Skip to main content

Be the titan, or the web-caught fly? (1 March 2009)

It's true, as Mr. McAvoy says, that big changes will always be driven from without, but unless they also resonate within the structure, such changes will be much harder to bring to be. (Bailey)

ViveanLea:

So ViveanLea, do you want to be one of those who "drive big changes," or one of those who "resonate within the structure"? Wanna go big, or small fry? Be the Titan, or the web-caught fly?: How well Bailey does articulate the choices available to you now.

Bailey's response would have resonated better with me if he had brought up liberals like Pelusi or Feinstein or (Barbara) Boxer. They're not Naders, but they're not frauds, either -- just tactically minded, adaptable, good people. Gore's an opportunist and a fraud. He's managed to persuade himself otherwise, but his environmentalism is about tactics as much as anything else. People who readily ride with him, likely do so because they sense that he is one who help them justify/validate a new zeitgeist -- one ultimately less earth-friendly, even -- if the need should ever arise (and it will).

Last thought: People like me are hoping that the establishment becomes mostly populated by those who had the stuff to call an end to the degree when it seemed fit to do so, rather than those who continued on, because 1) they were not capable of dealing with others looking at them as if they had just made the worst decision of their lives, as if they were now and forever, irrelevant, 2) because they continued to hope the hope that the university degree would lead the way down the straight, narrow path toward smart income, smart life, smart kids, smart partnering, smart locals: the professional's paradise, 3) because they were ones who never sensed that education of the mind/heart/soul was always the higher purpose, university just a means of getting "there."

Link: After Meltdown, Back to Post-Secondary?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...