Skip to main content

Why, I've always preferred plain rocks to jewels--and you? (12 March 2009)

sex city

@ Michael Fellman and Tyee readers (and you guys too, at Open Salon!):

Anybody else beginning to worry that if you spoil yourself and buy something real nice to wear, you risk it being "lost" in a tarred and feathered ruin of an evening? (In this climate, God help you if you have a taste for anything fine in anything other than organic coffee/food.) And is anybody else wondering how right this writer is in thinking that the wealthy are safe from pitchfork prodding? But what if someone offers to serve them up to satisfy (if only temporarily) the bottomless hunger of those who hate, hate, hate the greedy rich -- how long do you think they'll last, then? And when they're gone, who might we turn to next? -- Why how 'bout the Americans, even if Obama's still at the helm, who have surely made greedy, presumptive use of our generous, neighborly will for far too long! Mightn’t indeed the short term bathos be such that it'll become difficult to keep the long-term, long-wave, long-view in sight, even if you're the historian well practiced in calming her/himself by doing so?

This historian (i.e., our author) likes the idea of greed as a primary mover of history. Most do, as it means you don't have to explore psychology much, nor, more to the point, do much messy introspection of your own unruly mind, to understand the ways of people and their times. But, worth noting, is that some psychohistorians actually look to those who, in a sense, desire LESS, not more – masochists -- to the sheep rather than to the wolves -- when searching for those who keep the narrative of haves, then haves and have-nots, a seemingly neverending one.

It's certainly been ongoing, but there is an achievable end, though. That is, Attend to the masochists, cure them of their love of being the righteous impoverished, and the narrative wall WILL fall, thank God.

That is, Historians be damned: In these dampened times, please know that an ahistorical utopia is still well within the possible! It's not only true, it's just gotta be a better beacon to keep our eyes on than the one our "history is and forever will be, a dispiriting tale" author offers us.

If YOU want more, check out http://www.psychohistory.com/, but keep it under hat, will you -- not the safest of times to be showing off your New and Dazzling.

Link: Rescuing the Wealthy Idiots (The Tyee)


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Superimposing another "fourth-wall" Deadpool

I'd like to superimpose the fourth-wall breaking Deadpool that I'd like to have seen in the movie. In my version, he'd break out of the action at some point to discuss with us the following:
1) He'd point out that all the trouble the movie goes to to ensure that the lead actress is never seen completely naked—no nipples shown—in this R-rated movie was done so that later when we suddenly see enough strippers' completely bared breasts that we feel that someone was making up for lost time, we feel that a special, strenuous effort has been made to keep her from a certain fate—one the R-rating would even seemed to have called for, necessitated, even, to properly feed the audience expecting something extra for the movie being more dependent on their ticket purchases. That is, protecting the lead actress was done to legitimize thinking of those left casually unprotected as different kinds of women—not as worthy, not as human.   


2) When Wade/Deadpool and Vanessa are excha…

"The Zookeeper's Wife" as historical romance

A Polish zoologist and his wife maintain a zoo which is utopia, realized. The people who work there are blissfully satisfied and happy. The caged animals aren't distraught but rather, very satisfied. These animals have been very well attended to, and have developed so healthily for it that they almost seem proud to display what is distinctively excellent about them for viewers to enjoy. But there is a shadow coming--Nazis! The Nazis literally blow apart much of this happy configuration. Many of the animals die. But the zookeeper's wife is a prize any Nazi officer would covet, and the Nazi's chief zoologist is interested in claiming her for his own. So if there can be some pretence that would allow for her and her husband to keep their zoo in piece rather than be destroyed for war supplies, he's willing to concede it.

The zookeeper and his wife want to try and use their zoo to house as many Jews as they can. They approach the stately quarters of Hitler's zoologist …

Full conversation about "Bringing Up Baby" at the NewYorker Movie Facebook Club

Richard Brody shared a link.Moderator · November 20 at 3:38pm I'm obsessed with Bringing Up Baby, which is on TCM at 6 PM (ET). It's the first film by Howard Hawks that I ever saw, and it opened up several universes to me, cinematic and otherwise. Here's the story. I was seventeen or eighteen; I had never heard of Hawks until I read Godard's enthusiastic mention of him in one of the early critical pieces in "Godard on Godard"—he called Hawks "the greatest American artist," and this piqued my curiosity. So, the next time I was in town (I… I was out of town at college for the most part), I went to see the first Hawks film playing in a revival house, which turned out to be "Bringing Up Baby." I certainly laughed a lot (and, at a few bits, uncontrollably), but that's not all there was to it. I had never read Freud, but I had heard of Freud, and when I saw "Bringing Up Baby," its realm of symbolism made instant sense; it was obviou…