#i took so many creative liberties it was for composition… | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

nopefun · 3 years

Text

Interview #494: Ryan Frigillana

Ryan Frigillana is a Philippine-born lens-based artist living and working in New York. His work focuses on the fluidity of memory, intimacy, family identity, and visual culture, largely filtered through the lens of race and immigration. Embracing its plasticity, Frigillana explores photography’s relationship to context as a catalyst for thematic dialogue.

His first monograph, Visions of Eden, was published as two editions in 2020, and is held in the library collections of the MoMA, Getty Research Institute, and Smithsonian among others.

We spoke to find out more about Visions of Eden, his love for photobooks, and photography as a medium for introspection.

Lee Chang Ming Ryan Frigillana

Thanks for agreeing to do this! As we’ve just arrived into the new year, I want to start by asking: how did you arrive at photography and how has your practice evolved so far? Your earlier work was anything from still life to street photography, but your recent work seems to deal with more personal themes.

It’s my pleasure; thank you for having this conversation with me! Wow, looking back at how I’ve arrived at this point makes me feel so grateful for this medium, and excited to think of where it will lead me from here. I came to photography somewhat late. I was initially studying to become a nurse and was set to start a career in that field, but I found myself unhappy with where I was going. My mother was a nurse and I know what goes into being one; it’s not an easy job, and I respect those who do it, but my heart wasn’t in it. I found photography as a creative outlet during that stage of my life, and I’ve clung onto it ever since.

My first exposure to photography (no pun intended) came in the form of street and photojournalism. I would borrow books from the library a lot, consuming works by Magnum and other photographers working in that tradition. At the time, it was all I knew so that’s what I tried to emulate. Even early on in my undergrad career, these modes of creation were reinforced by curriculum and by what I saw from my own peers. My still-life work branches off of that same sentiment: the only names that were ever thrown around by professors were Penn and Mapplethorpe, so that’s who I studied. Thankfully over the years, I’ve been able to broaden that perspective through my own research. Though I don’t necessarily pursue street or constructed still-lifes anymore for my personal work, I’d like to think my technical skills (in regard to timing, composition, light) owe a debt to those past experiences.

I suppose now I’m starting to explore how photography can be used as language, to communicate ideas and internal conflicts. I’m thinking more about the power of imagery, its authorship, its implications, and how photographs have shaped, and continue to shape, our reality. That’s where my work is headed at the moment.

I liked how you mentioned photography as a language, which calls into question who we are speaking to when we make images and what kind of narrative we construct by putting photographs together.

In your work “Visions of Eden”, you trace your family’s journey as first-generation Filipino immigrants in America. I was quite struck by how you managed to link together original photography, archived materials and video stills. To me, with the original photography there was a sense of calm and clarity, perhaps in the composition. But with the archived material it was like peering through tinted glass, and the video stills felt like an unsteady memory. What was the editing process like for you and how did you decide what to include or exclude?

For me, editing is the hardest part about photography. Shooting is the enjoyable part of course because it can feel so cathartic. Sometimes when I shoot it feels almost like muscle memory in the sense that you see the world and you just react to it in a trained way. But with editing, it’s more of a cerebral exercise. More thought is involved when you have to deal with visual relationships, sequence, rhythm, and spacing, etc. The real creation of my work takes place in the editing process. That’s where the ingredients come together to form an identity.

When creating this identity, I not only have to think about what I want to say, but also how I want to say it. It’s like speaking; there are numerous ways you can communicate a single sentence. How are images placed in relation to one another? How large are they printed, or how much white space surrounds it? Are the images repeated? What’s on the following page? The preceding page? Is there text? How are they positioned on the spread? All of these little choices impact the tone of your work. And that’s not even mentioning tactile factors like paper stock or cover material. I think that’s why I have such a deep love for photobooks because 1) they’re physical objects and 2) someone has obsessed over every aspect of that object.

I’m aware that my photographs lately have a quiet, detached, somewhat stripped-down quality to them. I think that’s just a subconscious rejection of my earlier days shooting a lot of street where I was constantly seeking crowded frames and complexity in my compositions. As I’ve grown older, I realize less is more and if I can do more by saying less, that’s even better. Now, the complexity I seek lies in the work as a whole and how all these little parts can form something fluid and layered, and not easily definable.

For Visions of Eden, I wanted the work to feel somewhat syncopated and wandering in thought. That meant finding a balance between my quiet static photographs and the movement and energy of the video stills, or balancing the coldness of the illustrations with the warmth of the family snapshots. The work needed to be cohesive but have enough ambiguity for it to take life in someone else’s imagination. Peoples’ lived experiences in regard to immigration and religion are so complex that they can’t be narrated in any one definitive way. Visions of Eden, hopefully, is a rejection of that singularity.

Yes, there’s definitely something special and intimate about flipping through a photobook! For your monograph, you recently released a second edition which is different from your first (redesigned, added images, etc.). Why did you decide to make it different? Was the editing mainly a solitary process?

The first edition was a partially hand-made object. Illustrations were printed on translucent vellum paper and then tipped into the gutter of the book. When you flip through the pages, those vellum sheets would overlap over certain images, creating a collage-like effect. That was my original concept for this book. Doing this, however, was so laborious and time consuming, and not to mention expensive! Regretfully, I wound up making only twenty copies of that first edition. I wanted the work shared with a wider audience so that’s why I decided to publish a second run.

The latest edition is more of a straight-forward production without the vellum paper. With this change in design, I had to reconfigure the layout. I took liberties in swapping out some images or adding new ones altogether. Also, a beautiful afterword was contributed by my friend, artist, writer, and curator Efrem Zelony-Mindell. I still feel so fortunate and grateful to have had my work seen and elevated by their words in my book.

For the most part, yes editing is quite a solitary process for me. But there does come a point when I feel it’s ready, where I share the work with a few trusted people. It’s always nice to have that outer support system. Much of Visions of Eden was created during my time in undergrad school so I had all sorts of feedback from peers and professors which I’m grateful for. But in the end, as the author, you ultimately have the final say in your work.

Given that Eden is a starting point and metaphor in the work, I was thinking about ideas of gardens, (forbidden) fruit, and movement of people.

How do you view yourself in relation to your place of birth? In your series, I see the most direct links in the letters, old photos where tropical foliage is present in the background, and the photo of the jackfruit (perhaps the only tropical fruit in this series).

I came to America when I was very young, about five years old. For my family and for many other families still living in the Philippines, America is seen as a sort of ideological Eden: a land of milk and honey, of wealth and excess. We all know that’s far from the truth. Every Eden has a caveat, a forbidden tree. Which leads me to ask: as an immigrant living in this country, what fruits were never intended for me?

I honestly don’t remember much about my childhood in the Philippines aside from fleeting memories of my relatives, the sounds of animals, the smell of rain and earth, the taste of my grandmother’s cooking. The identity that I carry with me now as a Filipino is not so much tied to the physical geography of a place but rather it is derived from a way of life, from shared stories, in the values we hold dear, passed on from generation to generation. This is a warm flame that lives on in me to this day as I write these words thousands of miles away from where I came.

Photographs have a way of shaping our memory and our relationship to the past, which in turn affects how we engage with the present. The family photographs and letters used in my book act as anchors in a meandering journey. They serve as landmarks that I can return to whenever I feel lost or need assurance so far away from “home”. They give me the comfort and affirmation that I need to navigate a space where I never really felt I belonged. The spread in my book that you mentioned—the jackfruit on one side, and the Saran-wrapped apple on the preceding page—was a reference to my duality as both Filipino and American. It’s a reminder and an acknowledgment that I am a sum of many things, of many people who have shaped me. If I flourish in life, it’s because my roots were nourished by love.

I like how you mentioned photos as anchors or landmarks. Isn’t that why we create and photograph? To mark certain points in our lives and to envision possible futures, like a cartographer mapping an inner journey. Do you feel like you and your relationships with those you photographed changed through the process of making your works?

When my parents took pictures of our family, it wasn’t done solely in the name of remembrance; it also served as an affirmation of ourselves and our journey—a celebration. Every birthday, vacation, school ceremony, or even the seemingly insignificant events of daily life were all photographed or video-taped as a way of saying to ourselves, “Here we are. Look how far we’ve come. Look at the life we’ve made. And here’s the proof”.

Now, holding a camera and photographing my family through my own lens still carries all of that celebratory joy, but with so much more possibility. Before I really took photography seriously, I never realized its potential as a medium for introspection, but that’s ultimately what it has become for me. In taking pictures of my family, I not only clarify my own feelings about them, but the act of photography itself informs and builds on my relationship with each person. The camera is not a mere recording device, but a tool for understanding, processing, and even expressing love...or resentment. Though I may not be visible in my pictures, my presence is there: in my proximity, my gaze, my focus.

Does all of this impact my relationships? Absolutely. Photographing another person willingly always demands some degree of trust and vulnerability from both sides. There’s a silent dialogue that occurs which feels like an exchange of secrets. I think that’s why I often don’t feel comfortable photographing other people unless we’re very close. Usually my family is open enough to reveal themselves to me, other times what they give can feel quite guarded. That’s a constant negotiation. After the photograph is made though, nobody ever emerges the same person because each of us has relinquished something, no matter how small.

Being self-reflexive in photography is so important. I agree it should be a constant negotiation, but it’s something that bothers me these days – the power dynamic between the photographer and photograph, particularly for personal and documentary projects. More significantly, after the photograph has been made, who is really benefiting. But I guess if we are sensitive to that then perhaps we can navigate that tricky path and find a balance.

Right, finding that balance is key and sometimes there are no clear-cut answers. That power dynamic is something I always have to be mindful of. As the photographer, you are exercising a certain role and position. At the end of the day, you’re the one essentially “taking” what you need and walking away. There’s an inherent violence or aggression in the act of taking someone’s picture, no matter how well-intended it may be. This aggression carries even greater weight when working, as you say, in a genre like documentary where representation is everything.

I remember an undergrad professor of mine, Nadia Sablin, introducing me to the work of Shelby Lee Adams—particularly his Appalachian Legacy series. Adams spent twenty-five years documenting the disadvantaged Appalachian communities in his home state of Kentucky, visiting the same families over a long period of time. Though the photographs are beautifully crafted, they pose many questions in regard to exploitation, representation, and the aestheticization of suffering. He is or was, after all, an artist thriving and profiting off of these photographs. Salgado is another that comes to mind. This was the first time I really stopped to think about the ethics of image-making. Who is benefitting from it all?

I think the search for this balance is something each photographer has to reckon with personally. Though each situation may vary with different factors that have to be weighed, and context that must be applied, you can always ask yourself these same ever-pertinent questions: am I representing people in a dignified way, and what are my intentions with these images? Communication (listening), building relationships, acknowledging your power, and respecting the people you photograph are all foundational things to consider when exercising your privilege with the camera.

Well said! The process of making photographs can be tricky to navigate yet rewarding. Any upcoming projects or ideas? What’s keeping you busy these days?

Oh, let’s just say I’m constantly juggling 3-4 ideas in my head at any given time, but ninety percent of the time they don’t ever lead to anything finished haha. This past year has been tough on everyone I’m sure. I’ve been dealing a lot with personal loss and grief and the compounded isolation brought on by the pandemic, so for months I’ve been making photographs organically as a subconscious response to these internal struggles. It’s more of an exploration of grief itself as a natural phenomenon and force—like time or gravity. Grief is something everyone will experience in life and each of us deals with it differently, but in the end we have to let it run its course. I see these photographs as a potential body of work that could materialize as a zine or book one day, so we’ll see where that goes.

Other than that, I’ve been working on an upcoming collaboration project with Cumulus Photo. Speaking of which, I saw your photograph featured in their latest zine, running to the edge of the world. Congrats on that! It’s beautiful. But yeah, just trying my best to keep busy and sane, and improving myself any way I can.

Thanks! Looking forward to your upcoming projects! Last question: any music to recommend?

I feel like my answer to this question can vary by the week. I go through phases where I exhaust whole albums on repeat until I get tired of them. So I’ll leave you with the two currently on my rotation: Angles by The Strokes, and Screamadelica by Primal Scream.

Thank you for your time!

Thank you for a lovely discourse. I had a lot of fun!

his website and Instagram.

Get more updates on our Facebook page and Instagram.

#Ryan Frigillana #nope fun #new york #photographer interview #artist interview #Contemporary Photography #Visions of Eden #PhotoBook

330 notes · View notes

auncyen · 3 years

Text

Ok ok so I'd been idly thinking about updating "Chats with Joker in Mementos" for Royal for a while, except as far as I know there aren't any transcriptions for the Royal Mementos chats like there is for Vanilla...

So...after some questionable use of my time, I now have a list of a good chunk of the starters in Royal. Only starters, not responses, since the point of the fic is having Joker be the one to respond, and I didn't transcribe ones I didn't think would be interesting for him to respond to, but still, if anyone does ever look to do a complete transcription, this might be helpful as a start? Or just interesting if you want to see what some characters talk about. Spoilers for third semester below cut.

Ryuji: Man, we really bust our asses to get stronger in here. I wish it meant we got stronger in the real world too.

Ryuji: Man, I had this horrible dream last night… Can’t remember a thing about it, though.

Ryuji: Ya know what? I guess Mona does have a mask, technically.

Ryuji: Yo, the way he jumps behind Shadows is so sick!

Ryuji: Yo, is it just me, or is fallin’ asleep getting tougher every night? At this point, I’m outta ideas of what to do.

Ryuji: Kinda fiendin’ for some ramen right about now… Maybe I’ll hit up Ogikubo when we get back.

RyujI: So lately, I’ve been tryin’ to work some training into my nightly routine before bed.

Ryuji: Hey, is it just me, or is Morgana’s sword basically the same size as Joker’s knife?

Ryuji: My mom made gyudon last night! My fave! Now I’ve got, like, fifty times more energy than usual!

Ryuji: This phantom thief stuff feels real as hell whenever he’s flyin’ around with that grappling hook.

Ryuji: Dude, that grappling hook is awesome! He looks like a freakin’ superhero with that thing!

Ryuji: Aww man, I just can’t get enough of those Akihabara maids…

Ryuji: Aren’t knives kinda hard to use ‘cause of their shortness? I definitely prefer my own shit.

Ryuji: I always thought darts looked easy—just aim for the board, y’know? But, it’s waaay harder than that.

Ryuji: Every try the monja in Tsukishima? That stuff is LEGIT.

Ryuji: Yo, does this outfit really make me look like I’m part of some biker gang?

Morgana: Listen, it’s not that I look like a cat. Cats just happen to look like me.

Morgana: I repeat: I am not a cat. To prove it, I took an actual bath yesterday.

Morgana: So, cats love to chase mice, right? I don’t get it—where’s the fun in that?

Morgana: I’m always so entranced by Panther’s whip technique!

Morgana: Panther, we have matching tails!

Morgana: You know, I’ve never actually been in a car before. Is it anything like I am now?

Morgana: I definitely made the right decision giving him the code name “Joker.”

Morgana: I’m willing to bet Joker’s skilled enough to use throwing knives.

Morgana: Anime, books, movies… Phantom thieves sure are popular.

Morgana: Last night I dreamt that Phantom Thieves were kicking some serious butt—let’s bring that dream to life!

Morgana: I can teach you everything you need to know about being a phantom thief. Relax—you’re in good hands!

Morgana: *yawn* I didn’t get enough sleep…

Morgana: I couldn’t fall asleep at all last night. I just laid there with my eyes open…

Morgana: I like Yongen-Jaya; it’s a great place for a stroll.

Morgana: Is Shujin Academy the only thing in Aoyama?

Morgana: I was vegetating in front of the TV last night, and I have to say, there are some pretty decent shows on now.

Ann: The bakery had a sale yesterday and I ended up buying everything they had!

Ann: The Ferris wheel is a must for me at theme parks, every time. I love being able to just relax.

Ann: I have an upcoming shoot at a theme park, but what sucks is how I can’t go on any of the rides.

Ann: Last night I dreamt I was eating a chocolate bar, then all of a sudden, it got mad and started chasing me!

Ann: Every once in a while I have a dream where I get chased by a Shadow…

Ann: I’ve been sleeping really well since I started getting all this exercise.

Ann: I was up late watching TV last night, so I might be a little sleep deprived…

Ann: I tend to do my clothes shopping in Kichijoji—it’s fun looking through all the resale shops.

Ann: I hate when people ask me to say stuff in English just ‘cause I lived overseas.

Ann: It always bothers me when foreign movie subtitles leave stuff out or take too many liberties.

Ann: I was talking to my overseas friend the other day—her straightforward attitude was really refreshing!

Ann: I was talking to Shiho on the phone and before I knew it, three whole hours had passed!

Ann: Joker seems like he’d make a good cook, doesn’t he? I mean, he’s great with his knife and all…

Ann: It’s actually quite exhilarating to attack with a whip. I wonder why that is…

Ann: Whenever my foreign relatives come to Japan, they always rave about how much they love Japanese food!

Ann: Do you think there’s anything I can do about my outfit? I feel like I stand out too much in this…

Ann: Is there a difference between a whip and a grappling hook?

Ann: Ya know, Skull’s always been into skull designs and stuff.

Ann: Wouldn’t a grappling hook be awfully handy in the real world?

Yusuke: I wish to paint the world as only I see it. The best way to succeed at this is through practice.

Yusuke: It’s fun to walk around and inspect different temples and shrines. The architecture is always impressive.

Yusuke: If Shadows are sentient, do you think their being moved by a painting would invoke a change of heart?

Yusuke: There have been times where I was compelled to create three-dimensional art.

Yusuke: I’m quite curious about Mona’s Western-style sword…

Yusuke: I hear whips are quite difficult to use. Where did you learn how to wield one?

Yusuke: Joker using a grappling hook…. That would make for a picture-perfect composition.

Yusuke: Mona, what exactly do you have in those pouches?

Yusuke: Creating a piece of art is pointless unless I can convey the full essence of the subject.

Yusuke: Art museums stimulate my creativity like no other place—I wish I could live inside one.

Yusuke: Skull and I both use long melee weapons, but they’re total opposites of one another.

Yusuke: Why does my outfit have a tail? I don’t understand…

Yusuke: I considered growing my own bean sprouts, but it seems to be more expensive than buying them grown.

Yusuke: I once had a dream that I washed up on a deserted island. I painted as much as I pleased… So wonderful.

Yusuke: I may specialize in Japanese-style painting, but I’d like to learn some Western techniques as well.

Yusuke: That grappling hook is very useful. I should find a way to utilize one in my daily life.

Yusuke: The other day, I went into the mountains to gather vegetables so I could cut back on food expenses.

Yusuke: I tried to paint a landscape of the starry sky once, but it’s quite difficult to do so from within the city.

Yusuke: India ink isn’t my specialty, but I’ve been experimenting with it in some recent work, just for fun.

Makoto: I may have stopped being a doormat for adults, but people are still calling me a “teacher’s pet.”

Makoto: A phantom thief’s body is their most vital asset. We need to make sure we eat balanced, nutritious meals.

Makoto: Do you enjoy visiting theme parks? I’ve rarely been to one myself.

Makoto: Fox looks cooler using his katana than I had originally imagined.

Makoto: I had the weirdest dream… I was at school, but I was wearing my phantom thief outfit.

Makoto: Would anyone care to learn how to drive, while we’re here? This place seems as good as any for practice.

Makoto: I know it’s not very healthy, but I do enjoy eating ramen from time to time.

Makoto: Once I’ve graduated, I’m going to buy a motorcycle and go on a road trip.

Makoto: I’ve been working on my grades because I still want to attend college, despite being a phantom thief.

Makoto: I want to read a certain book, but it’s out of print. Where do you suppose I could find a copy?

Makoto: Maybe I’m just burned out, but waking up has grown awfully difficult lately.

Makoto: The grappling hook’s cable seems pretty strong, but it’s scary to think what could happen if it snapped.

Makoto: Once my sister brought home some sushi for me. It was indescribably good…

Futaba: I heard rhythm’s an important part of fighting, sooo… I started playing a rhythm game!

Futaba: There’s going to be an event tonight in the MMO I play. I can’t wait!

Futaba: This MMO I’m hooked on is really cool. Do you wanna play with me? Oh—it’s in English, though.

Futaba: I’m about to beat the game I’ve been playing. Wonder what I should play next?

Futaba: I’ve been going outside a lot more, so now I’m sleeping way better than I did when I was a shut-in.

Futaba: Guess what? I’m making a game called “Hungry Hungry Mona”!

Futaba: You know who’s a really good driver, is Sojiro. He can parallel park with his eyes closed!

Futaba: If you could shoot grappling hooks from your hands, you’d probably be able to get around just using those!

Futaba: Ya know, I’ve thought about workin’ out and fighting alongside you guys.

Futaba: You guys should try playing shooters! It could help you improve your gun skills.

Futaba: Last night I had a dream my hard drive failed… That was scary.

Futaba: Wouldn’t it be cool if you could mod the grappling hook so it was electrified?

Futaba: Sure, the internet’s convenient, but it’s not like it can do everything. Don’t overestimate its capabilities.

Futaba: I wonder if I’d be okay going to some place by myself if it wasn’t crowded. Inokashira Park seems nice.

Futaba: Yesterday Sojiro bought me my favorite instant yakisoba!

Futaba: Maybe I should get a gun too, just for self-defense… Nah, my hands need to be empty.

Haru: I found this cafe in Kichioji with phenomenal tea—would you care to try it sometime?

Haru: I ordered kusaya but they refused to make it—they said they couldn’t get the smell out of the kitchen.

Haru: I feel like I need to learn more about the world, but I’m not sure how to best go about it.

Haru: Recently, I’ve been finding rare delicacies rather enticing…

Haru: Even lately, I sometimes dream about doing phantom thief things with Mona.

Haru: If you’re having trouble getting yourself to relax, I recommend herbal tea.

Haru: Asakusa is a wonderful area—I love how it’s this blend of the old and the new.

Haru: Ever since I started high school I’ve been taking the train in the morning, but I’m still not used to it…

Haru: Queen, your mask looks like it’s made of iron. Doesn’t it get heavy?

Haru: Joker’s so acrobatic! He’s really got the hang of that grappling hook.

Haru: I don’t think I’ve gotten this much exercise since I was in ballet.

Haru: Let me know if you ever get a tear in your clothing—I’m good at sewing, so I could most likely fix it.

Haru: I dreamt that the vegetables I’d been growing all died… I was so sad.

Haru: Your weapon seems fun, Skull. Do you want to swap sometime?

Haru: Sometimes it’s impossible for me to fall asleep on days that we’ve been to Palaces, no matter how tired I am.

Haru: You know, before this, I’d never considered using an axe for anything other than chopping firewood…

Haru: My hands have gotten all calloused… I supposed it comes with the territory in gardening.

Akechi: I have no intention of changing my stance on matters, no matter what anyone may say.

Akechi: Pancakes... I don’t want to hear that word again for a long, long time.

Akechi: We don’t have much time left. Please do what you can to avoid getting sick.

Akechi: The enemies are stronger than ever. Don’t let your guard down.

Akechi: A world that panders to your every whim is so mundane. Where’s the thrill if there’s no competition?

Akechi: Do you prefer my previous outfit or this one? Moving around’s become much easier for me.

Akechi: This place is immense. If there weren’t train tracks everywhere, I’d bring my bike here.

Akechi: We’re working under the constraints of a time limit, so I’d appreciate it if you could be more efficient.

Akechi: If you’re looking for a way to train both your mind and your body, I highly recommend bouldering.

Akechi: You think I’m frightening when I fight? Well, I’m afraid you’re just going to have to accept it.

Akechi: I meant to tell you, regarding Shido… Thank you for keeping your promise.

Akechi: You may not like working with me, but I’m counting on your assistance until our goal is achieved.

Akechi: When we’re riding in the car like this, it’s easy to forget that we’re actually inside Mona.

Akechi: The Shadows here behave differently from the ones in the Palaces, don’t they?

Akechi: I’m getting a bit hungry. I should’ve eaten beforehand.

Akechi: I enjoy spending time in Kichijoji. It’s not very big, but there are plenty of trendy shops.

Akechi: Riding in the car may beat walking, but it doesn’t stop my legs from growing stiff and sore…

Sumire: I have a few different superstitions for good luck in my routines… They get sort of hard to drop.

Sumire: It was already hard for me to believe Palaces existed, but to think there’s such a massive one under Shibuya…

Sumire: It’s a bit cramped in here with this many people…

Sumire: I get stiff all over from just sitting in the car.

Sumire: Why is the one desert you get to eat during the week so delicious?

Sumire: A phantom thief outfit represents a person’s image of their rebellion, right?

Sumire: I wonder if I should try incorporating another sport into my gymnastics training.

Sumire: I wonder what I could use as inspiration for my performances…

Sumire: Swords are actually pretty hard to wield.

Sumire: Whenever I travel, I always end up buying some sort of good luck charm.

Sumire: Your outfits are all so unique. I can see coordinating them wasn’t a priority.

Sumire: This time of year, a heating pad’s an absolute must for keeping warm.

Sumire: Sometimes people will just walk up to me and ask me to show them a standing split.

Sumire: I’m in top shape today! Let’s keep going.

Sumire: Do you all stretch beforehand? You could pull a muscle if you don’t.

Sumire: It’s too bad gymnastics competitions aren’t on TV more often.

Sumire: Fighting makes for a pretty good workout, doesn’t it?

while I didn't transcribe responses, I did notice something a bit disappointing: neither Sumire nor Akechi seemed to have responses for anyone else. It's possible I missed one?? But not being able to remember any, they must not have many if they do have some. A bit odd.

#persona 5 #p5r #p5r spoilers #to pick from later

10 notes · View notes

passionate-reply · 3 years

Video

youtube

This week on Great Albums: a Great Album that your average rock critic would actually agree with me about! Find out how Kate Bush got her groove back with her fifth LP, Hounds of Love, and whether she ever came down from that hill. Full transcript below the break!

Welcome to Passionate Reply, and welcome to Great Albums! Ever since I first conceived the idea of Great Albums, I’ve always intended it to reflect nothing other than my own personal “canon”--not necessarily a list of albums that were influential, successful, or acclaimed by anybody’s standards but my own. But in this installment, I’m making a somewhat uncharacteristic move, and diving into an album that really doesn’t need me to advocate for it: Hounds of Love, by Kate Bush, often considered Bush’s greatest masterpiece--if not one of the greatest albums of all time.

Released in 1985, Hounds of Love was Bush’s fifth studio LP. Her career had started off surprisingly strong in 1977, with the release of her debut single “Wuthering Heights,” written when Bush was only 19 years old. With a high-concept theme, based around the titular novel by Emily Brontë, it would set the template for much of Bush’s subsequent career: irreverently eccentric, high-concept art-pop with the intensely personal passion of a singular singer-songwriter. But just how much patience for that sort of thing does the general public have, beyond letting the occasional “Wuthering Heights” through as a sort of novelty hit? Bush’s subsequent work in the early 1980s met with inconsistent reception, with her fourth LP, 1982’s The Dreaming, marking a particularly low point. The first album that Bush produced all by herself, The Dreaming took even more radical creative liberties, pushing her sound into increasingly experimental territory.

Music: “Get Out Of My House”

Following the fairly cold reception of The Dreaming, Bush took several years to produce her next album, but it would prove to be the one that redeemed her career, and arguably turned her into a bigger star than ever before. Hounds of Love managed to stay true to the core principles of the Bush aesthetic: moody and introspective, full of rich and complex narratives, as well as musical risk-taking. But it honed and refined that sound into something that was also remarkably pop.

Music: “Running Up That Hill”

“Running Up That Hill” was one of the biggest hits of Bush’s career, and arguably dethroned even “Wuthering Heights” as her signature song. I think the secret to its success is its ability to balance Bush’s experimental impulses with an intuitive, deep-felt emotional quality that makes her best work resonant in an accessible way. On paper, “Running Up That Hill” is as high-concept as anything else in Bush’s catalogue--a song about making a deal with God to swap sexes with your lover, and feel what life is like in another body? But at the same time, the song has an ability to “work” even if you don’t know all of that. Who hasn’t longed for a way to bargain with supernatural forces, for a chance at the impossible? There’s a certain applicability to its themes, which I think is a chief reason why it’s inspired so many covers and reimaginings over the years. But even when one listens to the original, the stately washes of digital synthesiser and the powerful conviction that propels Bush’s vocals make it easy to sympathize with. It feels grounded and physical, rooted in the most carnal aspect of the human body. Positioned as the opening track of the album, “Running Up That Hill” feels like an obvious lead single--in the best way possible. But it’s worth noting that not everything on the album is quite so radio-friendly.

Music: “Cloudbusting”

Perhaps one of Bush’s most compelling narratives, “Cloudbusting” is also, ostensibly, fairly high-concept, portraying a heavily fictionalized episode from the life of Wilhelm Reich. A controversial figure both in life and legacy, Reich is best remembered for his work in psychology, heavily influenced by the spectre of Sigmund Freud. But “Cloudbusting” focuses on his later-life fascination with the physical sciences, and his belief that a mystical energy called “orgone” was responsible for both human emotional woes as well as disturbances in the Earth’s atmosphere. Reich attempted to develop a machine that could manipulate this energy, and hence achieve the longtime dream of technological weather control, but there’s no evidence his “cloudbuster” really worked, or that there’s any such thing as “orgone.” But Bush’s “Cloudbusting,” and its accompanying music video, portray Reich as a tragic hero, silenced by government authorities who sought to destroy what they couldn’t understand, conflating his work with cloudbusters with his censure by the FDA for his questionable medical devices.

The song was inspired chiefly by the memoirs of Wilhelm Reich’s son, Peter, with Bush explicitly portraying Peter’s naive childhood perspective on his father, and that does allow for some substantial nuance here...but at some point we have to ask ourselves what responsibility an artist has to the truth. “Cloudbusting” is the musical equivalent of a film that’s “based on a true story,” and I see no reason why music can’t be just as capable of spreading misinformation as the Oscar-bait biopics of Hollywood. Just how accurate, or how beautiful, does a work of art need to be, for us to allow a bit of playing loose with the facts for the sake of a great story?

Setting aside these quandaries presented by its subject matter, “Cloudbusting” undoubtedly delivers musically. Across its sprawling runtime, it develops and earns a sense of grandeur, building from its infectious percussion and cresting with Bush’s fragile, but assertive prayer: “I just know that something good is going to happen.” If you listen closely to the percussion tracks on the album, you’ll notice that there’s no cymbal or high-hat utilized anywhere, which helps give the album its particular hazy, meandering ambiance.

That effect is perhaps even more pronounced on the second side of the album. Hounds of Love is divided quite sharply into two sides. The first side, also sub-titled Hounds of Love, opens with “Running Up That Hill,” and finishes with “Cloudbusting,” which serves as something of a bridge between the two, combining a singable hook and a pop-like verse-chorus structure with a taste for more visionary narrative. While the first side is home to all four of the album’s singles, the second side, sub-titled The Ninth Wave, strays much further away from the standard expectations of pop.

Music: “Under Ice”

Going by the tracklisting, there are seven tracks that make up *The Ninth Wave,* though their smooth transitions and willful defiance of verse/chorus structure create a seamless oratorio or song cycle feel, not unlike many of the great “album sides” of the prog tradition. The Ninth Wave also departs from the feel of the first side in its instrumentation. While the Hounds of Love side has its fair share of exotic instruments, such as a balalaika on “Running Up That Hill” and a didgeridoo on “Cloudbusting,” The Ninth Wave is more richly baroque, with elements like that jarring violin on “Under Ice.” As it progresses, the breadth of timbres increases, climaxing in the Celtic-inspired “Jig of Life.”

Music: “Jig of Life”

The explosion of folkish, backward-looking sounds of “Jig of Life” and “Hello World,” with their fiddles, whistles, and full choir, represent its protagonist’s return to the realm of the living, after the trauma represented by earlier tracks like “Under Ice.” The abstract, though affecting, narrative presented by The Ninth Wave seems to be a tale of death and rebirth, with a narrator who drowns themselves, only to be reborn--whether literally revived from a failed suicide attempt, or metaphysically reincarnated after a passage through the realm of the dead.

Much more has been written about the themes of *The Ninth Wave* than I’m getting into here, but suffice it to say that many people consider it the relative highlight of the album. But I think it’s worth questioning that a little bit, and taking the time to look at Hounds of Love a bit more holistically. Just because the first side is a bit less overtly experimental doesn’t mean it doesn’t have just as much to offer, artistically, or that it isn’t a part of what makes this album truly great. At the end of the day, I think we can probably agree that far fewer people would have ever heard The Ninth Wave if it weren’t for those more accessible singles on side one, moving copies of the record and adding to Bush’s widespread acclaim. Without “Running Up That Hill,” Hounds of Love might have gone down in history as a fairly niche cult classic like The Dreaming, instead of the era-defining album that it got to become.

On the cover of Hounds of Love, we see an image of Bush reclining and embracing two dogs--who were, in fact, her own pets. The image’s saturation in purplish pink and Bush’s perhaps sultry expression combine to create an impression of traditional femininity, which resonates with the album’s themes of gender and sensuality. Framed in by large white borders, we might read the composition of the cover as evocative of a personal locket or memento, a sort of furtive glimpse into Bush’s more private or intimate essence, fitting for the introspective and emotional focus of much of the music. This “framing” is perhaps also evocative of the idea of the domestic sphere of life--and hence, again, of femininity.

While the title track of the album portrays the “hounds of love” as figures of menace, who are said to “chase” after its narrator, the submissive and comfortable-looking canines portrayed in the cover art seem like a foil to that idea. In the history of European art, dogs are often used as symbols of fidelity, particularly in the context of romance. Titian’s Venus of Urbino, painted in the 1530s, is often considered the progenitor of the Western “nude” as an archetype. Alongside the titular goddess, paragon of eroticism and the feminine, the painter has also included a lapdog, peacefully dozing beside her. It’s tempting to see the composition of the cover of Hounds of Love as doing something similar, invoking confident sensuality alongside a symbol of faithfulness to portray the essence of idealized love.

After the release of Hounds of Love, Bush would once again take several years to produce her next LP, 1989’s The Sensual World. More closely related to The Ninth Wave than the A-side of Hounds of Love, it was nonetheless another commercial and mainstream success for the artist.

Music: “The Sensual World”

From the mid-90s to the mid-00s, Bush took an extended hiatus from music, focusing instead on her family and her personal life. Despite uncertainty surrounding the future of her career, she would eventually return to the public spotlight in the 21st Century, and remains active, if somewhat intermittently, to the present day. At this point, it’s safe to say that Bush has a fairly enviable position, having lived long enough to become a cultural institution, and able to bask in the cult following her unmistakable and distinctive work has earned her. For as much as I’ve praised the more commercial side of Hounds of Love in this piece, I still believe in the power of the truly unfettered creative soul, and I’m still happy for Bush that she’s achieved that kind of freedom.

My favourite track from either side of Hounds of Love would have to be “The Big Sky.” In the context of the album, it stands out for its rousing, triumphant crescendo of energy--a marked difference from the languid, introspective sensibility that dominates most of the material. And it manages that without bringing the cymbals back, either! Thematically, its emphasis on weather and the sky prefigures that of “Cloudbusting,” perhaps providing a more hopeful and naive vision of what weather can do, which resists being “clouded” by political drama. That’s all I have for today--as always, thank you all for listening!

Music: “The Big Sky”

#music #great albums #kate bush #album review #album reviews #classic album #classic albums

14 notes · View notes

ikuzeminna · 4 years

Text

Why I love Gundam Wing and hate Frozen Teardrop

With Frozen Teardrop being the first new thing released in the Gundam Wing universe in ages, I feel I should make my stance on it clear, seeing as I’ve read (and by now thankfully forgotten) a large chunk of it.

So, what do I like about Gundam Wing? I can say without lying, almost everything. I like the story, the characters, the themes, the designs and the music. I like its humor, its subtlety, the fact that everyone plays a role and that there's no definite bad guy (nor good one for that matter). I like its dynamics and how you can view it any way you want, e.g. the Gundam pilots being heroes or plain murderers. And I like that you can and even must dig to understand things. The whole composition really works for me.

And what's best is that this entire composition makes Gundam Wing more; it makes it unique. I grew up with classics like Dragonball and Sailor Moon, the forefathers of the 'Idiot Hero' archetype for both males and females. Even to this day you see series featuring these types of main characters. Classic scenario of a naive yet pure kid growing up to become the savior of the world. We've all seen that.

It's why Gundam Wing is so special to me. It has a completely atypical setup and there's absolutely no stereotype I can apply to any character, no matter what TV Tropes may say. Heero is hardly your typical hero, is he? Heck, Heero is hardly a typical anything. What's more, Gundam Wing doesn't follow the 'growing stronger' plotline that, for example, the original MS Gundam or Seed series used. No, Gundam Wing starts out with fully trained soldiers who can kick your butt from episode 1 and will kill you without qualms if the situation requires it. (That's not to say that the characters don't grow, it's the physical growth and capabilities I'm talking about.) What's truly surprising about that is the age of the characters. This is another important point. Gundam Wing and realism. Many times I hear that GW is realistic. I'm sorry but no. Teens fighting against armies isn't realistic. Teens leading said armies isn't either. Neither is bending steel bars, nor surviving jumping off cliffs or blowing up your suit, nor successfully back-flipping from a motorbike onto a clothesline, nor becoming the Queen of the World as a teen, nor stealing a MS carrier plus suit at the age of ten, nor walking around with bazookas at the age of ten nor what have you. It's safe to say that Gundam Wing lacks any sense of realism. But it does not lack logic.

Realism never was Gundam Wing's aim to begin with. The way I see it, it's not just the plot or circumstances that prove this, but also the "inhumanity" of the characters. Would a real person with a similar background as Heero, Duo or Trowa really exhibit such selflessness or noble-mindedness as them and risk his life for strangers by fighting a war that could end in their death? I don't think so. Would anyone as sheltered as Relena give up her lifestyle, have the guts to go against the world's armed rulers with just words and put her life on the line for the sake of others? Hard to believe.

And that's it. One of the things that contributes to Gundam Wing's uniquity and is therefore a, if not the, defining trait of the series, is that it doesn't tell the story about angst-riddled terrorists and princesses, but a tale of heroes. The characters are ridiculously noble, strong, selfless, courageous, determined, make the impossible possible and still retain a certain purity, despite having gone through hell and back. It's what makes them so awesome. It's what makes the series so awesome. Duo isn't badass because he fights in the war. He's badass because he fights "so that no one else will have to" and when you see what he went through, you can only say "wow". Lady Une killed Relena's father and when Relena is given the opportunity to take revenge, she declines, saying there's been enough bloodshed. That's role model material there. Something that is sorely lacking in a lot of shows nowadays. And something that a lot of people seem to miss the point of (I'm referring to those that call the pilots wussies for not killing in EW).

All of this is the reason I hate Frozen Teardrop with a passion. Forget the nonsensical, recycled plot or the billion clones of everyone or the terrible mobile suit names like Snow White or Merciless Fairies. Forget Treize getting French’d by his mom or the Zero System being a digital cat or Relena’s grandfather being a disgusting ephebophile. That stuff is messed up and random and dumb and I have no idea what was wrong with the author at the time to write this.

It’s also that he completely destroys the essence of the original series, making every single characters whine about some drama and the never ending “woe is me” monologue I had to wade through every chapter.

Let’s take Duo, for example. He woke up one morning and decided to become an irresponsible, gold-digging bastard. To get Hilde’s money, he agreed to her terms to cut his braid off and get a “proper” name, just to buy himself a motorbike with their joined assets. Then he inherited a church plus orphanage, which Hilde got stuck with, too, being his wife, and when she asked him how to fund the orphanage, Sumizawa wants me to believe that Duo freaking Maxwell was just “Eh, whatever, leave them to it. I’m out” before taking off? Excuse me, what???

I’ve had discussions with people about this and there were statements that maybe more people just need to learn how actual manic depressives and people with PTSD act in relation to Duo's development in Frozen Teardrop. I've noticed a tendency for people to want to apply realism to Gundam Wing, especially in fanfics, but as I said before, Gundam Wing and realism don't have anything to do with each other. So why should I apply it?

What I expect from anything featuring Gundam Wing's characters is the same "heroic" behavior that was displayed in the series. Sure, the pilots each had a mental burden to carry but it wasn't what defined them. For example, Trowa's insecurity about not having a name or yearning for a home never became the main focus unlike his endless selflessness. And Heero's bitterness about the colonies' betrayal was well hidden under his joining the Treize faction to be able to keep retaliating against OZ. A noble deed to fight on but was it really necessary for him to go for the missions with the lowest chance of survival?

As I said, Gundam Wing is unique because it is atypical. That encompasses pretty much everything; you have bloody murderers in the role of the 'heroes', noble, honorable 'bad guys' who value life and the ever flashy Gundams that can't even begin to compare to non-flashy Relena's influence and importance to the plot. So why on earth should I go along with Duo and Wufei bickering like kids, like characters from five million other series do? I want my uniquity. I'm not saying that it isn't a possible outcome for Duo and Wufei to become bitter and bicker and argue and not be able to stand each other when they become adults. But considering those two could get along splendidly, it's a letdown. Duo and Wufei are very much alike; they both lost people important to them twice, they both fight partly out of revenge and their loss has had the biggest impact on shaping them into what they are in the series, unlike the other pilots. Heck, they both wear their respective culture's colors for mourning. Despite that, their personalities (or ways of dealing) are exact opposites. It's enough to make for a more interesting relationship dynamic between them than what was done in Frozen Teardrop and a lot of Gundam Wing fanfics.

Heero's regression is the same. He was frozen because J said something to the extent of "a guy like him would be needed in the future". How J is even alive is another point of unnecessary addition. But what would a guy like Heero be needed for? Killing, apparently.

Way to ignore the ending of Endless Waltz.

I guess it's partly my wish for Heero and everyone else to live a well-deserved 'happily ever after' which makes me have such a knee jerk reaction to all the drama. That and the fact that there was nowhere near as much drama in Gundam Wing. Nor sap, nor stereotyping, nor "realism". >_>

This grated on my nerves, which was why I dropped Frozen Teardrop like a hot potato and haven’t bothered since. This novel does not only fail on a general level with all the random, messed up crap and terrible pacing, it also fails to satisfy the Gundam Wing fan in me because Sumizawa, the very head writer of the show, also ignored major character traits on top of everything else. Why would Catherine, who stated that she hates war and did everything she could to keep Trowa from fighting, train his clone to become a soldier? Why would Duo become that deadbeat I described above?

Being the sole writer of Frozen Teardrop meant he could take as many creative liberties as he wanted. But in the end, he took too many, which in turn resulted in so many inconsistencies with the series that Frozen Teardrop now takes place in an alternate universe, in which not the series but the manga Glory of Losers takes place. Which is the sole reason I’m not bothered by Frozen Teardrop’s existence anymore.

There were some good passages in the novel, it wasn’t all bad. The battles with the new characters were exciting at times, I’ll be honest, but even those couldn’t be called genuinely good because of the carbon copies deal. There is always some blemish. Like Heero’s proposal to Relena. I’ve seen fans of the pairing rejoice at the scene. Alas, I’m not one of them because frankly, the characters in the novel hardly resemble the original ones. So I don’t care.

As the head writer of the show I had expected him to treat the source material with more care and not run it over with retcons and meaningless additions. Best example being everything surrounding Odin. The world could've definitely done without him being Heero's father. Or freaking Trant being related to him.

But again, alternate universe so who cares.

#gundam wing #frozen teardrop #rant #meta #I don't like it #at all

56 notes · View notes

mucky-puddler · 5 years

Text

Here is Kubrick blog no. 2

So, this week I’ll be looking at Kubrick’s early work (again), Paths of Glory, and the introduction of Depth of Field; Stanley Kubrick, film, and the uses of history – yes, that is the whole title.

The first thing Nathan had us all do was shout out any themes we could think of that Kubrick had used in the films we had watched so far. This list ended up being ridiculously long and appeared to contain every film under the sun (which is something I never understood – creatives don’t really think about themes when creating things, it just kinda happens, so what is the point in listing themes to look at?). Here are a few examples of themes we named;

- Madness

- Masculinity

- Obsession

- Photography

- Chess

- Brutality

- Violence

- Animalism

- Sport

- Fathers/mothers

We then reviewed the Seafarers (again) and looked deeper at the shot composition used; one of the more obvious ones was the shot change from machinery to people, suggesting that within the seafarer community the people are simply machines designed to complete certain tasks.

Let’s move on to the man himself. It has been suggested that Kubrick makes his films for men, and the evidence is as such – his characters fulfilled the stereotypes of having the damsel in distress and the knight in shining armour, making his female characters weaker and in need of assistance, he would often utilise the male gaze to sexualise women (as seen in the Seafarers when the camera pans up and holds on the image of a naked calendar), all of which makes him seem misogynistic. Alternatively, Kubrick could just be representing the world around him – personally, I think we give people who grew up during the 40’s and 50s much more credit than they deserve – there is no way we can assume that so many people during that time felt the way we all feel now, because the times have changed so much and we don’t want to ruin our idealised, romanticised perspective of a different time. I’m not saying that there weren’t people that thought this way, I have no doubt that there were, I just don’t believe that everyone thought that way. In every single piece of media I have studied where there is some injustice, the argument has always been made that they were “representing the views of the time”, inferring that the creators did not have the same views when it is entirely possible that their own views aligned with the unjust perspective they present.

Okay, rant over for now.

Something else I picked up on, that is somewhat related to what I’ve said above, is how Kubrick used his camera to give himself as much freedom as possible. Kubrick was commissioned to film the Seafarers as a promotional piece, meaning there was very little creative liberty given to Kubrick – what he did have control over was the camera movement. It would appear that his favourite were the long tracking shots, giving the audience long takes of the food hall (and the food itself, to a pornographic extent).

Another clear feature is Kubrick’s sense of humour – his sense of humour was young, like that of a teenage boy (hence the calendar shot). He would sneak as much suggestive evocative imagery through the loopholes into his films to entertain his audience.

And now for our word of the week – Gematria; Greek for geometry, turning letters into numbers, giving the numbers power, meaning texts have hidden codes.

It has been suggested that Kubrick used gematria in his films – critics and fanatics have spent hours poring over his films, trying to discover the hidden meanings behind the numbers and text he leaves in the shots. The numbers 7 and 3 are said to be popular numbers in Kubrick’s films but no one has figured out why yet. I personally don’t see the point in obsessing over every pixel in a shot to mangle it into an alternative meaning, but some people enjoy it, so you do you.

The last thing I took from the lecture was that theme and style should be considered together, especially over the many films brought to life by a single director. For Kubrick, we should look at similar themes through films like 2001 and Spartacus and Lolita, just to name a few.

Now onto the film – the film we watched this week was Paths of Glory. Like all of Kubrick’s films so far, it starts with a lovely bit of narration and a somewhat boring long shot – expositional, some would call it. Both these features together let us know that we are in for a war-time film. For almost the entirety of the rest of the film, I couldn’t understand what these characters were saying, So I had to gather the deeper plotlines from context. Something I drew from the film was how realistic it was for a film of that era; it does not romanticise war like others have, it is a good example of strong men being scared to obey orders, then suffering the consequences.

Here is something about the film that confused me – there is a single shot that pans around the characters to watch them leave, and a washing bowl that was used at the beginning of the scene comes back into the shot – why? It is not referenced at all in the scene, or even the rest of the film. Why was that shot included? Was it because it looks cool? Thinking about it deeper, the character played by Kirk Douglas was using it at the beginning of the scene – this character goes on to defend the men who get called to trial for ‘not following orders’ but assigning their deaths anyway because of the the decision of the court. To someone who grew up religious, this sounds familiar (that’s right, we got Jesus imagery right here). Kirk Douglas’ character could be reflected as Pontius Pilot – he washes his hands of the blood of the men under his command (as demonstrated by the washing bow) – making the men that were sacrificed as an example to the rest a reflection of Jesus – they were strung up to poles.

Let’s now talk about authority, an obvious theme in this film. There appears to be two types of authority – those who care about the mission, and those who care about the people. The general, who is the former of these two authorities, could be considered obsessed with winning the battle and then the war, and does not consider casualties (he’s a bit of a dickhead). On the other hand, the colonel’s concern is for the men and the logic behind why they did not obey orders (which makes sense). There is, as there is with reality, challenge and contention within and between the ranks; everyone wants to either impress their superiors or undermine them. Within the theme of authority, I’m going to make up a sub-theme – authority vs reality; those in higher authority have an idea that they want to execute, and put it into action without thinking about the factors that could make it possible e.g. the men that would have to die to make their ideas a success. The reality of the ideas is that it most likely isn’t possible, and hundreds of men would die in the process before the authority would begin to realise. One of my favourite scenes from the film is when the fate of the selected men are being decided by the colonel and two generals, one of whom is for killing them in a court-martial, the other hearing reason and willing to give them a fair(ish) trial. The colonel is framed between the two generals, and at first, I thought it would have made more sense to have the more neutral general framed between the two arguing parties. However, after a second thought, the colonel is the one frames between two opposing but equal forces – they are the angel and devil on his shoulders (hell year).

Ah yes, we love a courtroom drama, a turn I did not expect this film to make – it reminded me of the courtroom scene in Hacksaw Ridge (such a good film), and I feel this is a fair comparison; the intensity was continual and high, there was a ‘will they, won’t they’ vibe to it, and an all-round good scene for both films. Only with “Paths of Glory”, I hated the son-of-a-bitch prosecutor and the court for clearly favouring him, giving way to another sub-authority theme – humanity vs the court. Like the overbearing general, the court sides with the authority rather than reason – I thought the defence was not given the opportunity to give their case to the fullest extent, even though their evidence was solid.

The final theme I’m going to look at is religion (catholic flavour) – there isn’t a whole lot to say here as it doesn’t play a huge role in the film, the only religious figure (other than the Jesus imagery) is the father that comes to bless those who were chosen to be sacrificed as an example to the others.

Okay, onto the reading – this reading doesn’t really have anything to do with the film specifically, and I only got through the introduction again. These people really need to calm down with their intros because I’m never going to actually read something of merit if they keep their intro’s long. The book I read is called “Depth of Field: Stanley Kubrick, Film, and the uses of History”. One of the first things it discusses is the phrase ‘depth of field’, because it’s meaning it two-fold; the first is concerning photography, as depth of field refers to how sharp and in focus parts of a shot are (which is relevant to Kubrick because he loved photography, so would be able to use depth of field to his advantage), and the second is in reference to researching and trying to understand as much about an area of expertise as possible (this could be Kubrick researching for his films, or could be these critics learning as much as they can about Kubrick – I suspect it’s the latter).

Also, they spoke very briefly about how what is in the frame is the only thing that can “portray the world of human emotion/feeling and action realistically”. I completely disagree with this statement – there are so many elements that goes into portraying human emotion, like music, rhythm, acting lighting, just to mention a few.

Something else I don’t quite understand is how/why directors are praised for working in multiple genres over their career – how is it different to a student having to do multiple courses or modules at the same time? Surely, they just work in whatever genre they want to at the time?

This might just become a list of things I don’t understand because we already know that Kubrick liked to have control over every single aspect of the film, but according to this introduction, he let the cast and crew experiment with their tasks? How does that work?

A quote I found interesting is this – “…seen as bringing the terrible news of the twentieth-century history…to a mass audience” – sorry what? What is this even saying? Is he translating what was happening around him into film for other people to better understand? But if that is the case, then the ‘terrible news’ would have already passed because of how long it takes to make and distribute a film. Why aren’t these people reading the news? Surely no one relies solely on film to give them ‘terrible news of the twentieth-century history’? Or does this mean the people outside of America, seeing as global news was not yet prevalent?

Anyway.

Adorno is a man that pops up a few times in this intro and is said to have said “art and ideology are becoming one and the same thing” and I honestly love that because it’s kinda true. This is also the same guy that said “poetry became impossible after Auschwitz” which is the kind of deep, philosophical shit I enjoy.

This intro really does jump all over the place because then they discuss how Kubrick primarily adapted texts that weren’t already popular, with the exceptions of The Shining and Lolita, so his audience could judge his work as his own rather than an adaptation. This seems a little selfish to me. Like he’s not acknowledging the fact that it’s someone else’s work?

I do plan on reading more than just the intro’s to the actual readings, but it’s so difficult because the intros are so long! Also, somehow this blog ended up being longer than the last one, I don’t know how that happened, please don’t hate me.

#film student #kubrick #stanley kubrick #paths of glory

2 notes · View notes

music2liveby · 5 years

Audio

DAY 175: Mickey by Toni Basil

Album: Word of Mouth Release: April 1982 Genre: New Wave

If you ever wanted any introspective on the writing process of these articles, I do about 15-30 minutes of research on an artist, album, or song in particular and compile my findings and tidbits to bring to you here! Now, the reason I bring that up is because when I feature songs that are one-hit wonders or are from artists with little documented history, I have to take a lot of creative liberties with how I represent an artist or song. Luckily, Toni Basil’s one-hit wonder Mickey is considered one of the most successful and straight up best one-hit wonders to ever exist. VH1 even ranked the track #5 in a list of 100 Greatest One-Hit Wonders. She left me plenty of material to feature here for you today! Born Antonia Basilotta, she adapted the stage name Toni Basil from a nickname during her time in the Las Vegas High School cheerleading squad. In fact, choreography was a prevalent part of Toni’s life since childhood, being the daughter to a mother who’s livelihood resided in a vaudevillian acrobatic comedy act. Toni was an original member of The Lockers, an influential dance troupe that is credited with bringing street dancing into the mainstream. The Lockers kept Toni busy on the touring circuit long before her musical career, even performing behind legends like Frank Sinatra. The shift from dance to music began in the late 70′s under a much different approach than the bulk of her career: jazz music. She sang a rendition of popular jazz track Wham Rebop Boom Bam on many nighttime TV shows including The Merv Griffin Show and the inaugural season of Saturday Night Live, where Basil saw plenty of attention as a solo act and as part of The Lockers. As her notoriety started to balloon, Toni wanted to capitalize on the limelight and started production on her first album Word of Mouth, which featured a number of cover songs mainly from fellow new wave band Devo. Mickey was actually also a cover song, originally named Kitty and performed by British rockers Racey. While Racey’s version embodies a more surf rock type element to its composition, Toni took over with her creative vision and changed the name from Kitty to Mickey to fit the song’s gender roles and added perhaps the single greatest opening cheer to a song: Oh Mickey you’re so fine, you’re so fine you blow my mind HEY MICKEY! With a hook like that, it was inevitable that Toni would land a massive hit with Mickey upon its release in the U.S. The cheer atmosphere was further driven home in the song’s music video, obviously choreographed by Basil herself. She even wore the exact same Las Vegas High School cheer outfit worn during her attendance. It’s generally considered that Mickey’s music video is the first choreographed dance video, receiving heavy airtime on the budding MTV channel in its early years. Toni only ever released two albums during her tenure, and most songs that weren’t Mickey bombed with audiences and later faded her back into obscurity. Although her time in the spotlight was over, Toni Basil stuck with behind the scenes work as a choreographer, including a role in directing the choreography for the Talking Heads’ video for Once in a Lifetime. Toni has never seen her famous song as a curse; in fact, she embraces her niche stardom and enjoys the place in history she has for its inception!

#Mickey #Toni Basil #Word of Mouth #New Wave #Pop #Cheer #365songs

2 notes · View notes

streetphotographycontroversy · 5 years

Text

“Garry Winogrand: All Things Are Photographable”

(Garry Winogrand Self Portrait)

I recently watched a documentary about famous street photographer: Garry Winogrand. (1928-1984) Winogrand was a photographer from the Bronx that devoted his life to capturing the “is-ness of things.” His observation of human behavior, activity, gesture and the relationships shared between people ultimately molded photography into the art form it is today.

Below is the trailer to the documentary:

youtube

Director: Sasha Waters Freyer

Produced By: American Masters

With: Geoff Dyer: English writer, Jeffrey Fraenkel: Author and owner of Fraenkel Gallery in San Francisco, Laurie Simmons: American artist, photographer and filmmaker, Matthew Weiner: American writer, producer, director, actor and author, Tod Papageorge: American Photographer, Leo Rubinfien: American photographer and essayist, Susan Kismaric: Curator at the Museum of Modern Art, Jeffrey Henson Scales: Photographer and Instructor at NYU, and Adrienne Lubeau: First wife of Garry Winogrand

Release Date: Sep 19, 2018

Garry Winogrand has always been an artist. At a young age, Winogrand was known to paint, but as soon as he wrapped his hands around a camera, he was never able to put it down. Once he realized that his school offered 24-hour darkroom access, he was hooked.

In the earlier years of his career, Winogrand hoped to work as a freelancer in Life and Look Magazines. He started his photography career as an illustrator for written texts for various magazines. However, being an illustrator forced him to conform to the written text, ultimately stripping his photography of the uncertainty, poetry, and ambiguity it had to offer.

So, during his unemployed days, Winogrand would go out and photograph city life and saw the potential that photography truly had to be an art. He started developing independent and personal goals with photography and began developing a style of candid portraiture. Many of the photographers featured in the documentary had described his work as mysterious, loose, messy, vulnerable, speculative and spontaneous.

The film revealed that Winogrand was influenced by Dan Weiner, an American photojournalist. Weiner also enjoyed capturing the fleeting moments of human life in the public landscape, which inspired the work of Winogrand. Weiner died unexpectedly in 1959 in a plane crash that drove Winogrand’s series of photographs taken in airports. Winogrand grew superstitious and began to snap photos of people in the airports before every flight he took. His main subject in this series were of people carrying lots of luggage.

Winogrand continued to photograph in public every day. His work began getting noticed by museum curators like John Szarkowski, the Director of Photography at the Museum of Modern Art. Szarkowski was intrigued by Winogrand’s work because he didn’t care about the shows or the “notion of being an artist.” He just truly enjoyed going out and photographing life. Soon enough, Winogrand’s work started getting featured in galleries and more magazines. In May of 1963, Szarkowski created a gallery featuring four other photographers called “Five Unrelated Photographers.”

In the film, his son read Winogrand’s Guggenheim Application essay. It read, “I have been photographing the United States. Trying by investigating photographically to learn who we are and how we feel by seeing what we look like as history has been and is happening to us in this world. Since World War II, we have seen the spread of affluence the move to the suburbs and the spreading of them, the massive shopping centers to serve them , cars to and from. New schools, churches and banks, and the growing need of tranquilizer peace, missile races, H-bomb for overkill war and peace tensions and bomb shelter security. And since the Supreme Court decision to desegregate schools, we have the acceleration of civil liberties battle by Negros. I look at the pictures I have done up to now and they make me feel that who we are and how we feel and what is to become of us just doesn’t matter. Our aspirations and successes have been cheap and petty. I read the newspapers, the columnists, some books and I look at some magazines, our press. They all deal in illusions and fantasies. I can only conclude that we have lost ourselves and the bomb may finish the job permanently and it just doesn’t matter. We have not loved life. I cannot accept my conclusions and so I must continue this photographic investigation further and deeper. This is my project.”

In his short life of 56 years, The Garry Winogrand Archive at the Center for Creative Photography estimates to have over 20,000 independent prints, 20,000 contact sheets, 30,500 35 mm color slides and 100,000 negatives. Winogrand was never into the fame and the fortune his photographs may have brought. His photographs illustrated a portrait of America, and he was always hungry for the truth, whatever the truth may be.

After watching this documentary, I was truly amazed with some of Winogrand’s photos. He truly had an eye for the visually interesting, keeping composition in mind and was very thoughtful in selecting his subjects. Many of his photographs were also considered to be controversial, which I think is interesting. He played with racial issues, the social hierarchy, gender and the woman’s place, and, in some cases, children. I think art, whether it’s drawing and paintings, sculpture or photography, should produce some sort of emotion. While his work is controversial, discomfort is part of human emotion and the fact that he’s able to draw that type of emotion from his work proves that he was a successful photographer.

Winogrand’s Photography (all featured in documentary):

Source

#garry winogrand #street photography #camera #35mm #portraitofamerica

2 notes · View notes

hyperesthesias · 6 years

Text

6 Points for 6 Rooms -- A Review of No-End House

OKAY -- so I finished Channel Zero: No-End House last night. I have some...feelings so I decided to write a review because I needed to get it out of my head. There are spoilers in this review, if you haven’t seen it, but I’ll put them under a cut.

Generally, the plot took an idea that has been a fairly common theme in the horror genre for a while. Nonetheless, it is a concept that has a lot of wiggle room and has a lot of opportunity for creative development and liberty. That being said, they missed a lot of those opportunities, which left me, as both a viewer and a writer, feeling somewhat disappointed and unsatisfied. With just six episodes, this show had the potential to be so much more than it was, but it felt they were playing it safe.

When I started watching, I was under the impression I’d be immersed in something much different. I’m familiar with CreepyPasta, (I used to be a big fan, six or seven years ago) and knew that Channel Zero was based on various CreepyPasta stories, so there was a part of me that was expecting the traditional CreepyPasta horror-fest stereotype. However, there was little about this show that qualified as ‘horror’ (which might be a little more manageable for those who don’t particularly like horror). That being said, the general vibe of this show could be summed up in two words: indecisively unsettling. Rather than horror, it seemed the writers wanted to give people the impression of ‘creepy’. However, it seemed the writers wanted to incorporate as many ‘creepy’ archetypes into this six episode mini-series as they could possibly manage, while somehow leaving the viewer unsure how to take it all.

Just as a general disclaimer: I want people to know I actually liked this show, but there were so many things that could have been easily refined to make this experience that much better, that I couldn’t keep quiet. So, just keep in mind I did like what I saw, I’m just a critical jackass. :)

1. The Creep Factor:

Between the strange videos that they receive on their phones, laptops, and TVs regarding The House; the music composition containing voices playing backwards; the man in the mask; the pedo guy behind the mirror; zombie dad; and the Harbinger Stranger** from the bar (who we won’t find out about until later) -- this show has a distinct vibe it knows it wants. Its main goal is to creep the audience, not so much divulge them into horror. It wants to make us curious and draw us in, a great tactic for an idea that has been done several times before. It knows it wants to be set apart. The problem lies in the execution.

The music composition stood out the most to me, as a musician. From the opening sequence, the music wants to tell you a story. It wants to tell you the emotional connection between our Protagonist and her Father, and eventually how that emotional connection is then shared with The House. Throughout the series, the music is trying to tell the viewer that these characters are trapped inside The House, along with everyone else -- that The House has actually consumed these people -- by way of the backward vocal recordings. That was mindblowing, I loved it. However, the placement of beats and downbeats were too far off. They didn’t make a sea-sick beat that gave off an unsettling vibe, it didn’t make lyrical sense. It felt distracting rather than adding to an element. There was a distinct pattern that followed the characters through their journey of The House: Enter, scare, pause, move on, repeat. But the music does not match this pattern, thus making the plot feel a little off-centered.

The House feeds on memories, sucking them dry until the victim remains an empty shell, which the viewer doesn’t know until later. The viewer is told The House is ‘psychological’, that it ‘gets in your head’, but for all the exposition, there is no explanation as to why. There is never given a reason or an origin to The House, the characters and thus the viewers are meant to accept The House as it is. The idea is to obscure as much as possible to build on the ‘creepy’ elements, and the mystery and curiosity behind its novelty: no one knows what The House is, who built, who manages is, neither how it works. But The Creep Factor doesn’t work for this scenario. The House is supposed to be ‘haunted’, a haunted art project that scares its occupants, lures them in with the appeal of the unknown. But haunted houses only work with the guarantee that you’ll be scared. Haunted houses feed off of Fear, and fear only stems from Doubt and Uncertainty. We are shown no uncertainty besides an urban legend told around a bar table, and that legend is promptly laughed at. Verbal exposition is not enough to sell it, you need something more: Have the people who have exited or escaped The House them spoken out? Are they still looking for the people who were lost inside? Are they scarred for life? Surely, they’ve recounted something about what they saw inside. We later see Jules on a Forum about The House, so we know these people are out there, but why aren’t they being used as the backbone for this legend? Surely, there had to be more people looking for their spouses, their friends, their families. Their fear would make others curious, and attempt to take up the challenge in their weakness.

One other thing is the unnecessary addition of the Orb. No one really knows what it is, it doesn’t even seem like Seth knows, and he lives there. Jules has a family, and it’s presumed they live in the same neighbourhood since she referred to it as “home”. So why didn’t The House create a home for her? She and Seth find an empty house to sleep in, (sidenote: we never really know where Seth actually lives -- later, he lives with Margot**), and she doesn’t have anywhere to go or fit in. However, the Orb continually follows her, but its origins are never explained, even though its purpose is clear: it shares the same goal as the other Manifestations, to consume memories.

A lot of details in this show, like the Orb, the man in the mask, and pedo mirror guy, felt like the writers wanted it all. They just wanted every creepy thing they could think of, every creepy trope, instead of sticking with one or two to make it better digestible. (No pun intended.)

You can’t solely rely on the creep factor in this kind of genre -- even if it isn’t explicit horror, even if it’s supposed to be ‘psychological’. Fear is one of the most powerful psychological tools. Use it. Which is why the rooms consisting of the man in the mask, the zombie dad, and the pedo mirror guy fell kind of...flat. No one was as afraid as they should have been. Humans are reactional creatures -- we feed off of each others’ emotions. The people exiting The House throwing up never once said: “Don’t go in there! Please!! I’m begging you!”, Margot seemed stunned when the man in the mask called her “Martian”, but she never once went “WTF how TF do you know what my dead dad called me?!”; and while she was scared of the man behind the mirror, there still wasn’t the critical reaction of: “how the hell did this place know what I dreamt all those years ago?”** The House is accepted for what it is, and it does not illicit the reaction it could have.

2. JT:

Sigh. This is a prime example of “We want to incorporate what we can from the original story, but we’re not sure how, so we’re going to completely waste this opportunity of creativity.” I did not read the original CreepyPasta for No-End House before I watched the show because I wanted an untainted perspective. Therefore, I was left utterly confused as to why the hell JT was the only character to encounter himself, and why his House Self killed his Real Self. Honestly...I’m still a little on the fence. I can make psychological assumptions: JT was always more in his head than he was present, he was introverted when he wanted to be extroverted, he was awkward, uncertain of himself, and liked to think of himself as “cooler” or “better” than he was; thus, his House Self, feeding off of his internal energy, was more powerful than his Real Self. But this still leaves gaping holes and questions.

In the original CreepyPasta, the Protagonist encounters a version of himself, and this version of himself is actually the door to the next room. He has to cut this version of himself open in order to access the next room. They fight and wrestle for control, until Protagonist manages to knife him and open him up.

None of this happened in the show. None of it, except for JT meeting another version of himself that wanted to escape The House and go to the real world. But we were never told why -- yeah, he wanted “real world experiences” such as eating ice cream, but there was no real connection. This goes in hand with “The Creep Factor”. It felt that this was done just to weird the audience out, with no real merit to the story. JT dies two episodes in, and Fake JT dies halfway through the story, adding really...nothing to the plot. JT told them about The House, sure, but if Seth was actually the one who brought people to The House, why was JT even needed?

The impact of JT seeing himself could have been used so much more wisely. If they didn’t want to dip into the element of gore (which really didn’t seem to be too much of a problem, considering the embodiment of memories), stabbing the Fake version of himself in Room 5 could have been what he’d seen, as he never really explained what it was he saw there, besides acknowledging he’d seen a frightening image of himself. This would have freed up his character for the duration of the series, and if they still wanted to kill him off, he could have still died outside the cornfield, but at least we would have had a complete picture of what mostly everyone** had seen in Room 5. And whenever you can, show! Don’t tell!

3. Dylan & Lacey:

This was your chance!!! This was your chance to show, not tell!! You nearly missed it! We were shown that Lacey recalled nothing of Dylan, that she’d built a life for herself without the recollection of the outside world. Their story was heartbreaking, but somehow also mildly forgettable. It all goes back to the fact that there are a lot of unanswered questions and misuse of screentime. What’s up with Dylan? Why didn’t we see more of him? Just when we were starting to, he was killed. We were told he’s been looking for The House, and he seems pissed. Has it only been a year? Has it been more? What about Lacey? Is there nothing that she remembers? Not even a smidge? Did she actually remember the necklace, or was she faking it? Their story could have gone longer, or at least more in depth if they couldn’t juggle screentime -- but this screentime was wasted primarily on him trying to overpower her and subdue her. However, their deaths did have some impact, in that they showed how powerful the Maniestations’ hunger is, and how ruthless Margot’s ‘Dad’ could be, and why she should be so afraid of him.

4. Memory Munchies:

Obviously, in the CreepyPasta there was no mention of The House actually consuming its occupants’ memories, this was creative liberty, or some kind of story addition worked out with the original author. And it is an awesome idea. I love it so much. It’s so rich and full, just like memories themselves. It has the potential for fear -- like with Jules and Margot -- and it has the potential for comfort -- like with Seth**. My only nitpick with this was it was a little confusing. Not only in how it was eventually revealed, (which is forgiveable, because we’re seeing all this from the Protagonists’ point of view, and no one has any idea what the hell is going on) but in a single thought: why weren’t the Protagonists more outnumbered?

There’s a great scene where they’re running through the school, hiding from her Father, who has been chasing Margot because he’s famished. But why isn’t more than just him? It was four of them against one of him (with some sorely convenient timing by “JT” and Seth). Was there a rule that Manifestations of The House could only consume the memories of their prospective relations, or the people they’re supposed to live with or be connected to? If that’s the case, why was Lacey being fed off of by a husband of her own creation, but Jules was fed off of by the Orb? But then what about the Cornfield? After a certain point of hunger, do the rules just not apply any more, or are they breaking the rules of The House, and that’s why they’re cordoned off to the Cornfield? It seemed they could leave the Cornfield, so what was stopping them from searching for them outside of the Cornfield? (sidenote: Jules said she remembered the Cornfield from when Margots’ Dad took them, so were the starving Manifestations always there, and that area was disguising itself as a Cornfield? Or did the Manifestations find the Cornfield because it was one of her memories, hoping for a snack? This entire plot sequence would have made more sense if the area had been generic, rather than connecting it to something from her past.)

This was a more mild missed opportunity: There were Manifestations that followed them to the edge of the neighbourhood, but what made them stop? They had no reason to stop, we were never told they couldn’t go beyond a certain point, and that’s proven by the starving Manifestations in the Cornfield. If they were as hungry as was shown, they would have needed them to stay. So why did this happen? There was the potential for a lot of fear and action here, where they could be chased through the forest and fields, possibly making “JT”’s, and Dylan’s and Lacey’s deaths a lot more interesting or at least intense.

5. The Ending:

Okay, another massive plot hole for me was the ending. There was no real resolution. Margot and Jules escaped The House, (and can we just acknowledge how badass Jules was?) but there was no resolution. There was just the denouement, and barely one at that. We’re explained about Seth and his involvement with bringing people into The House**, and he’s promptly consumed by these Manifestations, and we’re left to assume he becomes another hollowed out addition to The House. But there was continual talk throughout the final episode that they wanted to destroy The House, however we never see Margot or Jules go through with any kind of plan to do so. So, the viewer is also left to assume The House is still standing and will continue to consume more occupants every year. This was a rather unsatisfying ending, not only because The House was left standing, but because of the final point below:

6. **Seth:

YOU BLEW IT!! You freakin’ blew it!! The best male character on the show, and they totally veered his character left, and ran him into a ditch! I was absolutely incredulous. I’m still so mad this character was WASTED.

From the end of episode two and the beginning of episode three, I was rooting for Seth to actually BE The House! Doing so would have tied everything together, even Seth coming out of The House to find Margot’s Dad to (in this theory) make sure the Manifesation didn’t compromise the integrity of his secret, of himself, The House. Seth lured people to The House, he barely said a word about what he saw in Room 5, he admired its workings, and nothing ever seemed to touch him. Plus, just something I noticed: everything Margot told him about herself was reflected inside it.

It would have made a lot more sense to have The House be an actual, emotional entity, rather than just an “organism”. Especially since Seth hadn’t “anticipated on liking Margot so much”. It would have explained how she managed to be somewhat unscathed, and why she was allowed to leave the first time, because The House cared about her. It would have added a much needed layer of relateability to an unrelateable structure, and it could have been so easily explainable, especially with how he repeatedly mentioned his background and its connection to The House.

To show, or even tell this story would not have taken up a lot of time. It was one that could be recounted, rather than shown, if screentime was an issue: That he was a foster child, who’d been frightened, and hurt, and had been through hardship and presumable abuse -- that all of this had riled in him a supernatural link. A link that he used to protect himself when in his next home, by hiding in the house, by pretending he was in a place that was better. That this house protected him from his current family, until one day he found that he had this special connection to this house, that it responded to his will, by creating other rooms, or other interiors. And eventually, he made for himself an alternate reality, where he caged his foster family so they could never harm him again. But even after all of this, he’s still hurting because he still wants the family he seeks, so he goes from city to city year after year searching for that family, searching for good memories to fill the gaps in his own. Until one day, he meets a girl who feels like as lost as he is, who feels just as abandoned and angry and depressed. Someone with whom he feels a connection, one he’s never felt before, and he realises he doesn’t want anything to hurt her, that he wants her to stay.

This would have kept the integrities of both the character of Seth, and The House. Neither The House, nor Seth were evil entities, and combined, he would have been a much more relateable substance. The House gave people the chance to turn back, by way of the exit doors, and Room 6 was a well known secret: no one ever came back. The House in the series is more like an amoeba than anything else: it doesn’t have a will, it doesn’t have a personhood. But to make it truly frightening, combining it with the raw energy of this hurting person, that The House could do anything at his beck and call, would have changed the game for the better. It would have made the exits make more sense. Because in the series, it doesn’t follow why The House would ever let people go, it’s indiscriminate in who it ‘eats’. But as a person, it would not be. It would show mercy. Seth, knowing the pain of having no one, could then create a reality for each person, whatever they wanted, so they wouldn’t be in pain while they were fed off of, essentially. That shows mercy, something a house, by itself, couldn’t do.

But no. Unfortunately, none of that happened. Instead, Seth was regaled to a jackass boyfriend with commitment issues stemming from abandonment.

A glaring opportunity wasted. Absolutely, utterly so.

The worst part, is that it directly could have affected way the story ended: if they somehow found a way to defeat Seth, who was The House, The House would never have harmed anyone again, thus closing the plot point they missed.

All in all, I enjoyed it. I liked that there was no gratuitous gore or violence, especially no sexual violence. I adored how they made the consumption of memories, it was unique and colorful. Every actor played their part to a T, and I felt for their characters. I could understand where they were coming from. But they could have been given a better story to work with, and that’s the downfall of this show. It keeps with the CreepyPasta feel and theme, which is unfortunately immature and underexposed writing that leaves one wanting for something more.

#channel zero #no end house #channel zero no end house #horror #creepy #creepypasta #review #*

8 notes · View notes

aion-rsa · 3 years

Text

Jupiter’s Legacy: From Page to Screen

https://ift.tt/2RFY0l0

This article is presented by:

How do you bring a comic book to life? It’s a question that studios have been struggling with since they first began making live-action superhero serials in the 1940s. Netflix’s newest comic book series adapts Image Comics’ metatext on the medium, Jupiter’s Legacy. Created by Mark Millar and Frank Quitely, the story centers on two generations of heroes. In its quest to bring this story to life, Netflix has enlisted costume designer Lizz Wolf. Though she’s new to the superhero genre, she has plenty of experience with massive actioners—including Rambo, The Expendables, and Pacific Rim: Uprising–and she dived in head-first to create a unique and vibrant visual landscape which respected the comics while bringing the texture and depth needed to translate the archetypal heroes to the small screen.

In an unusual series of events, Wolf was brought on very early in the production in order to allow her to build the sartorial universe of Jupiter’s Legacy from the ground up. It was a rare chance for the costume designer to truly create something immersive and all-encompassing. “This project was an opportunity that very few costume designers get,” Wolf says. “In order to conquer the Herculean task of bringing the vast universe that Mark Millar and Frank Quitely had created to life, I had to strap myself in for the ride of a lifetime.”

Seeing that world come to life has been nothing short of a joy for artist and Jupiter’s Legacy co-creator Quitely. While the show does bring plenty of new layers to the costuming and characters, he was blown away by how much inspiration they took from the comics. Even when things were changed he feels it was for the better.

“Where they have embellished things, it’s not so much that they’ve done their own thing,” Quitely says, “it’s that they’ve taken what we had in the comic, and they’ve added to it and translated it in a way that’s going to work better for television. It’s a very interesting process for me to see.”

So how did Wolf get started on translating such an epic series through the lens of costuming?

“As this universe is literally littered with superheroes and villains with varying degrees of power, I created a doctrine based on the character depictions in the comic book,” she says. “A platform of their capabilities and back stories. This was the connective tissue to then assemble a visual language and start the design process. This design language was a culmination of the extensive research we did for each of the superheroes and their subgroups. I relied heavily on science and nature to guide me. I was inspired by everything from the natural world, architecture, black line tattoos, ancient symbols, alchemy, microbial photography, atomic ordering, complex life forms, and parametric equations.”

When it came to directly adapting the costumes from the comics, for Wolf it was a balance of respect and inspiration.

“In the beginning, I focused on the story to inform the design,” she says. “In order to achieve a cinematic feel, we had to extrapolate what was intrinsic to telling the story through an emotional color palette, composition, function, and the capabilities of each member of the Union from the source material. Then, of course, we had to pump them into three-dimensional characters.”

When Quitely visited the set, he got to explore those three-dimensional reimaginings of his art, something that he calls a privilege. While he visited each and every part of the production, and enjoyed it all, the costume department was something of a highlight for the creator.

“They were very faithful to all the main costumes,” Quitely explains. “But because there are so many supporting characters, they had basically come up with a lot of costumes that were just inspired by what they’d already found in the comic. That was really great to see.”

Discovering the creators were fans of her designs early on was an unforgettable moment for Wolf. She was keen to talk about their impact on her, and what she called a seminal vision of superheroes. So when Millar, Quitely, and the showrunners came back with good things to say, it was “the catalyst of confidence” for her. “It was truly a professional high point to hear that Mark [Millar] had liked the designs and the direction we were going in.” Wolf says. “That acknowledgment was everything!”

Paying homage to the silhouettes and color schemes of the comics costumes was key to Wolf. But she wanted to amp up the technology and detail. With suits that have to exist over decades, it was vital to make sure that they had durability and that classic Golden Age vibe. “These suits had to travel the expanse of 100-plus years and hold up, as well as remain relevant and be able to inspire generations to come,” she says. “That was a challenge!”

Jupiter’s Legacy Ending Explained

By Bernard Boo

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Mark Millar on the Genesis of His Superhero Story

By Aaron Sagers

Wolf battled through those challenges and found unexpected inspiration in the works of industrial 3D knitters. Diving deep into this new creative process gave Wolf a new insight, and what she called “single thread technology” led to the basis of what she describes as the show’s “suit mythology,” which also shaped the designs of the next generation’s suits.

Taking inspiration from anatomical artists like George Bridgman and Andrew Loomis, Wolf crafted a musculature for the super suits that was exaggerated yet natural. And she even built the origin of their powers, imbued following an “event,” into the suits. “This muscular structure was a molecular reaction of this event integrated into the suit itself,” she says.

That level of detail was something that immediately stuck out to Quitely. He was particularly excited by the intricate detailing that Wolf and her team added. Though the costumes might look the same from a distance, up close Quitely found an impressive array of subtle details, including emblems and alien patterns built into the material itself. “They’ve put so much thought and love and enthusiasm into the way they’ve gone about recreating this world, making it bigger and fuller in a way that will work for television,” Quitely says. “It’s been fantastic.”

Wolf was equally as enamoured with the process, describing it as a highlight of her storied career. “Designing the superheroes was an incredible thrill! I’ve experienced nothing like it. I’d have to say overall that Jupiter’s Legacy is my favorite project that I have ever done!”

Sacred Geometry

Lizz Wolf added a unique costume detail which created its own visual language, much of which was inspired by the concept of “Sacred Geometry.” The term references the idea of ascribing meaning and symbolism to certain geometric shapes and proportions. While usually used in religious buildings and art, Wolf strived to craft a superheroic Sacred Geometry for each of the six Union members using symbolic emblems and totems which were later integrated into their suits. “These were extractions or reflections of each character’s individual journey.” Wolf explains.

While researching the look of Jupiter’s Legacy, the team discovered amateur micro photography of frozen ice crystals. This naturally occurring phenomenon developed into the overall language of the costumes. “We created a series of these lichen-like formations that represented expressions or glyphs based on an alphabet of sorts,” Wolf says. “It was used on each of the Union’s super suits as an adornment or to create declarations.”

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Josh Duhamel on Becoming The Utopian

By Ed Gross

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Leslie Bibb and the History of Lady Liberty

By Ed Gross

The Utopian signified a particular challenge as his plain white suit was simple yet iconic. But Wolf built on his archetypal comic book silhouette that she felt represented the mythology of the character. While she didn’t feel like he was particularly formidable at first, once they built in Sheldon’s own Sacred Geometry which was built from “extractions from conjured celestial maps that could have guided Sheldon in his calling” the costume designer reveals, “he emerged to be very intimidating.”

Dressing Two Generations of Superheroes

Jupiter’s Legacy is a story about family, two generations of distinctly different heroes. The older and more archetypal group known as the Union are shaped by idealistic dreams and Golden Age comics. Then there’s the children of the Union, whose lives have been molded by their parents’ fame, privilege, and celebrity endorsement campaigns. When it comes to costuming, the differences are clear. The Union wear classic superhero suits, making them icons of hope and heroics. But their children rock civilian outfits, still just as recognizable but a clear rejection of the traditions of their family.

The Utopian

When it came to designing The Utopian, Quitely looked towards Superman and other classic Golden Age stories. But for costume designer Lizz Wolf, it was all about building only on what already existed in the comics. Keeping his white silhouette was key and Wolf “built on the mythology of the character,” giving him what she calls an “almost archaic, statuesque feel.” She adds that building that texture was key. “This is where the musculature was profound in exhibiting his mortal strength,” she explains. “This brought majesty to his suit, and then Josh Duhamel brought his god-like presence!”

Skyfox

One of the most significantly different costumes is that of Skyfox. Gone are his leotard/undies from the comics. Instead, Wolf crafted something with “a rugged sexiness.” The team retained his “iconic color scheme that is certainly a nod to royalty and his social status as George Hutchence.” But rather than drawing directly from the comics, they shifted tactics.

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Matt Lanter on Becoming Skyfox

By Ed Gross

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: David Julian Hirsh Couldn’t Wait to Play Blue Bolt

By Ed Gross

“His inspiration was part gunslinger, part playboy, 100% badass,” Wolf says. “His equipment is intentionally worn low on hips to provoke that rock star, cowboy vibe. He also has what amounts to the ‘Rosetta Stone’ of the Union embedded in his suit. The crowning element is his fractal-like Fox emblem. It’s like a talisman inspired by his fox-themed heirloom jewelry pieces from the 1920s.”

Brainwave

Another slight shift was Brainwave. In the comics, his suit evolves in the modern age. But Wolf decided to keep his iconic early look for the entire series. “This allowed us to really make his suit beam and keep his natural swagger evident. I love his suit and his veining motif. He just lights up in it and it appears to be actively circulating.”

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Ben Daniels Plays Mind Games as Brainwave

By Ed Gross

Sponsored

Jupiter’s Legacy: Andrew Horton on the Importance of Being Paragon

By Ed Gross

Wolf reveals that a strange mistake ended up playing a vital part. “That fabrication was one of those divine accidents. During our R&D period, a run of printed fabric went in an unintentional direction. That material mysteriously became more radiant when stretched over his muscular structure. That mistake became the end result.”

The Union

For artist Frank Quitely and writer Mark Millar, the Union’s costumes were key, as were their influences.

“We went right back to Superman and Batman. The early Marvel and DC heroes. The heroes from the mid 1930s through the ’40s, ’50s, ’60s, and ’70s,” Quitely says. The older generation wear traditional suits making them easily identifiable as heroes. “We were looking at everything that had gone before. We were wanting things that were recognizable and reminiscent of classic superheroes, even for people that weren’t immersed in comic book culture. Most people have got a rough idea of what Superman and Spider-Man are about. We wanted to deal with archetypes and representations of superheroes that would still strike some kind of chord with people that only had a passing interest.”

The Next Generation

cnx.cmd.push(function() { cnx({ playerId: "106e33c0-3911-473c-b599-b1426db57530", }).render("0270c398a82f44f49c23c16122516796"); });

Growing up in Scotland shaped Quitely’s choice to make the younger generation’s uniforms their everyday outfits. “I read a lot of comics when I was younger. Desperate Dan, Dennis the Menace, The Broons. The characters tend to wear the same clothes,” he explains. “It’s the same with your Saturday morning cartoons like Scooby-Doo. Their costumes are part of the aesthetic of each character. They wear the same clothes and colors all the time because it makes them more recognizable. To some extent we did that with the characters in Jupiter’s Legacy that didn’t have a superhero costume. Even if the clothes change, they have a recognizable style. And it’s important to try to stick with that because it helps build the character and it helps make the visual storytelling easy to follow.”

Jupiter’s Legacy premieres on Netflix on May 7. Read more about the series in our special edition magazine!

The post Jupiter’s Legacy: From Page to Screen appeared first on Den of Geek.

from Den of Geek https://ift.tt/3eyJBAf

#aion-rsa #Den of Geek

0 notes

cinema-tv-etc · 4 years

Link

∧ Top 10 Things Bombshell Got Factually Righ WRITTEN BY: Nick Spake As disturbing as it sounds, there are a lot of things Bombshell got factually right. Transcript

What exactly goes on behind the scenes of this controversial news corporation? Welcome to MsMojo and today we’ll be counting down our picks for the Top 10 Things Bombshell Got Factually Right. For this list, we’re taking a look at accurate plot points and details from this drama about the Fox News misconduct scandal. In case you haven’t seen the film yet, this list contains spoilers, not to mention bombshells. #10: More Than 20 Women Accused Roger Ailes In 2016, Megyn Kelly reportedly informed investigators that she had been sexually harassed by Fox News CEO Roger Ailes. When Kelly goes on the record in “Bombshell,” the investigators label her with the letter “W,” meaning that she’s the 23rd woman who has accused Ailes. According to Gretchen Carlson’s lawyers, more than 20 women accused Ailes of inappropriate behavior, both publicly and privately. Many of the women who spoke out against Ailes were former Fox News employees, including Rudi Bakhtiar, Laurie Luhn, and Andrea Tantaros. The film does take a few creative liberties with Ailes’ accusers. Most notably, Kayla Pospisil, a Fox News journalist played by Margot Robbie, is a composite character. Just because Kayla is fictitious, though, doesn’t mean her story is without truth. #9: Megyn Kelly’s White Santa Debate During a brief news segment in the film, Kelly scoffs at the possibility that Santa is any color other than white. This is based on an actual Fox News story in which Kelly slammed a Slate article entitled “Santa Claus Should Not Be a White Man Anymore.” Addressing all the “kids watching at home,” Kelly firmly insisted that “Santa just is white.” She’d go on to say that “Jesus was a white man too.” Kelly revisited the “White Christmas” debate in a later segment, claiming that an “offhand jest” she made snowballed out of control and Fox News was being unfairly targeted. Aisha Harris, the Slate piece’s writer, interpreted Kelly’s comment as more than just a joke and accused Fox of playing the victim. #8: Elizabeth Ailes Stood by Her Husband Connie Britton portrayals Elizabeth Tilson Ailes, Roger’s third wife. Working as a programming executive, Tilson met Ailes at CNBC and they were married in 1998. Just as there’s a significant age difference between Britton and John Lithgow, Tilson was 37 while Ailes was 58 when they wedded. “Bombshell” depicts Tilson as a “good wife” archetype who supports her husband, even as he faces a harassment lawsuit with accusations piling up. In response to the allegations, Tilson reportedly stated, “This is not about money. This is about his legacy.” Despite defending her husband, there were reports that Tilson took the accusations “especially hard” and considered divorcing Ailes. Nevertheless, the couple remained together until Ailes passed in 2017, less than a year after the scandal hit. #7: Gretchen Carlson’s Real Stories Although she was given her own afternoon show after leaving “Fox & Friends,” Gretchen Carlson didn’t always fit the network’s mold. Leading up to her termination, Carlson took a few stances that challenged the Fox News brand. As seen in “Bombshell,” Carlson did an exposé on how makeup is used to sexualize girls in culture. Carlson emphasized her point by not wearing any makeup for the segment, claiming this was a first for cable news. Carlson also advocated an assault weapons ban in a 2016 segment. 89% of viewers disagreed with Carlson, to which she replied on the air, “That’s fine. That’s what makes America great.” Only a few days after Carlson showed support for stricter gun laws, her contract with Fox News officially expired. #6: Roger Ailes Threw Doughnuts Actual reports indicate that Ailes was every bit as paranoid as “Bombshell” suggests. Ailes reportedly had around-the-clock security at his home and was even accused of spying on reporters. One of the most bizarre details that the film gets down is how Ailes used donuts. In multiple scenes, we see Ailes stocking up on these fried desserts. It’s said that Ailes orders donuts just so he can throw them at people during his emotional moments. This behavior is backed up in the biographical book, “The Loudest Voice in the Room,” which reads, “Aisles could turn donuts into projectiles.” Although Ailes didn’t always eat the donuts, both the book and this film point out his poor diet, claiming he’d order entire pages off room service menus. #5: Gretchen Carlson Recorded Conversations Instead of going after Fox News, Carlson filed a lawsuit directly against Ailes, who continually denied the allegations aimed at him. In the film, Ailes is finally backed into a corner when his lawyer, Susan Estrich, tells him that Carlson recorded their conversations. In 2014, about two years before the scandal broke out, Carlson started using her iPhone to secretly tape her meetings with Ailes. Carlson dedicated an entire year to recording the inappropriate comments of Ailes and other Fox News employees. Ailes reportedly asked Carlson to “turn around so he could view her posterior,” which we see him do on multiple occasions in “Bombshell.” The tapes also caught Ailes telling Carlson, “you and I should have had a sexual relationship a long time ago.” #4: Megyn Kelly Faced Backlash from Trump Supporters Fox News’ audience is known for being conservative, but that didn’t stop Kelly from calling out Donald Trump’s treatment towards women during the first Republican presidential debate. This ignited an ongoing feud between the two with Trump posting numerous tweets that painted Kelly as “crazy.” Kelly thus became the story, as well as a target. As the film shows us, Kelly was heavily criticized and even threatened by Trump supporters. In an interview, Kelly stated, “The vast majority of Donald Trump supporters are not at all this way,” but added, “The worst part is the security threats that I’ve had to face and, as much as I try to avoid some of that online vitriol, I get lots of it and I really hate it.” #3: Roger Ailes’ Meeting with Rupert Murdoch The final act of “Bombshell” is mostly faithful to Ailes’ downfall as he’s barred from the news empire he helped build. On July 21, 2016, Ailes and Susan Estrich reported to the apartment of Rupert Murdoch, played here by Malcolm McDowell. In the film, Murdoch’s two sons, Lachlan and James, are also present at the meeting. This is slightly off, as James was not present, although Lachlan did attend. Peter Johnson and Gerson Zweifach are also notably absent from this scene. Nevertheless, Rupert did inform Ailes that he’d temporarily be taking over Fox News. He also denied Ailes’ request to walk into the Fox News headquarters with him and announce his departure. Ailes ultimately agreed to go quietly, receiving a severance package of $40 million. #2: The Black Room Speaking to a former Fox News journalist played by Jennifer Morrison, Megyn Kelly learns about the infamous “Black Room,” as various insiders called it. Established in 2011 on the 14th floor of the News Corporation building, the Black Room is where Ailes supposedly managed public relations and surveillance campaigns against his foes in secrecy. Among the people Ailes targeted was reporter Gabriel Sherman, who’d go on to write “The Loudest Voice in the Room.” According to Sherman, the “Black Room” consisted of “consultants, political operatives, and private detectives who reported only to [Ailes].” The Fox News CEO reportedly used company money to fund these sketchy operations, although Susan Estrich claimed on Ailes’ behalf, “These allegations are totally false.” #1: Fox News Dresses Throughout “Bombshell,” Ailes is seen ordering the network’s female talent to wear dresses, sit at see-through desks, and show off their legs. According to “The Loudest Voice in the Room,” Ailes once called during a segment taping, saying, “Move that damn laptop, I can’t see her legs!” While Fox News denied accusations that there was a “miniskirt dress code,” Ailes didn’t make it easy for female employees to cover up their legs. Under Ailes’ management, Jedediah Bila claims that the wardrobe department was full of dresses, but no pants were available. Bila was also reportedly told that she couldn’t wear orange because Ailes wasn’t a fan of the color. After Ailes’ departure, women were permitted to start wearing pants and jumpsuits on the air.

https://watchmojo.com/video/id/30955

0 notes

salonduthe · 6 years

Text

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs-NonCommercial License.

Basically, you can distribute this text all over the place, as long as you always attribute it to me, you don't change a word, and you never charge anybody anything to receive it. But read the license for the full details.

-----

FOREWORD

"Ancient Chinese Secret, Huh?"

In the spring of 1994, I was handed a master's degree in film studies and politely invited not to return to graduate school in the fall. So I went to work at Dutton's, a fantastic indie bookstore in Brentwood, less than a mile from the Simpson condo, but that's another story. Doug, the owner, lets his employees borrow books from the inventory, on the principle that you can sell books better if you know them better, and that's how I discovered the Tao Te Ching (or TTC, as I'll abbreviate it from now on).

Oh, I knew about the book beforehand. I knew it existed, anyway, and I knew it was a classic of Eastern philosophy. But that's all I knew. Not that there's that much to know after that, about all anybody can really say about Lao Tzu is that according to legend, about six centuries before Christ, he got fed up with the royal court's inability to take his advice and decided to leave. Then, the story goes, he was stopped at the Great Wall by a guard who begged him to write down some of his teachings for posterity, and the result was this slim volume. Once I actually started to read the thing, I was hooked. Here was a book that managed to say with clarity what I'd been struggling to figure out about spirituality for several years.

The TTC I found at Dutton's was written by Stephen Mitchell, a version which remains popular nearly twenty years after its original composition. Having read a couple dozen translations since, it's still one of the most accessible versions I've seen, but even then, I found his style a bit too refined, too full of a certain "wisdom of the ancients" flavor. For example, here's how Mitchell starts the first chapter:

"The Tao that can be named

is not the eternal Tao.

The name that can be named

is not the eternal Name."

At the time, I was newly infatuated with the writing of Quentin Tarantino and David Mamet, so my dream version of a TTC reflected the simplicity and grit of their dialogue:

"If you can talk about it, it ain't Tao.

If it has a name, it's just another thing."

Anyway, I grabbed a couple other translations and started looking at the different ways they expressed the same sentiments--or, as I quickly discovered, how much poetic license Mitchell and other translators were willing to take with the original text. I don't think this necessarily matters all that much; many current English- language versions are by people who don't know Chinese well, if at all, and I can't read or speak it myself. To that extent, then, we're *all* (unless we're fluent in Chinese, that is) at the mercy of, at best, a secondhand understanding of what Lao Tzu said.

Once I thought I had a rough idea what was behind the words, though, I went about rephrasing the chapters in my own voice. My guiding principle was to take out as much of the "poetry" as possible, to make the text sound like dialogue, so the reader could imagine someone telling him or her what Tao's all about. You can't take the "poetry" out completely, because the TTC is always going to have those lines about Tao being an "eternal mystery" and whatnot.

But the beauty of the book isn't in its language, at least not for me--it's in the practical advice Lao Tzu offers us about how to live a productive, meaningful life on a day to day basis. What I wanted to do was to make that advice as clear to a modern American reader as it would have been to the guard who first asked Lao Tzu to write it down.

I worked through the first twenty chapters, then put the rough draft up on my website under a pseudonym I used online back in those days. A bunch of fan mail came in, so I kept plugging away at the text, then my hard drivecollapsed and all my files were completely erased. I was freelancing pretty steadily then, and what little free time I had I spent building my own website, so the TTC went on hold. I got an occasional email asking about the other chapters, and I developed a stock answer. When it was time for me to finish the job, I told people, I would.

Years went by. I'd left LA for San Francisco, then moved up to Seattle, chasing after big dotcom money. It was great for a while, but as Lao Tzu says, "If you give things too much value, you're going to get ripped off." In the middle of the worst of the frustration, I rediscovered the Tao Te Ching, and realized I needed to finish what I started.

I dug out all my old copies of the TTC and went shopping for more versions, some of which were even better than the ones I'd found the first time. Brian Browne Walker's translation comes close to the modern oral quality I was striving for, though his voice is still much more of an "Eastern sage" voice than mine. David Hinton is somewhat more poetic, but I think he does a wonderful job of capturing what Lao Tzu may have actually sounded like to his contemporaries. And Ursula K. LeGuin strikes a balance between the modern and classical voices that gave me a new perspective on Tao; her commentaries on several chapters are enlightening as well.

I wish I could say that I wrote the remaining sixty-one chapters in a hurried creative frenzy, but things took a little longer than I thought. I got distracted by the decision to move to New York City, and though I did get some work done on the book, it was a little over a year later, when (and, yes, I know how cliched this sounds) the planes crashed into the World Trade Center and I realized I'd still been wasting too much of my life on things that didn't pan out. Instead of talking about getting serious about my life, it was time to actually do it. (Living through the following two and a half years has also made me appreciate chapters 30 and 31 a lot more, for reasons that will become readily apparent.)

So here you are--with my own name attached, as thepseudonym has long since fallen away. From a scholar's point of view, this TTC is unfaithful to the original text on more than one occasion, if not in every single line. Case in point: in chapter 20, Lao Tzu didn't exactly say, "Don't spend too much time thinking about stupid shit." For all the liberties I've taken with his words, however, I've made every attempt to stay true to his message, and I hope you'll find something useful in my efforts.

--Ron Hogan

([email protected])

January 2004

-----

PART ONE

TAO (THE WAY)

-----

If you can talk about it, it ain't Tao. If it has a name, it's just another thing.

Tao doesn't have a name. Names are for ordinary things.

Stop wanting stuff; it keeps you from seeing what's real. When you want stuff, all you see are things.

Those two sentences mean the same thing. Figure them out, and you've got it made.

If something looks beautiful to you, something else must be ugly. If something seems good, something else must seem bad.

You can't have something without nothing. If no job is difficult, then no job is easy. Some things are up high because other things are down low. You know you're listening to music because it doesn't sound like noise. All that came first, so this must be next.

The Masters get the job done without moving a muscle and get their point across without saying a word.

When things around them fall apart, they stay cool. They don't own much, but they use whatever's at hand. They do the work without expecting any favors. When they're done, they move on to the next job.That's why their work is so damn good.

If you toss compliments around freely, people will waste your time trying to impress you. If you give things too much value, you're going to get ripped off. If you try to please people, you'll just make them pissed.

The Master leads by clearing the crap out of people's heads and opening their hearts. He lowers their aspirations and makes them suck in their guts.

He shows you how to forget what you know and what you want, so nobody can push you around. If you think you've got the answers, he'll mess with your head.

Stop doing stuff all the time, and watch what happens.

How much Tao is there? More than you'll ever need. Use all you want, there's plenty more where that came from.

You can't see Tao, but it's there. Damned if I know where it came from. It's just always been around.

Tao's neutral: it doesn't worry about good or evil. The Masters are neutral: they treat everyone the same.

Lao Tzu said Tao is like a bellows: It's empty, but it could help set the world on fire. If you keep using Tao, it works better. If you keep talking about it, it won't make any sense.

Be cool.

Tao is an eternal mystery, and everything starts with Tao.

Everybody has Tao in them. They just have to use it.

Tao never stops. Why? Because it isn't trying to accomplish anything.

The Masters hang back. That's why they're ahead of the game.

They don't hang on to things. That's how they manage to keep them.

They don't worry about what they can't control. That's why they're always satisfied.

"Doing the right thing" is like water. It's good for all living things,and flows without thinking about where it's going

...just like Tao.

Keep your feet on the ground. Remember what's important. Be there when people need you. Say what you mean. Be prepared for anything. Do whatever you can, whenever it needs doing.

If you don't compare yourself to others, nobody can compare to you.

If you drink too much, you get drunk. The engine won't start if you're always tinkering with it.

If you hoard wealth, you fall into its clutches. If you crave success, you succumb to failure.

Do what you have to do, then walk away. Anything else will drive you nuts.

10.

Can you hold on to your ego and still stay focused on Tao?

Can you relax your mind and body and brace yourself for a new life?

Can you check yourself and see past what's in front of your eyes?

Can you be a leader and not try to prove you're in charge?

Can you deal with what's happening and let it happen?

Can you forget what you know and understand what's real?

Start a job and see it through. Have things without holding on to them. Do the job without expectation of reward. Lead people without giving orders. That's the way you do it.

11.

A wheel has spokes, but it rotates around a hollow center.

A pot is made out of clay or glass, but you keep things in the space inside.

A house is made of wood or brick, but you live between the walls.

We work with something, but we use nothing.

12.

Sight obscures. Noise deafens.

Desire messes with your heart. The world messes with your mind.

A Master watches the world but keeps focused on what's real.

13.

Winning can be just as bad as losing. Confidence can mess you up just as much as fear.

What does "winning can be just as bad as losing" mean?

If you're down, you might be able to get up. But if you're up, you can get knocked down real fast. Don't worry about the score, just do what you have to do.

What does "confidence can mess you up just as much as fear" mean?

Fear can keep you from getting the job done, but confidence can get you in over your head.

Walk tall, but don't get cocky. Know your limits, and nothing can ever hold you back. Deal with what you can. The rest will follow.

14.

You can't see Tao, no matter how hard you look. You can't hear Tao, no matter how hard you listen. You can't hold on to Tao, no matter how hard you grab.

But it's there.

It's in you, and it's all around you.

Remember that.

15.

The ancient Masters were damn impressive. They were deep. Real deep. Words can't even begin to describe how deep they were. You can only talk about how they acted.

They were careful, like a man walking on thin ice. They were cautious, like a soldier behind enemy lines. They were polite, like a guest at a party. They moved quickly, like melting ice. They were as plain as a block of wood. Their minds were as wide as a valley, and their hearts as clear as spring water.

Can you wait for that kind of openness and clarity before you try to understand the world?

Can you hold still until events have unfolded before you do the right thing?

When you act without expectations, you can accomplish great things.

16.

Keep your head clear. Stay calm. Watch as everything happens around you.

Everything reverts to its original state, which was nothing. And when something becomes nothing, it gets right with Tao.

If you don't understand that, you're going to screw up somewhere down the line. If you figure it out, you'll always know what to do.

If you get right with Tao, you won't be afraid to die, because you know you will.

17.

When a Master takes charge, hardly anybody notices. The next best leader is obeyed out of love. After that, there's the leader obeyed out of fear. The worst leader is one who is hated.

Trust and respect people. That's how you earn their trust and respect.

The Masters don't give orders; they work with everybody else. When the job's done, people are amazed at what they accomplished.

18.

When people lose touch with Tao, they start talking about "righteousness" and "sanctity."

When people forget what's true, they start talking about "self-evident truths."

When people have no respect for one another, they start talking about "political correctness" and "family values."

When the nation is unstable, people start talking about "patriotism."

19.

Get rid of sanctity. People will understand the truth and be happier.

Get rid of morality. People will respect each other and do what's right.

Get rid of value and profit. People will not steal if they do not desire.

If that's not possible, go to Plan B: Be simple. Be real. Do your work as best you can. Don't think about what you get for it. Stay focused. Get rid of all your crap.

20.

Don't spend too much time thinking about stupid shit. Why should you care if people agree or disagree with you? Why should you care if others find you attractive or not? Why should you care about things that worry others? Call bullshit on all that.

Let other people get worked up and try to enjoy themselves. I'm not going to give myself away. A baby doesn't know how to smile, but it's still happy.

Let other people get excited about stuff. I'm not going to hang on to anything. I'm not going to fill my mind with ideas. I'm not going to get stuck in a rut, tied down to any one place.

Other people are clever; I guess I must be stupid. Other people have goals; I guess I must be aimless. Like the wind. Or the waves.

I'm not like other people. I'm getting right with Tao.

21.

A Master stays focused on Tao. Nothing else, just Tao.

But you can't pin Tao down-- you can't even see it! How are you supposed to focus on something like that?

Just remember what Lao Tzu said: The universe began as a void. The void fills with images. Images lead to the creation of objects. And every object has Tao at its core.

That's the way it's been, ever since the world began. How can I be so sure? I just know.

22.

Learn how to stand still if you want to go places. Get on your knees if you want to stand tall. If you want wisdom, empty your mind. If you want the world, renounce your riches. Push yourself until you're exhausted, and then you'll find your strength.

You can go far if you don't have anything to carry. The more you acquire, the less you can really see.

A Master takes this to heart and sets an example for everybody else.

She doesn't show offso people take notice. She's not out to prove anything so people take her at her word. She doesn't brag about herself but people know what she's done. She hasn't got an agenda but people know what she can do. She's not out to get anybody so nobody can get in her way.

"Learn how to stand still if you want to go places." That's not as crazy as it sounds. Get in touch with Tao, and you'll see what I mean.

23.

When you have nothing to say, you may as well keep your mouth shut. The wind and the rain don't go on forever. If nature knows enough to give it a rest sometimes, so should you.

If you're ready for Tao, you can live with Tao. If you're ready to succeed, you can live with success. If you're ready to fail, you can live with failure.

Trust your instincts, and others will trust you.

24.

Keep your feet firmly planted unless you want to fall on your face. Learn how to pace yourself if you want to get anywhere. Don't call attention to yourself if you want people to notice your work.

Nobody respects people who always have excuses. Nobody gives credit to people who always take it. People who hype themselves have nothing else to offer.

Think of being in touch with Tao like eating at a buffet: Take only what you need. Save some for everybody else.

25.

Something perfect has existed forever, even longer than the universe. It's a vast, unchanging void. There's nothing else like it. It goes on forever and never stops, and everything else came from it.

I don't know what else to call it so I'll call it Tao. What's it like? I can tell you this much: it's great.

So great that it endures. Something that endures goes a long way. And something that goes a long way always comes back to the beginning.

Tao's great. Heaven's great. Earth's great. And someone in touch with Tao is great, too. Those are the four greatest things in the universe.

Someone who's in touch with Tao is in touch with the earth. The earth is in touch with heaven. Heaven's in touch with Tao. Tao's in touch with the way things are.

26.

To be light on your feet, you need a steady mind. If your body is active, your mind should be relaxed.

A Master can travel long distances and still see everything she owns. She may be surrounded by beauty but she isn't caught up in it.

Why run around thoughtlessly? If you act lightly, you lose your bearings. If you act recklessly, you lose your self-control.

27.

With enough practice, you could come and go without a trace, speak without stumbling over words, do complicated math problems in your head.

You could build a door with no lock that nobody could open. You could tie something down with no knots, without even a rope, and nobody could pry it loose.

Masters have time to help everybody, and ignore nobody. They use their resources wisely, wasting nothing. Some people call this "following the light."

Good people teach others because they have the potential to be good too. Brains count for nothing if you fail to respect your teachers or to honor the potential in others. That's one of the most important lessons of Tao.

28.

If you are strong, but remain sensitive, power will flow through you. With that power, you'll always be right with Tao: It's like a whole new life.

If you are idealistic, but stay rooted in reality, you are an example to others. Set that example, and you'll always be right with Tao: There is no limit to what you can do.

If you are honorable, but remain humble, you will see things as they are. If you see things as they are, you'll always be right with Tao: Your life will become simple, yet full of potential.

Let Tao show you how to get right with Tao, so your slightest gesture can change the world.

29.

Want to take over the world? Think again. The world's a holy place. You can't just fuck around with it. Those who try to change it destroy it. Those who try to possess it lose it.

With Tao, you push forward, or maybe you stay behind. Sometimes you push yourself, other times you rest. Sometimes you're strong, sometimes you're weak. Sometimes you're up, and sometimes you're down.

A Master lives simply, avoiding extravagance and excess.

30.

Listen up: If you want to be a leader who's in touch with Tao, never use violence to achieve your goals.

Every act of violence backfires. An army on the move leaves a trail of tears, and a military victory always lies in ruins.

The Masters do what needs doing and that's all they do. Do what you have to do without arrogance or pride. Get the job done and don't brag about it afterwards. Do what you have to do, not for your own benefit, but because it needs to be done. And don't do it the way you think it should be done, do it the way it needs to be done.

The mighty will always lose their power and any connection they ever had to Tao. They will not last long; if you're not right with Tao, you might as well be dead.

31.

Weapons are terrible things. If you want to get right with Tao, reject weapons.

The Master, knowing all things came from Tao, recognizes what he has in common with his enemies and always tries to avoid conflict.

But when there is no other choice, he uses force reluctantly. He does so with great restraint, and never celebrates a victory; to do so would be to rejoice in killing. A person who would rejoice in killing has completely lost touch with Tao.

When you win a war, you preside over a funeral. Pay your respects to the dead.

32.

Tao is an eternal mystery, so small you can never take hold of it.

If a leader gets right with Tao, people will follow him on instinct. All will be right with the world. People will do the right thing without being told.

Everything that comes from Tao needs a name. But once everything has its name, you should make no other distinction between things. This prevents you from becoming trapped by them.

Everything in the universe is full of Tao and leads to Tao, just like the water in rivers that flows into oceans.

33.

Knowing things makes you smart, but knowing yourself makes you wise. To rule others, you must be powerful, but to rule yourself, you must be strong.

If you have only what you need, you have true wealth. If you never give up, you will find a way. If you stay true to yourself, you will never be lost. If you stay alive your whole life, you've really lived.

34.

Tao flows in all directions. It's in everything, but nothing can contain it. Everything needs Tao, so Tao provides, and never expects anything in return.

Everything comes from Tao, but Tao doesn't call attention to itself. It wants for nothing. Think nothing of it.

Everything leads to Tao, but Tao doesn't call attention to itself. Pretty impressive, huh?

It doesn't strive for success. That's why it succeeds.

35.

When you get right with Tao, everybody wants to be your friend. When they're around you, they can relax and enjoy themselves.

People can be easily distracted by music or good food. When we try to talk about Tao, it seems boring by comparison.

It doesn't look like much. It doesn't sound like much. But no matter how much you use, there's still plenty left.

36.

To make something smaller, you need to appreciate its size. To make something weaker, you must recognize its strength. To get rid of something, you need to hold it tight. To take something, you must give it up entirely.

To put it another way: Sensitivity and weakness overcome unfeeling strength.

37.

Tao never does anything but nothing is left undone.

If our leaders could get in touch with Tao, the world would take care of itself. Even if they wanted to impose their own ideas, they'd be drawn back to Tao's nameless simplicity.

When our lives are that simple, we want for nothing. We can relax, and the world becomes a better place.

-----

PART TWO

TE (POWER)

-----

38.

People with integrity don't even think about it. That's how you can tell they have integrity. Other people talk about how much integrity they have, when they really don't have much. If any. Truly powerful people don't do anything, but they get the job done.

Other people are always busy doing something, but nothing ever gets done. When kind people act, they do so without thinking about it. When the just act, they're always sure they're doing the right thing. But when the righteous act, and nobody reacts, they try to force everyone to do things their way.

If you're not in touch with Tao, at least you can still have integrity. If you don't have integrity, there's always kindness. If you don't have kindness, there's always justice. If you don't have justice, all you have left is righteousness.

Righteousness is an pale imitation of true faith and loyalty, and always leads to trouble. If you've already made up your mind, you don't know the first thing about Tao, and you never will.

The Masters pay attention to what's beneath the surface. They'll look at a tree's leaves, but eat the fruit. They turn all that down, so they can accept this.

39.

Since time began, this is what it's meant to be in touch with Tao:

Tao made the heavens clear. Tao made the earth solid. Tao made our spirits strong. Tao made the valleys fertile. Tao gave all living things life.

Tao gave rulers authority. Without Tao, the heavens would collapse. Without Tao, the earth would crumble. Without Tao, our spirits would fade away. Without Tao, the valleys would dry up. Without Tao, all life would become extinct. Without Tao, rulers would stumble and fall.

Humility gives us power. Our leaders should think of themselves as insignificant, powerless, unworthy of their stature. Isn't that what humility is all about?

Be strong, but pay no attention to hollow praise. Don't call attention to yourself. Don't make a scene.

40.

Tao is always heading back to where it came from. Tao advances by not pressing forward.

Things exist because they are. They are because they once were not.

41.

When a wise person hears about Tao, he gets right with it. When an ordinary person hears about Tao, he tries to get right with it, but eventually gives up. When a fool hears about Tao, he just laughs and laughs. If he didn't laugh, it wouldn't be Tao.

Here's what they find so funny: The path to enlightenment seems covered in shadows. The way forward feels like taking a step back. The easiest path seems difficult. Those with the most virtue seem debased. Those who are most pure seem to be grubby and soiled. The deepest thoughts appear shallow. The greatest strength looks like weakness. What is most real strikes us as imaginary. The largest space has no boundaries. The greatest talent seems to produce nothing. The greatest voice is unhearable. The greatest beauty is invisible.

Tao is hidden to us and it has no name. It is the source and the strength of all things.

42.

Chapter 42 starts out with some cosmic mumbo-jumbo about Tao making one, one making two, two making three, and three making everything else.

I don't know what it means, and, frankly, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

Let's get to the practical part: Men hate to be called powerless, insignificant, or unworthy, but that's how Masters describe themselves.

Because when we lose, we've won. And when we succeed, we've failed.

Other people will tell you what I'm telling you now: "Live by the sword, die by the sword." That's pretty much what Chapter 42 boils down to.

(See Chapter 46 for more details.)

43.

The softest force in the universe can overcome the hardest of objects. Something without substance can pass through the space between atoms.

That's how I know about the power of doing nothing.

The silent teachings and the power of doing nothing can only be understood by a few people.

44.

What's more important, fame or your well-being? What's worth more, your money or your life? What is more dangerous, winning or losing?

If you are too attached to your possessions, they will bring you misery. If you hang on to your riches, you will suffer substantial loss. If you know when you have enough, you will never be disgraced. If you practice moderation, you can stay out of trouble.

And that's the secret to lasting success.

45.

The greatest achievements may look like mistakes, but you will always be able to build upon them.

The fullest reserves may seem empty, but you will always be able to draw upon them.

The straightest line looks crooked. The most skilled people come off as clumsy. The most eloquent people are usually silent.

When it's cold, you can move around to stay warm. When it's hot, you should keep still and stay cool. But whatever the weather, if you stay calm, the world will sort itself out around you.

46.

"When the world is right with Tao," Lao Tzu said, "horses haul fertilizer to the fields. When the world loses touch with Tao, horses are trained for cavalry."

Nothing is more insidious than possession. Nothing is more dangerous than desire. Nothing is more disastrous than greed.

If you know when enough is enough, you will always have enough.

47.

You don't have to leave your room to understand what's happening in the world.

You don't have to look out the window to appreciate the beauty of heaven.

The farther you wander, the less you know.

The Masters don't wander around They know. They don't just look. They understand. They don't do anything, but the work gets done.

48.

Usually, we try to learn something new every day.

But if we want to get right with Tao, we have to let go of something every day.

We do less and less, until we end up doing nothing. And it's when we do nothing that we get the job done.

Let events take their course, and everything will turn out in your favor. If you act on your ambitions, they will never pan out.

49.

The Masters don't make up their minds. They turn their thoughts to other people.

They are good to good people, and they're good to bad people. This is real goodness.

They have faith in the faithful, and they have faith in the unfaithful. This is real faith.

A Master throws himself into the world completely, forgetting everything he's been told. People pay attention to him because he lives a life of child-like wonder.

50.

People who look for the secret of long life wind up dead.

Their bodies are the focus of their lives and the source of their death, because they think a healthy body is all there is to life.

Lao Tzu used to say a man who truly understood life could walk through the jungle without fear or across a battlefield without armor, totally unarmed. Wild animals and weapons couldn't kill him.

I know, I know: what the hell does that mean? "Well, he couldn't be killed," Lao Tzu said, "because his body wasn't where he kept his death."

51.

Tao is the source of all living things, and they are nourished by Tao's power. They are influenced by the other living things around them, and they are shaped by their circumstances.

Everything respects Tao and honors its power. That's just the way it is.

Tao gives life to all things, and its power watches out for them, cares for them, helps them grow, protects them, and comforts them.

Create something without holding on to it. Do the work without expecting credit for it. Lead people without giving them orders. That's the secret of the power of Tao.

52.

Everything starts with Tao, the mother of all things. If you know the mother, you know the children. If you know the children and remember the mother, you have nothing to fear in your life.

Shut your mouth and keep still, and your life will be full of happiness. If you talk all the time, always doing something, your life will be hopeless.

It takes insight to see subtlety. It takes strength to yield gently to force. Use that strength to hang on to your insight, and you will always be at peace. That's how to get right with Tao.

53.

If I had any sense, I'd be trying to get right with Tao, and the only thing I'd worry about would be messing up. It's not that hard to get right with Tao, but people are easily distracted.

"When the king's palace is full of treasure," Lao Tzu said, "ordinary people's fields are smothered with weeds, and the food supplies run out." Today, you see sharply dressed people carrying flashy weapons and living the high life.

They own more than they could ever use, let alone need.

They're nothing but gangsters and crooks. That's not what Tao's about.

54.

Tao's power is so deeply entrenched it can never be uprooted. Tao's power clings so tightly it can never slip away. It will endure for generations.

If you get in touch with the power of Tao, it will become real. If your family gets in touch with the power of Tao, the power will flourish.

If your community gets in touch with the power of Tao, the power will grow even stronger. If your country gets in touch with the power of Tao, the power will become abundant.

If the world gets in touch with the power of Tao, the power will be everywhere. How can I know this? I just do.

55.

A person filled with the power of Tao is like a baby boy: bees can't sting him, wild beasts can't attack him.

A baby has soft bones and weak muscles, but a firm grip. He hasn't had sex, but he can get an erection. That's because he's got lots of energy. He can cry all day and never lose his voice. That's because he's at one with his world.

If you're at one with the world, you know constancy. And if you know constancy, you've been enlightened.

It's not healthy to try to prolong your life. It's unnatural to impose the mind's will upon the body. People waste time and energy trying to be strong or beautiful, and their strength and beauty fade. They've lost touch with Tao, and when you lose touch with Tao, you might as well be dead.

56.

Those who know, don't talk. Those who talk, don't know.

Shut your mouth. Be still. Relax. Let go of your worries. Stay out of the spotlight. Be at one with the world and get right with Tao. If you get right with Tao, you won't be worried about praise or scorn, about winning or losing, about honor or disgrace. That's the way to be.

57.

You can run a country by sticking to principles, and you can win a war with strategy and tactics. But you can gain the entire world by doing nothing at all.

How do I know this? I've seen it happen: The more restrictions a nation imposes, the poorer its people become. When a nation hoards weapons, troubles arise from within and from without. When its leaders try to be cunning and clever, the situation spins further out of control. When they try to fix things by passing more laws, they only increase the number of outlaws.

A wise leader says to himself: "I do nothing, and people transform themselves. I keep silent, and they do the right thing on their own. I stay out of the way, and they prosper. I want for nothing, and they lead simple lives."

58.

When a nation is ruled with a light touch, people lead simple lives. When a government is harsh and demanding, people will spend their time trying to outsmart it.

Happiness is rooted in misery, and misery lurks beneath all joy. Who knows what could happen tomorrow?

Everything is relative; what's considered proper today may become improper. Correct appearances may hide dishonesty and sinfulness.

No wonder so many people get confused.

The Masters have sharp minds, not sharp tongues. They are austere, but never judgmental. They are straightforward, but not provocative. They are brilliant, but not flashy.

59.

Leadership is based on moderation. Practice moderation, and you'll get in touch with the power of Tao.

If you get right with Tao, nothing is impossible. If you get right with Tao, there's no limit to what you can do. If you get right with Tao, you can be a true leader.

Remember this advice if you want to be a leader: Plant deep roots in firm soil. Get right with Tao, and you'll always see things clearly.

60.

Being a leader is like cooking a small fish; get right with Tao, and it's quick and easy.

When you're in touch with Tao, you don't need to worry about misfortune. You can't make it go away, of course, but you can keep it from harming other people.

Also, as a wise leader, you cause no harm to others, so people won't have to worry about getting hurt, and they'll take the opportunity to do the right thing.

61.

Power flows down to every level of existence like a river to the ocean.

Victory comes from lying perfectly still and waiting for power to come your way.

If you yield to someone less powerful than yourself, you will be in a position to influence them.

If you submit to someone more powerful than yourself, you create an opportunity to get your own way.

So if you want to get ahead, lay low and bide your time. That way, everybody's happy.

62.

Every living thing gets its strength from Tao. Good people respect the value of Tao. The wicked and foolish don't, but Tao provides for them anyway.

Some people gain power and prestige through fancy words, others through great deeds. But Tao is available to everyone, not just the powerful. So don't look down on anybody.

When people become powerful, and everybody lines up to kiss their ass, sit still and stay right with Tao.

Why have the Masters always respected Tao? Because when you get right with Tao, you can always find what you need to get by, and trouble can never find you.

63.

Keep still. Don't work so hard. Learn to appreciate everyday life. Pay attention to details. Start small and work your way up. When people give you trouble, let it slide.

Break everything down to its essentials. Get the job done before it becomes a chore.

With the right preparation, difficult tasks can be completed with ease; every major project consists of simple steps.

The Masters don't take on more than they can handle, which is why they can do just about anything.

Don't promise more than you can deliver, and don't underestimate the task: You'll only make things harder for yourself.

The Masters are always aware of the difficulties involved, which is why they never have to deal with them.

64.

It's easy to maintain balance. Trouble can be nipped in the bud. Fragile things break easily, and small things are easy to lose.

Deal with the situation before it becomes a problem. Keep everything straight so it can't get messed up.

Every tree was once a seed. Every skyscraper started out with a shovelful of dirt. And--stop me if you've heard this one before-- a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.

When you try too hard, you defeat your own purpose. Cling to stuff, and you will suffer loss. The Masters make no effort, so they never fail. They aren't attached to things, so they never feel loss.

People often screw up when the job's nearly done. Pay as much attention to the finishing touches as you do to the initial steps, and you won't screw up like that.

The Masters try to be free from desire. They don't collect precious things. They don't cling to any beliefs. They pay attention to what everybody else ignores. They help the world get right with Tao, but don't try to change a thing.

65.

In ancient times, leaders who were right with Tao didn't teach everybody how to become enlightened. They kept people's lives simple.

People who know too much can't be taught anything. Leaders who try to be clever always screw things up. Leaders who keep things simple always make things right.

If you get that, you'll understand the mysterious power of Tao.

That kind of power is so deep, so extensive, it penetrates into every level of existence.

66.

An ocean is greater than the hundred rivers that flow into it, and all it does is wait to receive what they bring.

If you want to teach people, don't talk down to them. If you want to lead them, find out where they want to go.

People love leaders who make them feel safe without smothering them. They'll always support a leader like that, and because he doesn't try to compete with anybody, nobody is able to compete with him.

67.

Everywhere I go, people tell me, "Tao is so powerful, so immense, it's inconceivable!"

But it's only powerful because it's inconceivable. If we could wrap our minds around it, Tao would be just another thing.

The three most important qualities in life are compassion, or showing kindness and mercy to others, moderation, or knowing what a thing is worth, and modesty, or knowing your place in the world.

Courage stems from showing kindness and mercy to others. Generosity starts with knowing what a thing is worth. True leadership begins with knowing your place in the world.

But these days, I see everyone trying to act courageous without any trace of compassion. They try to be generous but they don't practice moderation in their own lives. They act like leaders, but they have no sense of modesty. No good can come of this.

If you want to get ahead, show people compassion. When other people attack you, defend yourself with compassion. It's the most powerful force in the universe.

68.

A true warrior never uses force with an attitude of pride or anger. A true victor does not pursue vengeance. A true leader shows humility.

This is the power of modesty. It's the best way to deal with people. It's always been an excellent way to get right with Tao.

69.

There's an old military saying: "I'd rather face an attack than have to make one. I'd rather retreat a foot than try to advance an inch."

That's the secret to moving forward while staying put, preparing for battle without revealing your strength.

When you defend yourself without any show of force, you give your opponent nothing to fight.

Attacking an enemy you've underestimated is a costly mistake. When two forces oppose each other, the winner is the one most reluctant to fight.

70.

Lao Tzu's advice was easy to understand and easy to follow. But nobody understood him or did what he suggested.

His words stemmed from ancient wisdom, and his actions were highly disciplined. People didn't get that, which is why they didn't understand him. And the less they understood him, the more meaningful his advice became.

That's why the Masters live simply, hiding their wisdom deep within themselves.

71.

If you know what you don't know, you're doing great. If you don't know what you don't know, you're sick.

The only way to get rid of that sickness is to be sick of it.

The Masters aren't sick, because they got sick of being sick.

72.

When you show no fear at all, the universe gives you something to really be afraid of.

Don't try to fence people in or grind them down. Just let them be, and they'll always be on your side.

The Masters know themselves, but they don't reveal themselves. They love themselves, but they know what their lives are worth. They let go of all that to concentrate on this.

73.

Those who dare to be bold die. Those who dare to be careful survive. So--what do you want to do?

Why is life like that, you ask? I don't know.

This is how Tao works: It doesn't push itself, and it always succeeds. It acts silently, and it always reacts. It can't be summoned; it comes whenever it's ready. It can't be rushed; it's always on time.

"Heaven casts a wide net, with big holes," Lao Tzu used to say, "but nothing ever gets by it."

74.

If people's lives suck, and they look forward to death, what good does it do to threaten to kill them?

If people are afraid to die, and the wicked are condemned to death, then who would dare to commit evil?

But that doesn't mean you or I can just take life and death into our own hands. That'd be like walking up to an industrial buzzsaw and trying to use it without any training. We'd only end up hurting ourselves.

75.

People starve because the government taxes them to death. People rebel because the government tries to run their lives. People act like life is meaningless because the government takes everything they have.

People who know how to enjoy life are wiser than people who value their lives.

76.

A baby's body is soft and gentle. A corpse is hard and stiff. Plants and trees are tender and full of sap. Dead leaves are brittle and dry.

If you are rigid and unyielding, you might as well be dead. If you are soft and flexible, you are truly alive.

Soldiers trained to fight to the death will die. A tree that cannot bend with the wind will snap.

Here's a useful saying: The harder they come, the harder they fall.

Here's another: The meek shall inherit the earth.

77.

Lao Tzu said using Tao was like pulling on a bowstring: The top bends down, the bottom bends up, and all the energy is focused in the middle.

Tao takes energy from where it is, and sends it where it needs to be. But most people take from those who don't have enough, so those who have too much already can have more.

So who in this world is truly generous to others? People who are in touch with Tao. They do their work without taking credit. They get the job done and move on. They aren't interested in showing off.

78.

Nothing is softer or more yielding than water. Yet, given time, it can erode even the hardest stone. That's how the weak can defeat the strong, and the supple can win out over the stiff.

Everybody knows it. So why don't we apply it to our own lives?

Lao Tzu used to say: "Take on people's problems, and you can be their leader. Deal with the world's problems, and you'll be a Master."

Sometimes the truth makes no sense.

79.

Sometimes, when an argument is settled, feelings of resentment still remain on either side. What's the point of carrying a grudge?

The Masters care about what they owe other people, not what other people owe them.

People who are in touch with Tao do their duty. People who aren't try to force others into submission.

Tao doesn't play favorites. But if you do right by Tao, Tao will do right by you.

80.

Lao Tzu had a dream about a small country with very few people.

They didn't need machines to get their work done faster. They took their lives seriously, and stayed close to home.

They may have owned boats and carriages, but they never went anywhere. They may have owned weapons, but they kept those weapons locked up, securely hidden. They had so few responsibilities, they never had to make a To-Do list to remember what had to be done.

They enjoyed simple foods, dressed plainly, lived comfortably, and kept their traditions alive.

And even though their neighbors were so close they could hear the dogs barking at night, they had no interest in leaving their homes, where they grew old peacefully and died.

81.

The truth isn't flashy. Flashy words aren't true.

Educated people aren't always smart. Smart people don't always have an education.

Good people don't argue. People who argue aren't good.

The Masters don't hang on to things. They're always doing something for other people, so they always have more to give. They give away whatever they have, so what they have is worth more.

If you want to get right with Tao, help other people, don't hurt them. The Masters always work with people, never against them.

(with thanks to ronhogan)

#ron hogan #favourite #wisdom #tao

2 notes · View notes

bryonysimcox · 4 years

Text

A Glimmer of Freedom: Week 16 & 17, Spain

Tiny glimpses of normal life have emerged here in Spain. George’s 30th Birthday, my first swim in the ocean since lockdown and a new video release have brought some variety to the last fortnight.

I slipped up. When our sixteenth week on the road came and went, the pressure to write this weekly post was building up, and I was increasingly frustrated that I couldn’t find the time (or the energy!) to write it. It got to a point that it made more sense to wait another week and present you with a fortnight’s worth of updates instead!

It does feel like a failure when you break a habit though. Sure, not many people read this blog and no one is shouting at me if I don’t produce a new post on the mark every week. But I still feel accountable both to others and myself to keep this journal as an ongoing reflection of our travels. Since the Covid-19 pandemic gripped the world and turned it upside down, in some ways this journal has even more meaning as a documentation of a life lived under incredibly unusual circumstances.

Alas, I’m here now, on a sunny Thursday in the early afternoon, trying to recall everything that’s happened in the last two weeks and also trying not to beat myself up about breaking my usual writing pattern.

On the 8th May, it was George’s 30th Birthday.

George has never been big on birthdays. For him, they’re just another day, but just one on which your age happens to tick over another year. For me, as an extrovert who loves an excuse to eat cake for breakfast or to throw a party, this mindset seems bonkers! Over the years that we’ve been together though, I realise George just really values the company of others and having a nice, low-key day.

So even though I was downright gutted that we were celebrating his big milestone in lockdown, with just one another’s company in the Spanish countryside, he wasn’t fussed and it turned out to be a really, really nice day.

(images) George’s birthday

I’d pulled together a video from friends and family singing “Happy Birthday”, and this motley crew of singers was such a lovely thing to watch, along to a breakfast of avocado on toast. After a lazy morning and even a bit of editing (yep, George happily worked on his birthday!) we decided to head out for a walk.

De-escalation measures are slowly underway in Spain and by George’s birthday we were finally allowed out for daily exercise or a walk with family members. Taking advantage of this (but sneakily breaking the allocated time windows for the exercise), we took our first walk to somewhere other than the supermarket in almost two months. And boy, was it worth it!

Empty streets, uncomfortable face masks and police tape cordoning off playgrounds don’t necessarily contribute to a pleasant walk, but it was the first taste of freedom we’d had in so long. We enjoyed seeing houses and areas we hadn’t passed by in a while, noticing changes that have taken place fuelled by a new demand for hygiene or physical distancing. And finally, we made it to the ocean: a sight for sore eyes.

Just getting to the ocean on George’s birthday and dipping my toes in the water was such a special moment, and a reminder of how much I value the sea, especially after having been deprived of this natural element for so long.

(images, left to right) Empty streets which still feel bizarre, getting ready for a paddle on George’s birthday, and a birthday walk (complete with face mask).

I’ve said it before on this blog and I’ll say it again: I’m constantly reminded of how ‘good’ we’ve got it. We’ve been treated with kindness and generosity, are able to exchange skills and resources with people, find work, upload videos, have access to the internet and get food in the shops. But all that said, I almost wept when I dipped my toes in the salty water after so long. I believe everyone has a human right to access nature.

Perhaps because George has now entered his thirties, or more likely because lockdown is triggering self-reflection among many of us, George and I have spent a fair few long evenings discussing life and what it means to be human. I’m not professing to have made any ground-breaking discoveries, but have noticed both how therapeutic and how liberating it has been to get a little more philosophical. It’s helped me to focus on life as it is now, and get less hung up about the future. People have asked us about our ongoing plans with the van and I feel more comfortable now telling them I just don’t know when and where we’ll get ‘back on track’. Whilst staying in Spain for an extended period of time wasn’t ever the plan, I still know that good things can come from it if I embrace the unknown and enjoy living here a little longer.

How many moments do we lose out on cause we’re fretting that they’re not what we planned for our lives?

One thing which I certainly didn’t plan for but have been pleasantly surprised by is getting a chance to learn a little more about agriculture. We spent time in the garden in Catalonia preparing for and planting vegetables, an activity that most folk in the Spanish countryside seem to be doing, in anticipation for summer as it comes around the corner. We were working with Pepe, who grows vegetables here as a hobby, and who has had the generosity to show us his approach and let us learn by getting our hands dirty. He is a kind and patient man.

(image) Building cane structures for tomatoes and planting peppers, cucumbers and courgettes.

Talking with Pepe has been great practice for my Spanish too, as I’m forced to use it in the moment. Reading in a foreign language has always been much easier than listening or speaking for me, because I don’t have the time pressure to respond and I can process the information visually. But everyday life relies on speaking and listening, and being in Spain has exposed me to more of that, which is ultimately a good thing. I do also try to read the Spanish news, not only to practice my Spanish but to keep an eye on the political situation here and how the Covid-19 crisis is being dealt with.

The Spanish government is rolling out a phased, place-based de-escalation plan which closely monitors Covid-19 cases.

My perception is that the government here has handled the crisis quite ‘well’ (though there are so many factors I perhaps can’t see) and has put the health of its people first and foremost before the economy. Plenty of things are starting to reappear, but with the overarching sense that there is a sensible, humanist power overseeing it all. Slowly but surely, children play in the streets again, people drink their coffees and chat a metre or two apart, and we learn to smile extra hard so that our eyes share the emotion that our mouth, now-concealed by a mask, can’t.

The next time we made use of our daily exercise allowance, I took the plunge - literally. We headed to the coast and we’d hardly got to the sand before I was in the water. Words escape me when I think of that feeling - of swimming in the sea and feeling completely unburdened by anything. It’s undeniably therapeutic.

Once de-escalation permitted a little more movement, George and I also decided it was time to film Suzi the van. Back when we were in Bordeaux (which believe it or not was our second week on the road!) we filmed a tour of the van with the plan of making a video all about our van build process and the finished result. But more recently when we came to edit all the footage together, we just hadn’t captured enough footage of the van, and especially little details of all the elements like the tyres, engine, furniture and solar panels.

So with camera in hand, we took Suzi out for a spin. It was nice to be filming again, even if it was just to get details of our dusty HiAce along quiet Spanish backroads. Each and every time we film is a chance for me to get more confident behind the camera too, balancing the composition, lighting and focus, and with the added complication that it’s not just a static image I’m working with.

(images) Filming Suzi the HiAce for our van tour video.

As we carry on filming and developing creative content through Broaden, it is a joy to see other folk making and creating too.

The internet continues to be a hotbet for this creativity. Back in Week 9 I wrote about my brother’s VJ live streaming and daily guided meditations from Gaba podcast, and these last few weeks I’ve continued to turn to the internet for inspiration and entertainment.

Just one example of the art we’ve enjoyed online this fortnight was when my dear friend Rosie Tee shared a line-up with the likes of Jamie Cullum and the Electric Lady Big Band as Cheltenham Jazz Festival took place virtually. More than 600 people tuned in for Rosie’s set online (which can be viewed again here), which is a testament to the potential audience hungry for creative expression. More recently, my brother did another VJ set for the arts and entertainment community ‘Is Dead’, with a live stream that took place in a virtual warehouse! It was pretty mind-boggling to be in this virtual events space with other people from across the world, listening to DJs and watching Dominic’s visuals projected on a virtual screen within this virtual space.

(image) Rosie Tee plays ‘Wax & Wane’ for Cheltenham Jazz Festival and Dominic (VJ XYZ)’s live set in a virtual warehouse.

The internet is an incomparable resource when we leverage it as a platform for sharing and distributing art, and especially when we focus on its ability to be decentralised and accessible.

As people slowly enjoy increasing liberties again, I anticipate the internet will have a newfound role to play. Whilst I’ve now experienced some freedoms to move around and do things which I couldn’t over the last two months, there is no sign of a ‘miracle-cure’ or rapid recovery from this pandemic. Many daily interactions which once seemed normal will long be impeded and the potential effects on our mental health and sense of connection could be profound. This is where the digital world will likely mesh with the physical, providing ways to talk and debate, disseminate news and new ideas, and share acts of creative expression which enrich our lived experiences in the tangible spaces we inhabit.

Last week I went to an online workshop which perfectly exemplified the value of the internet in this way. As part of a series called ‘Building Our Power’, the ‘Economics for Beginners’ workshop I attended via Zoom brought together around 100 participants to hear Sarah Arnold, an analyst from the New Economics Foundation. Sarah presented ideas about the role of the economy, policy tools, and ways in which the government could respond to Covid-19 in a way which would promote a more equitable and healthy society (rather than resort to austerity, which is not good economic policy).

The session was much more than just a presentation though, as the online platform and skilled facilitators allowed for a rich and varied discussion, with questions from the participants for Sarah and opportunities to discuss the topic in detail in future groups. It struck me that in this instance, this digital format was probably even more effective than a real-life scenario would be at disseminating technical information and developing ideas in an engaging and inclusive way.

With our new footage of the van and the on-tap resource of the internet, we also released the van tour video this week.

It was a great feeling to finally bring together footage from as far back as May 2019 right through to the clips we’d shot in Catalonia this fortnight into a complete video. George did a cracking job with the edit, and I helped out making graphics like the intro scene. When it was finally done and dusted, watching it back felt like the end of our van-building chapter and in some ways the start of our adventure (even though we’ve already been ‘on the road’ for more than three months). To finally share it online has been a pleasure.

youtube

The comments that we’ve had back about this video have been positive and constructive. Along with the interest we get about The Hundred Miler, the feedback loop of making and creating leaves me determined not to lose faith in the power of creativity and the power of people. Sure, lockdown continues to be confusing and exhausting, but if we can use the internet and acts of mutual aid to compliment the glimmer of freedom we’re starting to experience in the physical world, we can stay connected.

And that connection - to each other, to our thoughts, and to nature is what gives me meaning more than any grand travels or planned-out futures.

#estadodealarma #vanlife #SuziTheVan #BryonyandGeorge #digitalnomads #broaden #traveldiaries #lifeinlockdown #COVID-19 #coronavirus

0 notes

oliverarditi · 5 years

Text

The elision of geography

At the age of fourteen I was lucky enough to spend a few hours, one afternoon in Los Angeles, with the two writers who were then probably the best known skalds of that city’s architecture – Esther McCoy and my grandfather, Reyner Banham. It was not an edifying afternoon, as I was not at the time sufficiently interested in architecture to glean any insights from those two ripe ears of knowledge, and the only memory I have of the conversation in McCoy’s deep, lush back garden was her casual racism, directed at a black plumber who had recently worked in her house. For many years I wondered whether to raise McCoy’s remark with my grandmother, who was also present, but I imagined she would be offended at the implied stain on her friend’s character, and it’s too late now. It is a reminder, with hindsight, that America is very much a different country to Britain, where a left-leaning intellectual of McCoy’s generation would certainly have known that such conventional racism would be shocking to members of the succeeding cohort. I also recall the uncomfortable ‘ah…’ Banham gave in response, but nothing else of their conversation.

That mute ‘ah…’ is perhaps emblematic of Banham’s relationship with the United States. He was a European socialist intellectual, who lived through the privations of the Depression, the Second World War, and the following years of austerity. Politically, he was not at all aligned to the values that informed the American way of life, or its material culture, but he loved the place, and especially the experiences afforded by its disposable consumerism. He is known for giving positive valuations as works of design to many manifestations of America’s car-centred mass culture, such as freeways, automobiles themselves, roadside diners and so on, and it’s hard to dispute the implicit observation that these were the work of a particular culture’s designers, producing the exemplary aesthetic of their cultural and historical circumstances. But of the steep gradients of inequality that made the American Dream accessible to some, he has very little to say. I certainly wouldn’t suggest that the social deprivation suffered in large parts of urban America invalidate the point that Banham reiterated throughout his career: so-called ‘low culture’, which is the only culture known to the majority of Americans, should be understood and valued on its own terms. But clearly Banham either couldn’t find the language to acknowledge both sides of that coin, or felt that it was not his job to do so.

In his very well-known book, Los Angeles: the Architecture of Four Ecologies, he makes some reference to ‘problem areas’ such as Watts, discussing the flat, valley-bottom street grids that he refers to as ‘the great plains of Id’ as a ‘service area supplying the foothills and beaches’. He examines the role that unscrupulous property developers played in shaping the area, and even mentions the Watts riots of 1965, but nowhere does he seem to acknowledge race or class as structural factors in the composition or dynamics of Los Angeles. I know very little about that city, but I do know that where society is organised around large economic inequalities and coercive social hierarchies, those factors always play a part, perhaps not in the formal composition of any particular building, but certainly in the form and meaning of anything so all-encompassing as a metropolis. Their elision in this work appears to be paralleled in the ways that Banham’s Angelenos experience their city.

I’m not that familiar with the general response to the book, but I am aware that it’s been criticised for this lack of emphasis on socio-economic inequalities; other than this observation though, I’m barely capable of reading it critically. Not only does it embody the voice of a man I love and miss (and Banham’s informal spoken voice can always be heard in his prose, by those who knew him), but I don’t know nearly enough about LA or architectural history. In his Los Angeles Times review of the 2009 edition, Richard Rayner notes Banham’s avoidance of sources that took a darker view of Southern California than he, and concludes that ‘most likely Banham didn’t want to go there. […] Banham wrote like a blissed-out lover, surrendering to his feelings of derangement and wonder while keeping his eyes wide-open.’

That’s a phrase that puts me in mind of writers like Tom Wolfe and Hunter S. Thompson, whose New Journalism techniques I know Banham admired, and which I think can be seen at work in Los Angeles. In Banham’s decision to ‘learn to drive in order to read Los Angeles in the original’ there is a parallel to the immersion practiced in New Journalism, as in Wolfe’s cross-country trip with Ken Kesey and his Merry Pranksters in The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test; in a similar manner to Wolfe, Banham chose to spend time living among Angelenos, as an Angeleno, in order to decipher the most exciting and culturally distant urban text he had yet encountered. His book was also a deliberate attempt to upset the conventions and assumptions of architectural history writing, formally and methodologically: although it is (as far as I can tell) a rigorous piece of scholarship, there is also a sense of New Journalism’s subjectivism, and its emphasis on truth over facts. It is the experience of Los Angeles that Banham identifies as its meaning, rather than the static formal qualities of its great buildings or its street plan.

I read this monograph, with its hip, humorous, and harmonious prose, as much as a piece of creative writing as a work of historical research, and although I certainly felt informed about the Los Angeles of fifty years ago, I was equally entertained, and edified in whatever mysterious ways we are by the linguistic game called literature. Formally, the book zig-zags through its subject matter, alternating thematic chapters with those specifically examining architectural practice, and those discussing the four ecologies of his title, to which he gives names three out of four of which are also strongly reminiscent of New Journalism’s switched-on verbal jouissance: Surfurbia, Foothills, The Plains of Id, and Autopia. This is clearly an act of revolt against the conventional architectural history narratives of Banham’s time, which, when speaking of cities, fabulate a linear sequence of foundation, development, the construction of Important Buildings, and their influence on later Important Architects. The multiple loci of Banham’s narrative render the city’s history resistant to the usual hierarchies of time and influence, and indeed to those of geographic centrality and peripherality.

Its multiple centres of urban gravity, which at the time Banham was writing basically meant the places that Angelenos would get out of their cars, are key to his description of the city. Downtown, which was both the location of important municipal institutions, and the historic origin of Los Angeles, was treated by Banham with contempt, a place which had not expanded rapidly enough to make any unique claim on the metropolis. Despite Los Angeles’s widespread association with the automobile, Banham points out that its decentralised growth was enabled by a comprehensive public transport system of railways and trams, whose unloved and largely dismantled networks became the palimpsest on which the matrix of roads and freeways was inscribed. This distributed peripherality, in which every mall, pedestrian area, assimilated pueblo or commercial strip becomes both a unique urban centre and completely interchangeable with every other locus of commercial activity, is taken by Banham as the city’s characteristic feature, and presumably explains his almost complete lack of interest in its ‘major’ buildings.

The works of name architects that Banham treats as significant are almost all houses, with the occasional commercial structure thrown in. The only major public structures he discusses are the Watts Towers and the freeways, which he regards as the principal repository of Los Angeles’s characteristic formal aesthetics; other large structures get short shrift, the Dodgers Stadium being discussed only in respect of its parking lots. The freeways, which he presents as equivalent to the totality of other metropolises’ great churches, museums, civic buildings, palaces and whatever-the-hell-else, are formally beautiful to Banham, but properly consumed at the wheel of a car. The intersection of the Santa Monica and San Diego freeways ‘is a work of art, both as pattern on the map, a monument against the sky, and as a kinetic experience as one sweeps through it’, but the book makes clear that it is the last that is privileged. Whether it is its aesthetics, its sociality, its topography or its history, Los Angeles is correctly apprehended in a movement through; the experience of living there is one of motility, of eliding the geographic distance between wherever you are now and whatever it is you need to do next.

Los Angeles: the Architecture of Four Ecologies offers a fifty-year old view of its subject. I know that Banham’s description of run-down Venice Beach, the resort that never was, seems incredible to those currently victimised by its eye-watering property prices, but in general, I have no idea in what ways the city has subsequently changed. However, the Los Angeles that Reyner Banham knew, as he describes it in this book, has clearly either had an enormous influence around the world, or it was simply a portent, the inevitable consequence of a particular model of consumer capitalism that first had the liberty to shape its environment in Southern California, but which now can be found at every vertex of the globe.

At the very end of the book, Banham discusses the differing responses to Los Angeles’s freeway system, as either dividing communities, or ‘uniting individuals of common interest’. He could have been describing contemporary discussions of the internet, and the parties to whom he ascribes those opposing positions are still roughly the same. However, the extent to which just such a network has shaped social life anywhere that relatively affluent people live in proximity to one another could be observed before the ubiquity of digital connectivity. I live in a rural village in the East of England. It is no more than a few miles from the nearest town in any direction. At the time that Banham wrote his book, the vast majority of the inhabitants of such a village could reach those towns only by bus or bicycle; cars were getting cheaper, but their ownership was far from universal. Walking around my village today, viewing its fine medieval church, its Tudor guildhall, its timber-framed inns and houses, it’s easy to imagine that you are looking at the place in which I and others live; but while LA is a palimpsest, its earlier structures visible only occasionally in the spaces created by their removal, in England the parchment has been overwritten without the earlier text being removed.

This gives a misleading impression of continuity with the past; but the people who live in the village are connected to shops, workplaces and cultural or leisure sites across a wide geographic area by a well-maintained road network and easily obtainable, cheap-to-run cars, and they do little in the village except eat, take leisure and sleep in their separate family accommodations. Their experience of topography, of work, leisure and consumption, is characterised by movement, by informational connectivity, and by a fleeting, predominantly visual engagement with the materiality of their surroundings; the church is a thing, whether aesthetically pleasing or utterly meaningless, seen from the car on the way to somewhere else, an image, not a site of community praxis. The same is probably now true of the village pub. The rural geography is elided in just the same way as the territory irrelevant to an auto-mobile Angeleno’s day in 1970. My grandfather liked to describe himself as a ‘historian of the immediate future’, and in the introduction to the 2000 edition of his book that I recently read, Anthony Vidler describes Los Angeles as the ‘city of the immediate future’. Actually, I think, much of the world was already living in it by then.

0 notes