Skip to main content

You kept your couch--for how long (12 July 2009)


photo by House of Sim

If you're still wearing the same clothes you bought ten years ago, then part of you hasn't changed through all that time. Too bad--Since you weren't all that to begin with, we were hoping to see a change.

- - - - -

Look again--Some people noticed, travelingferret, and they might have appreciated the recognition. But yeah, the design is good. Also, though some are trying to defend IDEA goods by pointing out that they can last the long while, I believe more effort ought to be put in defending the idea that the nature of their composition and their cost, make them easier to imagine as only temporary goods. Goods well suited for who you are NOW, that is, constituted so you don't feel you have to keep them around forever, or pass them on to other people they no longer well suit, either. You can get rid of them, as you should anything that remains static, while you go about life's primary business--growing into something richer and more wonderful--different.

What we need to do is really get good at re-using the materials. You buy knowing you'll be breaking in on down soon enough, to be put back into something relevant and new. Planned obsolescence is moved by the wrong energy, but can be "re-made" into a philosophy which redeems change and growth, that is, into something rather well usefully suited to work against an age increasingly driven to redeem stuff that should be well out of our face by now, but was, unfortunately, well built to last. More talk about the good old days and the crappy youth of today, grandpa? Lovely, can't get enough, as they say. . . Say, How're your bones doin', gramps?

Link: "IKEA is as bad as Wal-Mart" (Stephanie Zacharek)


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 …

"Life" as political analogy, coming to you via Breitbart News

Immediately after seeing the film, I worked over whether or not the movie works as something the alt-right would produce to alienate us from the left. Mostly the film does work this way  -- as a sort of, de facto, Breitbart production -- I decided, though it's not entirely slam-dunk. There is no disparagement evident for the crew of the space station being a multicultural mix, for instance. Race is not invisible in the film; it feels conspicuous at times, like when the Japanese crew member is shown looking at his black wife on video conference; but the film maker, wherever he was actually raised, seems like someone who was a longtime habitat of a multicultural milieu, some place like London, and likes things that way. But the film cannot convince only as macabre relating to our current fascination with the possibility of life on Mars -- what it no doubt pretends to be doing -- because the idea of “threat” does not permeate this interest at all, whereas it absolutely saturates our …