when they were setting up for the announcement and questions. I thought, "What the hell--I've got nothing else to do, so I'll play photojournalist with my phone." I had to use the zoom, so the pics are really, really poor in image quality, but it was a great exercise nonetheless:

As the opening remarks were made, the scene was in full sun. By the time the last person was done speaking, the entire scene was in shade. It's all about not catching anyone making a funny face. I think it's mostly taking a lot of shots and hoping for the best, but I get the feeling veterans actually know how to catch the right moments. Ideally, you want to catch the speaker gesturing without a funny face. I also noticed that, in general, women gesture more often and more emphatically than men do. And, of course, the pics should be cropped properly. Then you've got look-space and head-space and all that really basic stuff. I took 32 pictures and these 4 are the only ones I'd let see the light of day. That doesn't mean they're good:

Mayor Ed Lee

I think that first shot is a typically acceptable zoom and angle and decent overall for the most part, but there are still some distracting things in it, such as the reflection of the sun in the badge, the big grin, and the guy looking to the left, all of which I've marked here:

Neat how I put those arrows in there, huh?

Well, I got a new camera:

I sure hope it doesn't take long to learn how to use it.

(May prosperity be with me.)

.

Sexy Dragon Magic

2012-01-11T19:04:00.000-08:00

The Return of Van Halen

In case you haven't heard, 70s/80s rock beheamoth,Van Halen and original front-man, the quasi-enigmatic, maybe just ornery, often comedic David Lee Roth finally found a way to patch things up right. The arena rock vets' first tour supporting a full album made with Diamond Dave in over 25 years revs up on February 18th at the KFC Yum! Center in Louisville, Kentucky. (I'm compelled to think VH picked Louisville to start the tour at least in part because they were amused by the name of the venue.)

"Tattoo," the first single and video from the yet-to-be-released album premiered yesterday on Vevo. Shot predominantly from familiar low angles right in front of the platform, it doesn't take more than one view-and-listen to see why all Roth has to do is step on stage with a microphone in his hand in the company of the VH family to instantly stake a claim to the American rock throne. Their feet might not move the same way they used to, but their hands sure do. By the time you're half way though Tattoo, the difference between the two Van Halens is impossible to miss. I can't put my finger on which one it is, but the song is definitely reminiscent of a VH-con-Roth tune from days longer gone by than any of us Gen-X-ers would care to admit. Maybe it's "Where Have All the Good Times Gone?" Or how about "And The Cradle Will Rock?" Could be, but you know what? It doesn't matter. It's Van...Halen. A quick injection of Roth's singular signature care-free swagger turns these guys into a different band. I don't know how else to describe what they do--it's Van Halen. And it's no surprise Wolfgang Van Halen, son of group co-founder Eddie Van Halen, considered by many the greatest rock guitarist of all time, clearly has a leg up on former VH bassist Michael Anthony.* Rounding out the VH-Four is perpetually under-rated drummer, Uncle Alex, doing what he does so well behind the bright lights of Eddie and Dave.

Last week, Van Halen played a special secret warm-up show at Roth's uncle's venerable but cozy West Village Club, Cafe Wha? to rave reviews. Roth started the show by welcoming the insider crowd to "Occupy Van Halen" before Eddie ripped into the Kinks' classic and VH fave, "You Really Got Me."

A different Kind of Truth, Van Halen's first album behind David Lee Roth since the multi-platinum 1984 from the same year, is scheduled for a February 7th release. Concert Tickets go on sale this Saturday.

*Case and Point (Tattoo is great, but this, ladies and gentlemen, is Van Halen.):

___________

This post and the accompanying photo are dedicated to Tony Contelmo, a big VH fan. When I graduated from The Ohio State University, I received sincere, unqualified, non-choked out congratulations from exactly three people. Tony and I graduated from high school together, and coincidentally ended up living across the street from each other in Columbus. We let him keep his drums in our front room. Lots of fun at parties. Tony was a jazz drummer and is responsible to turning me on to the genre. I'll never forget the look on his face during one party when some schmoe none of us knew was pounding away pretty hard on his set and sure enough broke a stick. I don't recall exactly which one it was, but the week I graduated, he brought me a six-pack of some very good pale ale. Cheers, Tony...

.

Veri Greedy

2012-01-11T16:48:00.000-08:00

Just another day in San Francisco...

CaChaVa Art Blog

2012-01-10T14:12:00.000-08:00

The other day wasn't the first time I've noticed someone sketching me at a cafe. It's an epidemic in this town. This time I got a look at the product:

Not a bad likeness, particularly for a 10-minute job. That's the artist, Caitlin Van Arsdale peeking around the back of her sketch pad. See more developed samples of her art on her blog, Cachava: Drawings and Other Things...

http://cachava.blogspot.com/

Good luck, Caitlin.

.

Action Photography

2011-12-28T21:05:00.000-08:00

Wanna see a breathtaking photograph?

Click here: http://coldthistle.blogspot.com/

.

2011-12-28T16:07:00.000-08:00

They're Right About 2012! Here's Proof:

2011-12-18T21:02:00.000-08:00

A Couple of Thoughts on Politics...

2011-12-14T18:38:00.000-08:00

(though I'm loath to do it.)

Extraordinary?
I'm very happy the war in Iraq is ending. I always think about the amount of fuel it takes to wage war, though as critical of an issue as fuel consumption is, it's obviously not the number one concern in warfare. President Obama kept his promise. When he took office in January of '09 there were about 150,000 American troops in Iraq. Now there are less than
8,000. I applaud the President for this in addition to simply handling the job appropriately in general. However, on a rhetorical note, upon reading his comment calling ending the war, "an extraordinary achievement,' I'm immediately reminded of Ohio State University President E. Gordon Gee once calling the Buckeye football team playing hated arch-rival Michigan to a 20-20 tie, "one of our greatest victories ever." It's not a perfect analogy, but it's well within in the ball park.

Newt v. Barack
Also, I read something about Newt Gingrich taking the lead in polling among contenders for the Republican Presidential nomination. Gingrich is one of those guys that I used to love to hate. Remember--when he was Speaker of the House in the late 90s? When the good times rolled under Bill Clinton? Yes, exactly--before George Bush took office and promptly broke a heavy fuel pact with the middle east.* All that was before I saw the inanity of the vast majority of partisan rhetoric--on both sides. Now that I've become a habitual writer and thereby see the ridiculous things that go on on in both major parties, I've taken a different look at ol' Newt. Don't get me wrong--I'd rather be forced A-Clockwork-Orange-style to watch the Mary Tyler Moore Show over and over than have a Republican President and I don't like Gingrich's politics for the most part. I've heard him speak on television and read his comments here and there over the past 10 years or so, though, and the guy just don't strike me as that typical narrow-minded, contemptible far-right power monger nearly as much as he once did. There's something I like about him, but I just can't put my finger on it. He's got a Ph.D in Modern European History from Tulane. No shit? There's something cool about that. One can't help but wonder if he might have been dreaming of the Oval Office when he picked that major. The point is, I think he's pretty smart--Obama smart, even--and if you think the Prez can spank him just because he can dribble between his legs, you should probably think again. In addition to being brainy and well educated, the guy is a political bulldog with a commoner's persona and I think he's someone who has the potential to win over more than a few undecideds. I can't present you with a list of facts about Gingrich's record off the top of my head because, quite frankly, I don't like politics. But I've absorbed enough about him through informational osmosis so that I'm not surprised at all that he is the current front-runner among a group of otherwise unimpressive Republicans.

Simply put, Newt is no joke

*All the suggestions about "educating me," while insulting, are at the same time cute and adorable, and, therefore, easy to dismiss.

.

They Said Your Case Was Tragic.

2011-12-07T14:56:00.001-08:00

You heard it all before...

.

Bobby V. Under Cover

2011-12-07T12:39:00.001-08:00

When I lived in New York, I spent the first couple of years waiting for an excuse to adopt a local sports team to support. In football, I liked the Jets because I'd been a fan of the Sack Exchange back in the 80s. (I'm a defensive end by trade.) and still follow them loosely, but I never really got to be that big of a fan. After a while it became evident that many of my friends were Mets fans and I was always getting invited to games. What made me officially claim myself a "Mets fan", though, was an incident that represents what can be so great about sports, and I think you see this kind of stuff more in baseball than the other major sports. Bobby Valentine, the Mets' manager at the time, got booted out of a game for some reason. He proved his resourcefulness and dedication with a ploy to return to the dugout, seen here:

http://www.seattlepi.com/sports/article/Forget-11-or-so-Red-Sox-hope-Bobby-V-is-coming-2335117.php

I think the Red Sox made a good choice. Seriously.

.

Itchy & Scratchy's Low-Budget Replacement

2011-11-30T19:14:00.001-08:00

New Michigan Coach Probably the Right Guy

2011-11-21T18:56:00.001-08:00

Thoughts on the Ohio State-Michigan Rivalry...from a Buckeye Fan's Perspective

My first thought about first-year University of Michigan Head Football Coach, Brady Hoke is that he passes two of those tongue-in-cheek intuitive sports "tests" you hear announcers and maybe even coaches or scouts talking about now and then. First, there's the look test. Yep--he's got it. He definitely looks like a Michigan guy. The other one that you probably wouldn't understand unless you were a fan of the Wovelerines or their arch-rival, The Ohio State University Buckeyes, is that he passes the name test. Brady...Hoke. Brady...Hoke." It's a Michigan name all the way and I'm not saying that because
a Michigan alum currently working on one of the greatest quarterback careers in NFL history bears the name, Brady. It's both names together, but mainly the surname, Hoke, that just stinks--and I mean stinks--of Michigan.

After viewing his acceptance speech, though, I see signs indicating that he's exactly the kind of guy that could bring the Wolverines back to a level of national prominence. He's a little dumpy. He nervously huffed and puffed through the speech and press conference, a performance the polar opposite of what we came to expect from Ohio State's recently departed head coach, the senatorial Jim Tressel. He just doesn't look to be very comfortable with the press or the spotlight. But you know what--that's exactly the kind of coach Michigan needs. In fact, as he squirmed through the event, I was reminded more than once of Woody Hayes, not to say that Hays was intimidated by the press, of course.

The last 22 years of the OSU-Michigan rivalry is divided into each team dominating half of the span. Before that, during the the 70s and most of the 80s, the heyday of the rivalry, the series is nearly an even split. They call the years of Woody Hayes vs. Bo Schembechler the 10-year war, which Schembechler, a former OSU assistant under Hayes, won with a 5-4-1 record. Hayes' successor, Earl Bruce, walked away with 5-4 record against Michigan before a 6-4 season preceded by a string of 3-loss seasons inexplicably cost him the job in 1987. The University fired Bruce the week of the Michigan game. The band played in his front yard the night before the annual grudge match and Bruce went out on mixed note, beating the Wolverines by a field goal in his final game coaching the Buckeyes.

The rivalry promptly cooled under Bruce's replacement, John Cooper. Many OSU fans presume (likely correctly), that Cooper was hired mainly because he'd recently defeated Michigan in the Rose Bowl as Coach of Arizona State. Cooper went on to post a stellar overall record at Ohio State, but just didn't understand the Michigan rivalry, going 2-10-1 against "that school up north." During the last few years of his tenure at OSU, Cooper's steadily worsening record against against Big Blue became a favorite taunting tool for Michigan fans. To make things worse, Cooper didn't fair well in the biggest games at all, going 3-8 in bowl games. He did manage to win a Rose Bowl, though, which is probably the only thing keeping him alive. (See Kirk Herbstreit's departure from Columbus.) He also beat Notre Dame twice behind the hard running of future Heisman Trophy Winner, Eddie George, but not quite in the style his replacement would.

Jim Tressel took over for the Buckeyes in 2001 and primed the flickering OSU torch during his acceptance speech with a warm and fuzzy story about holding the ball on place-kicks for Cleveland Browns kicker Lou "The Toe" Groza at Browns practice sessions when he was a kid growing up in Cleveland suburb, Berea. He then proceeded to set Buckeye Nation ablaze by practically guaranteeing success against Michigan before a packed house at a Buckeye home basketball game:

It's okay to chuckle about parts of the comment. The point is that it truly was an incendiary moment for the rivalry. Tressel kept his word, making up for all those disappointing losses to Michigan by higher-ranked OSU teams under Cooper. He went 9-1 against the Wolverines, highlighted by 2002's barn-burner clinched by a last-second interception inside the Ohio State 5-yard line. That win sent the Buckeyes to the National Championship Game, which they won for their first title since 1968. By the time 2006 rolled around, the Buckeyes were waltzing off the field after "The Game" as if winning it was no big deal the same way Michigan players did during the late 90s. Tressel also went 6-4 in Bowl games, including a Rose Bowl win and the National Championship. Lost in the shuffle of Tressel's inspiring run at OSU--however disappointing the end may have been--is his 2005 squad--lead by another Heisman Trophy winner-to-be, Troy Smith--running up 617 yards of offense against Notre Dame in the Fiesta Bowl after weeks of hype about media-christened offensive mastermind ND Coach, Charlie Weiss. In game recaps, I recall hearing mention that it was the highest single-game yardage output against Notre Dame ever. The stat may have specifically applied to bowl games, but I couldn't tell you for sure--I can't find mention of it anywhere on-line. Touchdown Jesus must have a key to the backdoor of the Internet.

So, here we are with up-and-coming star Brady Hoke's already rejuvenated Michigan team sporting a 9-2 record and licking their chops. OSU's default interim head-coach selection, Luke Fickell and his disjointed Buckeye squad have a tall order this week. The Wolverines are surely thinking blow-out and the Big House will definitely be rockin'. Indeed, Hoke fell into the best possible OSU-Michigan scenario a first-year coach could hope for. The honeymoon may be short, though, if intensifying rumors of Urban Myer's acceptance of the Ohio State job are true. Like the majority of OSU former coaches, Meyer is an Ohio native. That might not surprise you, but what might is the amount of Ohio blood that has been oh-so important to Michigan's success over the years, and not just among the players, many of whom are, in fact, plucked from the Buckeye state. Schembechler and his successor, Gary Moeller are both Ohio natives. So, though Brady Hoke looks like a Michigan guy and has a Michigan name, it should come as no surprise that he sure does sound like he's from Ohio--because he is.

That's not all that concerns me about Hoke, though. He made a comment in the press conference about having been a linebacker and bringing a linebacker's mentality to the job. That statement, his impressive career record, the turnaround he's already fostered at Michigan, and that damn inspiring combination underdog-bulldog persona he carries so effectively tell me that if Urban Myer indeed becomes the next head coach of the Ohio State Buckeyes, there are good days ahead for the rivalry--if Hoke can recruit well.

There's just too much going against the Buckeyes this week. This one might get ugly. Then again, if Fickell can play keep-away and the players can avoid turnovers, there's always the chance that OSU tailback, Boom Herron could have a special day. I'm not counting on it, though.

Ohio State 17
Michigan 31 (The home team goes on the bottom.)

.

The Right Sandwich

2011-11-16T14:44:00.001-08:00

Well, I'd been searching all over for the best sandwich in town. Sure enough, it was hiding at a little deli right around the corner all that time. I'm not even sure what the name of the place is, but it's on Ellis or Eddy at Franklin. This is it:

This is what they give ya:

A thing of beauty, no? Please note the strategically aligned opposing twin layers of meat. I'm not sure that I've ever seen this before. Another stroke of (in)genius. Also, note the healthy color of the tomato and especially the leaf lettuce. This is a hot beef and cheddar sandwich which I noticed the artist adding both mayo and mustard to. I forget what the excellent bread is called, but the crust is cracked into little sections all over the top. I'm splitting it up for 2 meals, but it's probably enough for 3 and costs less than most Subway foot-longs. Morty's makes a very good sandwich as well, and the only place I'd say is even close these folks would be Ike's. All things sandwich considered, though, this place is the winner.

.

Cup-A-Joe

2011-11-13T12:25:00.001-08:00

Sticking with the S.F. cheap eats theme:

The best cup of coffee in town?

Cup-A-Joe. Great roasty, rich coffee flavor with a lot of character, but not overly bitter. I repeat--not overly bitter. All things considered, it's just right. Soluna makes a great cup as well--not cheap, though.

.

IT'S-IT

2011-11-09T19:35:00.000-08:00

Damn right, it is. (Yes, I know--there's your perfect slogan. What can I say?)

Ok--who's the genius behind this?...

Actually, it's ingenious. The greatest ice cream treat of all time, bar none.

.

The Definitive Answer

2011-11-07T10:00:00.000-08:00

http://www.newyorker.com/humor/issuecartoons/2011/11/14/cartoons_20111107#slide=2

Meatballs

2011-11-05T15:37:00.000-07:00

Cut the crap, Morty!

The Perfect Italian Meatball?

I suppose this guy must be right since he's actually Italian and has that thick accent. He says Ricotta is a must. That's a new one on me, but I bow to his native-ness and it sounds like a winner anyway. There's more than one way to skin a meatball, though.

A few alternatives:

Don't use breadcrumbs. Use bread soaked in water for a few minutes and wrung out. You don't actually wring it like you would a wet T-shirt. Just kind of ball it up in both hands and squeeze it. Be sure to remove the crust from the bread first. Your meatballs will come out more moist this way.
Fennel is key to Italian sausage, but it won't hurt your meatball either. Toss some in.
Yes, there aren't many Italian recipes that don't call for garlic, but how many don't call for Basil? Toss some in.
Early in the video, I was worried he was going to stick them in the oven. I was still surprised though when he cooked them on the stove-top in sauce. Very interesting. Stay on the stove-top, but I say live a little and fry 'em in oil. They get a nice, crispy thin outer layer that way and they're nice and juicy. They're great that way even without sauce. Cover them in sauce before serving, of course--if there are any left.

Bon Apitito

.

Mak Wins Apple Logo Race

2011-10-19T15:09:00.000-07:00

I said I would mention something about the recent mini-drama regarding different versions of the Apple logo altered to include Steve Jobs' profile in commemoration of his groundbreaking work. It turns out some designer from London or somewhere claims he'd come up with the same idea which he executed slightly differently months before Jonathan Mak, the Hong Kong design student whose blog got 180,000 hits upon the release of his design at the time of Jobs' death, did. The following media coverage kinda sorta implied that Mak must have gotten the idea from the other guy and, apparently, Mak was vilified to a degree. Ah, the rollercoaster of fame.

I'm nothing close to a professional graphic designer, but I did dabble in it a bit. Both designs are great, but I like Mak's better. It's well executed and he released it at the right time and by a quirk of fate, he became famous. But as far as generating the idea goes, I would think any graphic designer would tell you that what those guys did with the design is quite obvious and that there were likely many other graphic-designer, iPhone fanatics who had the same idea and just didn't follow through. Mak alluded to this directly in his original post:

Posting designs like this one makes me paranoid, because I can’t shake the feeling that it’s not original. I enjoyed the process regardless, but please let me know if somebody else beat me to the idea!

The story I read about the drama mentioned that Mak's blog comment was intended for "the public." It's my guess, it was more specifically intended for other designers/artists who likely make up the bulk of his readers and I have no reason to think the comment wasn't sincere.

He didn't steal the idea. It was a race and he won.

.

Mic Cheetham Website Animation

2011-10-18T16:24:00.000-07:00

A quick note on animated websites:

I think many of them are way too slow. If you're going to have animated transitions, they should be relatively quick. I think often, they just come out gimmicky. Also, the site needs to have other astheatic qualities that work in combination with said animation.

Check this site out. Be sure to mouse over the icons in the bottom left-hand corner of each page once your in them, and play a little Pong with Hal before entering the site:

http://www.miccheetham.com/

Awesome.

.

"No matter How Long It Takes..."

2011-09-11T10:17:00.000-07:00

Anyone who reads this blog knows I'm not a fan of former President, George Bush. Nevertheless, one should consider exactly what he was thrown into ten years ago today. I've actually heard people criticize his reaction upon being notifying of the attack on the World Trade Center--political hyperbole at its best--or worst. Look again when you see that clip today and
put yourself in his shoes. Maybe in that moment he considered the fact that he was sitting before a group of young children. I've never been one to take part in such extreme rhetoric on either side--or at least it's been many years since I have--and I've never seen anything wrong with Mr. Bush's reaction at that moment. I see a guy trying to suppress a look of grave concern. I also see the wheels turning and maybe a well-warranted hint of anger. What would you have had him do? Jump up and run out of the room abruptly? Or jump up and grab the Secret Service guy who delivered the shocking news by the lapels, shake him back and fourth violently and yell, panic-stricken, "What?! Say it isn't so, man!! What ever shall we do??!!" If it were Bill Clinton or Barack Obama, what do you think they would have or should have done, exactly? It's safe to guess that their reaction would have been very similar. I understand that "politics is a contact sport," etc., etc., but criticism of Bush's reaction at such a unique and jarring moment is exactly the kind of extreme* politically-motivated distortion of reality that turns my stomach.

When 9/11 mastermind, Osama Bin Laden wad killed by a U.S. Task Force in May, of all the reactions by major public figures, I thought the closing words of Mr. Bush's statement were the most appropriate by far:

No matter how long it takes, justice will be done.

I like that.

*I wanted to use the word, "petty" here, but I didn't want to offend anyone.

.
Sent from my BlackBerry® on the MetroPCS Network

Windows on the World

2011-09-10T14:30:00.000-07:00

I dined once at Windows on the World, the restaurant at the top of the World Trade Center. To be honest, the food was average, but the night-time view was nothing less than stunning.

After I looked out the back window that day, I tried to call Carrie but couldn't get through. It stayed that way all day. I ran and got my camera and headed up to the roof. After getting a few shots there, I went outside and walked down Noble Street and turned left, heading south along the East River. There's a line of factories there between the street and the water that trails off as you head south. I was less than a hundred feet from
clearing the wall of the last factory to obtain a clear view of the towers when a worker from a warehouse on the left side of the street went running back toward it, yelling, repeating to his co-workers, "Did you see that building fall?!!" When I cleared the wall I got a few quick shots of a yellowish white plume of dust and debris blossoming next to a single WTC Tower.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/09/MN7B1L2G9M.DTL

In today's San Francisco Chronicle, linked above, Folsom resident, Kari Flickinger makes the comments in regard to the U.S.'s reaction to the 9/11 attacks that, "We're like a little kid who didn't know what to do." I agree with Ms. Flickinger's implied aversion to an ongoing state of war. I think that it's fair to say at the very least that our presence in Iraq lasted quite a bit longer than necessary if it was necessary at all. As I've pointed out in an earlier post, though, I think the more important point is that certain extremist rhetoric did nothing but throw unnecessary fuel on the fire, creating a world-wide state of hostility.

Other than that, though, I think the U.S. actions, particularly in Afghanistan and more recently Pakistan, are well warranted. For the long run, I agree with Ms. Flickenger's idealistic notions about a world without war. I really do. Nevertheless, I find her comment ironic in that it reeks of immaturity. In short, when some punk--or punks--sucker punch you from behind, you don't let them get away with it. If you do, they will surely do it again. I know this from experience. Ms. Flickinger should count herself lucky that she is not embroiled in the fight against these extremist fanatics. Perhaps she's forgotten the handful of terrorist attempts that have been foiled over the past ten years. Yep, the shoe-bomber wasn't the only one. The other one that comes to mind first was the fella headed for LAX from Canada with a trunk full of explosives. Remember that one, Kari? Perhaps if 10 years ago a 747 had slammed into the Trans-America Building or the Golden Gate Bridge, Ms. Flickinger would be singing a different tune.

Building

2011-09-09T13:54:00.000-07:00

I took a few photos of the World Trade Center while living in New York--the old fashioned way, on film. I also have maybe a dozen photos of the events of September 11, 2001. I was home at the time and I heard the planes hit, but didn't know what it was. I thought a building in the neighborhood was being demolished by a wrecking ball. Then I got a voice mail
mentioning a disaster in New York, asking if I was alright. (hoping I was dead) I didn't even turn on the TV. Maybe I remembered the slightly metally crash sounds I'd heard earlier. I don't clearly recall hearing an explosion--mostly just a crashing, crunching sound. I looked out the front window. The Chrysler and Empire State buildings stood tall under a pristine blue sky, dominating midtown as usual. A cool breeze blew in as I scanned the scene. Those two buildings and the Twin Towers kind of served as a navigational aid in Manhattan. If you were between them and got crossed up directionally before becoming really familiar with Manhattan, you always knew the Empire State and the Chrysler were uptown and the WTC downtown. Independent rock band Luna has a song called, "Going Home" with the following typically whimsical Dean Warham lyrics:

The Chrysler Building is talkin' to the Empire State
The Twin Towers are talkin' to each other.

When I looked out the back window, the smoke trail drifting from the burning towers seemed to already stretch for miles.

Everybody's got stories like this, but the fact is that between TV jobs I worked two separate stints delivering seafood in Manhattan for a company a friend did sales for. We had a stop directly across the street to the south of the tower and usually made it around that time of the morning. I don't recall whether I was working there at the time or not. I also don't think it was an every day stop. It is what it is. It was right there.

I recall the smell coming from ground zero being considerably strong all the way in Greenpoint for at least 2 weeks.

I considered scanning the photos from that day and posting them this week, but why? Everybody saw what happened and my pics just show one more angle and distance of the horror. I know I've seen those images more than enough in addition to seeing much of it with my eyes. I should have done the pre-9/11 ones. Maybe I will.

Instead, I got these pics this morning in San Francisco of a building under construction. Neat, huh? Sometimes you don't know how these things might go over. I wouldn't post the close-up without the wide. One of the pics I got of the WTC, pre-9/11 was a pretty nice wide silhouette taken from the roof of my Greenpoint building at dusk. My girlfriend suggested using it in our Christmas card in December of '01. If there was any shot of the buildings you could do that with at the time, that was one of them, but I still thought it wasn't a nice reminder on Christmas. She insisted, though, so guess what? It was a very warm and fuzzy shot, though.

I always thought that a cool thing to include in the WTC site memorial would be a sculpture shaped like one of the columns in the bottom floors' exterior facade in which the vertical lines go straight up from the ground and at the second floor converge and head straight up, kind of shifting the pattern. Just take one of those and maybe have the tips broken off at different heights. A three-dimensional structure standing alone. Two facing each other other or aligned as the buildings were might be even better. I think that would be quite appropriate and properly effective in many ways. I always liked that facade. Scroll down for a great shot of it in on this page: http://www.bobbyshred.com/twintowers.html

Some of these iron skeletons waiting so patiently to be filled and covered by cement seem to hint at that shape. I like these pics. There's something sad about them, for sure, but they are shots of a building going up:

(I just noticed the bird in this shot. Very cool:)

Don't Get Me Wrong about the Times

2011-09-04T12:16:00.000-07:00

While I'd like it to be more "independent," all things considered, the NY Times is the best source of world news in exsitence. The breadth and depth of coverage is rarely matched. That's not to say there aren't other great news sources. The SF Chronicle is fantastic and you might be surprised to learn that the Cleveland Plain Dealer is a pretty good paper too, but the Times is in a different league. Any journalist will tell you that and those who say otherwise have an agenda against it. That's not to say the Times is above certain shenanigans. Print journalism is in trouble and they're competing at the highest level.

To further my point, I'll say that I haven't noticed another source covering the following topic so closely and regularly:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/world/asia/03china.html?pagewanted=all

I was intimidated by the Times at first, but they're right when they say you'll find things in it that you won't find anywhere else. It is what it is. If you're concerned about human rights and you don't read it, consider yourself uninformed.

.

And, While We're on the Subject of Tulsa, OK...

2011-09-03T15:17:00.001-07:00

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/man-stabbed-dies-during-surgery-tulsa-hospital/nDXZd/

Pregnant Woman Pushes Husband out 17th-Floor Window

2011-09-03T13:37:00.000-07:00

"They said Josh, who was in the Air Force, didn't leave because Amber was eight months pregnant with their first child."

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/josh-hilberling-pushed-window-dies-alleged-male-spousal/story?id=13813096

Geeee...I just can't put my finger on it, but this story rings a bell.
.

Bonzo Bingo with Goober and Junior

2011-09-01T18:01:00.000-07:00

It turns out there are quite a few Goober & The Peas videos on Youtube. Here's a few of them...

Detroit Municpal Recordings: "The Most Distinguished Recording Cartel on Earth."...

Goober and Junior promote a comeback show as only they can:

Poor Junior...

Note the confident, I'm-in-charge nod of the head to the crowd at 1:20. Truly priceless...

They're a lot of fun.

.

Give a Holler for Goober & The Peas

2011-09-01T16:11:00.000-07:00

"Because love is something that needs to be nurtured, watered, cared for, and...talked to."

--Junior

Well, folks, I dug deep in to my stash of CDs and ran in to some old friends. I first encountered Goober & the Peas by chance during a night out at 700 High, also known as the 700 Club, in Columbus, Ohio way back in the early 90s. As the boys warmed up, it was impossible not to notice their nearly perfect Honky-Tonk period, Grand Ol' Opry outfits. I had no idea what was coming, but most of the people in the crowd appeared to be pretty excited. When the single from their first album, The Complete Works of Goober & The Peas, "Funky Cowboy," kicked in and all I saw was a flash of the bottom of lanky front man Goober's shoe about level with his the top of his head as a spray of hay engulfed the crowd, I knew I was in for a fun night. I actually believed their opening lines about being from Arizona until my friend, Julie, pointed out that everything about their clever, highly amusing 50's-era Honky-Tonk culture-spoof shtick is an act, and that they're actually from Detroit. Of course, there was no way for me to know at the time that they appear on Detroit Municipal Recordings.

Please, allow me to introduce you to the boys. In the photo at the top, at left, on lead guitar, is "Junior." Always a gentleman, that Junior. Tough to get a
snap-shot of him when he's not tipping his hat. Peakin' out from behind ol' Junior with a devilish smile is Bassist, "Boss Hoss." And that beanpole in the back muggin' for the camera, well, that's ol' "Goober," himself. Next, also on guitar, is "Shorty." (Hell, you mighta figured that one out for yerself.) Last, but certainly not least, you've got Doc on the skins.

It turns out the boys played a well-received come-back show (seen here) the day after Christmas, 2009, bringing and end to a painful "15 year hiatus/vacation." Why wasn't I notified?

I'd like to write a post describing the full effect of their live performance, but words could never do it justice. It must be experienced. You can get an idea about the completeness of their dedication to what they stand for, though, by checking out their Facebook info page. Here's a sample:

Band Interestes:

Putting things on layaway, pride in one's hygiene, Swanson Turkey Dinners, finding hope in the bottom of a bottle, vacationing along the Detroit River, sitting at the bar whining about cheatin' hearts, warm bubble baths...

Also, you can find the vast bulk of their catalogue on Amazon, including their farewell (second) album, The Jet Age Genius* of Goober and the Peas (seen here). In case yer wond'rin' about the footnote and can't read it here, I'll let ya in on it: "'Genius' rating based on public opinion poll. Margin of error, +/- 66%." It was also mighty nice of the guys to let us know before purchasing that the 1995 product is, in fact, recorded "IN STEREO." This album is great, but I think Complete Works gets the edge. It's filled with songs lamenting relationship and family trouble, reminiscing about the good ol' days, and a heart-breaking comparison of a lost love's turkey dinners to those of corporate behemoth, Swanson's, all interspersed with deep-delving dialogue between Goober and Junior. The point is, if you have even the remotest affinity for rockabilly punk, you'll be happy to own both of them. I don't know what else to say. You have to experience it for yourself. Both albums kick ass and are very enjoyable and humorous. I laughed through the whole album today. They're a blast. Here's a few lines from "Consider Me":

Just cause yer ma and pa and me don't get along
I'll still come to yer window and sing my song
And if I told your mama that she was good-lookin'
Said real nice things about her god-awful cookin'
If I said her tuna casserole was good
Even though the thing tasted just like wood
Would you still consider me?
Would you still consider me?

That's actually mild lyrically. They're hilarious. Also, if Doc wasn't obscured in shadow on the cover of Jet Age Genius*, you might recognize him. It's John Gillis, later know as Jack White, founder of The White Stripes.

I didn't even know they have a video:

Oh, I don't knowwwww...they might be promoting unflattering images of women in that song. Quick--Somebody call the ACLU on Goober and the Peas!!

The Department of Peace

2011-08-26T15:00:00.000-07:00

You see this kind of thing in S.F. all the time, but I find this to be a particularly clever piece of rhetoric...

Why not? (Don't answer that.)

Sent from my BlackBerry® on the MetroPCS Network

The Rule of Thirds

2011-08-24T14:54:00.000-07:00

There was a point when I was living in New York when photography got to be a pretty serious hobby. Like San Francisco, there are just lots and lots of great subject matter there. I never studied how to deal with lighting or got beyond a rudimentary understanding of the relationship between aperture and shudder speed. Individually, they aren't so difficult, buy thinking about how they work together can be confusing. In aperture, the bigger the hole, the smaller the number, right? It didn't matter though because I really only cared about shooting in non-overcast sunlight, the best light there is, anyway. All I cared about was composition which I think is
paramount to photography. Most professional SLRs make automatic adjustments for lighting conditions anyway, and though I've seen some cameras with a kind of "steady-shot" feature, the one thing the camera can not do for you and never will is position itself. Considering advancements in computerized visual recognition technology, I wouldn't be surprised to hear of a semi-automatic zoom, maybe, but I would never use such a thing and I would guess that most professionals wouldn't either. Bottom line: composition will always be the photog's responsibility.

Not that I'm any sort of authority, but I would have no reservations whatsoever in telling a novice photographer (I'm practically a novice, myself.) that if there is one rule of the trade that will instantly make him a much better photographer it is The Rule of Thirds. I know it did for me. I ran into a photographer recently who said it started with artists using it in paintings and naturally drifted into photography. In The Rule of Thirds, which is very effectively illustrated on this Wikipedia page with a gif you can mouse over, the frame of the photo viewfinder is divided into 9 equal squares or rectangles by using 2 vertical lines and 2 horizontal lines so it looks like a tic-tac-toe board. The rule states that positioning important elements in the subject matter on the lines, but even more-so at the intersections, will make for a more dynamic, interesting image.

I recently got a Blackberry and I've been taking some pictures with it. I took a few shots of S.F. City Hall in which I slanted the frame--another rockin' little, terribly simple trick that will add tension to a shot. In the Batman TV series many of the introductory wide shots of the bad guy's layer or wherever the brawl took place were shot cockeyed. Yesterday, I happened to catch sight of a photo-worthy subject. Even the most experienced photographers will tell you luck has a lot to do with catching that interesting moment just the right way. This is the only shot I took. I really lucked out.

The first stroke of luck is the gesture the woman on the left is making. It's nothing less than a photographer's miracle of serendipitous timing. If she had her arms down at her sides like her friend, the shot wouldn't be nearly as good. Combined with the look on her face, it makes you wonder what she's thinking or saying. Secondly, I think the cab adds something--gives it a nice urban feel as does the metal book drop-off box. The old fashioned window shapes on the Federal Building in the back help too. Also, I hadn't noticed before taking the shot just how long the woman on the right's hair is, which also adds to the appeal of the image. I'm not crazy about the maroon-colored vehicle partially obscured by the woman on the right, but it's not that bad. In fact, it probably adds a little more contrast against the thin sliver of her sleeve you see to the left of her purse strap than might have been there without it. I'm also not crazy about the point at which their feet are cut off, but everything else, especially the head-space, is so good, I'll gladly live with it. And in regard to the Rule of Thirds? I wasn't even thinking about it...

Sent from my BlackBerry® on the MetroPCS Network

;-)

.

Bo Derek.........United States Special Envoy

2011-08-17T13:20:00.000-07:00

Where do I apply? I'll have to take a break from all the fun I'm having and start working on getting Madam Secretary's number...

http://news.yahoo.com/bo-derek-backs-calif-bill-banning-shark-fin-193839605.html

.

A Match Made in Rock and Roll Heaven

2011-08-14T14:13:00.000-07:00

If wishes were horses we'd all ride.

--Doyle Bramhall II

It was only a matter of time. I recently learned that my boy, Doyle Bramahall II, the best barrelhouse blues-rock guitar player you never heard of, is now dating my girl, Sheryl Crow, the most under-rated lyricist in pop music. Isn't that sweet? Lucky him. Mr. Bramhall boasts a notable Rock and Blues pedigree which I'll leave you to explore for yourself on the bio-page of his website. I discovered Mr. Bramhall when he opened for Gov't Mule at Irving Plaza some time around 2000 or so. I thought he blew those fellas off the stage and to be blunt, after perusing his personal site and considering his relative pop-culture obscurity, I can't help but think he's been
the victim of sub-par management. Some time around '03 or '04 I caught a taped show from Roger Waters' then recent tour on VH1 or something and lo and behold, there was Doyle on lead guitar, effortlessly soaring through the solo of the Pink Floyd anthem, "Comfortably Numb." Hey--I know that guy. He spent much of the rest of the decade playing second fiddle to none other than Mr. Crossroads (jr.) himself, Eric Clapton.

I think the thing with Bramhall is that though he's got a handfull of tunes with good lyrics and he's a pretty good singer, overall he's not the greatest lyricist but obviously wants to write lyrics like every other recording artist does. A big point of contention within Zeppelin was that John Paul Jones felt that his attempts at writing were too often dismissed. On Zeppelin's DVD there's a clip in which a reporter asks Jones about the band's use of his lyrics writing to which he replies a bit tersely, something to the effect of, "Oh, I suspect we shall get around to it." Bramhall should have started something called the Doyle Bramhall Band a long time ago and recruited a heavyweight singer song-writer to share those duties and play "front-man" on stage, thus relieving him what I must assume is a self-imposed pressure to do it all. Creative people can be that way. Sometimes, he doesn't seem comfortable singing, if you ask me. Maybe Sheryl can handle that for him, eh? I caught a concert by Sheryl at the Beacon Theater in '99. If you're not familiar with all of her self-titled second album, you should be. There's a lot more to it than those 3 or 4 monster hits. She's known to use a Drop-D tuning occasionally and many of her lyrics are quite sumblime--in an every-day kind of way. And, oh yeah--she's a big Zeppelin fan too.

.

War of Words: NYT v. WSJ in Copy-Editing

2011-07-06T18:41:00.000-07:00

Journal Wins by Early-Round K.O.

Media Bistro ran a story today about a spat between The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal over The Journal running a story and not crediting The Times for breaking it. Bistro Writer, Chris O'Shea calls that and other disputes between the print-journalism behemoths, "meaningless." I'm not too sure about that. Scoops still means something to the folks digging them up, as well they should. Maybe someone should start looking at the big boys' copy-editing.

It's easy to kick back and pick on The Times for editing oversights as I have recently. I'm not the one battling high-pressure deadlines every day. I recently ran into a copy of The Journal, though, and while reading about a half-dozen or more articles in it, I did not come across any
noteworthy copy-editing mistakes or even a typo. The only thing I did notice was a not-really-necessary coma before the word, "in" in a very long sentence in the middle of a piece about congressional staffers who continue to earn income from previous employers while working on Capitol Hill. I'm inclined to think Journal editors just tossed it in there because the sentence was so long, but the truth is, it was so properly structured, it would have been just fine without it. But then again, I noticed the same thing somewhere else in that day's edition. It's possible that, technically, a comma is necessary before the word "in," but was abandoned in practice long ago, which would mean WSJ is really keeping it old school, which I applaud. Nevertheless, my final opinion is that according to grammar logic ("Grammar Logic!!"--who will be first to steal that one?), including a comma in that situation is incorrect.

I'm going to stop covering specific copy-editing mistakes in The Times because, quite frankly, they're all too common. Sorry, guys--WSJ wins hands down in a copy-editing/proofreading comparison.

I do want to clarify something, though. When I cited the following NYT example in a recent post, I didn't make it clear that I see ways to fix the poorly structured sentence. The simplest solution being eliminating "that climate change."

In Britain, reducing carbon dioxide emissions was one of the few policies supported by political parties of both the right and left, which both accepted that climate change was a serious problem and saw clean technology investment as a growth opportunity rather than an onerous obligation.

Wow... the more I read it, the more I see how bad the sentence is in various ways. The best solution would probably be to make it two sentences, which reminds me: I recently re-read "Media Coverage of Hidden Brain Damage Mounts," which I was pretty happy with at first. Enough time elapsed since I'd last read it, though, to make it clear this time around that it's plagued by a handful of painfully long sentences--a couple of which are even confusing--that could have easily been divided into two or even three separate sentences. This illustrates the value of at least a second person reading a piece before publishing. I'm only one person.

There ya have it.

.

A Few Scenes From the San Francisco Jazz Fest

2011-07-05T14:00:00.000-07:00

Here are some snippets from the 2011 San Francisco Jazz Fest. If you care to check them out, you might want to turn the audio down first and then turn it up after starting each video, since it came out distorted through my cheap camera.

I hate to say it. SF, but
I'm a credit-where-credit-is-due kinda guy. This was the best beat I heard all weekend (not that I'm an expert on beats) and, for that matter, in quite some time. You hear it on the subways; you hear it on the street. It's like sensory overload; infectious; nonstop. The last 20 seconds is particularly tasty...

This is Groove 8 from North Carolina. They did a kind of Funk/R&B jazz fusion. I'll mention that I caught the bass player direct an exasperated half eye-roll at the sax player when he got carried away during their performance the next day. Maybe he's Groove 8's equivalent of Sean Edan, a.k.a., "The Noodler" of Luna. Seriously, though, he was awesome just like the rest of the band. I believe they were the only outfit that played both days, which says something. They were great...

This is Mingus Amungus. Much of the excellent music you hear at the SF Jazz Fest is one or another kind of offshoot, related version of jazz. These guys did the best pure jazz I heard at the festival before the singer joined. Really smokin', stuff, including what may have been the best jazz bass solo I've ever heard, which I don't believe is in this clip. Too bad for you...

And to close, here's another lovely piece of pure jazz on the heavenly side. I didn't catch the perfomer's name. Isn't she talented?

.

Burn, Burn, Burn...

2011-06-11T11:32:00.000-07:00

The fact that at the time there were a half-dozen bands better than these guys should tell you something about the early to mid 90s ...

Yeah...they know how to belt it out.

Hi, Joey.

.

Copy-Editing Problems at the Times?

2011-06-10T13:22:00.000-07:00

This from a recent article in the NY Times:

In Britain, reducing carbon dioxide emissions was one of the few policies supported by political parties of both the right and left, which both accepted that climate change was a serious problem and saw clean technology investment as a growth opportunity rather than an onerous obligation.

Guys, guys, guys!! I've got better things to do. Break it up into two sentences next time.

...And furthermore, what really disappoints me is that the mistake is very, very similar to the problem we covered last weekend!

...If Judy Prebish was over there, somebody'd get busted down to society page copy boy!

.

NY Times Paywall? So Far, So Good.

2011-06-08T16:27:00.000-07:00

This is a great sign for journalism. Ideally, the rest of the industry will follow suit in descending order of prestige and size, or everybody just do it all on the same day...

http://www.businessinsider.com/time-for-a-lot-of-people-to-eat-crow-the-new-york-times-paywall-is-working-2011-6#ixzz1Oho6d8NC

.

Shaq Attack

2011-06-07T17:02:00.000-07:00

Do Your Homework, Bob.
(An Open Letter to Bob Frantz)

Mr. Frantz:

I enjoyed your lucid essay on the career of recently retired NBA superstar, Shaquille O'Neal. I agree with you--to a certain point. Indeed, in the final third of his career, Shaq's bread-and-butter move was backing guys down in the paint until he was nearly under the hoop before dunking or dropping in a baby hook. And, yes, during that part of his career he got away with
more than his fair share of camping in the paint and maybe even traveling. I think, though, that maybe you're being a little short-sighted in regard to his full body of work.

Other than an obvious case of myopia, the main problem with your piece, Mr. Frantz, is in the examples of other players you use to support your argument. Your criticism clearly focuses on what you perceive so confidently as O'Neal's limited post-player skill set. You write, "he never developed that basketball skills that so many of the all-time greats did." Then, to end the paragraph, you name single signature moves as evidence: Jabbar's sky-hook, Ewing's turnaround jumper, and Olajuwon's "dreamshake."

I grew up watching Kareem Abdul-Jabbar during the Lakers' "showtime" years of the 80s while I played center for my high school. Quite frankly, I was never that impressed with his overall offensive game. Yes--he used one very difficult, very effective shot--which he usually executed to perfection--that was, for the most part, unstoppable.  Still, at the time, his game was a shadow of what it was in his earlier days. I'll never forget the first time I saw highlight footage of him playing for the Milwaukee Bucks, absolutely wheeling and dealing--grainy shots of him executing various different moves including a baseline reverse dunk. Like Shaq, after the first ten years of his career, his game changed considerably. Also, you mention that O'Neal benefited from playing with Koby Bryant, one of the all-time greats and that Patrick Ewing's above average career would have done the same. Um... Abdul-Jabbar had a couple pretty nifty teammates, too. Exactly how do you rate Magic Johnson and James Worthy? As chopped liver?

Patrick Ewing never reached his potential. He didn't even start pulling down his share of rebounds until Pat Reilly became his coach. Comparing his "skill set" to Shaq is a no-brainer. Shaq wins, hands down. Patrick Ewing ranks easily among the top-ten most overrated players in the history of the game.

Olajuwan was one of my idols. He was a ridiculously gifted natural athlete, and, though he lived mostly on a high-arching turnaround jumper and nimble moves used under the basket after snagging offensive rebounds, he did have a high level of both skills and talent. Plus, he could swat shots with the best of them.   Yes--he was better than Shaq.

You also mention that O'Neal is not "in the league of the great Wilt Chamberlain [or] Bill Russell." I'll give you a pass on Russell, who was 6', 10", tops, and had a diverse skill set which he used at both ends of the court in addition to his natural athletic ability. He was the leader of the greatest dynasty in the history of the game. Anybody who knows anything about basketball knows he ranks as an all-time great and is considered by many to be #1.

Anybody who knows anything about basketball also knows that at 7', 1", Chamberlain, who did indeed have exceptional post skills in addition to natural talent and size, was ahead of his time. Most un-fettered commentary I've heard about Chamberlain called him a man among boys and much of the footage proves it (except against Russell) as he dumped in finger-rolls from his tip-toes while some poor schmuck enjoyed a close-up whiff of his apparently pheromone-blasting armpit. So, according to your logic, it was acceptable for Chamberlain to use his physical gifts to gain an unfair advantage, but not for O'Neal. How interesting. (Of course, the Cavs didn't exist when Chamberlain was playing, but we'll get to that later.) George Mikan was also ahead of his time, by the way.

You also mention "several of his contemporaries," but don't offer any specific examples, when in fact, in a discussion focusing on Shaq's contempararies' post-skills sets, you need mention only one: Tim Duncan. (I shouldn't need to explain this, Bob--so, I won't.)  I find this odd, considering your exceptional acumen for the game and its history.

And finally, in regard to the history of highly skilled NBA low-post players (Since he played as much like a small forward as a power forward, I won't cover James Worthy.), you missed the best. It's no surprise though, considering he played in the shadow of one of the all-time greats, regardless of position. He was slow, could barely jump, and at 6', 10", wasn't really all that tall for a low-post player in the 80s, going up against the likes of Abdul-Jabbar and Olajuwan. But long arms and deceptive quickness aided the most diverse post-skills arsenal of all time to make him nearly unstoppable. Yeah, that's right--Kevin McHale had it all: turnaround jumper (both ways), jump and baby hook (both ways), face-up jumper from anywhere within fifteen feet of the basket, sick baseline stuff and even sicker stuff deep in the paint.

You should watch this video, Bob. Pay close attention at these times: 1:45, 2:30, 2:47, 3:14...oh, I'm sure there are more, but I don't feel like watching the whole thing:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewBnHq04CRg&feature=related

This one might help, too:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlSZC4TAYVc

If you must rant, Bob, at least do a little homework.

Multiple Choice Quiz:

A.) Bob Frantz is fully aware of everything I wrote and wrote his piece specifically for the purpose of eliciting responses such as mine and with the goal of getting his piece printed in a newspaper as far away as San Francisco on the strength of its potential to initiate controversy.

B.) Bob Frantz really doesn't know that much about NBA Basketball.

C.) Bob Frantz does know quite a bit about NBA basketball, but is living in a state denial and jealousy of big-time winners because of constant hometown pro-sports let-downs.  He knows his Cavaliers ran out of miracles a long time ago and is having a hard time dealing with the fact that they were unable to win a championship with LeBron James--a classic case of sour grapes. Yep--Bob knows that the main ingredient missing from James' Cavs teams that likely would have put them over the top was a marquee pure point guard, and that the organization blew it when they didn't go all out to get Chauncey Billups when he became available in Detroit.

Shit happens, Bob.

.

Rhythm Kings

2011-06-07T10:31:00.000-07:00

From the Fuhkingruvin Dept.

Eat your heart out, Mr. Watts. (It's really the bass line that makes this so tasty, though.)...

Dr. Jack and a Note on Grammar

2011-06-06T14:06:00.000-07:00

Thoughts on The Times

Dr. Jack
Saturday's New York Times included an obituary on Dr. Jack Kevorkian. A Times obit is the best condensed, easily digestible biography you'll ever read. It's one of my favorite things about the paper. I have a single reflection on the hotly contested issue of Kevorkian's work. Every person over the age of
60 with whom I've discussed it--in truth, there were only a few--expressed approval.

Sorry, Ian
Newspaper staffs across the country have been decimated, surely creating increased per-staffer workloads required to produce the same quality and quantity. Typos and copy-editing mistakes slip through the sieve every day. It's an unavoidable result of the collision of high volume and constant deadlines. It's nothing new. My posts are probably full of mistakes I'm not even aware of, but I do go out of my way for proper grammar despite Kreig Zimmerman's "suggestion" that grammar is overrated. (Nice try, Kreig.) Nevertheless, I can't let this one slide. Another Times article from Saturday, "China Agency Says Threat To Ecosystem Is 'Grave'", includes the following sentence:

But the signs are growing that environmental neglect is causing instability.

I know--it sounds right, and in conversation it's quite common, generally accepted, and just not that big of deal. Still--and I hate to be such a stickler--technically, it is grammatically incorrect in a way I don't recall noticing in the Times previously. At the very least, it's quite awkward. The word, "indicate" or "indicating" might help, but when I get in that situation, I generally put the predicate at the end of the sentence, which, may technically be wrong as well. Is there anything wrong with ending with a verb? Somebody help me out, here. Just my two cents.

I should add an interesting note about this: when reading the questionably structured sentence all by itself, the problem isn't nearly as evident as when one runs into it while reading the article. This tells me it's also a rhythm thing.

Sniff, sniff.... I do it because... because I love you, man. ;-)

.

"Swayin' Like a Sunflower on a Spanish Afternoon"

2011-06-03T14:26:00.000-07:00

J. Paul Zoccali

My exploration of Indie Rock music didn't start until I was nearly thirty, and has, for the most part, remained peripheral. It never would have happened at all, though, if it weren't for my friend, Gene--a guru of the genre who once dreamed of starting his own record label*--inviting me to a Luna concert at the Bowery Ballroom some time around 1999. All in one night I was introduced to the non-mainstream but not exactly punk rock genre, and found two new personal favorites: a band and a live music venue. I like Irving Plaza a lot, but
the Bowery Ballroom, where Luna played their final show in early 2005, is unbeatable in my book.

Gene had tried to turn me on to Luna previously, as well as Built to Spill (who I also later became a fan of), but I just wasn't getting it through the two or three songs he'd played for me from their albums. Maybe I was too stressed out about getting on my feet in New York. Maybe Indie Rock is just an acquired taste requiring a higher energy, in-your-face hook for a formerly strictly classic rock fan, at the time transitioning to jazz.

At some point since that incendiary Luna show, I identified what I think was the show's setlist on line, which I'm now having a hard time locating. As I recall, the set that night ended with "Friendly Advice", followed by the two-song, sequentially crowd-calming encore** of "Sideshow By The Seashore," and "Bonnie and Clyde," both from the band's sonic and artistic masterpiece LP, Penthouse. The entire Luna show was exciting and dynamic, but it was the infectious lazy rumble of "Friendly Advice"--Luna's somewhat psychedelic, surf-rocky 2-chord gem--seemingly emerging from nowhere with all instruments in unison, that instantly made me a fan of the band. I see songs that start that way as the musical equivalent of In Media Res--it's like it was already happening in another dimension before breaking through an invisible boundary, picking you up in the middle of the ride.***

Partly because I'm into his art, partly because of my new commitment to lighter reading, I recently picked up "Black Postcards: A Rock & Roll Romance," Luna founder and front-man, Dean Wareham's autobiography. The narrative has more than a few holes I wish were filled in for clarity, but then again I guess it's appropriate that Wareham, whose unique art has been classified as Dream Rock, spins a yarn describing an unforgiving industry and the good times-bad times nature of the life of a rock band that is, at points, a disjointed blur. It's a front-car seat on a roller coaster ride driven by a guy who fronted not one, but two much-revered Indie Rock outfits. I'm inclined to think "Postcards" would make a good introductory primer for anyone considering a career in the music biz.

I wouldn't exactly call it a tell-all. Wareham sticks to code and doesn't dish on his bandmates nearly as much as I suspect he could have. But it's definitely a tell-a-lot, including a description of the initial moments of Wareham's unexpected affair with then new Luna bassist, Britta Phillips. (I wonder if Wareham's former bandmates ever refer to her as Yoko.) Incidental and/or coincidental pieces of trivia add extra flavor and humor to the story. In a passage about touring, Wareham bemoans an unwritten obligation that comes with playing smaller clubs. Apparently, the protocol requires that, before doing anything else upon finishing their set/s for the night, he and his bandmates mingle with the crowd to answer guys' questions regarding distortion pedals. Wareham also reveals that his first band, Speedy and the Castanets, borrowed their first drum kit from his then college classmate, Conan O'Brien.

During a recent stroll down Haight Street, I decided to stop in at Amoeba Music with the intention of browsing posters, oblivious that I was carrying "Postcards" with me. Once I'd perused the perimeter of the small-warehouse size shop whose outer walls are nearly completely covered with posters representing seemingly every pop music sub-genre and decade of the past century, I thought, "Well, I'll see what Luna they have."

The selection was bigger than I expected. I had to flip through only four or five items before I found, to my pleasant surprise and priced as used at $4.99, a pristine copy of the one major, original studio release by Luna missing from my collection, a six-song set defiantly titled, E.P. Anchored by "Sideshow," the set is filled out with five tasty leftovers from previous sessions and a couple covers. There were two stickers on the case, one indicating it was "Previously Owned", the other that it was "Out of Print." It was so clean--on the outside, anyway--I asked the clerk as he rang it up, "This is used, right?" I set my book on the counter as I reached for my wallet and the girl working the next register eyed the shot of Wareham the cover, upside-down from her angle. She couldn't have been older than thirty. I asked her if she was a Luna fan and she said she recognized Wareham from his previous band, Galaxie 500.

I'd heard one of the numbers from E.P., "The Moviegoer", at some point over the years, but didn't catch the words. The opening lines mock the money-burning extravagance of Hollywood in Wareham's signature, sardonically whimsical fashion:

In Hollywood, I hear they have, a disco-tech for dogs,
And summer camp, where you can send your Cabbage Patch Dolls

I couldn't help but to be reminded of an old C.B.S. post. "Late Night Looney Tunes" wraps up with a description of a Late Night with Conan O'Brien segment that aired during his short L.A. stint in which Triumph, the Insult Comic Dog makes sport of an L.A. spa for pets as only Triumph can. The spa employee--she may have been the owner--didn't exactly cooperate.

Ahhh, the interconnectivety of the universe. What is it with me and Harvard grads from that generation, anyway? (See: "Bullshit," and "A View.") I'm not suggesting that I'm on an intellectual level with the upper-echelon Ivy League folks I've coincidentally written about in this blog. My ex-girlfriend went to NYU for theatre, and I did work closely with a guy who went to Brown, but, so what? According to the makers of Family Guy, Brown apparently isn't all that prestigious. (I can't find the clip. In an encounter Brian has with a Harvard grad in the episode in which he returns to college, Brian mentions he went to Brown. The Harvard guy responds, "Ooh, my incarcerated business partner's retarded gay niece went to Brown. What year did you graduate?" (Everything is relative, I guess.))

The truth is, during the years when I watched Conan, I didn't get half the jokes, but I figured, at least semi-consciously, that if I immersed myself in material that is sometimes beyond me, it would bring me up over time. (Reading the New York Times every day was part of this plan.) Like Woody Hayes used to say, either you're getting better or you're getting worse. Either way, I wasn't aware that either Wareham or O'Brien went to Harvard until reading this book.

In a passage describing the meticulous, slo-mo creation of Luna's fourth and biggest selling album, Pup Tent, Wareham describes an unconventional method for hurdling writer's block:

I stayed up late working on [the "Fuzzy Wuzzy"] lyrics, sitting on the sofa, drinking aquavit and smoking cigarettes--too get in the mood. I stole a couple of lines from a women's fashion magazine, always a good source for florid and silly descriptions. The magazine said that long sweater dresses were a must-have for the season.
Sexy long sweater dresses
Chocolate knee-high leather boots
Maybe tonight will be the night
I can see your fuzzy wuzzy

Here's an even better example:

I had patched the "IHOP" lyrics together from an episode of Wheel of Fortune, my own reading on Andre Breton, and an article about the Khmer Rouge in the New York Times. They seemed to make sense. The song was about a cad.

And at the weekly meeting
Of anonymous Cads
You shuffle your feet
And whistle out loud
Listen what they're sayin'
What a load of crap
You ain't no Cary Grant
But then again,
Who is?

Wareham's use of disparate, unexpected sources of Rock and Roll inspiration illustrates the big, semi-secret, underlying joke of O'Brien's abstract humor and Wareham's often mysterious lyrics: sometimes there is no point--it's just silly humor for the sake of being funny, or simple, clever prose that have good rhythm and/or rhyme, and present a string of thought-provoking, but sometimes disconnected or even meaningless images. It's only rock and roll. Writing's not the rocket surgery most people think, but more about getting in a creative groove and developing little back-up methods like that. I experienced this while dabbling in T-shirt design. When you're being creative and coming up with ideas, it feeds itself.

Then again, some of Wareham's vivid poetry is thought-provoking in a more coherent way, like these provocative, half-whispered lines from Pup Tent's noirish title track:

I see you walkin'
Walkin' on your tippy toes
Swayin' like a sunflower
On a Spanish afternoon
My mind is takin' photographs
Of every little thing
Exhibit number 8...
Don't be late

Finally, to complete this serendipitous circle revolving around a mind of which it is increasingly apparent that I am a part--and have been for some time--but am having a hard time reconnecting to (mainly because of false allegations by, well, sanctimonious Christians among other fanatics--but that's another story), Wareham mentions, among anecdotes recalled from Luna's 2004 farewell tour, a certain politically-charged event at a Luna date in Cincinnati:

The next day, Britta and I wandered into a Barnes & Noble in Cincinnati. They had a huge Christian book section there, but I also saw a teenage girl wearing a Larry Flynt T-shirt, which warmed my heart. Wherever you have sanctimonious Christians telling you what's right and wrong, you also have people who despise them.
One gentleman at our Cincinnati show wore a T-shirt bearing an image of George Bush as Lucifer, with a quotation from the Bible on the back, a warning to us all to beware of false prophets who think they are vessels for the Lord. I invited him up to the stage and he received a round of applause.

Hmmm...this story sounds familiar. (I refer you again to "Bullshit.")

I really enjoyed the book. Thanks, Dean.

Scribble Scrabble (Other Reflections on "Black Postcards: A Rock & Roll Romance")

The Long and the Short of It
Wareham writes a lot about the creative part of the recording process, which I found interesting. There are two different extremes artists and their producer can take in their approach to it. He describes instances in which Luna went through both: doing several takes for every song part and meticulously trying different effects, etc, finally piecing it all together, as they did on Pup Tent. The other way, then, is to get everybody in the same room, play the song like a live performance and add overdubs later, but never do more than 2 or 3 takes, as they did on their last album, Rendezvous. A recurrent, somewhat humorous part of Wareham's story was how lead guitarist, Sean Eden, was very meticulous about his solos, particularly on the songs he wrote, sometimes doing as many as 20 takes. Wareham felt that, as is often true in the creative process, that the first one was the best. This tendency earned Eden a few nicknames, including "Meanderthal" and "The Noodler." Either way, it all came out in the wash. Eden's provocative riffs and beautifully minimal, soaring Gilmour-esque solo work is a key component in Luna's signature sound.

Days of Our Lives
Near the end of the book, in his discussion of Rendezvous, Wareham writes that when the guitar player sings a song, it's a bad sign for the band, kind of like when a sit-com brings in a baby or a pet. I couldn't disagree more. Eden's singing a couple tunes on the farewell collection added a new dynamic missing from previous Luna records. Around that time, the band added a member named Laura to play keyboards and other accompaniments during live performances. Months later, Eden revealed that he and Laura had been having a relationship and keeping it secret, thus making for 2 romantic relationships that started through meeting as Luna bandmates and kept secret at first. Wareham quips, "Luna was turning into Fleetwood Mac." In more ways than one, Dean--one of the things that made Fleetwood Mac's art so appealing is that they had three different lead-singers. The vocal line, usually way out in front of the mix in pop music (unless you're Led Zeppelin) is the main thing most listeners pay attention to, so changing it up occasionally automatically creates a fresh, dynamic feel.

A Fine Farewell
I was very happy to read Wareham's concurrence with my opinion, held since first listening to it, that Rendezvous, which was the subject of considerable negative criticism in the press, is actually among Luna's best albums. Wareham states unequivocally that Days of Our Nights was their worst effort. I would counter that the only reason that's probably true is that the outstanding "Black Postcards", one of three or four numbers that might qualify as a Luna anthem, happens to be on Romantica, which I would otherwise rank at the bottom of the Luna catalogue.

_________________

*Gene wanted to call it Liberty Records. During an impromptu creative meeting, we came up with a logo consisting of the Statue of Liberty holding a burning 45-rpm record. I then added, "How about New Liberty Records?" We were on our way.

**Luna's encore reminds me of a notable comparison between two bands that are hardly comparable otherwise, except for the magnitude of their success. At the one Grateful Dead concert I was lucky enough to attend during their last tour, the crowd did a lot of anticipatory hooting and hollering--and mooing--on the way into the show. Sure enough, the band paid off. I was blown away. The sound and the musicianship were both incredible. A Grateful Dead concert is a special experience. I even started a clap during China/Rider (before the transition and lasting through it) that spread relatively far through our section of Giants Stadium . I later heard from more than one Dead-head, that it was a "good show." Take from this what you will: When I attended a concert by Jimmy Page & Robert Plant in 1998, the same thing happened: primal shouts echoed through the outer concourse as fans shuffled into Madison Square Garden. What happened that night that I've never seen at another concert, though, was the same yelling and screaming coming from the crowd as it made its way out.

***Kashmir opens with a swirling cymbal crash you may not have noticed. That's the explosion through the invisible barrier and the ensuing spray of shards. Jimmy Page is a genius.

Writing Notes
I gave this post one last read-through while listening to "Black Postcards" live from the Luna documentary, "Tell Me Do You Miss Me."

It's a gift.

.

(Of Course I Did)

2011-05-16T14:09:00.000-07:00

From The Skipping Record Dept.

The headline, the photograph, the predictable narrative of futility, the matter-of-fact brevity. The level of accuracy with which the various elements of the article compliment each other is uncanny. The hallmark nondescript style of the photography, with its deceptively understated, slightly
cockeyed composition bolsters its black-and-white color scheme's tendency to focus the viewer on the content.

The setting and the scene is a journalism standard hardly worthy of note: the President of the United States standing outside the Oval Office flanked by any number of administration officials. This time there were two.  In the middle, gesturing from behind a podium and in mid-sentence, is President Obama. To his right stands Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton; to his left, recently-former U.S. Chief Envoy to the Middle East, George J. Mitchell. While progressing through Steven Lee Myers' recent New York Times article, "Amid Impasse in Peace Negotiations, America's Chief Middle East Envoy Resigns", occasional glances at the accompanying picture make the relative states of mind behind the facial expressions in it increasingly obvious, and, despite the dire seriousness of the subject at hand, its perpetually frustrating quality becomes undeniably, sadly comical. From left to right, here's what the faces secretly reveal--Clinton: exasperated, maybe even a little despondent; Obama: concerned, but resolute; Mitchell: stupefied.  The tragically ho-hum frustration of the piece is underscored by its sub-headline, "For George J. Mitchell Jr., shuttling between the Palestinians and Israelis went nowhere."

Myers didn't waste time hinting at the significance of Mitchell's decision to vacate the position, leading with a couple of impressive highlights from the former Senator's resume: brokering a peace agreement in Northern Island, and leading the congressional investigation of steroid-use in Major League Baseball. Not bad, right? To help illustrate my point, I'd like to provide a summary of the major points in the history of the untenable nature of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but attempting to do so in a sensible way would be just as frustrating as the ongoing attempts to solve it. Let it suffice to say that solving a problem requires logic, something that is by nature at odds with the issue so close to the root of the problem: religion.

Starting with a quote by Obama situated about midway through the piece and lasting until the final paragraph, I found it difficult to suppress an increasingly audible laugh born of frustration with the sadly routine quality of the event and sympathy for the subjects of the photo. Said the president, "We remain committed to peace in the Middle East and to building on George's hard work and progress toward achieving this goal." (Of course we do.) Myers wrapped things up by pointing out that Israeli and Palestinian officials blamed each other for Mitchell's resignation. (Of course they did.) As venerable New York Yankee alum, Yogi Bera would say, "It's like deja-vu all over again." (Of course it is.)

It's because of sharp, tight pieces of journalism like this that I love to read The New York Times. It's the level of writing I aspire to. The different elements of the article combine to actually illustrate the underlying frustration hidden not so far between the lines of the narrative. It's a literary multi-dimensional bull's-eye; the journalistic equivalent of not a Derek Jeter inside-out-swing, solo-shot that barely clears the little league right field wall at Yankee Stadium, but rather a Mickey Mantle 3-run blast that finally falls on pavement.  I don't mean to imply that the Times is the only news outlet doing such quality work, but I see samples of this kind of multi-level effective communication more in it than anywhere else. Someone mentioned to me once that when she sees someone with copy of the Times, she assumes of them an air of pomposity--just another piece of institutionalized, run-away rhetoric eroding the industry inch by inch. The Times is a source of in-depth coverage delivered at a level of consistency matched by few others, and that has nothing to do with any perceived political slant. (Just skip the Op/Ed page and "Politics" section--like I do.)  It's one of the few remaining levees of integrity standing against a rushing flood of attacks on the journalism industry.  I urge you to try it. It's a little deep at first, but once you're treading water, I promise, you'll love it.

I don't mean to suggest the U.S. should stop attempting to bring peace to the Gaza Strip. Nor do I mean to make light of the highly contentious and hostile situation there, or of anyone who is devotely religious. But, since two years of trying to resolve the differences between Palestine and Israel was enough to perplex a diplomatic heavy-hitter the likes of Mitchell, maybe the President should take a different approach when considering a replacement. How about Joe Torre? Anybody who can handle a team of multi-millionaires possessing as great a collective amount of sheer talent as Torre's Yankee teams did, without weekly clubhouse fistfights breaking out must be a pretty good people person.  Toss in four World Series wins and two other appearances, and dealing with George Steinbrenner, and dealing the New York media, and it's easy to see Torre's probably as well qualified as anyone.

I considered including a summary of Mitchell's predecessors and their tenures, here, so I did a Google search for an itemized history of U.S. Chief Envoys to the Middle East. I couldn't find one. (Of course I couldn't.)

Bravo, Steven.

.

Three Little Words

2011-04-28T16:32:00.000-07:00

I have only a few followers on this blog. Why anyone would follow it is beyond me.  One of them is Manhattan Real Estate Broker and fellow Northeast Ohio native, Heather Bise. I recently stumbled on Heather's latest post from her blog NYC Matters, Memoirs of an Unlikely Capitalist, and felt inspired to offer a reflection, respectfully, of course:

You thought you were a New Yorker when the plane landed, Heather? That is adorable. I was surprised after 5 years there when a friend--a Bronx native, yet--looked at me thoughtfully with
an air of surprise, and maybe even a little respect, and said, "John, you're a New Yorker."

I arrived in the city in a U-Haul truck with about $700 in my pocket and no job in wait. I bounced around on floors and couches while most of my stuff sat in storage before finding a 4th-floor walk-up room hardly long enough for me to lay down flat in on West 75th Street. The only window was a skylight, so while the view consisted wholly of dusty, typically New York slopped-on white paint and plaster, is was very well lit, particularly at 5:30 in the morning. The room had a sink and I shared a shower and a toilet with the tenants of four other units on the floor. I was quite happy when, after about 6 months, an oh-so slightly larger room in the front of the building that did, in fact, have a vertically-oriented window went vacant and Stan the landlord offered it to me. Stan used to get upset with me because I would crack the roof hatch-cover just outside my door to let the hot air out of the building. (At times, I had no A/C.)

I bolted for NYC with my itty-bitty B.A. in Communications from The Ohio State University and the goal of getting into TV, which I did by networking while tending bar.  At the last place where I stayed--which afforded the same accommodations--before moving into that bright, but small walk-in closet, I was occasionally awoken by the schick-schick sound of a Bic lighter around 3:00 am coming from my host's bed as I tried to snooze on the floor next to it. He wasn't lighting any kind of cigarette, I assure you. It was during this time that I was working my first television job.

My dog, Achilles, was always a great watchdog.  You'd be lucky to get within 20 feet of my dwelling space without his picking up the scent and creating enough of a ruckus to let everyone know. The only time I ever saw him get snuck up on was when my host's "supplier" knocked on the door one night. Like many old New York brownstones, the stairs in the building were creaky, so how the guy made it to the door without me hearing, let alone the dog, was quite perplexing at the time.  Achilles jumped up and barked and looked at me as if to say, "What the...?" It was the only time I recall seeing him that concerned. It was clear that he was consciously aware, as was I, that something was particularly wrong because someone made it all the way to the threshold without his picking up the scent. I could tell it hurt his pride and he was actually apologetic afterwards. My increasingly temporary roommate* greeted the visitor, traded a few hushed words with him, and turned to me and said he needed sixty bucks.  You should have seen his eyes nearly pop out of his head when I reached in my backpack and partially unfurled a wad of cash I'd earned tending bar to extract the needed amount. I handed it over and our surprise visitor departed.

When I told Brian Downs, the star bartender at the now defunct The Bear Bar** where I was working at the time, he said, "Ah-ha, he did the Ninja walk on ya." and added that if it weren't for my stash, my host, my self, and my trusted companion likely may not have made it through the night. "3 shots--boom, boom, boom." Fortunately, our manager was kind enough to let me lock my backpack in the liquor closet until I got my own place, which wasn't long after that. And the rest, of course, is history.

(Some badly misdirected, misinformed, quasi-delusional individuals have suggested I haven't "paid my dues." This is one of the biggest, most absurd jokes of them all and I am not lost on the irony that many of these folks don't know what dues are. I've paid more than anyone I know and I've been treated quite unjustly in return.)

Oh, Heather...you've had it so, so easy, my friend. From one New Yorker to another, I've got three words for you, delivered with as much affection as possible (I think I like you):

Boo Fucking Hoo.

*I am feeling a certain amount of remorse because I do not recall my late-night smoking host's name. Our relationship was brief, though. What I do recall about him is that he was a Brooklyn native, that he mis-spelled the name of his college on his resume (Hoftra), and his sandwich condiment preference from orders we'd make to the deli next to the bar: Ham and cheese with onion and--wait for it--"heavy mayo."

**The late Brian Downs was, to an extent, an Upper West Side legend. Women would show up at The Bear Bar, a Grateful Dead-themed hole-in-the-wall, in groups of 6 or 8 for this guy. He would only accept bills as tips, letting the coins accumulate on the bar, occasionally throughout the night taking one hand to theatrically sweep them away, spraying change across the room as his patrons laughed triumphantly.

The best bartenders in New York have some kind of shtick. They're entertainers. They have to be in many places. I once sat down at Mugshots and the guy behind the bar was clearly an aspiring comedian, and a pretty good one at that. I kept asking him where I could see him perform, but he stuck with the charade, insisting he was not a comedian, which actually made the whole thing that much funnier. ("Funnier"--is that a word?) (Mugshots, by the way, was an east-side theme-bar aptly decorated with arrest photos of seemingly every celebrity ever to have a brush with the law during the second half of the 20th century, from Larry King to Al Pacino.)

The walls of The Bear Bar were nearly completely covered with various doo-dads, including a few hunting trophies, many with bras hanging from them. Behind the middle of the bar, mounted near the ceiling was the head of a dear (A six-point, as I recall.) with a badly singed snout. I remember noticing this on my first trip to the Bear Bar, which was during the day, and wondering about it. My first night out there, my curiosity was relieved. Brian's shtick consisted of using a Bic lighter (an odd and unintended recurring theme for this post) to fill his mouth with butane. And when I say "fill", I mean fill.  He passed around some complementary shots to my friends and I, and started filling up without explanation while we slammed them. I had an idea what might be coming, but no idea of the magnitude.  It was my first week in the city. Once fully charged, he quickly turned, crouched nearly to one knee, faced the ceiling in the direction of that poor stag and launched a fireball that would impress a Hollywood Pyro tech. The crowd cheered as he turned to me, nodded and said, "Welcome to New York."

Writing Notes
"partially unfurled".... hawwwww--hawwwww. I got a lot more than "nothin," kids.  Words to live by?: I do my best work when I'm not even trying.

.

Jim Page, Microbiologist

2011-03-31T13:19:00.000-07:00

The quintessential opener for a Zeppelin cover band:

...straight into this one...

"If we could just join hands..."

.

"How Dare You Call Me a Snollygoster, You Mooncalf?"

2011-03-05T12:35:00.000-08:00

That's the title of the link accompanied by this photograph which I see regularly on the Merriam-Webster website. Sometimes it reads, "Top 10 Rare & Amusing Insults." Though I prefer to have a hard-copy version handy (for nostalgic reasons, I guess), I use the site as a thesaurus while

writing. The title and the list are cute enough, but is it just me, or is the photo a little, um, shall we say, "extreme?" When I see it, I can't help but to be reminded of Sara Palin's target map and the Arizona shooting tragedy. When news of the terrible incident broke, I thought Gabrielle Giffords must be pretty liberal. Well, as it turns out, Giffords was recently named "most centrist member of Arizona's congressional delegation" for the fourth time in as many years. This doesn't change the sheer insidiousness of the massacre, but considering that a centrist stance is essentially that of a peace-maker, it does make the whole thing a little more disturbing.

In my most delusional, paranoid moments, I think the appearance of this yellow-eyed fella (Who the hell has eyes that color?) pointing a hand in the shape of a gun right at me might be part of internet companies' highly sophisticated ad algorithms based on their heavily cookie-driven, highly detailed biometric file on me designed to deliver ads taylored very specifically for my interests, wants, needs--or at least what they perceive them to be; that for some reason they're trying to scare me out of using the site to keep my work sharp.

Ohhhh, but as The Kinks told us, paranoia will destroy ya, won't it? And besides, it's not an ad, anyway. It's part of the site content and therefore couldn't be specifically for me, right? Even though it's likely writers that use the site most, it couldn't be a blanket thing to keep all writers scared. The very thought is absurd and clearly the product of a general predisposition to delusions on my part. I mean, why would M-W do that? They must be for good writing, right? Good Lord, will someone please pass me the Xanax!

(I will continue to use the site.)

Chinese Eco-Coaltion Takes a Bite Out of Apple

2011-01-28T13:42:00.000-08:00

A coalition of Chinese environmental groups recently released a report ranking Apple Corporation last among companies it graded for handling of environmental and workers’ rights issues.

The Green Choice Alliance, a group of 36 Chinese environmental groups lead by The Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs (IPE), accuses the computer tech giant of being evasive and secretive when it was addressed about a number of incidents occurring at factories in its supply chain.

Apple’s unwillingness to cooperate with environmental investigators is highlighted by

its reaction to a spate of poisonings at Lianjian Technologies, a subsidiary of Taiwan-based Wintek. CCTV, China’s state-run media outlet, reported in February of 2010 that 49 Lianjian workers had been hospitalized since the previous August after inhaling n-hexane, a chemical solution used at the plant to clean Apple’s touchscreens. Plant managers had switched to n-hexane because it dries faster than alcohol. The poisoned workers received no response to a letter they sent to CEO Steve Jobs asking for an explanation. When the Alliance investigated, Apple neither confirmed nor denied that Wintek was part of its supply chain and refused further comment.

The Alliance is also concerned with workplace conditions at Foxconn, a manufacturing plant where iPods and iPads are made. In May of 2010, a rash of employee suicides there was severe enough to prompt management to institute a “no suicide” pledge for employees.

The report is the culmination of a year-long study of 29 multi-national technology companies’ handling of inquiries about pollution and working conditions at Chinese factories in their supply chain. Hewlett-Packard, Vodafone, and Toshiba are among those who were commended for actively addressing such issues. Nokia, LG, and Ericsson also fared poorly, but Apple was graded worst for dodging public inquiry and environmental groups’ requests for investigations. The Financial Times quoted IPE Director, Ma Jun as saying, “Apple behaved differently from other big brands and seemed totally complacent and unresponsive.”

Also according to FT.com, Apple Spokesman, Steve Dowling said the company has a rigorous auditing program for not only its direct suppliers, but for their suppliers as well, adding that Apple does not provide information about its suppliers.

Founded in May, 2006, IPE monitors corporate environmental performance in the hopes of facilitating public participation in environmental governance. The release of this report illustrates increasing environmental awareness in China.

Sources

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90778/90860/6900072.html

http://www.salon.com/technology/how_the_world_works/2010/05/26/foxconn_no_suicide_pledge

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5817abce-23d4-11e0-8bb1-00144feab49a.html

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jkZSzoUydmWpR0jISWJpW9WxfJgg?docId=CNG.25618aec21fc75e1f01ca9c1a8621f73.921

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/20/apple-pollution-supply-chain

http://www.chinacsr.com/en/2011/01/20/8205-apples-pollution-in-china-highlighted-in-new-report/

Writing Notes
Ok...I think this is a big step forward in regard to using the knowldge I got out of the McKane book and even some writing tips in the Berry book. I wrote this in 2 2-hour sessions, one each on consecutive days. I think it's fine as far as the inverted pyramid goes, but could have been better in regard to delayed mention of specifics. Also, there are some long sentences, but I'm addicted to making ones that are well-structured and clear. My longest sentences are short compared to half the sentences in Brave New World. I know--that's a bad way to look at it.

I also did a blog post on this subject for Pacific Environment, but some last-minute edits didn't make it as of the last time I checked: "computer tech giant" is in there twice, which is terrible; there's an apostrophe on the word,"companies" that shouldn't be there; and in the first paragraph, the word "Alliance" needs to be changed. "Coalition" would probably be best.

Pacific Environment is a great group doing big things on a relatively small budget, by the way. Is there a single identifiable section of the planet that warrents more environmental attention than the Pacific with its swirling garbage patches in the middle and excited industrial charge on the other side of its rim? If you're an environmental adovocate, you should check this group out.

.

And Now for This Message...

2011-01-05T15:04:00.001-08:00

Watch the face of the guy to the left of the boss immediately after he says "Ideas." It's in the wide shot:

"Makes all the difference." Very funny.

.

The Black Angels

2010-12-26T16:17:00.000-08:00

I recently spoke to my friend and ever-dependable indie rock guru, Gene. Once beyond the pleasantries about the wife and kids and a brief tip of the hat to NFL football, our conversation predictably veered toward indie rock. The last time we spoke, he mentioned the Crystal Stilts, whom, for whatever reason, I never took the time to explore. I will. A stone of dejection landed in my gut when he answered my querry about what's new or good in the scene by saying that he's always busy and hadn't been following as closely as in years past. I concurred that I know how busy he is and mentioned that I'd caught wind of a possible Luna reunion. He said he'd heard something about it, too. I may have mentioned The Radio Dept. as well. (Luna has a song called "This Time Around," too. Ahhh, the circle turns.) The switch flicked by the Luna reference apparently closed the the right circuit, prompting him to suggest The Black Angels.

It turns out they've been around since '06, but
part of what I like about hitting the indie scene late is that I know I can just absorb different artists in drips and drabs, stretching out the enjoyment and study of each one from a more casual standpoint.

Wow! My man never lets me down. The singer sounds a little, no, make that a lot like PJ Harvey. Check it out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQTkOP60bGg

Bonus Luna (very nice solo work in this one):

.

Introducing The Best of C.B.S.

2010-12-21T13:12:00.000-08:00

I've added a feature on the right side of the blog listing what I deem to be the best of

Communication
By
Symbol.

It's very interesting: when I started writing more regularly and getting feedback, I found that I was getting mixed feedback for various posts. Since I've been writing less lately, I decided to go ahead and create this addition to the blog going by my own assessment of the writing and content. Maybe I'm way off. Any feedback is welcome.

.

Recognition

2010-12-19T16:06:00.000-08:00

Recognizing in person someone you don't know personally can be a bit of an odd experience. For New Yorkers, seeing famous people gets to be old hat--quick. My girlfriend and I literally almost ran into Woody Allen once. One of us had to give in to avoid a collision. Being fans, we slowed our typical New York sidewalk rush to allow the legendary director to
cross in front of us to complete the 8-step trip from the entrance to his upper east side high-rise to a waiting limo unhindered.

Today, as I enjoyed a cup of coffee at Peet's while reading number 49 of Robert's Rules of Writing, "Hit Your Marks," I looked up and saw someone I recognized. It's been a while since I lived in New York, so that old "Wait a minute." feeling was there, palpable. The person I saw isn't all that famous, though, and there's another reason I recognized him.

I noticed on his ear what looked like a smear of office drab, light tan-colored paint. His clothes looked clean and new and he didn't look unhealthy. He did look a bit depressed, though, and maybe a little confounded. I know that face.

Once it dawned on me who I thought it was, I watched him for minute and decided not to approach him while inside. In hindsight, it may have been a bit of a risk and maybe even a little rude, but it dawned on me that I'd actually hoped to run into him. I guess it's the wanna-be journalist in me. I knew that from approaching him just once I'd be able to find something out and gauge my chances of talking to him again should he decline. He fixed his coffee, and, anonymously other than to me, walked out. I jumped up and followed, and not wanting him to get away, said "Excuse me." before just blurting out, "Are you Chris Brymer?" He said "No," and turned around to head back into the shop before quickly and with exasperation reversing himself, sighing, "Yes. I don't want to talk." I followed him in and went back to my table. I didn't want to bother him any more so I just let it go. Obviously, my approach could have been better, but I was so surprised I didn't think to give him my C.B.S. credibility speech. I'm not even sure if I saw him finally leave. The really weird part was how one of the employees found the rather innoucuous situation to be somehow an invasion of her turf. I almost needed hand puppets to explain. Oh, well.

.

Writing 'n' Stuff

2010-12-06T17:14:00.000-08:00

I decided I might re-write both "Chinese Vase," and "Disciplined Doctors" after studying the journalism writing book I mentioned in an a recent post. After just now re-reading them, however, I don't think I'll mess with "Chinese Vase." Except for a couple of minor errors, mainly the ommission of the name of the city where the auction house is located, I'd say it's quite good. "Disciplined Doctors," on the other hand, sucks. I think it is one that definitely calls for the inverted pyramid--a journalism concept I wasn't familiar with until reading "NewsWriting" by Anna McKane--just because there's so much info involved; it can get a little confusing. So, I will re-write it...just for kicks. Not that I think the inverted pyramid thing is necessary for every news story, but there are some where it would be best. Obviously, the orignial reason for it, that it was easiest for an editor to chop from the bottom, is long since obsolete because of word-processing, wouldn't you say?

By the way, both books are quite excellent, each answering many, many questions I had. Get this: I'd finished the McKane book, and was concerned I would
have to go back and re-take some notes because the beginning of my notes where in a notebook that went with my laptop when it was stolen. I checked my notes and it turns out that I started the new notebook with the first really important chapter by McKane, the third, which is about intro-writing for a news article. The first 2 chapters have important general info about what makes a news story, but the platinum I'd sought, the nuts-n-bolts stuff on writing, starts with chapter 3. I had nothing else to do, though, so being the lazy bum I am, I decided to review that chapter anyway and ended up taking about 2 pages worth of additional notes (I cross-checked them with the existing notes from that chapter.) and even amended some of the orginal notes.

Ironically, there were a few instances in which I questioned McKane's writing. I guess no one's perfect. (Blame it on the editor! ;-))

Oh, yeah--the investigative reporting book kicked ass too. It's an examination of techniques and methodologies used in 6 Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative articles.

Fascinating...just fascinating.

.

"Substance Abuse"

2010-12-02T14:44:00.000-08:00

More from the Bull's-Eye Dept.

The hyper-partisan rhetorical atmospshere intitiated and perpetuated by most TV news outlets pretty much ensures that like Ted Koppel, if you choose to be the voice of reason, you're going to get it from both sides. I wonder if all the pundets are going to go after this guy the way they went after Koppel:

In an exchange that aptly illustrates what Koppel's talking about, he and Media Critic Jeff Jarvis met on NPR's Talk of the Nation the same week Koppel and Olbermann traded statements. Upon listening, you'll notice that throughout the "discussion" Jarvis is rather hostile, even combative in tone compared to Koppel, who at one point had to say to a shouting Jarvis, "If you'll please let me finish..." Case and point for T.K.

Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia qualifies for this group as well.

Writing Notes
Technically, I'm still on Hiatus. I'm glad to see this issue has made it to the FCC, so I'm willing to do a few quick-hitters on it.

.

Ho...Hum

2010-11-27T13:53:00.000-08:00

Since I was sitting in a very comfortable chair, had nice copy of The Economist to leaf through between plays and an eclectic jazz mix played in the room, I remained in front of the TV after the Ohio State Buckeyes late in the third quarter exteneded their lead over the Michigan Wolverines to 30 points. No longer able to stand the boredom
that has become too common a feature of the annual grudgematch, I abandoned the contest with about 10 minutes remaining. Sure enough, the score at the time, 37-7, stuck. Head Coach, Jim Tressel continues his dominance over U of M. with a 9-1 record and a 7-game win streak.

Let's see...what was memorable other than the long run. I'd have to say the play where Pryor was running forward and about to fall out of bounds on his left and flung one straight down the sideline to a receiver who caught it and just barely got a foot down as he fell out of bounds. I think it was third and long.

What else can you say? Oh, yeah--the kickoff return was nifty, too. I haven't heard Michigan Coach, Rick Rodriguez's status as of 1:45, but it's quite possible that an overall winning record just might keep him at Michigan despite all his team's losses this season being in conference. Plus, someone in Ann Arbor is undoubtedly pointing to the fact that Woody Hayes had 2 or 3 uninspiring seasons before winning his first national title for the Buckeyes.

Oh, yeah...how is it possible that during pre-game clip montages ABC does not inlcuded the play at Michigan from a few years ago in which Troy Smith scrambled to avoid a sure sack and fired one down the middle to one Anthony Gonzalez who made what was likely the best leaping circus catch in the history of the rivalry? They never forget to insert that idiot from Michigan doing a Heisman pose though. What was that, 15 years ago?

I remember the 90s well. Screw blue. Keep spankin' 'em, J.T.

.

Drug Companies Enlist Disciplined Doctors, Promise Review

2010-11-19T18:37:00.000-08:00

[The Friday Five Hundred] 

Anesthesiologist banks an extra quarter-mill in just under two years.

          The Medical Board of California in May placed San Francisco psychiatrist Karin Hastik on probation for failing to maintain complete records about a long-time patient, negligence, and prescribing drugs without prior examination. Since 2009, she has collected a total of $168,658 from 3 major pharmaceutical companies in exchange for speaking and consulting services.
          Hastik is just one of 48 California doctors who have done similar moonlighting over the last 21 months, and at some point been subject to disciplinary action.
Though this group of doctors constitutes only 3 percent of all California physicians who provide such services, the fact that some of them have been repeatedly disciplined invites scrutiny of the involved companies’ vetting processes for selecting health professionals as representatives.
          According to other data also culled from a recent ProPublica investigation, 36 of the 48 California doctors earned more than $100,000 through such relationships since 2009. Three others exceeded the $200,000-mark. In 2009 and 2010, seven major pharmaceutical companies paid out at total of more than a quarter of a billion dollars to health professionals nationwide.
          The overall number of physicians who engage in the most lucrative aspects of these agreements has, however, declined in recent years as such relationships have been subject to closer examination. The deals often include one or a combination of services rendered by the physician including accepting drug samples, collecting consulting fees and participating in paid clinical trials. A recent survey conducted by industry journal, Archives of Internal Medicine, found that while a high percentage of doctors continue to do work for drug companies, the percentage that collected fees for speaking appearances has decreased from 25% to 14% since 2004.
          Representatives of several pharmaceutical companies involved—who each received a list of doctors included in the 30-state study who both appeared at speaking engagements for drug companies and had been the subject of discipline by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration—indicated that they plan to overhaul the vetting process.
          Nevertheless, Maryann O’Sullivan of Campaign for Effective Patient Care contends that the mere existence of such relationships presents ethical problems even when involving doctors with unblemished records, saying the act “undermines the trust in the doctor-patient relationship.” Dr. Wayne Anderson of San Francisco defends the practice, saying he notifies his patients of such transactions and has yet to receive a complaint. Others claim the speaking engagements provide learning opportunities to students for whom they might not otherwise be available.
          Anesthesiologist Dr. Gerald Sacks, cited in 2003 for insufficient record-keeping, tops the list among California doctors appearing in the study, earning $249,822. Lisa Bero, a pharmacy professor at U.C. San Francisco who studies such potential improprieties in the medical field, cites the high dollar amounts as a reason for concern: “If they’re getting as much money from pharmaceutical companies as they do for being a doctor, what are they really? Are they working for a pharmaceutical company, or are they being a doctor?”

488

Source
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/18/MNJU1GDLRF.DTL

Writing Notes
If there's anything inaccurate in this post, either the piece or the writing notes, will someone please let me know? I double-checked both and can't find anything.

I’ve decided to start doing a pair of weekly condensed re-writes of interesting news items with a same-day 7:00pm (arbitrary?) deadline and word-limits of 350 and 500, each with minimums of 325 and 475, respectively—just for kicks. Like President Obama said while getting grilled by a bunch of right-wingers at some press conference or town hall meeting or whatever it was, “You know, I’m having fun. This is great.” You know why he said that? Cause "my boy's wicked smart." The selection of the days and numbers has as much to do with a dedication to having alliteration in what you might call a column headline as with the fact that the numbers represent what I suspect are common lengths for many daily publications, both print and online.

Ideally, I want the story to be a same-day selection, but I thought the Chinese vase story was very interesting, particularly because of its underlying global economic implications, which one must infer from my piece, but I believe the Times may have gotten closer to. The pharma thing was in yesterday's San Francisco Chronicle so I’m creeping closer to same-day selection, but if I really like a story, I’ll let the same-day thing slide. But, as with these first two, the writing will all occur in one day. The conflict arises from the fact that as I was reading the Chronicle piece, I was circling paragraphs for potential new leads and numbering others, etc.

Taking 1,100+ words and reducing it to 500 is a great writing exercise and, as I indicated previously, basically what a copywriter does. The big challenge is coming up with new wordings that are just as correct as the source’s, which can, in some cases, be very difficult. The fun part is coming up with a new open/lead and telling the story in a different way, i.e., with paragraph order that’s as unique as possible.

These first two stories illustrate the different kinds of approaches one must take to such a task. Of the two, the vase piece is obviously much lighter in tone an afforded me greater creative license. It was a lot of fun. The pharma piece was just the opposite. Because of all the legal implications and an at least minimal level of anxiety that comes with writing anything even distantly related to a drug company, there were situations where I was quite wary of coming up with phrases different than Colliver’s, like “since 2009” for instance. By definition, I would assume that means more specifically, “since the end of 2009,” or “so far in 2010,” but I wasn’t comfortable straying from the exact words there.    It’s just li’l ol’ me, after all. Plus, in a story that tight with such direct implications, the writer likely found the very best word or combination of words in most situations and deviating from it is pointless, as with Colliver's here. I was happy to sneak "moonlighting" in.

I’m also making a commitment with the 350 and 500 to make no editorial changes regarding content, wording, or punctuation after clicking the “publish” button. This does not apply to Writing Notes. If you happened to read this the night it came out and again 24 hours later, you may notice major changes, such as the addition of the sentence you're reading right now. If there's actually anyone interested in following it, I think having the actual piece stand pat after publishing and then allowing Writing Notes to be open to change will give one an inside look at how a writer thinks and the progression of drafts/edits while being able to compare it to the completed work. It's gets to the point where the last draft is about filling in holes and trimming fat. Naturally, an hour after I finished the vase thing, I came up with 2 changes: first, I would change “exponential” because, even though it sounds great, it’s just too gross of an exaggeration, and I would change

Add 20 percent for the house plus a new jewel for the crown…

Toss in 20 percent for the house plus enough to add a new stone to the crown…

Oh, what else do I want to say about this pointless endeavor? I'm so lazy, aren't I? But I "look good," right?

Let’s see… I started the vase thing around 9am yesterday, burned most of afternoon doing a second interview with a Tango instructor who pre-empted the world series at a San Francisco Café on Halloween night, no less--which I’ll probably never do anything with--and got back to the vase around 6pm and came in a few minutes late.

I did a lot of paragraph shuffling on both of these and made it a point to end the pharma thing with Colliver's strong quote. The Times does it all time. It’s a very effective device. I would never end with a question unless it was in a great quote, such as here.

This is interesting—I started the pharma thing around 10am and stopped at noon to eat a delectable Cuban sandwich handed to me at eye level through the sliding window of a large square van colored in the scheme of the above logo. The handsome woman sporting a rat pack-style fedora who handled the transaction appeared to be the leader of this traveling band of sandwich gypsies who, my tongue tells me, seem to have half a clue. I sat down and listened to a 2-piece jazz set in front of City Hall while enjoying an amalgam of shredded pork, some form of pickle, and the nontraditional twist of a little chipotle sauce all jammed into a nicely toasted roll. The sandwich and the music made up for an otherwise crappy, midewest-overcast day that nevertheless serendipitously--dare I say, karmically?--tied the scene together by reminding me of the words of none other than the guy who made that fedora cool; the Chairman of the Board and the leader of the pack: "She don't like California; it’s cold and it’s damp.” (It's a gift.)

I got back to it at 2pm and finished the piece and all its tweaks by 5:00. It is currently 5:56. Overall, I’m not completely thrilled with pharma, but it’s not bad. One thing I’ve noticed about my stuff is that that it seems to get better as it goes. I don't plan it that way and it doesn't mean I think my conclusions are brilliant--it's more that I think the first third of my pieces are usually crap. While I was doing “vase” I got to the crown part and thought, “I’m just getting warmed up.”

I can see how these have gotten better since the Mehserle thing. I think doing them on back-to-back days is kind of key for the exercise. I suspect that by the end of January I’ll be more up to speed.

.

Auction Price of Chinese Antique Annihilates Month-old Record

2010-11-18T19:17:00.000-08:00

[The Thursday Three-Fifty] 

Local auction house flirts with the big leagues.

          A pair of West London siblings got quite a surprise Friday from a dusty curio salvaged from the attic upon their parents’ passing. They were undoubtedly thrilled when the local auction house informed them that the 18th-century Chinese vase, stored among
items valued at up to $65, was expected to draw a tidy $1.3 to 2 million.
         The piece, bearing an imperial seal, was fired some time during the reign of Emperor Qianlong, which lasted from 1735 to 1796, and likely adorned one of his palaces. Yellow and light blue in color, the 16-inch vase is decorated with circular motifs depicting fish and flora.
         Qianlong is remembered as a patron of the arts. Only a month ago a vase dating from the same era set the record for a Chinese antiquity by fetching $34.2 million in Hong Kong, highlighting a continuing effort by Chinese buyers to prod upward the value of their national art, a trend that would soon make an exponential jump.
         Bainbridge’s estimate ended up looking rather pedestrian when, 30 minutes after an opening price of $800,000, last week’s auction ended with a winning bid of $69.5 million, doubling the short-lived record. When the gavel finally fell, the sister sibling had to leave the room to catch her breath. Add 20 percent for the house plus a new jewel for the crown and the unidentified Mainland China buyer’s final order-by-phone price came to $85.9 million.
   Bainbridge spokesperson, Helen Porter said they were “absolutely stunned” by the staggering sum, which also shattered the mid-level auction house’s previous record sale of $160,000. “We’re just a typical auction house,” said Porter, “so you can imagine it was something of a surprise.”
         The sellers guessed the piece had been with the family since the 1930s, but weren’t sure how it came into their possession. Antiques Trade Gazetteer editor, Ivan Macquisten guesses the Qing Dynasty rarity initially made it’s way to England in the late 1850s among the booty brought home by British troops after the second opium war.

336
Source
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/13/world/europe/13vase.html

.

"Buckeye D" Correction

2010-11-15T14:31:00.000-08:00

Terelle Pryor, not Aaron.

After "publishing" a given post, I usually try to limit corrections or changes I might apply to it to punctuation mistakes, typos, spelling, maybe some all-important grammar here and there, but generally avoid major content and wording changes. The nature of the platform permits one must, in a nod to journalistic discipline, draw the line somewhere. A recent content mistake of mine was so egregious, though, that I decided to fix it.
I haven't seen many Ohio State football games this year. In fact, the Penn State game was the first one I watched in its entirety. That doesn't, however, constitute the whole of my explanation for getting the Buckeye phenom QB's first name wrong in Sunday's post, referring to him as Aaron. His first name is, of course, Terelle. Maybe it was a Freudian slip.

Aaron Pryor was an early-80's junior welterweight boxer hailing from Cincinnati, Ohio who participated in the best boxing match I've ever seen. He's the guy who just missed qualifying for an Olympic team that included Sugar Ray Leonard and the Spinks brothers. In a career including 2 comebacks before hanging 'em up for good in 1990, partly because of eye problems, Pryor amassed a professional record of 39-1 with 35 knockouts. He held the WBA Junior Welterweight Belt from August of 1980 until September of 1983. Known as "The Hawk," Pryor developed a bit of a rep for getting knocked down in the early stages of a fight only to come back and win by knockout.
The bout I refer to was the first of 2 monumental matches between Pryor and a fighter whose name you might be more familiar with: Alexis Arguello. The bout aired live on HBO during the premium channel's boxing coverage heyday with blow-by-blow call by Barry Tompkins and commentary by Larry Merchant joined by Leonard. Arguello and Pryor went right after each other upon the opening bell, foreshadowing a match that turned out to be nothing less than electrifying. It was one of those fights that while watching, you skipped bathroom breaks lest they last longer than expected, causing you to miss even the first second of the upcoming round. You wanted to be firmly in your seat by the time the contestants had theirs yanked away. One heated exchange of effective blows followed another until Pryor scored a technical knock-out in the 14th round.

The match was eventually named "Fight of the Decade" by The Ring Magazine, but came to be known more for a controversy over the use of a water bottle containing fluid referred to on more than one occasion between rounds in Pryor's corner as "the mix." Arguello's team cried foul, accusing the Pryor team of using a performance-enhancing concoction, the active ingredient being antihistamines intended to increase Pryor's lung capacity. Pryor's team collectively glanced at their Rolex, sighed, and rolled their eyes while countering that the bottle was filled with nothing more than normal tap water spiked with yuppie favorite, Perrier. Maybe they had some Steak Tar-tare with steamed asparagus and rosemary red potatoes hidden in a gym bag, too.
The two met in the ring again a few years later and Pryor beat Arguello handely in the late rounds minus any controversy.

HBO Special, Pryor/Arguello Part I
HBO Special, Pryor/Arguello Part II
HBO Special, Pryor/Arguello Part III

GO BUCKS!

.
indefinite amendments, so I figure

Buckeye D Takes Charge in Second Half

2010-11-14T13:44:00.000-08:00

          In the typical fashion of a Jim Tressel-coached Ohio State team, the Buckeyes, after trailing at half-time by a score of 14-3, tightly applied the defensive clamps about five minutes into the third quarter and proceeded to reel off 35 straight points without turning to page 3 of the playbook. The characteristically quiet about-face included a pair of pick-sixes, a 5-yard plunge by tough-headed tailback, Boom Herron, and a 58-yard bomb to the end-zone tipped casually and serendipitously from the hands of one Buckeye to another. Late in the 4th quarter, from inside the Penn State 10, in a play that rarely fails in such a situation, OSU tight-end and All-Name 1st-Teamer, Jake Stoneburner, ran an out-route parallel to the goal line and a few yards deep in the end-zone as all-universe talent, QB Terelle Pryor mirrored him from behind the line of scrimmage before tossing an easy floater to close scoring.
          Penn State's offense mustered a total of 59 yards in the second half, 49 of those coming during the first 2 of 7 possessions.
          Herron finished with 190 yards on 21 carries plus the TD. Pryor threw for, again in typically efficient, but unspectacular Tressel numbers, 139 yards, 2 TDs and a pick while completing 8 of 13 attempts.
          The eleven point deficit is the largest overcome by OSU under Tressel. An odd streak came to an end during the match-up: Penn State scored its first passing TD in Columbus since 1963. Who woulda thunk it?

Writing Notes
I went from memory and pulled some stats from ESPN.com for this heavily one-sided summary.

Also, I mistakenly referred to Pryor as "Aaron Pryor" in this post and since amended it. A post is born. Stay tuned.

.

"And such talk, as they say, is cheap."

2010-11-12T17:00:00.000-08:00

From the "Bulls-Eye" Department:

Linked below is Ted Koppel's recent Washington Post Op-Ed piece in which the reigning heavyweight journalism champ delivers a pinpoint knockout blow regarding the Keith Olbermann situation and what it signifies for the big picture of cable and internet journalism. In an inspiringly well-written analysis, Koppel cites The Radio Act of 1927 and points out that 60 Minutes was, ironically, the first TV news outlet to turn a notable profit:

Olbermann, O'Reilly, and the Death of Real News

People are always telling me I should post more often. I stumbled on the Koppel piece through a news industry daily e-mail from Media Bistro called TV Newser. Alex Weprin's post introducing the piece aptly illustrates the one way in which profit-driven cable news competition contributes to the steadily degenerating state of contemporary news that Koppel didn't specifically touch on in his expert dissection. An industry-induced, insatiable appetite for a constant stream of quick-hitting, abbreviated bits of news and incessant back-and-fourth punditry has initiated a self-perpetuating cycle marked by one thing: the need for speed and frequency; the constant race. Obviously, it has long been the goal of competing news organizations to "scoop" each other, but in-depth coverage and analysis, such as Koppel's, have been lost in the shuffle of a hyper-accelerated, daily barrage of what essentially amount to headlines and the most superficial facts.

Says Weprin, "Ted Koppel weighs in, somewhat belatedly (my italics), on the Keith Olbermann/political donation scandal..."

Breaking News!
Constructing a piece as thorough, well thought out, and well written as Koppel's takes more than a couple of days!

I might even suggest that Koppel's piece is, in a word, brilliant. For an equally insightful, but less Apocalyptic take on the Olbermann affair and how it relates to the current state of news coverage, see David Carr's New York Times piece, "Olbermann, Impartiality, and MSNBC."

.

Pat Sajak: Journalist, Political Pundit, Wheeler-Dealer

2010-11-11T12:20:00.000-08:00

From the "Foot in Mouth" Dept.

Though I agree with nearly all of his sentiment and stances on given political issues, I also recognize that Keith Olbermann can be rather extreme in tone and maybe sometimes a bit too lofty. However, I also suspect that the real reason his detractors are irritated by him is that he is usually correct and is in the habit of supporting his assertions with facts. You should have considered this before opening your mouth and reminding the world , Mr. Sajak, of your talk show that turned out to be nothing less than a colossal flop while simultaneously illustrating that in terms of both journalism and political pundantry, you are simply nowhere near being in Mr. Olbermann's league. Don't quit your night job.

Keith Olbermann's response to Pat Sajak:

Pat Sajak did not introduce me to America. I started on CNN the same year he started on “Wheel” (1981) and by the time I guested on his show in 1989, I’d already spent three years as a national sports correspondent for CNN, had a feature done on me by The Today Show (1986), been on the CBS Evening News (1988), and begun guest-hosting on ESPN (1989).

I think if he needs to apologize for anything it needs to be that talk show. When he was canceled, he was replaced by a crime-and-skin series called “Silk Stalkings,” for God’s sake. Obviously we guests must’ve really stunk.

Depth Perception

2010-11-09T18:16:00.000-08:00

But first this message:

          It is a common misconception among novice pool players that closing one eye while executing a shot results in greater accuracy. The opposite is, in fact, true. Having two eyes as apposed to one provides depth perception, an attribute of vision easily deemed necessary to excelling at billiards.     scuff the plastic tip. There were two ways to do it: either hold the stick perpendicular to the wall, press it firmly and directly into the crevice, and twist a few times, or starting at one end of the wall, press the tip in the crevice while holding the stick on an angle to the wall but parallel to the floor. You then drag and twist it simultaneously while walking to the other end of the wall. I'm not sure exactly how effective it was, but most everyone who played there thought it was worth a try. Personally, I thought the latter option was the better of the two as it seemed to afford more precision.
           Division One student-athletes hardly have time or energy for anything other than academics and practice, especially during the season. It is positively befuddling how these kids manage get in such trouble. That pool table was the favorite distraction for many of the basketball and baseball players who lived there. Football players from a couple buildings down showed up regularly, too. The lobby actually connected Zeringue to a twin building, Millet Hall, in which a few baseball players resided, but was otherwise inhabited by non-athletes.
          Steve, a Millet (pronounced muh-lay) resident from way down on the Bayou was one of the best, if not the best player who frequented the table. Steve was a slightly slovenly Cajun cat of average height with a red bean and catfish-fed belly that rarely interfered with his game. It was great to watch him play. He never shot with unnecessary force; always smooth; placed the cue ball for his next shot perfectly nearly every time; saw his intended path before he took his first shot, which, after seeing how effective he was, I would guess he rarely deviated from. He ran the table regularly and made it look easy.
          Though Steve was quite an influence on my game, I drifted toward a different style. I was having fun and was always competitive--I mean, it was mostly D-1 athletes using the table--but I never really applied myself in regard to placing the cue ball properly after each shot, a prerequisite trait of a truly exceptional player. Instead, I developed a bit of knack for making difficult shots. I was no trick-shot artist by any stretch, though I may have learned one or two along the way. Combination shots tempted me as more perfunctory options sat waiting. Successfully completing a bank shot through congestion and covering more than half the table was positively exhilarating. Razor-thin cuts where always a kick. It got to the point where if I began lining up a cross-side bank, my opponent would sigh and look away. Steve even said once, "He doesn't miss those."
          On many a weekend afternoon when most of the student body was home for a crawfish boil and enjoying those great, impromptu high-school-buddy reunions, Steve and I would have the table to ourselves. We got to know each other fairly well, talking about class or sports or the hot beautician at the salon. (Steve gave Annette a glowing review. As I recall, these were his exact words, delivered sluggishly in his gumbo-thick Cajun drawl: "Yeah--go to Annette. She rubs her tits all over ya." (I went to Annette. (Steve was right. (No one else cut my hair for the remainder of my stay at Nicholls. (Why go to anyone else?)))))
          In addition to all that, we also talked pool. Though I'm sure we covered a lot of ground regarding the nuances of the game, the one piece of information I gleaned from Steve that stands out is the point about depth perception. Now that I think of it, that little nugget was, in fact, un-Earthed during the conversation in which I finally found out exactly why one of Steve's facial sockets was filled with an awkward-looking prosthesis. Yep, you guessed it--a fishing accident. He even popped the hollow half-sphere out of place to show me both it, with its robotish-looking iris and pupil, and, by using his fingers to spread it open, the soft, pinkish cavity where a real eye was once connected. I nearly puked in it. My roommate and I, being the punks we were, privately referred to him as "Built-in," as in, "He didn't have to concern himself with making an effort to close one eye to aim a shot even if he wanted to--his aiming mechanism was "built in." (We were nineteen! It's not as if we said it to him or to anyone else for that matter. Jeeze!)
          I guess the upshot is that there's always an exception to the rule. In his own little way, Steve defied the odds and didn't seem to have a lot of angst regarding his handicap, which he overcame to excel at an activity that usually requires a full compliment of the affected mechanism.
          At one point, Steve's regular presence at the table came to an abrupt end. I didn't see him for weeks. When I finally ran in to him in the lobby I asked where he'd been. He said, "Oh, man, I got like two F's last semester and I'm on academic probation, so I had to give it up for a while." What a guy. The table happened to be empty. I challenged him to a game and he agreed to a quick one. He was rusty as hell.
          I've since changed my approach to the game somewhat. It's good to plan ahead and put oneself in the best position for the next shot and eventually the winning shot; plant seeds that bear fruit later, etc, etc. After all, you'll still get opportunities to sink a few corkers along the way. (Keep an eye out for Mosconi while you enjoy this delectably cheesy 80's music video:)

Writing Notes
Originally, this was going to be nothing but the Lite Beer ad with the title, "And Now a Commercial Message." Then I remembered Steve. It's a cool little story.

I don't recall who it was, but some well-known author--like, Steinbeck/Hemingway well-known--said that it is the details that the reader wants, that makes a story good. That's all this is--a true story; a little ditty. An attempt to take you there with descriptive prose. I am sure that there are at least a few people out there who read this post and don't care for the Annette reference. Too bad. I didn't include it because I endorse such crude talk, as harmless as it is, for guys over the age of, say, 30. Steve actually made the comment, though, and it thus adds to the story. I may have actually gone to Annette once. I embellished in the subsequent parenthetical statements and saw a chance to go 5 deep with them in a way that works. Every parenthetical statement there qualifies as one for the previous statement to which it applies, so, though it's a touch gimmicky, it's technically correct and I think the humor comes through. If you're really offended by the Annette thing, don't read my blog.

Another thing about great books is that they get better as they go. Conrad's Victory doesn't really kick in until the final third of the story when the bad guys arrive in the boat. The writing in that scene is phenomenal, by the way. But the point is, good story-telling is all about creating suspense and wonder early and then offering a relieving payoff later. It's not rocket surgery. I think this one does that pretty well. I doubt that anyone reading this expected Steve to be missing an eye. I'm just not thrilled with the writing in the first half. I guess it just doesn't swagger quite as much as my posts might tend to. There's nothing wrong with a little swagger, right?

.

          During my two years at Nicholls State University, located in the deep south of Louisiana, I developed into a decent pool player. The dorm building I lived in, Zeringue Hall (I hadn't been there a month before I swiped the 3-dimensional aluminum "Z" from the front of the building.), had a free table in the lobby, which was rarely not in use. The table's surface was warped 6 different ways. It was generally not decided until during a given game whether a forceful, straight-on shot that rebounded directly back on to the felt after bouncing off the worn away, exposed hardwood of the couple pockets missing their rubber backing counted. Only one or two of the half-dozen sticks available, none of which were perfectly straight, were equipped with an actual pool-cue tip. If you were playing doubles, which was common due to the popularity of the table, there was a good chance you'd end up shooting with a cue that had nothing at the tip but the flat, hard-edged, circular surface of the closed end of a little white plastic cylinder that once served as a mount for a long-forgotten proper cue-tip.   Applying chalk wasn't an option. Instead, one would occasionally utilize the coarse mortar between the exposed bricks of the walls in the room to

Ex-Transit Cop Gets Two Years in Shooting Death

2010-11-08T16:03:00.000-08:00

Outrage at Minimum Jail Term Results in Near-Riot

              An ex-San Francisco Bay Area transit system police officer received the minimum prison term possible Friday for the shooting death of an unarmed 22-year old straphanger. Johannes Mehserle was sentenced to 2 years in jail, minus time served, for a charge of involuntary manslaughter stemming from the January 1st, 2009 incident.
          In the early morning hours of that New Year’s Day, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Police responded to a reported brawl onan Oakland-bound train. Mehserle was among a group of officers who arrived at the station where the train was being held. While attempting to handcuff Hayward resident, Oscar Grant, as he lay in a prone position, Mehserle stood and shot him in the back. According to official reports, Grant had previously attempted to flea and further resisted arrest as Mehserle attempted to restrain him. Mehserle claims he intended to use his Taser, but mistakenly drew his gun and fired it. According to testimony, Mehserle announced that he intended to use his Taser before firing.
          In defense of the sentence, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge, Robert Perry cites believability of Mehserle’s story, pointing to one of Grant’s friend’s testimony that Mehserle said immediately upon shooting Grant, “Oh sh--, Oh sh--, I shot him.”   Other witnesses also indicated Mehserle appeared surprised and mortified after firing. Perry dismissed an additional conviction for intentionally firing a gun, which conflicts with the manslaughter charge.
          Cel phone-recorded video of the scene, which appeared on Bay Area Fox affiliate, KTVU, shows Grant being punched repeatedly, apparently by BART Officer, Tony Pirone in the moments before the shooting.
          Simmering racial tension, book-ended by near boiling points, marked the troubling saga. A week after the incident, a peaceful afternoon protest was followed the same night by destructive rioting resulting in 120 arrests, a scenario that nearly repeated itself. A peaceful demonstration beginning at 2:00pm, Friday, though it never reached riot level, was marred later in the day by extensive vandalism. 152 people were arrested, mostly on charges of disturbing the peace and unlawful assembly.
          Mehserle’s attorney plans to appeal the conviction.

348

The information in this post was taken from these sources:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/11/05/BA061G7HVS.DTL&feed=rss.bayarea
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/30/BABI15KCD5.DTL&type=adfree
http://www.mercurynews.com/oakland-bart-shooting/ci_16539041?nclick_check=1
http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/Timeline-of-BART-shooting-incident-98073009.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BART_Police_shooting_of_Oscar_Grant

Writing Notes
I'd been waiting for a good reason to do a post as a copywritten piece with a word-limit like the green blog posts linked on the right. Instead of referring directly to sources, I wrote it as an original piece and named the sources at the end. It's a great writing exercise because you're forced to try and come up with original wording, which is more difficult the more sources you look at. These damn paid journalists are good at coming up with the best words. I was happy about sneaking "straphanger" in there, though I can see why a journalist might intentionally avoid it in this case. It's a very common term in New York.  I really like the opening line of the second to last graph as well.

I originally intended to write this based strictly on the Saturday Chronicle article, but then decided to write a summary, ending with the Saturday print cycle, as if my reader knew nothing at all about the story. I figured it would be more challenging that way. Doing that with a 350-word limit, one is presented with a lot of editorial choices. This piece is really nothing but facts and purported facts. I picked 350 for the limit ahead of time because I believe it is the same limit used in the green posts.

I wrote the whole thing in about 3 hours, went and read the Times and ate lunch, and came back and took about another hour to tweak it. So...call it about 6 or 7 hours from start to finish. That's not including all research, though. It's also a good exercise in terms of fact-checking while writing considering the subject matter. I definitely didn't want to get anything wrong on this one and to be honest, I hadn't been following the story all that closely. It could be worse and it could be better. I'm going to start doing these more often. I may do a separate opinion piece.

.

Football Helmet Impact Measurement Tech

2010-11-06T10:21:00.000-07:00

Here's a very interesting article from today's New York Times by Alan Schwarz on the HIT system, an electronic device that measures and records force and location of helmet impact in football players. North Carolina University leads the way in utilizing the technology:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/06/sports/ncaafootball/06helmets.html?_r=1&ref=sports

"That's it, baby! If ya got it..." (I felt compelled. Hhhhawww. Do I hear an echo?)
.

Charlie Don't Surf

2010-11-02T13:18:00.000-07:00

"Duplicity--the refuge of the weak and the cowardly."

--Joseph Conrad

          I'm concerned that in the long run, this gentleman will not receive proper literary due outside of Poland and maybe San Francisco. It is quite possible that, had I never seen Apocalypse Now, based on Joseph Conrad’s short story, Heart of Darkness, or hadn’t attended the University of Toledo for a total of 2 quarters, the gifted author may have never appeared on my reading list radar. One of the two instances in which I recall the title and author being mentioned was, of course, in reference to the movie. It was in some obscure interview with Francis Ford Coppola, the director of the award-winning film.
          I was strictly a news reader until the last couple of years. I would read 80% of the front section of the New York Times in one sitting. It’s like a current history lesson and you will see items in it that you won’t see anywhere else. Then, for some not clearly identifiable reason,I switched to mainly reading books, originally planning to re-read the ones I liked most in high school, full attention to which I neglected at the time. After giving it some serious thought, though, I realized there were only a few, really. I got the ones at the top of the list out of the way—Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies, Of Mice and Men. I had a job that required an inordinate amount of sitting and doing nothing, so I had a lot of time to read. Odd coincidence, huh? Then I got this crazy idea that I wanted to read books spanning history, starting with one from each century. Next thing you know, I’m reading Plato, Orwell and Dante. Strange for a guy who previously would pick up a book once in a blue moon, isn’t it?   Penny Lane strange, baby. As far as reading something from every century is concerned, I think I may have the second millennium CE covered, but I’d have to do an itemized count to make sure.
          While browsing at Borders Books one day I came across that company’s publication of three of Conrad’s short stories in one set: The Secret Sharer, An Outpost of Progress, and Heart of Darkness. Though I don’t like the idea of a bookseller undercutting publishers, I have to say that except for a noticeably higher than normal number of minor editing oversights, Borders’ publications are great to read. They come in that size that’s a step up from the standard smallest paperback, they’re printed in text of a great size and font and while they are technically a “paperback,”, the cover is actually made of plastic. If there’s ever been an acceptable use for plastic, I’d say it is the cover of a book. On top of all that, they’re very affordable.

I’d always been a big fan of Apocalypse Now and I’d had a mind to read the original story for quite a few years, so I picked up the Borders set. After reading those three novellas, it was clear how Conrad really weaves the plot in a challenging way, but it was the prose he uses to describe human interaction and psychology that really stood out. It wasn’t until I read his full-length novel, Victory, though, that I really got an idea about his full literary arsenal. After reading this one, I am of the opinion that Conrad, a native of Poland who wrote in English--his second language, which he didn’t learn until past the age of 20--is unmatched in crafting creative descriptive prose. Also, his knack for analyzing human psychology through close examination of the relative thoughts of characters involved in a cat-and-mouse game is positively fascinating. Finally, he weaves highly insightful social commentary with a Dystopian thread into the story more seamlessly than any other author I've read. It’s not like a Huxley novel where an everyday character all of the sudden goes into an extended and profound philosophical speech. Conrad’s social commentary comes in bits and pieces, some larger than others. I noted so many passages, I hate to list just one.
This passage is about the protagonist Axle Hyst’s burial of his father, a jaded anti-social writer. “His son” in this entry refers to Axle. It’s not as much the content as the prose in the second half of this passage that I like:

His son buried the silenced destroyer of systems, of hopes, of beliefs. He observed that the death of that bitter contemner of life did not trouble the flow of life’s stream, where men and women go by thick as dust, revolving and jostling one another like figures cut out of cork and weighted with lead just sufficiently to keep them in their proudly upright posture.

Here are 2 notable quotes:

For every age is fed on illusions, lest men should renounce life early and the human race come to an end.

Plus,

There is no strong sentiment without some terror as there is no real religion without a little fetichism.

In Victory, it is spelled with a “c”—fetichism. Here’s a pair of quotes regarding diplomacy:

Yet, when one thinks of it, diplomacy without force in the background is but a rotten reed to lean upon.

A diplomatic statement is a statement of which everything is true but the sentiment which seems to prompt it.

That’s pretty thought-provoking stuff if you ask me. If you can manage to look past the occasional racially or ethnically bigoted reference, it's well worth it to read Conrad. The only other bad thing I can say about Victory is that there is a plot twist or two in the latter part of the story that he didn’t completely sell me on.

          I believe I mentioned something about the University of Toledo. In 1992 I attended that fine institution of higher learning for 2 quarters before transferring to The Ohio State University. I took a very unique and enjoyable English Composition course there in which all we did was watch war movies and write about them. The instructor, a guy by the name of Cary Arnold, a laid back graduate student who’d earned his B.A. in English at Ohio State, conducted the course in a manner that was refreshingly Bohemian, particularly for an English course. He strongly encouraged open discussion. There were less than 30 people in the class, which also helped to facilitate a casual atmosphere conducive to creativity. Shockingly, I guess, there was never a problem with anybody shooting up in the back of the room or having sex in the corner. It was a very positive and productive setting.
          We watched the John Wayne flick about the SeaBees. We watched Tora! Tora! Tora!, The Cain Mutiny Court Marshall, featuring Boggie at his best, and Platoon. We watched The Longest Day, which became an instant favorite of mine to be joined later by Black Hawk Down.
          We also watched Apocalypse Now. Cary surprised me when he read my paper on it, “The Stench of Lies,” (That's the one I'd like to get back.) aloud in class. (Hhhhaw, hhhhaw, polishing fingernails, sniffin’ smugly like Barney Fife.) My thesis was that Willard, by experiencing many of the same bizarre atrocities Kurtz had through the course of his pursuit and study of him, was becoming more and more like Kurtz himself, likely destined to indeed become another Kurtz, thus illustrating a self-perpetuating destructive cycle. Sure, this analysis might seem a bit obvious now; rudimentary, even, but a valuable fable nonetheless. I guess Cary thought it was a pretty good analysis for a 21-year-old. Maybe it was just the writing.
          Speaking of fables, a former journalism pro who's thinking about starting a blog told me recently that she's considering one featuring stories that include a moral and I thought that might be a nice feature to add to CBS occasionally. So what's the moral of Willard and Kurtz? When you're pursuing someone, be they persecutor or player, crank or con-man, take care to maintain your personal integrity and relative superiority--that's what they're trying to hack away at. The beauty of movies like Apocalypse Now and literature in general is that by simply being aware of the possible unseen effect of such a situation on a character like Willard, one is properly armed against it. Indeed, knowledge is power.
          It didn’t occur to me until I decided to write this piece, nearly 20 years later, that Cary Arnold and my experience in his course, "English 118, Composition II--Film," was a big reason for my move to Ohio State. All things considered, that’s quite an interesting revelation, wouldn't you say? I look forward to reading more Conrad.

Writing Notes
This one sat about 75% complete for at least a week before I got around to slapping a conclusion on and letting it fly. I deleted a lengthy digression/rant about an unbelievable idea I have for a political/sci-fi thriller that would have come after the Penny Lane reference. Someone suggested to me recently I might try writing sci-fi. The problem is, I'm not a fiction writer. I write non-fiction.

The Borders paragraph illustrates different approaches on can take toward different types of non-fiction work. In terms of a serious journalistic report or scholarly work, one might be quick to call it a digression, but for this blog, I'm willing to let it fly if it is informative and constructive, both of which I think the Borders tip is. I like perusing mom-and-pop bookstores, but I don't like how many folks who frequent them tend to look down their noses at a place like Borders. They carry some pretty cool stuff.

When I write something, I have a really hard time letting it go until it produces, at least to some extent, the desired effect. Kreig Zimmerman had mentioned something to me about posting more often, adding, "Not everything you post has to be genius. "Genius??" What? Do mean to imply that I actually wrote something that is genius? "That's crazy talk." Besides, as I said in my actual inaugural post which I've since deleted and I believe may have been titled, "Ideas," I'm not going for genius in my writing. I'm going for ingenious. Indeed, much of what I do is not straight journalistic reporting so I have the luxury operating free of word limits and deadlines, though I have made a commitment to post weekly. Either way, it's my blog which was started and continues to be for the purpose of serving as an online writing portfolio. I did not start this blog as a news outlet which I thought might actually gain a following. Nevertheless, I am positively thrilled that it apparently has. I guess I must be doing something right. Please keep coming back. Even so--and this isn't to suggest that every single thing I write is professional level writing--quality writing will continue to be my number one priority with the goal of professional quality prose and story-telling, something I would deem prerequisite in a professional journalist. Investigating and reporting is what you learn on the job. This is a general interest blog and it would be silly of me to think I could compete with actual news outlets that employ professional reporters. I'll post on CBS as often as I see fit. When someone's paying me to write, I'll have no problem with deadlines and word limits both of which I understand the value and necessity of. At FNC, where I did some copywriting as a P.A., we would reduce 1000-word A.P. stories to 4 or 5 sentences. I believe the Red, Blue, and Green posts linked on the right of this blog both had word limits and I banged out both of those, soup to nuts, in about 2 hours a piece. No worries--I've shed the weight. And, I will add that, with the exception of one early post--"58 Million Gallons," I believe--these pompous, long-winded, self-indulgent pieces of claptrap of mine are self-edited and self-proofread.

Anyway--I actually made substantial amendments to the last 3 paragraphs of this piece between starting the paragraph you're reading now and finishing the second Writing Notes graph. You never know when you're going to find the hammer that will drive the nail home. I find that my final edits, often made after I thought I was done, are a gloriously enjoyable crawl to the finish line, driven by that gnawing, nagging feeling that "something's not right and you just don't know what it is."

I know what it is, and I know who it is. I intend to fix both. Actually, I get the feeling the "what" is out of the way. I guess I'll focus on the "who."

.

From the "Where Would We Be Without Them?" Dept.

2010-10-30T12:41:00.000-07:00

"Your reasonableness is poisoning my fear."

-- Stephen Colbert

What a great message by the sanity advocates today. It looked like a nice cross-section of Americans there on the Mall. Cheryl Crow and Kid Rock playing with The Roots?? What more could you ask for? Such scenes always remind me of a very cool song about a coast to coast adventure based on hope. (If Elvis covered it, it must be good, right?) I think it was in the Ken Burns' PBS documentary about the history of the blues in which
they accused the guitar player who sings the song of lightening up Blues and Rock and Roll, making them more palatable for a white audience. Maybe it was Scorsese's. I don't recall. Though Muddy Waters was right when he said the Blues had a baby and named it Rock and Roll, I have to disagree with the experts cited in that documentary and I'll add that it was this guy more than any other who with his infectious, driving shuffles injected urgency into the genre. I'm quite happy that I got to see him perform live at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame kick-off show. He tore it up.
I once knew a guy who was a big fan of Chuck Berry, but for some reason denounced said fandom a few years ago; almost seemed scared to claim himself a fan. His unusually apathetic reaction to Berry's appearance on TV that day caught me off guard. It was a bit perplexing to turn the knob and all-of-the-sudden observe a spigot that had gushed for a lifetime remain bone-dry. "Since when are you not a Chuck Berry fan?," I asked after a pause. He took a breath and tried to answer, but was unable to conjure a proper response, his lips pursed, his face clearly betraying a state of confoundment. All previous appearances by Berry on the this guy's god-box elicited a different reaction. He would spring from a slouching position in his lazy boy knock-off, lean forward, and literally hang on the edge of his seat, able to contain neither the smile on face nor the tear in his eye as he simultaneously tapped his foot and bobbed his head in agreement, saying the same thing every time: "Ya hear that beat? That's rock and roll." (The term, "rock and roll," by the way, was originally a black euphemism for sex.) His point was, in part, that the AC/DC blasting through my bedroom door which had prompted repeated threats to "cut the god-damn cord" wasn't really rock and roll. Who or what could possibly turn this guy around? One might call him a sellout. Spineless, even. It was disappointing and sad in many ways. Though it's impossible to avoid losing a certain amount of respect after such a blatant surrender, I can't blame it all on him--I mean, he was, after all, in his seventies at the time. I suspect evil, monstrous forces at work there. Whoever it was couldn't pull that shit on me.

          I once attended a Zeppelin laser show at the Museum of Natural History in New York. The planetarium was being renovated, so the show was held in the theater. It was by far the best of the two or three such shows I've seen. The guys conducting the show sat in the balcony and made it a point to remind the audience not to wear the 3-D glasses while driving home. The show opened with The Song Remains the Same. The intro sequence was, appropriately, electric. In front of a swirling ectoplasmic fog matching that song's album's fluorescent color scheme, one after another and each in its turn the four symbols rose from the bottom of the screen, slowly ascending through the center before disappearing at the top, Page's icon finally emerging from the depths as his intro solo began. It was a well-conceived production. They used one element exclusively for Rock and Roll. You couldn't see the actual mechanisms. They were on the floor near the stage, one in each isle on either side of the room, obscured by seats and the sparse crowd. I think it was a motorized spinning disc with 2 or 3 normal, very bright white lights positioned equidistantly from each other on the circle and pointing out directly from center on radius lines. The wheels must have been slightly angled so as to project the lights on the wall in long, wide-barreled baseball bat-shaped projections reaching the ceiling, diffused at the edges, and at their ends, gradually dissolving to darkness. As you focused on the lasers playing on the screen, you sat between two giant wheels churning rapidly in your peripheral vision, carrying your forward.
          When Chuck motions briefly with both arms early in this performance, he is mimicking the mechanism that drives the wheels of a locomotive.

That's a nice warm grindy sound he's got comin' out of that ES-335, i'nt it?
          An interesting nugget about Berry is that he didn't tour with a band, opting instead to hire local musicians in whatever town he happened to be playing. I suspect that in towns where he played most often, he'd hire the same guys regularly, thus establishing some familiarity, but it's an interesting practice nonetheless.
          In the above live recording, Berry omitted the last verse of the song. It's interesting that the line it ends on works just as well as does the last line from the original studio recording, thus giving him the option of deleting that last verse from a live performance without being concerned about not ending on a final line that wraps up the journey quite poetically. I don't know if Berry wrote his own stuff or not, but it's quite possible that it was planned that way. Writers are smart like that. Also, as exciting as that oh-so pleasingly loose and swingin' live performance is, the urgency and drive come through a little more strongly in the studio cut. The video sits on the photo of the artist you're looking at now. Look at the train while you listen.

Writing Notes
The final edit came a little less than 30 hours after the first word. Originally it was just going to be a brief blurb about Berry following the opening quote and with the first video. Then it grew and grew some more. Everything worked well, so I went with it. The only element that changed places in the structure was Hall of Fame reference. Otherwise, I did no shuffling. Instead, I spent a lot of time on wording. There are 2 or 3 sentences that might still be a touch awkward, but I had to step away from it. I love the way it runs. You have to pay attention to add it all up and everything ties together quite nicely, I think.

Yes--the ES-335 line was a late addition.

.

A View of The Bridge

2010-10-27T15:37:00.000-07:00

Gods

Until recently, the only books I’d read that can be loosely termed biographies were two poorly written, scandalous attempts by insider hacks to make a buck off the shooting-star sagas of some actual rock stars. A guy I once waited tables with at a Ground Round, of all places, while in college, was unabashed in his concise critique of Hammer of the Gods. I remember it like it was yesterday: “It’s a bunch of lies!,” he said dismissively while securing his apron as I banged out an order for a deep-fried Chimichanga, the inspiring disdain in his voice nearly bringing a tear to my eye as I raised my chin, squinted with one eye, and nodded deliberately in covert compliance. Well…I wouldn’t say the book is all lies, but it is the only source on the subject yet in which I’ve seen the only late member of the rock group covered in the book denigrated to anywhere near such an extent. I’ve seen more sources that describe him as

Huxley

No One Here Gets Out Alive is much worse from a writing standpoint, but it is full of savory nuggets of info about a certain Lizard King and his tumultuous odyssey through late 60s L.A. counter-culture and the American music scene, a peyote-induced quest for spiritual and artistic integrity. The Doors got their name from Dystopian author, Aldous Huxley’s The Doors of Perception, an extended essay describing a mescaline trip. The book’s title—the ultimate Nihilist’s war cry—is taken from the final song on the Doors’ album, Waiting for the Sun, “Five to One.”

Mojo
.

          While the subject of The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama has been referred to as a “rock star,” other than the open admission of occasional drug-use and a decidedly intellectual disposition, there’s not really much comparison, from either a content or a writing standpoint, between David Remnick’s telling of the life of our 44th President and the previously mentioned bios. I suspect that biographies of prominent politicians, particularly those of U.S. presidents, follow some unwritten criteria established by the best of the bunch over the course of many years and are by-and-large marked by much better writing than are rocker bios. So, with nothing to compare it to, I can’t fairly offer what one might call a critique or a review. We’ll call it a reflection; a collection of points I found interesting or significant, and maybe a few conclusions; an assessment. Call it what you will. Just another glorified college term paper!
          Regarding presidential bios, Remnick gives a brief and interesting summary of the highlights of Presidents who were authors, Presidents’ autobiographies, and biographies of Presidents in the chapter covering Obama’s first book, Dreams from My Father. Teddy Roosevelt leads the pack among President authors with 38 titles to his credit and he was also an astoundingly voracious reader. The first biography of an American President was Life of Andrew Jackson, penned some 10 years before he ran for president. Upon winning the presidency in 1824, Jackson named his biographer, John Eaton, who had served under him in the War of 1812, his Secretary of War. According to Remnick, every presidential biography since has followed roughly the same formula used in Jackson’s: “the rise from modest circumstances to an adulthood of selfless service to flag and country.”
          That’s one of the things I appreciated about The Bridge, but I probably shouldn’t have been surprised by and am now inclined to believe is likely common among Presidents’ bios: Remnick took great care in establishing historical perspective for many key points in the book. In what is in my opinion an amazingly efficient piece of writing, an entire chapter is dedicated to the history of black politics in Chicago, seemingly including every major player going back to 1900 or earlier.
          Obama’s springboard to success, and first major political triumph, really, was becoming the president of the Harvard Law Review. Since he was the first African-American to hold the position, the story made the front page of the New York Times. Before Obama, the history of the respected law journal’s staff included a total of three black members. Though he didn’t capitalize on the achievement in the traditional way of obtaining a position with a highly respected law firm or a major clerkship, the prestige of the position later helped Obama make political inroads in Chicago. Remnick astutely establishes the general atmosphere at the Law Review, summed up in this passage:
a dedicated family man who loathed touring and would have preferred to be home farming. Of course, the title of the book is taken from “Immigrant Song,” the opening salvo of the therein-chronicled band’s third release, Led Zeppelin III.

Brad Berenson, a classmate of Obama’s and a member of the Federalist Society who went on to work for the Bush Administration, said, “I’ve worked in Washington for twenty years—in the White House, in the Supreme Court—and the most bitter political atmosphere I’ve ever experienced was at the Harvard Law Review.”

The Bridge is full of fascinating information such as that, not exclusively related to Obama’s political career, that again, for some reason, I wasn’t expecting. There are, though, some very interesting tid-bits that are directly related to his political path that you may not have heard about.

"Thought being a Senator
might be cool."

Obama’s academic history and accomplishments, his even-handed approach toward law and partisan politics, his time spent as a community organizer in Chicago after completing his undergraduate degree at Columbia, his natural penchant and pedigree for reaching out to constituents and colleagues of varied backgrounds, his work ethic, etc., etc. all make it clear that he worked very hard to get where he is. He is well qualified. He’s a good writer. He played his cards right. Nevertheless, one undeniable conclusion that can be taken from The Bridge is that in regard to the actual political races he participated in, he lived a bit of a charmed political life. He won 2 races in which his opponent was ruined by a marriage or divorce scandal, including—in another bizarre and, I presume, typically Chicago political nugget—his U.S. Senate Democratic primary race against California-native math-and-computer whiz, Blair Hull. Hull made a fortune on the sale of a computerized options firm he’d started with money earned by utilizing an advanced card-counting method at the blackjack tables of Las Vegas—a venture that came to an end when a partner published a tell-all. At some point during the primary campaign, for fear that it might later become public and appear that he was trying to hide it, Hull and his ex-wife decided to make public their divorce records, which include a detailed description of a death-threat-laced tirade by Hull generously peppered with the both the F- and C-words. Then, a week before the election, Hull admitted he’d been treated for alcohol abuse in the 80s. Obama won by a landslide. Said one of Hull’s consultants, “He was rich and bored. He thought being a senator might be cool.”

An interesting though troubling event covered in the book was a foreign visit Obama made as part of a congressional delegation, which included Indiana Republican and Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Richard Lugar, who had tutored the young senator. The group was destined for Russia, Ukraine, and Azerbaijan to inspect weapons-storage facilities. In Obama’s words upon returning:

So, we enter into the building. There are no discernible fences or security systems. And once we are inside, some sort of ramshackle building, there were open windows, maybe a few padlocks that many of us might use to secure our own luggage. Our guide, a young woman, takes us right up to what looks like a mini-refrigerator. And inside the refrigerator there were rows upon rows of test tubes. She picked them up, and she’s clanking them around, and we listened to the translator explain what she was saying. Some of the test tubes, he said, were filled with anthrax and others with plague. And you know, I’m pretty close and I start sort of backing off a little bit. And I turn around…and I say, “Hey, where’s Lugar?” Doesn’t he want to see this?” And I turn around and he’s way in the back of the room, about fifteen feet away. And he looked at me and said, “Been there, done that.”

While Remnick’s account of the President’s life portrays him in a mostly favorable light, it does include a few not-so-flattering facts, none of which I found either egregious or ground-breaking enough to be noteworthy. The only part of the book that I didn’t like was what I deem a forced attempt to add drama in the form of tension between Obama and his wife, Michelle, during his career as Senator. Surely, there was some heartache involved as Obama campaigned, and later traveled back and fourth and spent a great deal of time living in Washington D.C. while Michelle cared for their young daughters. There are suggestions in The Bridge that she wasn’t always completely behind her husband’s political aspirations. I’m not buying it. I don’t doubt her level of ambition one bit. She was a high school honor roll student and, like her husband, a Harvard Law Grad. I suspect she was 100% behind him the whole way.
Here are two lucid comments by the author regarding the President’s general political disposition that I thought stood out. I’m reminded of a quote by one of the great philosophers: “Passion clouds judgment.”:

His views, foreign and domestic, were generally progressive, but their expression was more analytic and deliberative than passionate. Passionate moralism would never be his dominant key.

and,

Obama was never remotely a radical; as a student, lawyer, professor, and politician he had always been a gradualist—liberal in spirit, cautious in nature.

Not every prominent and influential African-American political figure jumped right on the Obama bandwagon. From his earliest days in Chicago working as a community organizer and remaining in the final days of the presidential election campaign, and probably to this day, there were those that questioned whether or not he was “black enough”, questioned his “street cred.” New Orleanian, Jerome Smith, a veteran of the civil rights movement of the sixties, claims to be not caught up in Obama-mania because upon being elected Senator, Obama did not on the senate floor voice disapproval of his being the only black U.S. Senator. Said Smith, “He is a man who can be accommodated by America, but he is not my hero,” finishing the sentence with a profound political comment: “because a politician, by nature, has to surrender.”
While I agree with Smith’s sound observation regarding the basic nature of politics, I would remind him that surrender and comprise are not synonymous. Remnick frequently refers to Obama as part of the post-civil rights movement generation of black leaders who are less radical in their approach to politics, more willing to negotiate through compromise. Caroline Boss, an active political voice on campus at Occidental College—where Obama started his undergraduate coursework before transferring to Columbia—commented on how he hadn’t made a commitment to any certain campus political group, but rather occasionally attended meetings of various groups. Said Boss, “Obama was a person who was mainly an observer.” Nearly 2 years into his administration, it appears that this characteristic remains an integral component of his executive style. To suggest he has no political agenda would be quite naïve, but it generally seems to be on the backburner, yielding to a measured, moderate approach, which dedicated detractors will, of course, characterize as “on the fence.” But what did The Founding Fathers really have in mind regarding the President’s role in our government’s system of checks and balances? Writes, Remnick, in a striking passage about the politics of obtaining and occupying the oval office:

Early in the history of the Republic, it was impossible to imagine political self-projections at all. The Founding Fathers were philosopher-statesmen who saw the executive branch as a check on the unruly and corruptible legislature. Campaigning itself was a degradation of the office. “Motives of delicacy,” Washington said, “have prevented me hitherto from conversing or writing on this subject, whenever I could avoid it with decency.” Washington established the American Presidency as an office neither to be sought nor to be declined. Even in a democracy, it was somehow bestowed, not battled for. The historian M.J. Heale has called the early Presidential posture “the mute tribune.”

Essentially, calling the Presidency a “mute tribune” suggests that the office is not meant to be a bully pulpit at all, a rather absolute notion which, some 240 years later, is a bit extreme in its idealism. However, even when considered from a more realistic standpoint accounting for the continuously evolving complexity of American politics and the sheer breadth of influence and power afforded the position, the passage recommends that at the very least it be used so sparingly. One doesn’t have to dig very deep into American history to find a President whose administration’s general demeanor starkly contrasts that of the current one in this regard.
I recently made the acquaintance of Kreig Zimmerman, a multi-talented blogger and advanced thinker of astounding political acumen that has reached such depth and complexity that I believe sometimes he loses track of it himself. In one of his more digestible observations, he made a comment to the effect that if you piss off both sides, you must be doing something right. It tend to agree with this sentiment, and would add that it doesn’t take much to find oneself in that situation in a political landscape dominated by battling conspiracy theories and extremist rhetoric. I’m not just yet in the mood for another jaunt through Purgatory, so I’ll have to go by memory. As I recall, it is that volume of Dante’s less than comedic trilogy in which the insightful fourteenth-century poet asserts that when one is magnanimous in the face of insults and ridicule, it will only intensify the scorn of the insulter, a philosophy easily applicable to a high-ranking government executive who remains calm in the face of typical partisan hyperbole, often delivered with feigned urgency. It is exactly the kind of cool, reserved demeanor displayed by Obama in response to emotionally-charged partisan rhetoric that most “pisses off” extremists—right, left, Republican, Democrat alike (While the right tends to lead the way in deceptive rhetoric, it is Democrats that made “ideology” a bad word.)—who rely on alarmist overtones to bring attention to issues which may warrant executive attention at some level, but might not make it to the President’s desk simply by virtue of not ranking very high on a presumably mind-bogglingly complex To-Do list that must be prioritized according to a realistic sense of urgency.
Think of American partisan rhetoric in terms of everyday euphemisms that refer to “balance” or “moderation” used to assess various things. If one is sane, he or she is said to be on an “even keel.” If one is thought to be insane, he or she may be given the negative label of “off balance,” the technical designation being “bi-polar.” It’s good to reach a happy what? A happy medium. Anything is okay in—wait for it—moderation, and so on. Why then is it that extremist, polarizing rhetoric is so commonly accepted while a moderate stance is so vilified? I guess we, as a nation, must be insane because our political discourse is overwhelmingly bi-polar. It’s precisely this kind of Orwellian contradiction that slows democracy and greatly delays civic progress by discouraging reasoned assessments and actions. (See Bullshit.) Yes, conventional political thought dictates that it is by virtue of the push and pull between extreme viewpoints that complex issues are sorted out and a happy medium is reached, but in recent years such commentary has escalated beyond the point of diminishing returns. In his Truthdig article, “Noam Chomsky has ‘Never Seen Anything like This,’” Chris Hedges quotes the renowned intellectual. Says, Chomsky:

I have never seen anything like this in my lifetime…The mood of the country is frightening. The level of anger, frustration and hatred of institutions is not organized in a constructive way. It is going off into self-destructive fantasies.

It’s not that I think Obama isn’t a dedicated party man; his recent tireless campaigning proves otherwise. It has become evident, though, that that allegiance does not dominate his every executive decision. Remnick’s account refers frequently to Obama’s penchant for bipartisanship throughout his political career, and includes a letter written by the then-Senator titled, “Tone, Truth, and the Democratic Party,” which includes a sentence that aptly illustrates his stance on extreme rhetoric, even that of his own party (my favorite quote in the book):

I am convinced that, our mutual frustrations and strongly held beliefs notwithstanding, the strategy driving much of Democratic advocacy, and the tone of much of our rhetoric, is an impediment to creating a workable progressive majority in this country.

Remnick closes with a brief history of 19th-century African-American presence at The White House, which includes the fact that black slaves played a major role in construction the President’s mansion and much of Washington D.C. In this chapter, the author also offers insight into Abraham Lincoln’s political posture during his presidency and The Civil War. According to Remnick, Lincoln’s highest priority at the outset of the conflict was to maintain the union, intending to so with slavery intact. It wasn’t until the war was more than a year old that Lincoln changed his stance for political reasons and made emancipation an issue. Upon issuing the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln “neither denounced slavery as a moral travesty nor liberated the slaves in states loyal to the union.” In a passage concerning black activist, Fredrick Douglas’s suspicion of Lincoln, Remnick writes:

The President had raised hundreds of thousands of dollars to colonize American blacks abroad. He signed a contract with a firm called the Chiriqui Improvement Company to repatriate five hundred freed slaves to Panama. He urged them to move abroad and work in the coal mines. “Your race are suffering, in my judgment, the greatest wrong inflicted on any people,” he told a group of blacks from the District at a White House reception. “But even when you cease to be slaves, you are yet far removed from being on an equality with the white race.”

In the same section, the author cites “the contradictory nature of Lincoln’s statements and actions when it came to slavery.” Sure enough, a cursory examination of the history of Lincoln’s political rhetoric reveals notable comments contradicting those above, including ones that not only advocate abolition for political purposes but, in fact, denounce slavery itself. His “Peoria Speech,” a 3-hour marathon delivered in response to the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which he saw as a tool to promote slavery because it provided those new states with the option of having it, contains the following powerful yet eloquent passage:

This declared indifference, but as I must think, covert real zeal for the spread of slavery, I can not but hate. I hate it because of the monstrous injustice of slavery itself. I hate it because it deprives our republican example of its just influence in the world—enables the enemies of free institutions, with plausibility, to taunt us as hypocrites—causes the real friends of freedom to doubt our sincerity, and especially because it forces so many really good men amongst ourselves into an open war with the very fundamental principles of civil liberty—criticizing the Declaration of Independence, and insisting that there is no right principle of action but self-interest.

Good Album

Apparently, politicians’ changing their stance on certain issues for political reasons is nothing new. Obama’s rise to The White House at the very least represents a giant step toward dispelling current worldviews of the U.S. as articulated by Lincoln in that prescient statement delivered some 150 years ago.

Obama

The title, “The Bridge”, refers to the Edmund Pettus Bridge located in Selma, Alabama. The structure is not known for its visual aesthetics or majestic towering stanchions like those of, say, the Golden Gate Bridge or the Brooklyn Bridge. Built in 1940 and named, ironically, after a confederate civil war general and U.S. Senator, it has apparently served its purpose well, providing passage via Broad Street over the Alabama River. It’s been crossed by cars and trucks and buses and bikes, undoubtedly fire trucks and ambulances on life-saving runs, young boys walking to little league practice, farm-hands trudging to work, and perhaps a little old lady or two walking to church. The total combined weight and purpose of every vehicle or human being that has crossed it over the years pales, however, in comparison to the symbolic weight of the event for which the structure will be remembered, a confrontation whose preceding moments, along with chilling scenes of the event itself, were captured on photograph. One of the most famous of these photos fills the inside cover of The Bridge, foreshadowing the central theme of the work, a quote attributable to John Lewis, that Barack Obama is what comes at the end of that bridge. Lewis, Martin Luther King, and other civil rights giants—those whom Obama alludes to when he says that he stands “on the shoulders of giants”—lead an unsuccessful attempt to cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge en route to the state capital while on a peaceful civil rights march. Remnick opens with a detailed account of their encounter with state and local authorities. It is difficult to put a value on the symbolic, emotional weight this otherwise run-of-the-mill, small-town bridge must hold for African-Americans and anyone, really, who truly loves freedom.
It’s a good read.

Stay tuned for more thoughts on The Bridge.

Writing Notes
There was a lot more I wanted to cover, but what’s here went a lot longer than I originally planned. I really wanted to go straight from the “workable progressive majority” quote into the conclusion, which worked great, but as good as that segue was, I felt that something was missing and that I needed to address the close of the book and I found the Lincoln thing really significant anyway. It’s a little more nondescript this way. I also didn’t want the conclusion to be so melodramatic, but it was tough to avoid and considering the subject matter, not such a terrible indiscretion.

It wasn’t until I added the Lincoln stuff that it dawned on me to include the Chomsky quote. I happened to stumble on it after finishing “Bullshit,” so I couldn’t insert it into that one, but it fit great here. The fluid process of writing is cool that way.

I hate to use so many indented quotes, but they all apply. It’s the kind of thing you don’t want to get too dependent on.

What else?… I blew out a mention of the mudshark incident in the first graph. Google it.

If you think the political opinion digression is egregious, check out what I deleted. The parenthetical intro and conclusion where going to be part of it:

(Rant/Digression Alert)
Legalizing marijuana, for instance—despite the President’s open admission to having used it—probably doesn’t rank very high on The White House Urgency Chart. Nevertheless, I was accosted on the sidewalk not long ago by a young co-ed who claimed to be an employee of the medicinal pot dispensary “right across the street.” She railed against Obama for not paying enough attention to the issue. I tried to explain to her the top-secret rocket science of the “priority” phenomenon, yet she persisted. Then I explained that it’s a state thing that starts with cash-strapped California, which has fast-tracked legalization because of the potential monetary windfall it would yield to the state. Still…she just wouldn’t S.T.F.U. So I said, “But one of the first things the guy did when he got into office was to call off the Feds from investigating medicinal marijuana dispensaries in states where it’s legal.” She sighed, walked away and had a brief conference with a friend who then delivered a veiled insult to me before they walked away. There’s just no getting through to these damn extremists.
This crazy concept about prioritizing at The White House in the face of special interest or partisan rhetoric was aptly spoofed in an episode of The West Wing in which the Organization of Cartographers for Social Equality—a fictional representation of a group that actually exists—not only argue that the relative sizes of northern and southern hemisphere continents is greatly distorted in traditional maps—a point worth considering—but bizarrely suggest that maps should be reversed vertically so that Antarctica is on top and Greenland at the bottom, thus making the entire map “upside-down.” Scientifically, it’s not so ridiculous as the Earth actually has no “top” or “bottom.” In fact, it’s mind-expanding to think about. I dare say, liberating. But it would be quite ludicrous to attempt to change such a ubiquitous, entrenched standard.
(End Rant/Digression)

I spent a lot of time on this one; tweaked it quite a bit. Sometimes I feel like the process is more “editing” than “writing.” I've re-read it so many times, I have no idea how good or bad it is--none. Between thinking of stuff to add and wanting to post other stuff that was timelier, I kept putting it off. I didn't really shuffle paragraphs at all in this one, but rather kept deleting some stuff and adding other stuff. I’m going to do an itemized post of other thoughts from the reading at some point in the not-too-distant future.

It could have been tighter, but writing-wise, I’m quite happy with it—just a collection of observations and thoughts, really.

Working with photos and captions must be better in WordPress. It can be a real nightmare here on Blogster.