#it's absurd to our sensibilities now but it is so not out of the realm of possibility for someone to agree w the practice

[britneyshakespeare]

i had a very strange dream last night where i was looking through my facebook memories and a year ago today i had apparently posted a long, intended-as-a-joke post about how it's a shame we don't hang people from the gallows in the public square anymore. i was like wow oh god i don't remember writing this at all. this seems unlike myself; i think this is so unfunny and hurtful. how will this change how people see me? well it's a good thing i never posted that after all then.

[commander-jbennett]

SHARE AT LEAST FIVE SONGS THAT REMIND YOU OF YOUR MUSE, OR THAT YOU ASSOCIATE WITH YOUR MUSE'S CHARACTER ARC. Including lyrics is optional.

tagged by: stole it tagging: steal it if you'd like :)

Mystery of Love - Sufjan Stevens (mostly in regards to his relationship with Isaac) = Oh, to see without my eyes. The first time that you kissed me/ Boundless by the time I cried /I built your walls around me/White noise, what an awful sound/ Oh, oh woe-oh-woah is me The first time that you touched me /Oh, will wonders ever cease?/Blessed be the mystery of love/Lord, I no longer believe/Cursed by the love that I received/ Now my riverbed has dried. Shall I find no other?/ Oh, oh woe-oh-woah is me. I'm running like a plover. /Now I'm prone to misery./ The birthmark on your shoulder reminds me./ How much sorrow can I take? Blackbird on my shoulder/And what difference does it make when this love is over?/ Hold your hands upon my head 'til I breathe my last breath/ Oh, oh woe-oh-woah is me, the last time that you touched me.

The Logical Song - Supertramp = When I was young, it seemed that life was so wonderful/A miracle, oh, it was beautiful, magical/But then they sent me away to teach me how to be sensible, logical, oh, responsible, practical. /Then they showed me a world where I could be so dependable. Oh, clinical, oh, intellectual, cynical/ There are times when all the world's asleep the questions run too deep for such a simple man/ Won't you please, please tell me what we've learned?/I know it sounds absurd/Please tell me who I am/I said, now, watch what you say, they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh, fanatical, criminal./ Oh, won't you sign up your name? We'd like to feel you're acceptable, respectable, oh, presentable, a vegetable.

Dream Sweet in Sea Major - Miracle Musical = Alone at the edge of a universe humming a tune/ For merely dreaming we were snow/A siren sounds like the goddess who promises endless apologies of paradise, and only she can make it right so things are different tonight./ We'll go together in flight. /It's now and never, a reverie endeavor awaits somnambulant directives to take the helm./Believe me, darling the stars were made for falling like melting obelisks as tall as another realm./Un ensemble d'enfants, la galaxie s'étend jardin de l'imagination./ Combler la lacune, voler face à la Lune vois comme nous évoluons./ It feels like flying, dut maybe we're dying./ A cosmic confluence of pyramids hologrammed./ Children born of one emotion our devotion's deepest ocean no division reasoned we'll be free./ To know we are beyond a bow, and lo, the hues arrange to show it's perfectly clear. / Pure delights surround us as we sail. / Now that existence is on the wake let's see what we can make. /We will be atoning at last eternal through the past above a blinding star. / One light higher than the sun, invisible to some. Until it's time.

Father - The Front Bottoms = I have this dream that I am hitting my dad with a baseball bat, and he is screaming and crying for help./ And maybe halfway through, it has more to do with me killing him then it ever did protecting myself. /And I believe that, yeah, Dad, maybe no one is perfect, but I believe that you were pushing your luck/ It just sucks it played out like this, a terrible movie and you can tell none of the actors even give a fuck. /Can I sleep in your bed?/ And when I crawl out in the morning can I stay inside your head?/ 'Cause you were high school, and I was just more like real life./ But I was just more like his wife/ I'll do the push-ups, I'll wear the makeup/I'll do whatever he wants all night. /And I am leaving as soon as I come/As soon as I come, you will probably forget my name/I hope I fall asleep at the wheel and crash my car on the ride home. Or I could just stay here.

Broken Crown - Mumford and Sons = Well, touch my mouth and hold my tongue/ I'll never be your chosen one/ The pull on my flesh was just too strong, stifled the choice and the air in my lungs. /Better not to breathe than to breathe a lie. /'Cause when I open my body I breathe in a lie./And I will not speak of your sins/ The mirror shows not/Your values are all shot/But oh, my heart was flawed/ I knew my weakness/ So hold my hand, consign me not to darkness./So crawl on my belly 'til the sun goes down/I'll never wear your broken crown/ I took the road and I fucked it all away/Now in this twilight, how dare you speak of grace?/I can take the road and I can fuck it all away, but in this twilight, our choices seal our fate.

Magnum Bullets - Night Runner = A dark and moonless night has never felt so right. /An empty mirror only shows what's left inside/ The neon beckons me beyond its ghostly light/ No longer I pretend the staircase I descend will lead me anywhere but my unscripted end./My heart and hands collide/The gun lays at my side/Too late to turn back, only fate's left to decide/ Back up the stairs again, I am a different man. /A broken mirror only shows as best it can/Running in shoes that shine with blood that isn't mine./A stinging trophy of the battles I've survived/No longer I defend the choices I pretend could make amends that heal the loss of precious time/My conscience paralyzed against the rising tide of haunting memories that drown a wasted life.

Let the River In - Radical Face = I closed my eyes and saw my father's sins/They covered me like a second skin/I peeled them off and sure I bled a bit/And now I'm free to sink my own damn ship/I cut the branch down from my family tree to start a fire in the middle of the living room/Now the house is just ash this time, sink or swim/Let the river in if blood is thicker than water/We might drift away, but we've got thick skin.

[theblackshit]

Every now and then I am reminded that we spend the vast majority of our time indoors: at home, at school, at the office, in shops and retail spaces, in bars, clubs and restaurants, in the apartments of friends and relatives, in train stations and moving vehicles, in hotels, venues and theaters, in museums, churches and hospitals – big boxes and little boxes with varying ratios of functionality to ornament.

Every now and then I am also reminded that we live in an air-conditioned dream/nightmare. In standard hotel rooms, split AC units are now as common as bedside bibles used to be. In most cases, these units are fixed to the wall above the entrance door, so that upon entering the room, guests can briefly enjoy a view unencumbered by the sight of the bulky appliance – a sort of icon corner in reverse, since an icon corner is usually located to be visible when you first enter. Once you lay down on the bed and gaze up at the familiar yet bewildering piece of engineering, you might begin to wonder: what’s the optimal temperature? Will I get sick if I sleep with the AC on? Is this thing more ugly than it is convenient? Would natality rates suddenly drop if these machines didn’t exist? Is this a tool that “brings energy home” as Ursula K. Le Guin would have it, or one that “forces energy outward?” How does it work? What’s inside the box? Is it good, is it bad? Where is the remote control for this thing?! 

Although the overhead placement of these split units is clearly a matter of practicality, I can’t help but overthink and ask myself if we also tend to place them at such heights, along with other physical objects including speakers, curtains, wall reliefs and friezes, because they pertain to immaterial realms such as temperature, sound, light and narration. As a “unit,” this compact object is at once whole and dependent upon an unseen network, which suggests a hidden elsewhere beyond the confine of the room. While its boxiness could bring to mind minimalism’s so-called “specific objects” (objects that can be apprehended on a phenomenological level), the idea that it contains unseen parts and is linked to an unseen system constitutes a conceptual or even metaphoric opening. Philip Seibel’s quietly baroque Gehäuse sculptures consciously play with this dichotomy. 

In borrowing some of the formal qualities of these units, Seibel paradoxically empties them out, thereby turning what first appears to be an enclosure into a container or a vessel where other ideas can get on board like stowaways. Looking up at his Gehäuse makes us aware of the many other vessels and boxes that create and sustain the conditions for our lives, those that shield us and our belongings, or again, those which act as receptacles for our fears and aspirations. Like ships made of reeds, there is something sensible but absurd about Seibel’s encasements. Their sleek finish seems to conceal something that is beyond our reach; or at least, it blurs the line between the manufactured and the handcrafted, the real and the fake, the readymade and the not already made, the functional and the decorative, the office, the hotel and the gallery. 

Emile Rubino

[class1akids]

BNHA 333 Thoughts

So, I’m glad that in the end Star (who apparently is Kathy after all) did have another trick in her sleeve, just like I expected last week. At least she’s not as pathetic as Nagant was.

I’m not going to go into the absurdity of the plot. Like I’ve been saying for the start, New Order has only two rules:

1. It can do everything the mangaka wants to do.

2. It can’t do anything the mangaka doesn’t want it to do. 

Also, let’s switch off our brains and don’t try to investigate things like how Star knew what the AFO vestige realm is like or that she can change the nature of her own quirk with an unspecific rule (but cannot make it stronger than All Might) or just how risky this gamble could have been. 

Whatever. I’m so bored of this fight that in the end I don’t really give a crap. 

HK made ShigarAFO ridiculous with the entire tanking of lasers and bombs to elevate him to global threat, now sacrificed Star to make him go back to just a normal, Japan-sized threat. 

I guess Star will destroy as many quirks as it takes to scale him back to Deku’s level - not that we got to know many of these quirks, since in this fight ShigarAFO barely showed anything other than reflect and tank everything. 

If Regen is gone, Star - a 4-chapter deus ex machina - becomes major contributor to the victory. OK, then. 

Also, with Tomura’s body breaking apart, he would need someone to heal his body. Maybe he’ll go after Eri and start the UA siege? Though if I remember correctly, AFO, the Elder also has a copy of every quirk that’s inside Tomura, so maybe he can just take that. 

The more interesting / dreadful question is where will New Order end up?

Not gonna lie, I really want it out of the story. It is too busted and deus ex machina-like to be enjoyable for me. 

1. The obvious option is the nomu. (which how the hell is not dead yet) 

2. Someone from LoV (this is how Overlord Spinner is born)

3. Before being given away, New Order finds the door to OFA and becomes a Deku vestige (wow, that would suck so much if Deku got another candy)

4. The sensible option would be for the rule to disappear when Star is done disintegrating, but then ShigarAFO would end up with the busted New Order. 

Some other random thoughts:

Star saying that this is the payback to All Might sounds quite shoe-horned. All Might saved her with ease, never breaking a sweat, almost like a side-thought. Yet, she’s sacrificing her life to pay him back? Sounds like a pretty unequal trade. It would have been better to leave it as her motivation of being a top hero and leave it at that. The All Might legacy angle is jarring to me. 

You can tell that it’s a dude trying to write a female character, when all the people she thinks about are a squad of dudebros (no female pilot in her squad, nope, sir). Basically, she’s like a guy, except HK drew her with boobs. Oh wait, that’s right. That’s exactly what happened. 

Also not even the sister from her deep deep origin story made an appearance in her final thoughts. 

I honestly thought something like this would happen, but with All Might’s vestige, once he becomes a full vestige inside OFA. Star’s “death scene” is exactly how I imagined All Might’s death to be and him trying to pry Shigaraki in the vestige world would have carried all the emotional weight of his bond with Nana and the guilt he felt over abandoning Tenko. But the scene was given to Star instead.

 With this, I’d say the likelihood of All Might staying alive went up quite a bit, which I guess is a plus, though seeing an emotional pay-off like that would have been quite something. 

[your3fundamentaltruths]

my favorite partner

With love to a lovely fandom, a continuation of my most popular Polin drabble on AO3, the color green, in honor of Polin Day. (Also related to no matchmaking.) You can also find this one on AO3. Happy Polin Day!

—

“Bridgerton has always thought himself such an easygoing fellow, but he does not much like being thwarted,” Lord Billington comments casually as he leads her to the floor.

“Does anyone, my lord?” Penelope asks rhetorically.

Lord Billington nods. “Touché, Miss Featherington.”

“Especially a man and I daresay our friend in particular is little used to it. Seeing as he is so often able to charm others into bending to his will.”

“But not me and, it seems, not you.”

Not any longer. “I have known him forever,” she says simply, echoing Colin’s earlier words.

“And familiarity breeds contempt?” Lord Billington queries with a grin.

“I wouldn’t call it contempt,” Penelope chides, but she knows her answering smile is cheeky. “Merely an ability to resist his charms.”

Lord Billington laughs loudly. “That probably annoys him more than actual contempt.”

She giggles. “You do know him very well indeed.”

“I vow I can feel his eyes boring into my back even now,” Lord Billington informs her with a smirk that she's quite sure she mirrors.

They have a lovely waltz, for Lord Billington is a fine dancer and excellent company, so much so that she thinks it a pity it is unlikely to be repeated. Not only because Lord Macclesfield had to nudge him in the first place, but also because, unlike his fellow Determined Bachelors, Lord Billington has no mama or aunt to pressure him to attend society events at least occasionally. It is likely only his friendship with Colin that has him making an appearance at a Bridgerton ball and Colin seems so very cross with him that she is not sure he’ll be able to count on another invitation any time soon.

—

Much to Penelope’s surprise, on the rare occasions Lord Billington does make an appearance in a London ballroom, he always saves a dance for her, even after he is married.

His wife Ellie is a lovely woman and doesn’t mind a bit both because she befriends Penelope immediately (we redheads must stick together) and because she knows her husband would not be himself if he did not take every opportunity to tease and torment one of his old friends.

And it certainly torments Colin whenever the now-formerly very rakish earl escorts her to the floor.

It seems Colin really does not like being thwarted.

—

Even after she is married, Lord Billington makes a point of asking Penelope to dance with him at the first ball she attends after her secret is revealed. “For old times' sake, Lady Whistledown?” he says with a wink as the strains of the waltz begin.

The invitation had had their proper address crossed out, with Lady and Lord Whistledown written in a distinctly masculine hand just above. At the time, her husband had been amused.

She expects he is less amused now.

“If you try to claim my wife’s waltz, I will bludgeon you right here in your own ballroom.”

Right in one. She knows him so well.

“If you really must murder me, do try to do it cleanly. My wife should hate the unnecessary expense of having my blood scrubbed off the floor.”

Lady Billington is unable to stifle a snicker, but quickly composes herself to nod solemnly.

“Taking ‘lovesick newlywed’ a bit far, though, eh?” Lord Billington can't resist ribbing him further. “I expected it what with how sickeningly sweet you were at your wedding, but I thought you would’ve mellowed some after all that romantic drivel at the Hastings ball. What a spectacle you made of yourself, old boy.”

“It was lovely and very grand,” the usually quite sensible Lady Billington says approvingly, elbowing her husband disapprovingly. “A fitting swan song for the cleverest lady in London.”

“Oh, I don’t know about cleverest. Second cleverest, I’d say, unless we are out of town,” says Lord Billington affectionately.

“Speaking of lovesick,” Colin mutters in the other couple’s direction before taking her hand. “I do believe this is my dance.”

“I suppose it must be, if only to prevent a homicide.”

“Only for that reason?” he asks airily.

“I should not like to be widowed so soon after our marriage because you were hanged for murdering a peer of the realm. And I’d hate to lose my favorite partner, you know,” Penelope replies as they take their positions.

“You do mean me, don’t you?”

“Who else, my love?” she teases. Her eyes widen when he doesn’t answer right away. “Colin Bridgerton! You didn’t really think –”

“I didn’t like not being your first choice,” he confesses with all the bashfulness of a schoolboy as he leads her gracefully through the steps of the dance.

She can’t help smiling. Goodness, but he’s absurd. He nearly married another woman her first season and subsequently became quite the rake, likely consorting with more ladies than she cares to consider, but he’s been harboring a secret insecurity over being refused in favor of his friend for a dance. “You ridiculous man,” she scolds affectionately. “I suppose it’s a good thing that I wasn’t often in the position of choosing between eligible gentlemen.”

“But you should’ve been,” he says quietly.

“It was for the best,” she says soothingly. “Otherwise, who knows who might’ve swept me off my feet whilst you wandered?”

“Had I been a bit cleverer, perhaps I wouldn’t have wandered so long or so far before coming home to you.”

Though he’s smiling, he still looks a touch too serious for her taste, so she bites back the quip or into so many other ladies’ arms. “Truly, it gave me time to grow up and become my own woman. Otherwise . . . well, I adored you so that I don’t know that I would’ve bothered to learn who I was apart from you if you’d loved me from the start. Nor would you have had time and space to grow into the man you were meant to be.”

He sighs in that way she knows means he wishes they were not in public so he could kiss her. (Not that that’s always stopped him.) “How is it you always know precisely what to say to me?”

“I know you.”

“That you do, my darling,” he says softly, looking down at her with that look - her look, the one she’s been seeing for a very long time, though it’s only recently she’s come to realize what it meant, to understand that he’d begun to fall long before he knew it himself.

[route22ny]

The split-screen reality of the Trump era became all too real for Stephen Richer recently, and in a very literal way. On May 15, the Arizona election official — a Republican — was looking at two computer screens. On one was former President Trump’s claim that a key election database had been deleted, an “unbelievable election crime.” On the other screen was that very database, quite intact.

“Wow,” Richer tweeted. “This is unhinged. I’m literally looking at our voter registration database on my other screen. Right now.”

A couple of days later, he made his dismay even more explicit.

“What can we do here?” he asked in an interview with CNN. “This is tantamount to saying that the pencil sitting on my desk in front of me doesn’t exist.”

When Richer unseated a Democratic incumbent to become Maricopa County’s recorder in November, he thought he had won the most boring job in politics: maintaining the county’s voter files. But he had not reckoned on Trump, #StopTheSteal, and the most massive, audacious and successful propaganda campaign in modern American history — a campaign that has adapted Russian-style disinformation to U.S. politics with alarming success.

Fortunately, Richer and his local Republican colleagues have refused to be victimized. Instead, they have shown how to fight back.

Information warfare takes many forms, but it has an overarching goal: to divide, demoralize and disorient a political foe by manipulating the social and media environments. As Yuri Bezmenov, a Soviet intelligence defector, explained in a chilling 1983 interview, “What it basically means is to change the perception of reality of every American to such an extent that despite the abundance of information, no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interests of defending themselves, their family, their community and their country.”

One potent weapon of mass distraction is the “fire hose of falsehood,” a torrent of lies that aims not so much to persuade as to confuse and disorient. After Russian intelligence services got caught poisoning a defector and his daughter in the U.K. in 2018, the Russian government responded with a blizzard of mutually contradictory lies: Britain did it, Ukraine did it, a jealous lover did it, it was a suicide attempt and so on.

Another standard technique: conspiracy bootstrapping. First you spread a rumor. Then you demand an investigation. Failure to investigate just confirms the conspiracy, but so does an investigation with a negative finding. It’s a trap: either ignoring or debunking the conspiracy theory propagates it.

Those techniques are not new. Intelligence services and propaganda experts understand them well, and master propagandists like Josef Goebbels and Vladimir Putin have used them to powerful effect. What no one imagined was that they could be deployed by an American president and his party — and not against a foreign antagonist, but against the American public.

Pundits often say that, whatever his authoritarian tendencies, Trump is too inept and inattentive to have done much lasting damage to democracy. They are wrong: In the realm of information warfare, Trump is a genius-level innovator. It was he who figured out how to adapt Russia-style disinformation to the U.S. political environment, no mean accomplishment.

His use of the fire hose of falsehood was masterly. In his 2016 campaign, according to PolitiFact, 70% of his checkable claims were false or mostly false, a flood of untruths whose like had never been seen in a presidential campaign. He began his presidency by lying about the weather at his inauguration and also lying about the size of the crowd. By the time his presidency was over, Washington Post fact-checkers had clocked him at more than 30,000 confirmed falsehoods, with nearly half coming in his final year.

Similarly, he was a master of conspiracy bootstrapping. He retailed conspiracy theories and falsehoods on the grounds that a lot of people were saying them, although of course he was the sayer-in-chief. Truth and common decency need not apply; when a prominent cable news host criticized him, Trump peddled an absurd (and deeply cruel) lie that the host was suspected of murder.

The black arts of disinformation had the intended effect, at least from Trump’s point of view. They exacerbated the country’s divisions, commandeered the country’s attention, dominated his opponents, disoriented the media and helped him establish a cult of personality among followers who trusted no one else.

Still, he saved the worst for last. His pièce de résistance was the propaganda attack on the 2020 election. Beginning months before the election, he launched a drumbeat of unfounded attacks on mail-in voting. Pundits were puzzled. Many Republicans vote by mail, and the pandemic was especially dangerous to older voters who lean toward Trump; why discourage them from voting safely and conveniently?

But Trump was aiming for the post-election. He saw he was in electoral trouble. With the anti-mail campaign, he was organizing, priming, and testing an unprecedented propaganda network, ready for use if he lost.

And then came #StopTheSteal itself, a disinformation campaign whose likes the country had never witnessed. It mobilized the White House, Republican politicians, social media, conservative cable news and talk radio, frivolous litigation, and every other available channel to broadcast the message that the election was rigged. The Big Lie, as it was aptly named, failed to keep Trump in office, but it succeeded at its secondary goal: turning the Republican Party itself into a propaganda organ.

In April, only a fourth of Republicans believed Joe Biden was legitimately elected, and GOP politicians who insisted on truth were persona non grata.

With that as background, we can see more clearly what is going on right now in Maricopa County, Arizona’s largest. In 2020, Biden carried Maricopa by more than 45,000 votes, and with it the state. The result was certified by the Republican governor, double-checked twice by the county’s election officials, and then confirmed by two independent audits.

But in classic bootstrapping fashion, Trump and state Republican leaders seized on conspiracy theories, such as that phony ballots had been smuggled in from Asia, to launch an unnecessary recount conducted by an unqualified company whose boss had promoted uncorroborated charges of election fraud. In textbook fashion, the controversial recount drove yet more public attention to the conspiracy theories, engendering yet more suspicion and spawning me-too demands for partisan “audits” across the country.

The Arizona shenanigans will not change the outcome of the 2020 election, but that is not the point. A great propaganda campaign is cyclonic and self-propelled: once unleashed, it takes on a life of its own, heedless of any underlying reality. By that yardstick, the Arizona recount is a great propaganda campaign.

Americans have never been exposed to Russian-style disinformation tactics, at least not coming from a major political party and deployed on a national scale. We are thus dangerously vulnerable to them. What can we do? There are no quick or simple answers; developing immunity requires everything from more sophisticated journalism and better-designed social media platforms to teaching media literacy, and much more.

But here is where to start: Do what Stephen Richer did. Insist loudly, unwaveringly and bravely on calling out lies, even at the cost of partisan solidarity.

Once it became clear that the #StopTheSteal campaign was escalating instead of dying out, Richer went public with a no-holds-barred denunciation of what Trump and his enablers were up to. “Just stop indulging this,” he told CNN. “Stop giving space for lies.”

At his side were all five of the Maricopa County supervisors — four of whom are Republicans. Calling the recount a sham, a con, and a “spectacle that is harming all of us,” they declared they “stand united together to defend the Constitution and the republic in our opposition to the Big Lie. We ask everyone to join us in standing for truth.” They also wrote a blistering 14-page letter shredding the alt-audit in detail.

Propaganda attacks succeed when critical points of resistance collapse; they stumble when trusted voices expose lies for what they are. Individuals and small groups may not be able to shut down a propaganda campaign or neutralize all its effects, but they can strip away its facade of legitimacy and act as an anchor against runaway fabulism. That was why the Soviet Union struggled so mightily to silence Andrei Sakharov and other dissident voices, and why those voices ultimately brought down the evil empire.

And it is why Rep. Liz Cheney made a difference when she chose truthfulness over her job in the Republican congressional leadership. The day she was booted, she read her colleagues John 8:32: “You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.” She could not end #StopTheSteal, but she could, and did, dent its credibility and embarrass Republicans whose equivocation and silence abetted the Big Lie.

In the same way, Richer and his colleagues in Arizona laid down a marker. They risked their political standing and even their personal safety (Richer has needed security protection) to expose their own party’s propaganda and shame those who spread it.

The deployment of Russian-style information warfare has allowed Trump and his authoritarian cult to usurp the Republican Party. And they are not finished. Now that they have succeeded with mass disinformation, it will be a fixture of American politics for years to come.

Countermeasures begin, though do not end, with personal integrity: standing up for facts and staying reality-based, whatever the short-term political costs. Think of it as epistemic patriotism, and pray for more of it, especially from Republicans.

***

The author, Jonathan Rauch, is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, and the author of “The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth.”

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-arizona-dreaming-20210522-uyd6ivuv75hd5gof2geyd5adtu-story.html

[passionate-reply]

Have you and Telex met somewhere before? If not, you may want to make their acquaintance. This delightfully irreverent Belgian electro-disco trio came in next to last at 1980′s Eurovision Song Contest. And then they did an album featuring English lyrics by Sparks’ Ron and Russel Mael! Find out all about what makes this record tick, in this week’s installment of Great Albums. Full transcript below the break...

Welcome to Passionate Reply, and welcome to Great Albums! It’s time to break outside the Anglosphere, and take a look at one of the finest synth-pop acts to come from Belgium: the irreverent post-disco trio of Telex. Telex were, in fact, so European that they were sent to that most European of institutions, the Eurovision Song Contest, in the year 1980, in what was perhaps their finest hour in the spotlight.

Music: “Eurovision”

While many contemporary listeners may find “Eurovision” amusing, it actually didn’t go over well in the contest itself, and Telex managed to place second to last on behalf of the Belgian people, losing even the (arguably) more illustrious last place to Finland. It was one of the earliest true “joke entries,” so perhaps the masses weren’t ready for this approach yet. Despite its generally upbeat sound, I think the lyrics of “Eurovision” come across as really quite harsh--and the song’s availability in both English and French meant that plenty of people understood them. Mocking the financial instability of Italy and, apparently, anyone dumb enough to tune into Eurovision, there’s really a rather condescending, perhaps even cruel, sensibility about it. A conspicuous reference to the Berlin Wall, a symbol of some of Europe’s deepest divisions and greatest political turmoil, gives it an extra nudge towards feeling rather contextually inappropriate. Telex’s “Eurovision” might just be the most cynical or anti-European song ever entered...at least up until Hatari of Iceland gave us the thunderous industrial anthem “Hatrið Mun Sigra,” in 2019.

Telex’s follow-up to this “incident” is, in my opinion, where their career starts to really get interesting. While it isn’t that heavily advertised, 1981’s Sex was actually something of a collaboration album, featuring English-language lyrics on all tracks which were contributed by Ron and Russell Mael of Sparks. Given the recent resurgence of interest in Sparks spurred by Edgar Wright’s documentary on them, I figure now is as good a time as ever to revisit this somewhat lesser-known work in the Sparks catalogue--or, at least, with one foot in the Sparks catalogue.

In my opinion, Sex takes the better aspects of both of these groups and combines them into something that feels like more than the sum of its parts. Telex’s soft, yet sprightly synth arrangements have as much fun and flair as those of fellow Sparks collaborator Giorgio Moroder, and feel more substantive and organic than Sparks’ many attempts to play with various genres in which they remained outsider dilettantes. Likewise, the Mael brothers’ lyricism is a major improvement to the often clunky English offered by previous efforts by the Belgians. Recontextualized amidst a sea of dreamy Euro-pop, and delivered by Telex’s suave yet unassuming vocalist Michel Moers, the same style of lyricism that often makes Sparks feel crass and overwrought to me becomes transmuted into something I’m much more amenable to. Much like Devo, I’ve often found the “smartest guys in the room” vibe of Sparks a bit off-putting, but Sex has a certain subtlety or ambiguity about it, that keeps me coming back and pondering it.

Music: “Dummy”

The feel-good, squelching bass grooves of “Dummy” recall the most affable work of the seminal Yellow Magic Orchestra, and a falsetto hook that’s to die for marks it as one of the more pop-oriented tracks on the album. Had it stopped at “Dummy, hey, I’m talking to you,” it would be not only less interesting musically, but also conceptually; the overt questioning, “now who’s the dumb one?”, rescues it from simply being mean. I like to think it calls to mind the archetype of the fool who is constantly vocally doubting the intelligence of others, in an attempt to cover for their own insecurities. While it’s a comparatively simple track, lyrically, it establishes some of the album’s most important themes, portraying traditional “intelligence” as mutable, and perhaps questionable. Despite its appeal, “Dummy” was actually not included on the original tracklisting of the album, but rather debuted as the B-side to the single “Brainwash,” before receiving this promotion in later revisions of the LP. In this rare case, I actually think the later edition is superior, and it’s the one I’d recommend.

Music: “Brainwash”

Besides just sharing opposite sides of the same single, there’s also a strong thematic connection between “Dummy” and the slower-paced, narrative-driven “Brainwash.” Arguably the most high-concept track to be had on Sex, “Brainwash” tells the tale of an intellectual who willingly forfeits his intelligence for the sake of falling in love. That, in and of itself, is a take on the love song that I’ve never heard before. We all know the trope that being in love makes one stupid--our word “infatuation” is basically Latin for “being made stupid.” But “Brainwash” suggests that, given the choice, we might well be better off as fools rushing in. What good is a life full of knowledge if it is one without passion, and deeper humanity? The narrator of “Brainwash” seems fully cognizant of what they abandon, and makes an informed decision to do so. But what complicates things even further is the development that the object of the narrator’s affections seems desperate to make them regain their prior book smarts--perhaps a commentary on how society frames this issue, and its willingness to prioritize the prestige of education over genuine human happiness. The single “Haven’t We Met Somewhere Before?” explores a related, but also distinct tension between knowledge and happiness.

Music: “Haven’t We Met Somewhere Before?”

Moreso than anything else on the album, “Haven’t We Met Somewhere Before?” is really sort of harrowing. Moers’s falsetto feels less like a fun disco aftershock and more like a cry of pain, and the stilted melody and more brash synthesiser stabs establish an air of unease--though still not so strong that it feels out of place alongside lighter tracks like “Brainwash.” Its lyrical narrative is plainly a tragic one, with a narrator who thinks he’s encountered his wife, but can’t quite piece it together, or get the response that he’s looking for. It’s evocative of the very real agony a sufferer of dementia and their loved ones might face, losing their memories, and, with them, their connection to the people around them. But perhaps the most eerie thing about the track is that it never does dip into more maudlin territory, even if it feels like it ought to. In the full context of the album, and particularly the sentiment expressed by “Brainwash,” we’re forced to question just how unfortunate the tale expressed in this song is. Perhaps “Haven’t We Met Somewhere Before?” is also suggesting that love is more powerful than knowledge, in its own way. Perhaps the characters it presents have transcended the need for knowledge of their shared history, because their bond is deeper and more primal than that? Similarly subversive questions about love are also posed by “Exercise Is Good For You.”

Music: “Exercise Is Good For You”

With a pleasingly abrasive, textured synth line and a rather singable refrain, “Exercise Is Good For You” is the one track cut from the later version of the album that I do find myself missing. This track’s narrator has devoted themselves to exercising--perhaps over-exercising--in the wake of a bad break-up. At first blush, it may seem a bit absurd, but this is a real-life coping mechanism, and one that can potentially be quite dangerous, particularly as it’s often combined with eating disorders. The potential for peril is compounded by the notion that, well, “exercise is good for you,” and that in a world where too few of us partake, anyone who does must be doing the best for their health. While it doesn’t deal with the realm of knowledge, I do think “Exercise Is Good For You” works in a similar space as tracks like “Brainwash” and “Haven’t We Met Somewhere Before?” do, offering an ambiguous narrative that asks us to question something we habitually value--in this case, by portraying the apparent virtue of physical fitness in a darker and less healthy light.

Earlier, I referred to this album simply as Sex, but for the UK market, it was re-christened Birds & Bees. There is obviously something quite transgressive and irreverent about naming a pop album “Sex”! We like to think of pop music as trading chiefly in themes of love and romance, so the title Sex functions as a bit of a “low blow,” suggesting that we ought to think more cynically about “what’s really going on below.” Despite this, there’s really not a lot of terribly bawdy tracks to be had on either version of the album, which may come as some surprise if you’re familiar with their early track “Pakmoväst.” I think the fact that the album title was changed, and seemingly “censored” with the very knowing title Birds & Bees, only adds to its transgressiveness, and lends it a certain allure of the forbidden.

You won’t find birds or bees on the cover of the album, however, but rather a butterfly, feeding off the nectar of two large flowers. It’s certainly an image that can be read as evocative of sensuality, with yonic visual overtones. Perhaps more overtly offensive to the eye is its queasy, dull yellow colour scheme, which is actually much more stuck in the 70s than the rather sharp and with-it electro-disco stylings of the music.

Historically, the butterfly is often used as a symbol of innocence, particularly with respect to the carnal knowledge of sex. In François Gérard’s depiction of the mythological heroine Psyche, a butterfly hovers above the subject, as she receives her first kiss from her lover, Cupid, a god of lust and sexual desire. The suggestion of youthful innocence is only heightened when the title Birds & Bees is applied. We might also consider the similarity between the idea of naivete or innocence as a virtue, and the apparent thrust of tracks like “Brainwash,” which also challenge the utility and benefit of knowledge about the world.

Telex would go on to release three more LPs after this one, and while they never quite surpassed a cult following, they keep up with the times quite respectably, incorporating sampling and digital synth textures without losing their signature levity and playfulness. I think they’re well worth a listen if you’re interested so far.

Music: “Raised By Snakes”

My favourite track on this album is one that’s exclusive to the later release, and never appeared anywhere else: “Mata Hari,” which was not only added to the album, but given the prominent position as its opening track. Mata Hari was actually a real person, a courtesan famous for her exotic dances inspired by her time in the Dutch East Indies. But she became caught up in the political storm of the First World War, and the French government convicted her of spying for the Germans--even though many believed she was framed. After her execution for the alleged crime, her severed head was embalmed and displayed in a Parisian museum, for all to gawk at...until it mysteriously went missing, possibly stolen by an “admirer.” It’s a strange and tragic tale, for sure, and one suitably treated with a sense of mystery and uncertainty by the song. An undoubtedly complex and controversial figure, Mata Hari can be seen as a symbol of European disunity, not unlike the Berlin Wall, as well as a representation of sensuality used for devious and destructive ends. I think this track enriches the album’s themes while also feeling somewhat separate, with its more pensive mood and third-person lyricism. That’s everything for today--thanks, as always, for listening!

Music: “Mata Hari”

[sagebodisattva]

The Universe Doesn’t Give a Shit About You

You know, one thing that has become seriously irritating nowadays, is this whole “the universe is doing something for you” shtick, that’s apparently become the latest favorite new age meme, currently making it’s rounds on the internets. Take a look at this stuff.

(A variety of examples are shown.)

And that’s just a small sampling. And this isn’t just a case of a few isolated incidents. This type of sentiment is everywhere now; seemingly having become all the rage among many aspiring spiritual truth seekers.

“Depressed? Cheer up. The universe is horny for you!”

By first appearances, making references to the universe seems to reflect a more scientifically based position, although, I don’t think these seekers really mean it in a scientific way. Essentially, these new age universe worshippers are just former theists, who probably finally realized the complete absurdity of that position, and so now, have shifted their heels over to pantheism; that is, a doctrine which identifies god with the universe, or regards the universe as a manifestation of god; which is basically a veneration of nature. And, as we all know, mother nature is pretty much a cold, predatory, discriminating bitch; so I’m not sure why anyone would associate nature with a benevolent god.

I know, god loves you so much, he allows evil to rack you to the core on purpose. It’s a test, right? It’s all part of his divine plan. God just wants to see if you will curse his name when he makes times get incredibly tough. It’s a Job type of deal. He’s forcing you into a position of struggle and suffering, all so he can wage a bet with the devil over whether or not you will be disobedient. Isn’t that just so cool of him? Now you get to show god just how loyal and subservient you are to him, despite all the abuses he hurls at you! That’s such an enviable position! The one true god loves you so much, he tortures you as a demonstration of just how much you worship and obey him. That’s what love is. And just think of how lucky you are! He picked *you* as a guinea pig in his twisted self aggrandizing experiment! He chose YOU! This would make such a great reality TV show!

Heaven and Hell productions, presents...

“The God Fucks Me Factor.”

Ah yes, it would be, so nice. Because god takes great pride in your blind obedience, you know. And he’s a very jealous god, if you can believe it. So what’s going on inside your head is of supreme importance him! You must think that you believe in him, then confess it with thy lips, and then go down, and perform some lip service on the godhead. You should show great pride in being a slave. It’s a feather in god’s cap. And now, can be more fully realized with the advent of pantheism. It’s theism, with a pan. It’s pantheism.

Famous 17th century Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza was really captivated by the idea of pantheism, and his many philosophical contemplations on the subject is largely responsible for ushering the position into modern day prominence. Pantheists do not celebrate a distinct personal or anthropomorphic god, but rather, accept all gods into worship, because they view god as everything. An ideological stance that can become quite problematic, to say the least.

Throughout history, pantheism has been a belief system that, in one form or another, tended to be the most common default faith practice among the many various indigenous peoples from around the globe. It’s the same ideologic methodology that the pagans of Europe used to practice; that is, before Rome came along and forced Christianity deep down into every person’s every available orifice. And you should always keep this historical fact in the forefront of your mind. Your Abrahamic belief system is the result of a Roman soldier raping someone’s great great great great grandma and grandpa with a big middle eastern theological strap-on dildo. Don’t you ever forget that. Your whole modern day spiritual life was originally founded on a theological psych-rape. Your precious sacred religion was passed down to you through your family being raped. And it’s no coincidence that Rome, an arrogant empire dead-set on conquering the entire world, found Christianity to be quite compatible with their grandiose ambitions. And that should tell you something about the core fabric of the Abrahamic cult religions.

So, pantheists believe that god is everything. All inclusive, with no exceptions. No standards or filter necessary. This includes every kind of concept; even the stupid ideas and majestic fantasies, floating around inside our heads. And this also includes every kind of object or person to have ever existed, no matter who or what they are. This means they are ALL god, whether it be a virus, a parasite or an infectious bacteria, whether it be a machine gun, cocaine or a dildo, whether John Wayne Gacy, the unabomber or Adolf Hitler, they are all but different forms of an ambiguous enigmatic god! He’s so complex, you can’t even fathom him. He’s got value and purpose so profoundly beyond your puny logic, you can’t even question him.

And not only is every kind of object or person a manifestation of god, but guess what? With pantheism, ALL the different gods, are god as well. It’s not that some gods are valid, and some gods are not, or that maybe all gods are completely full of shit, no! In fact, it actually quite the opposite, I’m afraid. Now, all different gods are actually the one same god. Every so called “god” is graciously welcomed into pantheism with open arms. Whether Yahweh, Zeus, Horace, or the great honorable bull testicle god, all of them are just different manifestations of the one same god!

Yeah. You know, when it gets right down to it, I don’t have any issue with the whole “god is everything”, bullshit, but, uh, to say the least, I think these concepts might be just a little *too* inclusive for most of the population’s tastes. They’re simply not palatable to their delicate tongue’s tender sensibilities, and they therefor much more prefer to perform oral worship on a single god head. Who am I to stop them?

But the concept of a universe is just so much better then a god, isn’t it? Yeah. It’s a better false substitution. The idea of the universe as a higher power is more soothing then the idea of a god as a higher power. This particular surrogate for the truth is just so much more secure and comforting. But in the end, it’s the same exercise. The idea that something ELSE in the field of perception is the responsible agent. In fact, most of this pantheism business just seems to be a matter of replacing the word “god” with the word “universe”, and calling this a new ideological position. Are you confused? Well, worry not! I will gladly give you a little taste, and bestow upon you three prime examples.

Quote:

“Never trust anyone completely but God. Love people, but put your full trust only in God.”

Lawrence Welk.

Nice. Which now becomes:

“Never trust anyone completely but the universe. Love people, but put your full trust only in the universe.”

Quote:

“Never lose an opportunity of seeing anything beautiful, for beauty is God’s handwriting.”

Ralph Waldo Emerson.

Sweet. But could also be stated:

“Never lose an opportunity of seeing anything beautiful, for beauty is the universe’s handwriting.”

Quote:

“Man has to start with something and then develop it - he cannot ever make anything from nothing, only God can do that, and call forth the creation.”

Margaret Weston.

Awesome. But let’s not overlook:

“Man has to start with something and then develop it - he cannot ever make anything from nothing, only the universe can do that, and call forth the creation.”

See how it works? Just about any dialogue about god could still hold water when replacing the word “god” with “the universe.” So it’s really not all that much of a novel position. It’s just a convenient one-size-fits-all philosophical cure-all. An ideological placebo. And I’m not one who is much impressed by Dues Ex philosophy, which is what any type of theology basically is, including pantheism.

For those of you not familiar with the term, “Dues Ex”, it is derived from the term “Dues Ex Machina”, a Greek phrase, which translated means, “a god from a machine”, and is usually employed as a literary device, wherein an explicitly complex seemingly intractable problem in a plot narrative is suddenly inexplicably solved by the addition of an unexpected character, object or situation. Think the eagles coming to save Frodo from uncertain doom in the fiery volcano of Mordor. Basically, it’s a cheap fast way to tie up the loose ends of a difficult quandary. It’s ideological laziness, and quite frankly, has no place in philosophy, in much the same way that theism has no place in philosophy.

And by the way, speaking of the “a god from the machine” thought experiment, it reminds me that, when it comes to gods and machines and ghosts and men, philosophers have gotten the whole thing all wrong all along. A god may emerge from a machine, but if it does, bear in mind that both the god and the machine are equally sourced from the pure mind. And this is the part people just can’t seem to understand. Though-out history, philosophers have always deeply contemplated the idea of “a ghost in the machine”, but that’s because most philosophers think they are a physical creature living in a physical environment. But it’s a huge lie. There is no ghost in the machine. What you actually have, is a machine in the ghost; as, there is no such thing as physicality, and a “deterministic mechanical universe”, is just an abstraction. What you call “physicality”, is a denser mental state; and to attribute this mind-space into an idea of objective locality is just plain falsehood. It’s just plain wrongheaded.

And it doesn’t matter if you include the “self”, as god, because this “self”, is still an attribution. The egoic character that you’ve associated an identity with, isn’t a self, so this is still in the same realm of falsehoods. Illusion is everything on the screen of perception; including the physical body, and all it’s supposed psycho-biological properties. Wherein is any universe?

So that’s pantheism; which, I’m not all that partial towards, due to it’s attributional psychology, which shares the same central backbone as orthodox religion. Why would it be any different with pantheism? The responsibility is still elsewhere, hence the power is elsewhere also; so it matters not that you’ve replaced an anthropological deity with celestial chemistry. Same excrement, different poop chute. And that’s the same reason why, that if a truth seeker were to take a purely scientific position considering the universe, it wouldn’t be all that much different then a theist or a pantheist viewpoint.

“How’s that?”

That’s right, Charlie. As previously stated, a purely cosmological scientific viewpoint; that is, the idea of the universe as some grand cosmic physical context of exterior space consisting of a mixture of different objects and chemistries, is just that: an idea. In other words, also completely full of shit. There is no “universe”, existing, anywhere. And that’s why, the universe doesn’t give it a shit about you. There’s no vibrating strings out there governing some law of attraction that brings forth metaphysical emergent properties when you energetically match a frequency. No. What you really have, is just an IDEA of a universe, which is not really located in a space-time continuum, but, only imagined as a location in a mind-space continuum.

If you can understand this basic fundamental, then you may have finally grasped one of the basic truths of reality.

[thereddeath2093-blog]

2020A_CW-210 personal blog post

DOOM

By Steven Bunch

                 I spend a lot of time thinking about doom. It’s a rather abstract concept to preoccupy oneself with, but still I find myself living a “doomed” life. I listen to doom metal, I watch movies and TV shows full of doomed people on doomed worlds, I fantasize about the doom of the planet and my own personal doom. It even gets so much more specific to the point of absurdity; my favorite rapper is MF DOOM, my favorite super villain is Dr. Doom, I even play DOOM the video game.

               Half of my time spent thinking about doom, is trying to understand what the word itself really means. What is doom? What does it mean to be doomed? This as you can imagine inspires all sorts of philosophical questions about life and death, fate and inevitability, as well as many others. For all my pondering, I can’t really come up with a solid answer or something definitive. Sure, I could go with a typical dictionary definition of the idea, but it is more than that to me. It encompasses too much to be summarized and completed in a single or simple string of sentences. It’s an aesthetic, an ideology, and a state of being to me, something transcendental unto itself.

               The aesthetics of Doom are easily recognized but much like the idea itself, abstract and difficult to definitively explain. There are rather obvious tropes and visual elements that appear in art and media that are representative of what I’m talking about; ruined buildings, smoke filled skies, destroyed cities, dead bodies, anything apocalyptic really. However, the idea is much deeper than that. A piece of art, or anything visual, that can inspire feelings of dread, despair, or hopelessness exemplify this aesthetic in its purest forms. This has a place in the greater sense of the word and the idea of Doom itself.

               The ideology of Doom, unlike a lot of ideologies, is not one that is readily “chosen” in the same way one might choose to be a democrat or one would take up the cause of conservation. This is a kind of mentality that people usually fall into, and more so often than they might realize. Unlike the aforementioned aesthetics, the ideology is easily explained and familiar to most people. While chiefly the mentality is signified by feelings of doom or feeling doomed, it is a little more complicated than that. A true ideology of doom comes when this mentality is reflected out into the world as a whole rather than the individual. More than a simple feeling of personal helplessness, an ideology of doom encompasses the whole of humanity, to see the entire human race as doomed. As you can imagine, this is not a particularly hot-take, especially these days. That being said, embracing this fact would be the key difference between someone who is merely cynical and someone who is waiting with baited breathe for the apocalypse. Which is essentially what I’m talking about.

               People would scarcely admit to themselves, and even more so to each other, that they want the world to end. But the fact of the matter is that most people on some level do. Being a “doomer” has even become a popular internet meme. You get a sense of this feeling anytime someone has a particularly fashionable doomsday prophecy or something like this virus breaks out. People talk about “what if this gets worse?” and “what if this is the ‘big one’?” and they do so in very practical sensible ways, but it’s not hard to see something under the practical nervous façade everyone displays. There’s a part of it that is exciting to everyone. There’s a little voice in every one’s head that says “well fuck, if the world ends, I don’t have to go to work on Monday”.

Now that might seem rather funny like a Sunday newspaper comic, but there’s something deep in the psychology of that mindset. People don’t want to have to go to work, but more than that, they don’t want to be expected to participate in the societal machine that makes people go to work and earn money. Part of being an adult is accepting and fulfilling obligations that are somewhat thrust upon you from outside regardless of how one feels about those particular obligations. People are to a degree forced to participate in a society that they don’t agree with, or at the very least, do not like their position in. An apocalypse frees the shit scrubber and the burger flipper to eat his boss and give a finger to the man free of any guilt of any financial or typical consequence. All of us have someone higher on us on the ladder we wouldn’t mind making a meal out of.

Naturally this all extends outside of working relationships and obligations, but to the far reaches of civilization as a whole. Every person from pauper to prince is well aware, that the “system” in place is not only incredibly flawed and corrupt, but also antithetical to the very human soul itself. Obvious injustices such as bigotry, war, poverty; as well as little things like traffic, wasted time, rudeness, all support the notion that something is wrong .“The system” as your local pothead would call it, isn’t designed to crush people into machines and thoughtless consuming automatons, but one can’t be faulted for believing it so, considering how often said system produces such hollow beings. One of the mindset of “Doom” recognizes that the easiest way for these things to change, if they can be changed, is to wipe the slate clean entirely.

                This is the point where most people will close this page because I’m starting to sound like a cultist of some kind. But, those people aren’t remiss to do so. This is the kind of mentality that leads people into cults. Nearly every cult is a “doomsday” cult of some kind. Even Christianity for all its pomp and circumstance, is hardly ever different. Some of the most colorful and interesting passages of the Bible come from the book of Revelations and the prophecy for the end of the world. That’s how natural this all is, how prevalent it is in the human psyche. We have always been waiting for the end of the world, because unlike most animals, we are very poignantly aware of our own mortality, and this awareness manifest itself in strange ways. The strangest of all being embracement.

               This leads to my final point about Doom itself as a state of being, the embracement of death. Now again, I’m not trying to get all death-cult on you, but there is something to be said for not only accepting one’s own mortality, but embracing it. The fact of the matter is, life sucks, and not just these days or in a particular circumstance. Life, on the whole, is a tragedy. We are born into fragile bodies against our will, bodies that will very slowly decay with us trapped inside them. We are born into families we do not choose, with people who do not know but are entrusted with our entire existence, and then as an adult expected to serve someone else entirely. We are expected to work and struggle and to get sick and to suffer until we are physically incapable anymore. And if you whine about it, there will always be someone to chime in and remind you that your particular suffering isn’t even close to the breadth of suffering humans can experience because “someone always has it worse”. This is a world where a good death is considered “getting old”, which is essentially just fermenting and rotting longer than anybody else.  

               To be “Doomed” in this sense is a recognition and rejection of fighting these things. If we are all going to die, then there can be no “good death”. All death is natural, all the world is transient, a passing image. Nothing, least of all people, last forever. You spend a lot more time dead than alive in the grand scheme of things, and in that, being dead is more of the default state. That’s not to say that this is a suicidal feeling at all. This isn’t some philosophy of suicide in so much as it is a philosophy of embracing the inevitable end of all things. Someone in the “doomed” state of being isn’t going to go out and seek the end of their own life, but they aren’t the kind of person to shy away from it either. They allow themselves to fall away and let go of life’s worries much more readily. There is a reason that coming to terms with one’s own mortality is a huge part of Zen and eastern spiritual learning.

Why would you shy away from death and doom if the world is a bag of ass and you’re going to die anyway?

               After many hours wasted thinking, I have come to the conclusion that this is where I draw my artistic inspiration from. All of my world view is painted with a funeral veil. I find myself obsessed with the aesthetics of doom because I constantly live in that state of being. I can’t help but feel a compulsion to drive this aesthetic as far as I can. I feel the innate urge to draw visions of monsters, destroyed cities, and the sky shredded by cosmic terror so naturally. I can’t help but express this feeling through my artwork. Something within me wants to say to people, or remind them; “hey, not only are things like suffering and death very real, but sometimes they are the only thing that is. They are inevitable and they shouldn’t not be cowered from, but embraced and mastered.”

Now, maybe I’m projecting too much. (I tried not to be too first person, oh well). Perhaps I’m just trying to explain my own morbid fascinations I can’t otherwise do so with. Maybe I’m just too edgy for my own good or it’s because I have a very strong belief in the afterlife. Though it’s not out of the realm of possibility that there’s just some people out there (myself chiefly included) who are just sort of depressing, death obsessed freaks. However, I gamble a stamp, that considering how many depressing death obsessed freaks are really out there in the world, that I’m not entirely off-base when I talk about these things being prevalent in the subconscious of the human race as a whole. I believe something deep in the human psyche craves a change, craves destruction to make way for something new. Something in each of us wants these things no matter the cost, something in each of us, craves Doom.

[lynchgirl90]

undefined

KYLE MACLACHLAN FLIRTS WITH THE DARKNESS  #TwinPeaks 

David Lynch's most reliable guide reveals that Twin Peaks will never end, because everything is Twin Peaks.

BY

TYLER COATES

SEP 3, 2017

I am standing outside the Soho House in Manhattan when I get a text from an unknown number. "Hey Tyler. Kyle here. I'm on the sixth floor at the end of the room. (Walk towards the light! 😆) See you soon."

KYLE MACLACHLAN JUST TEXTED ME.

I stand in place for a moment. I take a breath.

Kyle MacLachlan just texted me a joke and he used an emoji.

My reply, which takes entirely too much time to compose, is simply to tell him I'll see him upstairs soon. He writes back: "Cool 👍" And I immediately picture FBI Special Agent Dale Cooper, the character he played on Twin Peaks (and is playing—sort of—on Twin Peaks: The Return) giving an ecstatic thumbs-up on the original iteration of the series.

I'm aware that I'm slightly nervous as I walk through the sixth floor restaurant. Meeting a famous person is nerve-racking! And MacLachlan is a big deal in my brain, maybe because I've been consumed all summer with Twin Peaks: The Return, David Lynch's revival of his cult classic TV series on which MacLachlan starred in its two-season run from 1990 to 1991. Maybe it's because MacLachlan is, let's face it, a very handsome man. He's also less foreboding in person than on television. His hair is a little messy rather than perfectly combed in place and shellacked with pomade; the collar on his navy polo shirt slightly popped in a breezily unkempt manner, as if he's on a late-summer vacation. (He lives not far from here in Manhattan.)

And maybe my nervousness is why I immediately bring up Blue Velvet, his second movie ever, and his second collaboration with David Lynch. I mention that I saw the movie when I was 13 or 14, somehow convincing my dad to let me rent it. (My mother's theory: "He probably thought it was about Elizabeth Taylor and a horse.") That's when MacLachlan gives a slightly embarrassed laugh, and he says, "I bet that was...frightening?" There's an iconic scene in which he's completely nude and Isabella Rosselini, clutching a butcher knife, goes down on him after their characters first meet. So yes, I was possibly frightened. But I knew then—as I know now, having seen much of David Lynch's work, with and without MacLachlan—that it was something interesting, peculiar, scary, and absurd, and everyone involved was willing to take a major risk to fulfill this one guy's crazy artistic notions.

I settle in my seat, and I remember that I'm here to talk about David Lynch—and Twin Peaks—with the man who has been the face of those notions for many years. Lynch is big on avatars and doppelgangers, the nature of good and evil, and fucking around with our ideas of the American Dream and the horrors that exist just below the surface, hidden thanks to our willful ignorance. And he's put all of this into the world by telling a large, expansive story with MacLachlan's face—still handsome after all these years—at the forefront.

What's the allure of Kyle MacLachlan, anyway? There is the obvious handsomeness, an all-American look that the actor attributes to one feature in particular. "It's the chin," he says with a laugh. "It's hard to get away from that." But there's something about his personality, too, that offsets—and maybe works in tandem—with his looks. He has a kind sensibility, an inherent goofiness that makes one naturally comfortable around him. He seems to have heard this before, from people who have tried to describe him without being able to put their finger on it exactly. Back to his face, just for a second: MacLachlan tells me that it's got an edge to it, so he hears, that has served as a trademark of sorts. "There's something off—that's the thing," he says. "People would always tell me, 'Something about your face is a little bit off.'" (Writer Rich Cohen once described him, in an early '90s profile in Rolling Stone, as "the boy next door, if that boy spent lots of time alone in the basement.") Does he sweat the comments he's received about the indiscernible weirdness of his persona, his face? Not really. "Listen, if it gets me work, that's fine," he says.

Lynch gave MacLachlan his first big break: the starring role in Dune, the anticipated adaptation of Frank Herbert's celebrated sci-fi novel. Most young actors dream of landing such a role, playing the hero in a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster helmed by a buzzy director (Lynch's previous film, The Elephant Man, earned eight Oscar nominations). But Dune was a disaster—both on the production side and once it was released, flopping with critics and audiences alike. It was a hard first lesson for MacLachlan: Expectations could work against you, and it was important to be a practical actor, not to dwell on the losses, and to always keep an eye out for the next thing.

The next thing happened to come not long after, when Lynch came back to him with the script for Blue Velvet and offered him the role of the lead, Jeffrey Beaumont. Blue Velvet was the second big break—the real one, the one that propelled MacLachlan's career forward, and what solidified his connection to his director and friend.

"David is not Hollywood," MacLachlan explains. "My sense of it was that people didn't know what to do with me." He'd done the post-Dune audition rounds, and he wasn't finding other jobs landing in his lap. "Somebody does a movie that makes a zillion dollars, he plays the young hero, and producers can plug him into a million other things," he says. "The smart ones obviously build a construct. Not everyone has that ability."

Blue Velvet introduced a regular theme that Lynch has examined throughout his work since, which MacLachlan describes as "flirting with that dark soul, getting closer and closer to it until you're faced with the ultimate evil." Despite the film's brutality, it has a somewhat happy ending—suggesting that triumph over evil is possible. "Jeffrey barely escapes," MacLachlan says, "but he's changed forever."

With Jeffrey Beaumont, MacLachlan displayed full-on naïveté, playing a young man who realizes that the world in which he finds comfort is hiding sinister forces. His next major role, another created by David Lynch, would be a character who would find himself up against similarly dark factions—although this time of a supernatural quality.

MacLachlan admits that Twin Peaks was a bit of a fluke. The idea of David Lynch working in the realm of network television was absurd in itself. Blue Velvet, while earning Lynch his second Oscar nomination for Best Director, was met with a polarizing critical response. (Roger Ebert's review in particular was a scorcher, and he branded Lynch a misogynist for the way he "degraded" Rossellini on film.) His follow-up, Wild at Heart, which premiered at Cannes a month after Twin Peaks debuted on ABC, was met with equal parts enthusiasm and derision. (It won the Palme d'Or that year, even though the film was met with boos by the notoriously vocal film festival audience.)

Pairing up with writer Mark Frost, who had spent three years as a writer on NBC's police drama Hill Street Blues, Lynch broadened his idea of Americana—specifically, the darkness that lies beneath the surface of a quaint and seemingly wholesome small logging town in Washington—into a series. MacLachlan, bolstered by the critical success of Blue Velvet yet still reticent of how Lynch's next idea would play, didn't have high hopes. "It was completely unexpected that it would be anything more than a Movie of the Week," he tells me. "That's why a lot of us were on board: to watch David Lynch do this—and the anarchy that would reign down. Yeah, okay. Why not?"

But ABC executives loved the two-hour pilot, which introduced the murder of the beautiful homecoming queen Laura Palmer, the FBI agent who was summoned to solve her murder, and the various cast of characters who may very well have had something to do with the crime. "Suddenly we were doing it," MacLachlan says. "They called our bluff and bought the show."

Twin Peaks was a bonafide phenomenon, and its first season—consisting of the pilot and seven subsequent episodes—was a massive hit over the course of its eight-week run in the spring of 1990. Not only did it reunite MacLachlan with the director who introduced him to movie audiences, but it assembled a large ensemble cast of familiar and fresh faces.

The show was a mixture of television neo-noir and classic nighttime soap, but with a certain quirkiness that grabbed the attention of television audiences. There was a central murder mystery plot, yes, but there was also romantic intrigue, whispered secrets, a woman who communicated with a log. It often depicted its protagonist dreaming of a mysterious room, decorated with red drapes and a black-and-white chevron-patterned floor and populated by the kind of grotesque characters straight out of a Flannery O'Connor short story. It blended Lynch's dry humor and his absurdist non-sequiturs with the themes he began exploring in Blue Velvet—but with an entirely new style that filmmakers would spend years trying to replicate.

Laura Palmer's murder was solved in the early part of the second season—she had been raped and killed by her father, Leland, while he was under the influence of a demonic presence known as BOB—and the show began to shift into an unwieldy procedural drama. MacLachlan is honest about the missteps of the show's middling second season.

"I thought the first seven episodes [in Season One] were brilliant," he admits. "We had gone on a crazy tangent [in Season Two], and they were trying to pull it back. But it had already drifted too far off."

The series ended with a massive cliffhanger in a final episode directed by Lynch. Cooper, who had a new love interest in Heather Graham's Annie Blackburn, attempts to save her from an ex-FBI agent who has committed his life to terrorizing Cooper's. The pursuit finds him entering the mysterious red room of his dream through a portal in the woods; caught in what is known as the Black Lodge, he comes face to face with his mortal enemy as well as the evil that is holding the town hostage: BOB himself. BOB overtakes Cooper, creating a doppelganger of our hero and entering our world in disguise—leaving Cooper trapped in this impeccably decorated limbo.

Once again: disappointment. As with Dune, MacLachlan took it in stride. After all, Twin Peaks had earned him two Emmy nominations and a Golden Globe. He had had a steady job and got to work again with Lynch to craft a great role—arguably, in hindsight, the most vital of his career. "There was certainly a disappointment when it was cancelled," he tells me. "But I said to myself, 'Well, that's done. Time to find the next thing.'"

Two things propel actors: Getting work that pays enough to stay afloat between jobs, and finding work that's compelling and challenging—roles that don't leave you typecast and stuck playing the same character over and over again.

Of course, MacLachlan did play Dale Cooper again in Lynch's big-screen prequel to the series, Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me, which was released a year after the show's cancellation. MacLachlan initially passed on playing Cooper again so soon after the show ended, although he eventually joined the production. But his role was small, and the absence of many other Twin Peaks regulars (and its bleak, darker tone) was off-putting for fans. The film was not a commercial success, and the critical response was mixed.

MacLachlan—who tells me that he had to find "a construct" for himself, a certain kind of figure he could play with slight variation—took a few odd roles in the '90s. There are a couple of forgettable indie movies on his résumé, plus Oliver Stone's The Doors, in which he played keyboardist Ray Manzarek. In what would be one of the biggest box-office successes of his career (that is until he leant his voice for a small role in the Pixar film Inside Out), he played Cliff Vandercave in The Flintstones, an insanely successful movie (it earned over $300 million worldwide) that feels like a lost '90s relic. (Do you remember anything about The Flintstones, other than it happened? I saw it twice, and I mostly just remember MacLachlan's biceps.) Yet he still proved he could play a different type: the sexy antagonist—even if that chance involved wearing a sleeveless double-breasted suit and playing the foil to John Goodman's Fred Flintstone.

But that led to his next role in what would be another infamous moment in modern film history: Paul Verhoeven's Showgirls, one of the most notorious movies of all time and the first big-budget NC-17-rated film to get a wide release. MacLachlan has been vocal about how he feels about the film. (He told Esquireearlier this year, "What did I learn from Showgirls? I learned what not to do!") Naturally, he chuckles when I even bring it up. (It's an inevitable topic of conversation. You can't not mention Showgirls in the presence of Kyle MacLachlan.) And he's honest with me about why he took the role. "It was a deliberate attempt to change things up a bit," he says. "All actors do that to varying degrees of success and failure. And, to be honest, I was a big fan of Paul Verhoeven, so I thought, 'Well, this could be fun.' I just happened to pick the wrong one." (Every gay man I know would suggest otherwise, but hey: Everybody's a critic.)

Once again, MacLachlan's career took another oddball turn. But these moments were still high-profile; he was still on the radar. And his early work with David Lynch continued to cast a welcome shadow over him as an actor, particularly as those who appreciated and found influence in Blue Velvet and Twin Peaks began to rise in the Hollywood ranks themselves. At least that's MacLachlan's theory for his three major television roles of the last two decades: Trey MacDougal, the impotent Upper East Side mama's boy who served as a frustrating love interest to Charlotte on Sex and the City; Orson Hodge, a devious dentist on Desperate Housewives; and the Mayor of Portland on Fred Armisen and Carrie Brownstein's hipster satire Portlandia, who could very well be Dale Cooper if he had gone into local politics instead of the Black Lodge.

"These things came to me because of my work with David," MacLachlan says. "Not because they were looking at the roles and saying, 'Oh, he'd be perfect for that.' The creators were people who had in some way been inspired by David, or affected somehow."

Two decades after Twin Peaks, as the show's cult following only grew larger and larger and its influence became more overt as dark, quirky mystery shows about the dangers hidden out of sight in small-town America became more and more popular, MacLachlan couldn't shake the series from his head. He and Lynch remained good friends, and Twin Peaks was often a topic of conversation when they saw each other. "Over the years, we'd get together and sit, chat, have coffee, catch up," MacLachlan tells me. "Occasionally I would bring up the idea of Twin Peaks. I recognized for me, selfishly, it was a great character, a great period of time. I was hungry to revisit that and to have the experience of working with David again."

"OCCASIONALLY I WOULD BRING UP THE IDEA OF TWIN PEAKS. I WAS HUNGRY TO REVISIT THAT AND TO HAVE THE EXPERIENCE OF WORKING WITH DAVID AGAIN."

Years later, Lynch called MacLachlan on the phone, and his tone was markedly more assertive than normal. "I need to talk to you," Lynch said to him, "but I can't do it over the phone." The two met in New York, and Lynch delivered the news: He and Mark Frost had figured a way back into the world of Twin Peaks. Was MacLachlan interested in joining them? "We've talked about this, David," MacLachlan recalls saying. "But if you need to hear it from me: Yes, I'm in." Nothing was settled yet. Scripts hadn't been written. A precarious deal with Showtime was in the works, and there were stops and starts, which naturally worried MacLachlan. But eventually everything fell into place, Lynch and Frost and MacLachlan signed their deals, members of the cast were coming back, along with some new familiar faces. The network handed the keys over to Lynch to direct a whopping 18 episodes. It was official: Twin Peaks was returning to TV.

Let's rock.

Where the hell do I begin with Twin Peaks: The Return? For one thing, as I write this, I still haven't finished it; Showtime is keeping a close guard on the final two episodes that make up its grand finale, and the network didn't provide journalists screeners throughout the season. Perhaps that's part of why it's been so fun to watch: Not only is every episode completely unexpected, with most of the theories surrounding its complex and meandering plot as indecipherable as the show itself, but no one is getting an early look at this show. We all have to wait to see what David Lynch has in store for us precisely when he's ready to give it away.

I'm chatting with MacLachlan on the Monday afternoon following the 16th episode of the series—the one in which Agent Cooper finally comes out of the catatonic state in which he's been trapped for a very long time (15-plus hours for us, but much longer for him). Before that, he was trapped in the body of Dougie Jones, a Cooper doppelganger who lives in Las Vegas, sells insurance, and presumably has a gambling problem; most of his biography before the events of the season begins is provided by his wife, Janey-E, through one of her regular screaming sessions leveled at her dim man-child of a husband. (Naomi Watts, playing Janey-E, is a master at the David Lynch monologue.) How he got into Dougie Jones is still sort of a complicated mystery. Some people have their ideas of how it works, but for me, well… I've simply watched the show and kept myself from asking too many questions for the sake of my own sanity. I've simply enjoyed the long, twisted ride.

MacLachlan hasn't seen the final two episodes, either, although he knows what happens. From the beginning, he was in possession of what he calls The Bible. "After a little bit of cajoling, they let me have the script," he admits to me, "as long as I absolutely swore never to show anyone." (He keeps that promise with me, despite any effort I make to milk a secret or two out of him. "We all felt an obligation, really," he says. "We wanted to protect this thing so that people could experience it in the proper sequence.")

The world of the new Twin Peaks is massive. It expands beyond the borders of the small Washington town, with scenes taking place in Manhattan, Las Vegas, South Dakota, New Mexico in 1945, and in the Black Lodge. And while it brings with it a return of many of the beloved characters from the original series (with a few noted exceptions), it also introduces a wide variety of new characters in those far-flung locations. It is perhaps the most impressive cast of actors on television in recent history, and that doesn't include the musical guest that shows up every week at the Bang Bang Bar. (Whoever is booking for the Roadhouse is doing one hell of a job.)

"WE ALL FELT AN OBLIGATION, REALLY. WE WANTED TO PROTECT THIS THING SO THAT PEOPLE COULD EXPERIENCE IT IN THE PROPER SEQUENCE."

MacLachlan asked for the complete script almost out of a necessity to understand where his role fit within the larger story. Well, I should say "roles," because at this point he's playing three: there's Special Agent Dale Cooper, trapped in the Black Lodge for 25 years and then released into the world once again; Dougie Jones, the aforementioned dummy who's learning about the world almost like a child (or maybe he's actually Cooper, trying to remember who he actually is); and then there's Mr. C, the Cooper doppelganger who left the Black Lodge behind in 1991 at the end of the original series.

As much as the rest of us wondered how the residents of Twin Peaks would look and act after a 25-year hiatus, MacLachlan himself wondered how to get back into the role of Agent Cooper. But first he had to tackle the two opposite poles of Dougie and Mr. C. For Dougie, he looked to Peter Sellers for inspiration, also remembering Jeff Bridges's performance in Starman; for Mr. C, he thought of Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men. Dougie, he admits, was the easier role to take on, while Mr. C was much tougher.

"It's hard for me to play that," he admits. "I can do it, of course, but I don't know if I really want to."

I bring up the moment when Mr. C murders his son, Richard Horne, steering him on top of a rock formation and watching as he is electrocuted. Mr. C shows no sign of empathy—that's in his nature, of course. But it was hard for MacLachlan to pull off. "Of all the things David had me do, that was the worst. But it's true to the character. As an actor, I want to show some humanity. It's so hard to be absolute." I can tell, through the calm and measured quality of the good-natured man who sits before me, that diving into the depths of his own potential dark side was no easy mission. He had to find that humanity within his director, who he says went along with him on both Dougie and Mr. C's journey. "David almost embodies the qualities of the characters," he says. "I can see it in his face. With Dougie, there's a certain energy. When I'm Mr. C, it's dark and he's in another place. It gave me the confidence to carry the character to its fulfillment."

He tells me another difficult task was to act as Mr. C with David Lynch as his character, FBI Deputy Director Gordon Cole. "I didn't like it at all," he says, definitively, and with a look of deep concern. It suggests that MacLachlan felt uneasy breaking out of the kind of figure that Lynch has pushed him to play so many times: the innocent who flirts with danger but ultimately controls it. Dougie, in a way, was his own release from that darkness: all joy and absurdity. When I ask him about his favorite scenes, MacLachlan immediately sports a big Dougie Jones smile. His sex scene with Naomi Watts comes to mind, and he imitates the look of perplexed ecstasy on Dougie's face as he sleeps with his wife. He flails his arms about a bit, not noticing that he's drawing some attention from some of the people sitting near us in the restaurant. But I suppose when you've taken the leaps that he has—flirting with the darkness that David Lynch has created, or even doing something so bold as acting in a sex scene in front of a film crew—you lose some of your inhibitions fairly easily. I'm much less nervous around MacLachlan by now, and much more impressed with the confidence he exudes, something he's learned from the fearlessness that his job requires.

MacLachlan knows Twin Peaks: The Return isn't for everybody. He knew this as soon as he saw the script, realizing that fans of the original show might not embrace the revival with as much enthusiasm. I suggest that there are two different kinds of people: Twin Peaksfans and David Lynch fans. "Twin Peaks: The Return is for the David Lynch fans," I say, and MacLachlan nods.

"It was going to be the Lynch fans who would have the most fun," MacLachlan says. "That was obvious to me as we were traveling on that journey. It was going to be darker, visceral, and have the same kind of surreal elements that David loves to mix in with the ingredients. Who's to say how the Twin Peaks fan base and the David Lynch fan base would find common ground? David Lynch fans were in for it the entire way, and the Twin Peaks fans who made the leap might find something special, too."

As one of David Lynch's regular players, MacLachlan has learned not to parse the material for meaning—just as he's learned not to demand too much explanation from his director. This, he admits, he learned the hard way. "On Dune, I was rabid. I drove David to madness," he says. "And finally he closed the door on me." He offers no detailed analysis of what has transpired over the show's 16 episodes so far, and I get the sense that my intuition—to focus less on the meaning and more on the form—is the best way to experience it.

Instead, he accepts that there's a purpose to everything he's done, simply because Lynch has created it. He offers an explanation for the director's working relationship with Mark Frost, who is certainly more grounded in his craft. "Mark is the kind of writer who says there needs to be reason and process," he explains. Lynch, on the other hand, pays closer attention to theme and ideas—particularly where evil comes from, how it corrupts innocent men and women as it spreads like a virus, and where to put it in order to keep it contained. "I don't think David feels compelled to resolve everything by any means, maybe because of the idea that it's ongoing and we'll pick it back up if we have to," he says, pointing to the differences in the way Lynch and Frost attack the material. "Maybe that's why they get together once every 25 years," he laughs.

At the end of the day, the return of Twin Peaks is almost enough of a treat for MacLachlan as much as, I'd suggest, the people who are tuning in each week. "It's like a weird high school reunion," he says, and I think that the people who either watched it when it first aired or throughout the years on DVD or streaming on Netflix might say the same thing.

"I DON'T THINK DAVID FEELS COMPELLED TO RESOLVE EVERYTHING BY ANY MEANS, MAYBE BECAUSE OF THE IDEA THAT IT'S ONGOING AND WE'LL PICK IT BACK UP IF WE HAVE TO."

Working with Lynch again has been a delight, MacLachlan says, as has acting for the first time with fellow Lynch muse Naomi Watts. And, naturally, he speaks with visible exuberance about seeing Laura Dern on set again 30 years after they starred in Blue Velvet together. Dern plays Diane, the previously unseen assistant to Agent Cooper who would receive his daily briefings in the original series; she steals every scene with a sharp, bitter tongue and a platinum blonde bob wig. "Laura and I have traveled this road together a long time," MacLachlan says. "We love David very much, and we get a real kick out of each other."

But seeing Dern interact with Lynch, who directed her in Wild at Heart and Inland Empire, showed MacLachlan a different side to his friend and director. "They tease each other a lot—David and I don't really tease each other!" he laughs. "I mean, we get along, we have fun, we have a laugh. But I never felt thatcomfortable, you know? I wondered, how does she do that?" MacLachlan says that he and Dern aren't unlike siblings, realizing that their individual relationships to their father is surprisingly different.

Ultimately, MacLachlan is grateful for the opportunity to play this character again, and he's grateful for the fans for keeping the spirit of Twin Peaks alive. ("I think the fans played a big part of this," he says of the revival.) He feels like he's a part of something bigger, a piece of moving art that is ripe for interpretation and inspiration as much as it is entertaining. And, as always, he guides me to understanding how it falls within David Lynch's worldview, as well: "David tells me, 'Everything is Twin Peaks. It's all Twin Peaks,'" he says. "These stories continue—that's the whole thing. Everybody kept living and going on and doing their thing. It never stopped. Now we're picking it up again, 25 years later. Who knows if we'll pick them up again down the road, I don't know."

Before I'm even able to ask the final question—either because he knows it's coming, or simply because his answer is so obvious for him—he gives a sly smile when he responds.

"Would you do it again, down the road?"

"Oh, yes. In a minute."

Link (KM)

[libertariantaoist]

Since FBI Director James Comey has become a kind of arbiter of the political  discourse – to say his pronouncements have been decisive would not, I think,  be an overstatement – his  appearance before the Senate Intelligence Committee was much anticipated.  As Hillary Clinton and her supporters continue to re-litigate  the presidential election, blaming him for her defeat, how he would defend his  decision to reveal that the FBI was investigating her private email server,  and the possible unauthorized release of classified information, was the focus  of much interest. And yet the really interesting aspects of his testimony had  to do with two questions that, in a free society, would not normally be the  domain of law enforcement: 1) What should be the nature of our relations with  a foreign country, i.e. Russia? And 2) what is a legitimate journalistic enterprise?

The first question belongs in the realm of the State Department, the White  House, and Congress: that is, unless having any sort of non-hostile relations  with Russia have now become illegal. Given the current political atmosphere,  one might well conclude that this is now the case, and that was certainly the  tone of the questioning – and Comey’s answers – at the hearing. Leave it to  Lindsey Graham to gin up a veritable orgy of Russia-bashing: after a series  of questions about the investigation into alleged Russian “interference” in  the election, he asked:

“GRAHAM: So what kind of threat do you believe Russia presents to our democratic  process, given what you know about Russia’s behavior of late?

“COMEY: Well, certainly in my view, the greatest threat of any nation on  earth, given their intention and their capability.

“GRAHAM: Do you agree that they did not change the actual vote tally, but  one day they might?

On this last, Comey seemed to demur, but that such a question could even be  asked unaccompanied by a chorus of laughter highlights the utter absurdity of  the discourse in Washington. The very idea that any nation, anywhere on earth,  represents a dire threat to our democratic process is itself absurd. After all,  are Russian armies poised at the Canadian border, ready to take New York? To  listen to our solons, assembled in solemn conclave, one would think it was the  KGB, and not al-Qaeda, that blew up the World Trade Center and attacked the  Pentagon on 9/11.

This nonsensical Russophobia – like the Red Scare before it – is meant to distract  us from the real threat to our democratic process – which comes, not from any  foreign enemy, but originates right here at home, with Washington at its epicenter.

This was brought home later in the hearing, when Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Nebraska),  brought up the question of WikiLeaks. Taking up where Sen. Graham left off,  Sasse asked if we might expect the alleged Russian invasion of our politics  to intensify, and Comey obliged him by answering in the affirmative – “especially”  in 2020. The questioning continued along these same lines:

“SASSE: Do you believe any of WikiLeaks disclosures have endangered American  lives and or put at risk American interests?

“COMEY: I believe both have been the result of some of their releases.”

It’s  a lie that WikiLeaks releases have led to the death or endangerment of a  single American anywhere:  if it has, then why didn’t Comey name the victims and the circumstances? As  for endangering “American interests,” the question of whether these are advanced  by maintaining a worldwide regime of surveillance and repression is not something  either Sen. Saase or Comey are prepared to address, and with good reason. The  Senator from Nebraska, who seems to represent the interests of a certain fortress  in Langley, Virginia, more than he does the people of his own state, was eager  to know what we were doing about prosecuting the founder of WikiLeaks:

“SASSE: Can you help me understand why Julian Assange has not been charged  with a crime?

“COMEY: Well I don’t want to comment on the particular case, because I don’t  want to confirm whether or not there are charges pending. He hasn’t been apprehended  because he’s inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London.”

The FBI Director, in answer to Sasse’s worry that Assange is not being pursued  with sufficient vigor, rushed to reassure him:

“COMEY: I don’t know where you got that impression, but WikiLeaks is a important  focus of our attention.

“SASSE: I intentionally left the almost half of my time for you to sort  of wax broadly for a minute. There is room for reasonable people to disagree  about at what point an allegedly journalistic organization crosses a line to  become some sort of a tool of foreign intelligence. There are Americans, well-meaning,  thoughtful people who think that WikiLeaks might just be a journalistic outfit.  Can you explain why that is not your view?

“COMEY: Yes and again, I want to be careful that I don’t prejudice any future  proceeding. It’s an important question, because all of us care deeply about  the First Amendment and the ability of a free press, to get information about  our work and  –  and publish it.

“To my mind, it crosses a line when it moves from being about trying to  educate a public and instead just becomes about intelligence porn, frankly.  Just pushing out information about sources and methods without regard to interest,  without regard to the First Amendment values that normally underlie press reporting.  And simply becomes a conduit for the Russian intelligence services or some other  adversary of the United States just to push out information to damage the United  States. And I realize, reasonable people as you said, struggle to draw a line.

“But surely, there’s conduct that so far, to the side of that line that  we can all agree there’s nothing that even smells journalist about some of this  conduct.”

That our interpretation of the First Amendment is now dependent on the olfactory  sensibilities of the FBI Director highlights the fact that the real danger to  our republic isn’t in Moscow, but right here in the good old United States of  America. If the WikiLeaks revelations – that our government is systematically  engaged in spying on us, and is involved in any number of foreign operations  that violate our alleged values and even cross the line into illegality – is  “intelligence porn,” then so were the Pentagon Papers.  According to Comey’s logic, Daniel Ellsberg should’ve been prosecuted and convicted  for revealing the truth about the Vietnam war to the American people.

Sasse didn’t bring up the Ellsberg case, however he did try to get Comey to  distinguish between what we consider legitimate journalism and, in effect, what  the FBI Director considers to be espionage:

“SASSE: So I want to hear this part one more time and I know that the chairman  has indulged me, I’m  –  I’m at and past time. But the American journalist who’s  seeking this information differs from Assange and WikiLeaks how?

“COMEY: In that, there’s at least a portion and people can argue that maybe  this conduct WikiLeaks has engaged in, in the past that’s closer to regular  newsgathering. But in my view, a huge portion of WikiLeaks’s activities has  nothing to do with legitimate newsgathering, informing the public, commenting  on important public controversies, but is simply about releasing classified  information to damage the United States of America. And  –  and  –  and people  sometimes get cynical about journalists.

“American journalists do not do that. They will almost always call us before  they publish classified information and say, is there anything about this that’s  going to put lives in danger, that’s going to jeopardize government people,  military people or  –  or innocent civilians anywhere in the world.

“And then work with us to try and accomplish their important First Amendment  goals while safeguarding those interests. This activity I’m talking about, WikiLeaks,  involves no such considerations whatsoever. It’s what I said to intelligence  porn, just push it out in order to damage.”

So let’s parse this. According to Comey, the distinction between WikiLeaks,  and, say, the Washington Post – which has been publishing leaked information  from its friends in the intelligence agencies in order to smear the President  as a tool of the Kremlin – is that the latter “will almost always call us before  they publish.” What this means is that Comey and company can leak whatever they  want – but anything not approved by them in advance amounts to espionage. The  leaking of the fact that former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn was  in contact with the Russian ambassador prior to the election, and the releasing  of the contents of a transcript of those calls to the media – that’s just fine  and dandy. But Julian Assange publishing a video of a US military helicopter  mowing down a van full of journalists, or revealing the fact that the Democratic  National Committee actively sabotaged the Bernie Sanders campaign, is a “crime.”

In all fairness, Comey did say that the leakers are the criminals, and the  publishers are not to be prosecuted – unless, of course, they’re WikiLeaks.  Yet I don’t see that there’s any effort to go after, let alone prosecute, those  who leaked the Flynn transcripts – Comey won’t confirm that there’s even an  investigation underway – probably because some of them are within his own office.

This episode ought to scare the daylights out of anyone who is genuinely concerned  about the survival of democracy in America. Comey’s prominence, his growing  visibility in the conduct of our politics, is in itself a symptom of the danger:  for now we have the chief law enforcement officer acting as the arbiter of who  is and who is not a journalist. That he is now taking center stage in our political  drama is indicative of the fact that we are living in a police state.

This is the logical consequence of our all-pervasive all-seeing all-knowing  “intelligence-gathering” apparatus, which peers into our computers, our phones,  and every aspect of our lives.

If knowledge is power, then Comey and the heads of our various intelligence  agencies, are all-powerful. Forget the alleged Russian “meddling” in the last  election – Comey had far more of an effect than did Julian Assange, as even  Mrs. Clinton implicitly avers.

This is where we are in the year 2017:  the accouterments of democracy are  falling away, like the remnants of a chrysalis. What is emerging is a creature  that bears no resemblance to anything the Founders intended, although they did  warn against its appearance. James Madison, the father of the Constitution,  foresaw  the incubus that would possess us if we failed to guard against it:

“Of all the enemies to public liberty war  is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ  of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes;  and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the  many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of  the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and  emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added  to those of subduing the force, of the people…. [There is also an] inequality  of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war,  and … degeneracy of manners and of morals…. No nation could preserve its freedom  in the midst of continual warfare.”

We have been in a state of continual warfare  since September 11, 2001, and Madison’s warning against the dangers of militarism  is surely more relevant today than ever before in our history. For the apparatus  of universal surveillance that has invested people like Comey with such inordinate  power was born in and is sustained by this state of perpetual warfare.

The framers of the Constitution, fearful of  the specter of militarism, added to that document a Third Amendment, which says  that “no Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without  the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed  by law.” And yet, thanks to the machinations of the War Party, we are at war,  and will no doubt be in that condition for the foreseeable future. So the Third  Amendment is no protection against the Comeys of this world, who have stationed  their soldiers in our homes – in our computers, our phones, even in our television  sets!

None of this will change until and unless our  foreign policy of perpetual war is abandoned: that is, until and unless the  Empire is finally overthrown. Only then can our old Republic be restored.

I fight for that day, and I live for it.

[haroldgross]

New Post has been published on Harold Gross: The 5a.m. Critic

New Post has been published on http://literaryends.com/hgblog/mcu-from-the-beginning-and-before-the-ending/

MCU: From the Beginning and Before the Ending

In prep for Avengers: Infinity War, I decided to rewatch the entire sequence from its 2008 beginnings. Why? Well, first: Why not? This audacious sequence of films has pulled off something no one has even come close to producing, except Lord of the Rings. During the course of 18 films over 10 years Marvel has woven a story together with the goal of paying it off in film 19. They found great actors to tell great stories about flawed heroes; heroes we recognized ourselves in.

And with the exception of one of those films, they were all solid and well done. And the one that wasn’t so great, well, it still has my respect because unlike Sony’s flailing at the Spidey universe, it woke them up to the fact that they had to produce quality if they wanted to succeed. They never stumbled again, though certainly the movies had differing impacts and approaches. And the clues and nods are just incredible to see when you know everything that is to come. As we get ready to leave the Joss Whedon era, who really set the template for this cycle, you have to wonder if anyone would have the guts and talent to try this again.

If you want to rewatch it all yourself, do it over at least three weeks. I squeezed this into less than two weeks at two or three films a day. Fun, but exhausting.

So here we go, in brief, through the dots that brought us here.

Phase One (though we didn’t know for sure that until Thor)

Iron Man is still a surprisingly effective movie. My original write-up is lost, but I still am amazed at how it subverted the comic genre on screen by being a real movie. We got to know and care about Tony Stark, despite his ego, or perhaps because of it. He was flawed but engaging. The world was believable and intriguing. It had humor and action and, above all, a really good script and acting. This wasn’t done with a nod and a wink, it was done to do it well and it showed, launching the huge franchise we are celebrating this year. Sure, the ending was a bit overblown and the villain a bit too teeth-gnashy, but the series would learn as it went along.

The Incredible Hulk is already a second bite at the apple at this character (third if you include Bixby’s series), but it does an interesting job of not disavowing Ang Lee and Eric Bana’s take by bridging from it to the this new version during the credits. It is substantially more comic book style than Iron Man and still struggles with its villains and finale. However, it is an important piece in the Avengers puzzle. It introduces the Super Soldier program, something lost on me till now, and it provides an important pivot for David Banner. This more morose and pouty Hulk has to leave his past behind and accept who he is to become the Ruffalo version.  Sure that comment is a bit revisionist, but you get to do that when you see it after knowing where it will go. It isn’t a great film, but it continued the character-driven approach Marvel wanted and gave us hope they had some real sense of what they had…the tag with Tony and the General sealed the deal on it.

We all would like to forget that Iron Man 2 existed. It was rushed to screen and just doesn’t have the same polish as what had come before. But it is easy to forget that it also introduced Black Widow, got Pepper and Tony together, shifted Tony’s attitude, queued up Captain America with a couple nods, and continued Phil Coulson’s involvement. Having watched this the day after Rampage, however, I can confidently point out that while it may be just an action flick, it is still better than most of the similar tripe being produced even if it isn’t up to the MCU standards by any stretch. However, it also put the fear of god into Disney/Marvel/Kevin Feige. They never tried for a pure money grab again, knowing that they had to meet the expectations of their audience or risk losing it all. Here we are almost 19 films later because they learned their lesson.

Thor is where the MCU really started to hit its stride, understanding what they had and where they intended to go. It is the first 3D. It is the first to push the comedy throughout. It introduced the first Infinity Stone. And it tagged the end with a mention of The Avengers. Thor was always the one hero that worried me because it was off-realm gods and magic. How do you make that mainstream and believable next to human heroes (even if they’ve been mutated huge and green)? But they did it, and managed to launch Brannagh’s career as a director of huge films to boot. They also took an existing god and gave him an origin story by making him mortal-ish for a good part of the film. Its one misstep, though it worked for the story, was Portman’s Jane, who they had to disappear to keep things going in subsequent films.

Captain America: The First Avenger. Hail Hydra! Where Thor had nailed the stride of the humor, Cap nailed the format of the MCU journey. The movie had its own style, reflective of its time period,ss and set up everything that was to come through Civil War (and a couple of TV spin offs as well). Despite the CG of Rogers never looking quite right at the beginning, it was still an effective and smart choice. And the ending manages to give us both action and pathos in a way that made it a great story as well as a solid action flick.

Marvel’s The Avengers redefined the term “big” when it came to films. Its non-stop action and coalescing storyline still amaze. It is full of character and some of the best moments yet to grace the series (then and now: Puny God!). It is the first taste of what Joss and Feige had planned for a much bigger feast and it certainly whet the appetite and proved they could pull off something no one else had even tried. And damn if they didn’t get you to feel the passing(ish) of a minor character with a great scene. Oh, and of course our first glimpse of Thanos.

Phase Two

Pivoting into Phase Two, Iron Man 3 kicked off a sequence that could best be termed: Consequences. Unexpectedly, if sometimes ham-handidly, it took on some serious matters like PTSD. It did so with humor and action, though it went a little off the rails in its blithe quippiness, Christmas theme, and kids. We know this world now, and with IR3 and Phase 2 , we’re getting a new sense of the characters, watching necessary doubt creep in this middle stretch of the sequence. It wasn’t what a lot of folks wanted, but it was fascinating and, again, necessary to build the platform that eventually becomes Ultron and Civil War. And, despite any of its weaknesses, it still is incredibly entertaining and rewatchable.

Thor: The Dark World has an odd flavor of political intrigue, but intrigue that has been in motion for quite a while. It also introduces the next Infinity Stone, but you could blink and miss that aspect if you didn’t know what you were looking for. In retrospect it is clear and sets up the Collector as well, who has his own role to play. It is full of humor and action, and it does advance some of the characters, but it feels a bit outside the Phase in some ways.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier takes a huge and brave leap for such a big sequence. It irrevocably changes the face and structure of the world, setting up Phase Three as well as impacting the spin-off series. Certainly there is a lot of character work here shimmed in between the action, and new characters who will continue forward. And, if you needed any other sense of how far ahead the crew plan, we also get our first mention of Doctor Strange in a throwaway interrogation…a hint that wouldn’t pay off for another five movies.

And now for something completely different, Guardians of the Galaxy. This romp, while still very much in the MCU, was a welcome break from what we knew and a huge expansion of characters to play with. Yes, it is a bit silly at times, especially how quickly the Guardians all bond, but the humor is fun and the action is great. There really is something for everyone in this branch of the universe, as well as laying out the mysteries to grow on and our first real interaction with an Infinity Stone.

All damaged characters, enter here: Avengers: Age of Ultron. This marked the end of the Joss Whedon era, and perhaps not on quite as high a note as he would have wanted. This story rewatches better than it played initially, though. It is a very psychologically complex tale with a lot of layered construction and cultural nods. It also has the trademark Whedon dialogue throughout, and the brilliant choice of Spader as Ultron. Also, this is the first direct mention of Wakanda and the tee-up for Black Panther. When you realize that this is the culmination of 10 previous films and the setup for the next eight (or 11 if you go through the full Phase Three sequence), the threads Whedon wove, and the guidance to get there, is going to be tough to match. Also, it’s worth noting that they were again willing to take the risk of pivoting to new characters and big changes, with more yet to come to keep it both fresh and, let’s face it, affordable.

Ant-Man gets a little absurd, admittedly, but maintains the connections and thread of the universe. And it’s a universe that can sustain a lot of different styles. That alone is something of note. Each movie, or perhaps better considered, each character has a particular sensibility that shapes the movies they are in. Be it the earnestness of Capt. America or the nuttiness of the Guardians or the comic book silliness of Ant-Man, each style supports the sense of the stories they are in. Ant-Man is fun and amusing, and uses its tech relatively well…at least within the confines of a PG rated film. That said, Ant-Man is the movie that feels the most out of place in the collection so far, even more than Guardians. I think that is because it is such a familiar world, but the action and dialogue are very broad in comparison.

Phase Three

Where Ultron showed the cracks in the friendships and group, in Captain America: Civil War it all goes to hell, launching the third phase through a moment of crisis and uncertainty. This installment is really more like Avengers 3 than a Captain America, but the schism formed here will surely come back to roost in a few films. For now, however, it serves more to break up the gang, redeem Bucky, and launch Black Panther. It is also the first of the films to show real fallout from the carnage that the heroes inflict upon the world trying to save it. The world’s reaction is eerily apropos current politics as well.

Forgetting that the medical scenes in Doctor Strange were just, well, absurd, the rest of it was really pretty fun visually, in action, and dialogue. Where else could a cape become a character? And while it feels rather on its own in the universe for most of the tale, other than some throw-away side comments, by the end it is solidly ensconced in the larger tale leaving only a single Infinity Stone unaccounted for.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 tries a bit too hard to be bigger and better than its first iteration. The fact that is has the highest number of tags at the end of the film is symptomatic of that as well. However, some questions get answered, some necessary information was layered in, and the action is huge. Fortunately, the humor continues unabated as well. As romps go, it was a hoot, if not as unexpected now that we’ve seen these characters and have a sense of them. It does cement the Guardians as a self-selected family and has given them a purpose that will aim them squarely at Infinity War, even if some of the moments were a little forced. Also, the two Guardian movies make the best use of 3D in the MCU (at least so far). Or at least make the most conscious use of it. They do have an advantage being in space and all, but really it is more about the director thinking about the presentation from the outset and throughout the story.

Spider-Man: Homecoming was a wonderful surprise entering into the MCU. And with Marvel guiding the Sony franchise, it has been reinvigorated and morphed into something both new and closer to the original material. Whether Sony will respect that input and collaboration and stick with it remains to be seen (and rumors on the street are that they won’t). Still we’ll get at least a couple more appearances of Spidey over the next few years and we’ll get to watch him grow-up in reality and in his role as a superhero.

Meanwhile, back in Asgard… Thor: Ragnarok brings about a few necessary aspects of plot and relationship, but it is generally just a good romp. While it is mostly just a pause before the finale that is coming, it does also take make some radical changes, declared right in the title. How that will play out, other than with some additional fighters to tackle Thanos, we’ll find out soon. But as a film it is a weird, anachronistic, pastiche of Waititi’s humor and the MCU ethos. Great fun, to be sure, but definitely one of the oddest of the films in the sequence in terms of how the bits clash at times.

Black Panther surprised me by not being as good for rewatching as I’d expected. It still is fun, and a great new world to explore, but it is not the action film it feels like the first time through. On seeing it again, it is the political message that rings through it like a gong. Not that it was subtle the first time, but after you know the story, it is that aspect that clearly drives and shapes it all. And, by the end, all the pieces are in place for Thanos and one heck of a showdown. What will be very interesting is seeing where they take Wakanda and the very real issues raised in Panther’s launch.

And now, on to Infinity War… and then probably the longest coda and shift ever conceived (2 years and 3 movies) with Ant-Man and the Wasp, Captain Marvel, and what was originally Infinity War part 2 (as conceived by Whedon). Where MCU goes at that point is a matter of much conjecture and very little information, but these last films should give us a good sense of the direction.

[autoalkatreszwebaruhaz-blog]

Autóalkatrész webáruház és webshop angolul

Autóalkatrész webshop és webáruház az angolul tudóknak

In spite of the fact that we see the economy backing off in such a large number of zones, and huge numbers of us and our associates are jobless, the best news is that online deals in America are proceeding not simply to rise, but rather to connect for the stars!

2010 is anticipated by numerous sources to see the start of a spike of up to a half ascent in internet offering. For some individuals this speaks to a gigantic opportunity. You don't need to backpedal and work in an unreliable circumstance for a business you don't care for. You can invest greater quality energy with your children, and work the hours that suit you.

Try not to misunderstand me, you will at present need to put in your 40 hours per week, or significantly more. You can however organize these hours around other action to upgrade your personal satisfaction. I know you can read heaps of guarantees about spending a hour daily and making millions, yet that is an extremely obsolete idea - we require a hold on reality - the so called masters who guarantee such rewards are encouraging off individuals who have minimal expenditure and enormous dreams. In the event that you need to profit on the web it requires diligent work and extend periods of time for the initial couple of years for the most part. What is cool however, is that you can do these hours around taking children to class, going to elderly guardians, adding to the group, seeking after a leisure activity or brandish or simply fit them in around a low level activity you loathe.

Autóalkatrész webshop angolul

There has never been a superior time for Americans to consider having their own particular online retail or administration business. On the off chance that you have a leisure activity about which you are very energetic - perhaps you can transform this into a salary, purchasing and offering hardware, consumables or even models. For instance - If your enthusiasm is memorable ranch hardware, maybe you have an opportunity to gather different agriculturists 'garbage' clean it, paint it and transform it into save parts for other noteworthy authorities everywhere throughout the nation. Maybe your energy is gathering exchanging cards, or toy autos, or teddy bears - a similar reasoning applies. Would you be able to repair them? Would you be able to purchase harmed ones and exchange them? Would you be able to simply exchange them? I know somebody who paid for his wedding by purchasing broken accumulations of exchanging cards at fairs, and afterward offering them independently on the web - he made thousands in only a couple of months utilizing understood ordered sites.

Autóalkatrész webáruház angolul jól tudóknak

Is it accurate to say that you are a maturing youthful mold creator? Would you be able to construct fantastic design from scrap materials, reused textures obtained from a philanthropy shop? You can offer this on the web and start to manufacture your own particular mold realm. In the event that you begin doing this, I particularly cherish pants and shirts from reused vintage textures, so I might be your first client!

Try not to go off and pay hundreds to assemble your own site - nothing will happen unless you turn into a website admin, and afterward you don't have sufficient energy to seek after your genuine business. Nobody will locate another site without a great deal of consistent exertion on your part. Rather take a webshop on EasySellAmerica, eBay or a comparative prominent arranged website. These shops cost as meager as 10-12 dollars every month, and the movement is as of now going by the site. It resembles having a little shop on the Main Street Mall yet without the rents and overheads.

Autóalkatrész webshop és webáruház Budapest

When you are built up you would then be able to manufacture your own webpage, connect your webshop to it until the point when you have enough movement and clients, at that point choose to join the web based retailing group.

This is all so natural. You don't have to pay a master your last dollars to reveal to you how to do it. You can spend this cash on beginning in whatever you need to do. You don't have to pay for activity to your webpage, you needn't bother with anything other than an energy for what you do, a thought that others like you will need to pay for, and essential web aptitudes to put advertisements on the web. Some grouped destinations are free for fundamental advertisements, so no cost or hazard.

What do you need to lose? Begin assembling your future, and stop simply sitting tight for that next activity. Lift yourself out of gloom and commend something energizing to do today! You can even do it low maintenance while you accept an interval position until the point when you sufficiently offer for a primary wage.

On the web there is no segregation or preference. Nobody will disclose to you that you are excessively old, you fizzled the restorative or you don't have enough involvement. Your guests either need what you have or they don't, it is that basic.

A few Tips on How To Sell Effectively Online:

Utilize a current webpage to begin and set up a webshop, individuals will discover you speedier.

Value your items or administrations to meet the market, in the event that you are excessively costly or excessively modest, individuals won't purchase from you.

Tell everybody in your neighborhood, family and friend network and colleagues and give them a bit of paper, or a card in the event that you can bear the cost of it (unique tip-attempt Vista Print - they regularly have free offers on the web) with your webshop address on it. Disclose to them what you do, be pleased and glad about your energy.

alkatrész webshop és webáruház Magyarország

Advance your business at each opportunity or more all have some good times, at that point the cash will begin to stream (if you have a feasible item or administration, obviously - this implies don't attempt to pitch icicles to Iceland!)

Give each client extraordinary client benefit. This does not intend to give enormous rebates, it just means be responsive, answer their inquiries. Be useful and constantly affable, notwithstanding when once in a while the client is absurd - that is exactly how a few clients are. On the off chance that you fulfill a miserable client, they will generally be your best supporter.

Give sensible conveyance times.

Acknowledge PayPal and Credit Cards (by means of PayPal).

On the off chance that your item permits, dispatch anyplace as long as they pay the expenses - does it make a difference where your client lives? This likewise implies outside America. You can trust PayPal installments framework; it is hard for somebody to cheat you.

Try not to deliver until the point when they pay you, and never give out your ledger subtle elements. Try not to react to messages who offer you more than your asking value, it is a switch trick. Anyway, don't stress, they won't pay by means of PayPal.

On the off chance that client reacts to your webshop, or promotion, by means of email they expect an auspicious answer. Browse your email, each day in any event, if conceivable twice every day. React rapidly, you would be stunned what number of messages from potential clients go unanswered and business is lost. Genuinely, I know somebody who missed a $250,000 arrange in light of the fact that he didn't try to browse his messages. This spoke to one month's deals for him, in one unprecedented deal, and he missed it. The client purchased somewhere else in the meantime.

Autó alkatrész webshop

On the off chance that you can offer counsel at that point compose articles about your item or administration, or leisure activity, and post them on ezines. You can return a connection to your advertisement or webshop in the asset box and this further advances your business.

On the off chance that conceivable distribute a decent grinning cordial photograph on your webshop, guarantee individuals the administration levels you will offer. Keep it proper however - For instance, don't utilize a semi naked photograph on something you need to offer children, or guardians.

Be straightforward, be cheerful, and celebrate what you do - you will rest easy, your clients will love it, thus will your companions.

In view of these essential tips, it is anything but difficult to begin your own online business, with negligible hazard and manufacture something that nobody can detract from you. Try not to pass up a major opportunity for the most straightforward and best time to begin a business ever - Right Now!

[thotyssey]

On Point With: Daphne Sumtimez

This fierce queen made her start in Manhattan, became huge in Brooklyn, and is now owning Manhattan once again. Singing, dancing, writing parodies and being damn funny are just a few tricks of her trade, but this performer is a philosopher at heart. Her new party at Easternbloc debuts this week: it’s Daphne Sumtimez!

Thotyssey: Hey girl, thanks for talking to us! You just pulled a double, hosting the Pieces happy hour and then appearing at Misty Meaner and  Mocha Lite’s show at Phoenix. How did it all go?

Daphne Sumtimez: Glad to be chatting with you! The children at Pieces and Phoenix were supercharged yesterday. The air in this city has been electric this weekend, and it feels good to have the engine revved, to be out and making moves. 

I was able to attend some protests on Friday and Saturday before shows, and nothing gets my blood pumping to perform like marching and shouting. It’s invigorating to get every person at Pieces to cry out in unison, “No Trump, No KKK, No Fascist USA!” It’s rewarding to see every mouth at Phoenix lip-syncing with you to “I’m Every Woman,” hours after the Women’s March.

Amazing! You know, my first pessimistic thought was that the protesting wouldn't do much good this early on, but you can tell that it has already gotten under Trump's skin.

Honestly, I don’t give a fuck about his ugly skin. His name just happens to be synonymous with white supremacy, misogyny, transphobia, Islamophobia, etc., which are the real targets of protest. I’m heartbroken and terrified about the absurdity of his administration, and it will be crucial to continue to express outrage at every ludicrous, dangerous action it takes. 

That said, inequality and violence have been woven into the fabric of this country for over 200 years, and if putting an awful buffoon in office has finally gotten people mad enough to speak out against them en masse, there’s hope. 

Also, I’m hoping Kellyanne Conway is stressed enough to buy some more blanched yaki to staple into her dumb head to hide the hair loss. Support the wig industry!

Amen on all counts! So Daphne, I must say that this past holiday season, I really enjoyed those cute Christmas videos you made with Elle Emenope. You two were just singing carols and making corny jokes, but it hit the spot with all the impending doom that's now upon us! Was that your intention when you made them?

Oh, thanks! That’s exactly what Elle and I were getting at. The two of us and our videographer Adam Harden really did have a day of cookies and egg nog and tree decorating and caroling, and I did sincerely catch a case of the warm fuzzies. It felt like being a kid at home with my family, but imbued with the sparkle of drag and celebrated with chosen family.

I’m so happy to know the videos brought you a bit of cheer! The whole reason I’m a drag queen is to feed an insatiable need to make people happy!

And you do it well! Okay, so let's get to the beginning. What's your hometown, and what was growing up like for you?

Alas, growing up in Roseland, New Jersey was fairly uneventful. I spent all of my free time alone in my room reading the encyclopedia until I was like 14. Then I did some theater in high school and fell in love with being on stage, but I never wanted to play anyone but myself or my mother, who is a lovely riot (as are my sisters and father). 

In fact, I never actually came out to them. One Tuesday night, when I was about 13, my mother said, “Get in the car. We’re gettin’ Starbucks.” On the car ride she was looking at me expectantly, and asked “Don’t you have something you want to tell me?” I had no idea what she was talking about. Then she said, “Goddamnit, you’re gay.” I said, “What?” She said, “Don’t you feel better now that you said it?” 

10 years later, I’m a fuckin’ drag queen living in the city. Go figure.

Thanks Mom! Love that. So what turned you on to drag, and when did you start doing it?

The first drag queen I really got excited about was Kelly, the YouTube sensation best known for “Shoes.” I think what drew me in was how something so silly could make statements about gender, class, and authority. I saw drag as something irreverent, goofy, and totally enjoyable for a simple laugh, but with layers to peel back and stuff to examine if you want to. 

Once I devoured all of Kelly’s content, I dove into the realms of Miss Coco Peru and John Waters films, then somewhere along the line a high school boyfriend introduced me to Drag Race and I was hooked. I started going to Rocky Horror in proto-drag, and I tasted blood and I wanted more. 

So, I chose to go to college at NYU so I could live in the city, and Daphne came bursting out of me. I got in drag as often as I could for whatever reason I could come up with. Five years later, people people pay me and put me on stages and screens!

I got to watch your performance at Dusty Ray Bottoms’ anniversary show at Pieces recently, and you sang a parody of “Impossible” from Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella, and it was amazing! Kind of obscure for the casual drag fan I think, but even if you didn't know the original song it was still funny. How long have singing and parody been part of your act?

Oh, I’m glad you enjoyed it! I love my stupid little ditties. I’ve been doing them for a little over a year now, and they’re my favorite numbers to perform. I love language and wordplay, and parody stands out to me as one of those grand traditions of drag. I’m actually about to start music rehearsals for a one-woman show of philosophizing through parody!

I actually recall that the first time I saw you many moons ago. You were Daphne J. Twinkle, and you wandered into Holly Dae 's old show at Boots & Saddle, and she let you do a number. That's the reality when you are starting drag, right? You have to go everywhere and do everything.

I remember that night! I was in a rainbow sequin dress, with a fuchsia Jem wig and a black-beaded bolero, and I had the time of my life to Christina Aguilera’s "Candyman.” I was over the moon that Holly let me do a number. 

In my opinion, that’s where good drag starts: joy. Ultimately, whether on the global scale of RuPaul’s Drag Race, or the personal scale of chatting with a lone stranger at the bar, drag is about reaching people. And people are much more receptive to letting you reach them if they can tell that you are happy. 

As far as building a “drag career” goes, I think you have to be in it for the sheer joy of being a drag queen. You show up everywhere you can because it’s your pleasure to do so. You want as many people as possible to love what you do, because you love it so much yourself. If you don’t genuinely believe that what you’re offering is exciting, then there’s no reason for anyone else to get excited about it.

What made you go with "Sumtimez?" Is it just as simple as, sometimes you’re Daphne?

Yup! I have a terrible fear of commitment and I’m emotionally inconsistent, so I didn’t want people expecting me to be anything *all* the time.

How far into your drag were you when you signed up for Season 4 of everyone’s favorite NYC competition, “So You Think You Can Drag,” and how did you enjoy that experience? And bonus question: what did you learn from it?

Aw, I look back on SYTYCD4 warmly! I’d been running around the city in drag for about two years at that point, but that was the first drag show I was a part of on a weekly basis. The other girls and I got along well enough, and I’m pleased to call a few of them friends still. 

I’m not a terribly competitive person, and I never expected to win, but surrounding ourselves with other artists is how we improve. The challenge of responding to a specific prompt definitely pushed me creatively, while watching how audiences react to different queens gave me a better feel of how to read the energy of a room. In those ways, competitions are like drag boot camps, where you learn the skills of the trade, so I think everyone should try it at least once. 

That said, I’m quite relieved that my competitive days are behind me. I’m too much of a control freak for all that!

Most gals from that competition traditionally work the Manhattan circuit after its over, but you embraced Brooklyn, and got several gigs there. How did that come about?

Scarlet Fever at TnT, girl! It was the Friday night rage for years. Scarlet Envy was already a good friend of mine, and I tricked her drunk ass into letting me on that stage so many times that Brooklyn had no choice but to put up with me.

Then, as I think these things tend to go, you look around you one day and realize that you’re a part of a family. Brooklyn became home, and I’ve been very lucky that her audiences like what I bring to the table. Funny enough though, most of my gigs now happen to be back in Manhattan.

That's happened to a lot of Brooklyn girls, particularly since TNT closed. Was that a shock to you when that happened?

Not really, to be honest. Rumors had been floating around for months, and plenty of property around it was getting bought up. It was just a matter of time. Turns out that home bars, like most things in life, come and go, you know?

You had a happy hour show at TNT on Fridays that you've successfully reprised with a new name--Funtimez with Sumtimez--at Easternbloc in the East Village a few months ago. Lots of displaced Brooklyn gals have repositioned themselves at that place. What makes Easternbloc so Brooklyn compatible?

Honestly, it surprised me just how well Easternbloc took to Brooklyn drag. A lot of that has to do with the fact that the staff and management are a bunch of sweethearts, and everybody treats each other with a level of respect and appreciation. The room itself also carries that delightful campy dive bar feel that’s so appealing to Brooklyn sensibilities.

What's the show like?

Fun Timez With Sumtimez has been a hit over there! I treat the show like I’m having a bunch of people over to my living room, so there’s this intimacy that edges deliciously on too-real. Some favorite bits include “Affirmation Circle,” where I share a tongue-in-cheek glimpse into my devastating emotional fragility, and “My LTR with LDR,” where I try to make Lana Del Rey songs performable. Everyone’s been eating it up and a nice crowd has been building! 

In fact, Frankie Sharp and I are about to partner up in carrying the happy hour festivities onwards all night with our new Friday night twirl: Dumbclub!

Let's talk about that. Frankie is of course a legendary producer and DJ of NYC nightlife, the man who brought us Westgay and Metrosensual and Frankie’s at the Jane, and he's been spinning a party at Easternbloc called Beef for some years now. What's Dumclub gonna be like?

Frankie’s at the top of the game, and the fact that I get to kick off every weekend with him has me grateful and inspired. I loooove what he spins, and it turns out that manic, hyper-energetic drag mixes super well with sexy boys, great asses, and a killer DJ set! We’re really pumped to join forces in whipping up a debaucherous, unpretentious night of uninhibited fuckin’ fun. 

One of the best parts for me is that we’re having new guest performers and hosts every week. There are so many awesome people in this city whom I haven’t gotten to work with as much as I’d like, and now there’s finally a Friday night bash where all of us from different circles of nightlife can come get stupid and really enjoy how much we have in common. Now’s the time to get back to the basics of loving on each other and having good, easy fun.

Sounds amazing! What else is going on?

Come see me as go-go hostess at The Box: legendary venue, truly spectacular shows, and me at my zenith of capricious charm!

Usually I’’m there on Wednesdays, but sometimes a few days a week. Anyone interested in hearing more should reach me at daphnesumtimez@gmail.com, because the Box tends to be a bit exclusive about these things. You know the old saying: a girl who's swanky, stanky, and skanky, gets herself some hanky panky.

Preach. Okay, in closing, let's jump on this meme wagon: what is a major #alternativefact about Daphne Sumtimez?

I am a healthy, self-sufficient adult who loves herself and doesn’t need a man to be happy. #alternativefacts

Well played Thanks Daphne, and have Fun Timez on Friday!

On Fridays at Easternbloc, Daphne Sumtimez hosts Fun Timez With Sumtimez (8pm) and the DumClub with Frankie Sharp (11pm). Follow Daphne on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and YouTube.

On Point Archives