#then they both went after jeff who was mostly passive

[riccissance]

Been thinking a lot about the brunch scene with Shauna, Jeff, and Jackie’s parents and what it can tell us about the characters. I may be misremembering, but I’m pretty sure Jackie’s dad stays pretty much silent the whole time. Jackie’s mom is clearly the decision-maker in the couple and it seems like he’s along for the ride. He grabs her hand to show solidarity in the offer to pay Callie’s tuition but is pretty irrelevant on his own.

I think that knowing this is Jackie’s main example of love growing up can contextualize a lot of her and Shauna’s dynamic. Jackie’s parents have shown her that love is one person submitting to another. It’s her dad going along with her mom’s decisions and blindly supporting everything she does. It’s her mom taking charge for both of them and not asking for his input. Jackie seems to act like her mom with Shauna and expect Shauna to act like her dad. Their relationship doesn’t even necessarily need to be interpreted as romantic, though I think it can be. Shauna is Jackie’s main person. She seems like the only person that Jackie has any real intimacy with throughout the show. So it makes sense that she’d try to mirror her parents’ relationship with her.

So when Shauna wants to make her own decisions or just disagrees with Jackie, Jackie interprets that as Shauna not loving her. If Shauna loved her, then she would agree no matter what. Of course, that’s not healthy and it makes Shauna feel stifled, but it’s all Jackie knows. And Jackie feels like any indication of Shauna’s independence means she loses her. So Jackie tries to cling harder to her, to control more, which only serves to push Shauna further away. 

And Shauna, the nonconfrontational child of divorce, can’t talk to Jackie about how she feels. Jackie has demonstrated that if Shauna is her own person, Jackie will leave. Shauna disagreed with Jackie’s idea to stay by the plane, and Jackie’s immediate response was to ignore her all day. She even pretended to buddy up to Mari to make Shauna jealous. So Shauna feels like Jackie sees her as replaceable. If she tries to be independent at all, she loses Jackie. And as much as Shauna is resentful of the position Jackie has put her in, she still loves Jackie and doesn’t want to lose her. 

I feel like the show does a good job of giving us enough context on each character to understand why they act the way they do. They make dumb decisions because they’re teenagers and can’t fully understand their own baggage. But at their heart, they’re both desperately trying to maintain their friendship. They lash out when they feel rejected. Jackie’s problem is with the interpretation of Shauna’s actions. She views any disagreement or deviation as rejection. Shauna’s issue is with communication. She thinks that openly admitting her frustrations would make Jackie leave her. 

Plus, the Taylors have made it clear that Jackie can’t just be good. She has to be the best, which means better than Shauna. So Shauna has to be the passive, lesser side kick while Jackie has to remain in control at all times and keep being the best. The funny thing is, they tell Shauna and Jeff how much better than them Jackie would be doing if she was alive, but if Jackie was there, they would probably be telling her she should be doing better. There is no ceiling to being the best so Jackie could never be enough while she was alive. 

I just think it’s very interesting that a pretty short scene with the Taylors can give us so much insight into Jackie as a character. We don’t see Shauna’s parents but their divorce is mentioned which makes it feel relevant. It makes sense that her parents splitting up would contribute to Shauna’s passivity and inability to communicate. Her parents admitted they were unhappy and her family was broken up. If Shauna just never admits she’s unhappy, nothing has to change. 

I really love how layered and morally grey all these characters are. And it’s just so devastating because these were manageable issues that got mixed up with teen angst before being thrown into a life-or-death situation. None of it needed to happen but these girls didn’t know any other way to be. 

[belizedeservesbetter]

Hercules is Bursting At the Seams With Potential

or, It’s Roger Bart’s World and We’re Just Living In It

Short Version: Right now it’s good but not great HOWEVER with some work this could be really spectacular

Long Version:

The production of Hercules presented by Public Works did exactly what it was meant to do. It brought in crowds, put the entirety of the Public Works community (all 200 of them) onstage and showed producers this is a viable project worth pursuing, be it on Broadway, a Disney park/cruise ship or simply available for licensing. 

In all, I liked it. But I didn’t love it, which was a little disappointing to be honest, especially because Hercules is my all time favorite Disney movie. But it is easily (easily!) fixable and could be amazing if they put the work into it.

I’m gonna divide this review/commentary/whatever into three parts:

1. The Good

2. The Bad

3. What I Think They Should Do Moving Forward 

So here we go. And I guess I should say there’s going to be a bunch of spoilers here, but if you’re reading this I’m assuming you’ve seen/loved the movie so you already know the plot. 

1. The Good

Every moment of this show is filled with an extraordinary amount of heart. You can tell everyone involved with this production loves the source material and wants it to soar. You can tell the entire cast is having a blast and loves being there. The material itself is full of heart because that’s exactly how it was written. The leader of Public Works made a speech at the beginning saying how Hercules is about what it means to be a hero and she’s exactly right. That message is the beating heart of the show.

The length of the show was also pretty nice. My problem with a lot of these film adaptations, Disney ones especially, is that they take a relatively short film and fill it with filler songs/moments in order to fill a 2.5 hour show. Frozen suffered from this. It didn’t need to be that long. However, Hercules was only 90 minutes with no intermission! There was little to no filler! The story, while at times a bit clunky in the beginning, doesn’t take any scenic routes to fill time. This kept the plot moving at a mostly good pace and I was never bored or looking at the song list to see how much longer we had left. I could focus completely on the cast and show without feeling like it was dragging on forever.

And the cast was so good too. Krysta Rodriguez has always been a fav of mine and I was thrilled to see her playing this role. She was fun and spunky and was in great voice. If anything, she didn’t have too much to work with. 

Jelani Alladin was FANTASTIC. He was the perfect Hercules. If producers decide to move forward with this show and take it to Broadway, Alladin better stay. He was charming and fun and funny and sang the hell out of “Go the Distance.” But what really impressed me about him was the dramatic moments and how personal and impactful they felt. There’s this great moment when Hercules talks to Zeus and Hera after becoming the hero of Thebes where he breaks down and has his wonderful moment with Phil and that whole scene was so good. He really lets you see Hercules’ insecurities at that moment and the way he was able to be subtle but still project to an outdoor audience of over a thousand was remarkable.

James Monroe Iglehart was great as Phil, as was Jeff Hiller and Nelson Chimilio as Panic and Pain respectively. 

The costumes were really cool (with one glaring exception but we’ll get to that later). I especially enjoyed Hades/the gods costumes, because they looked enough like their movie counterparts while still being unique to the show. The way they did Hades’ makeup was super cool, like they pulled him right into the real world. Likewise, the Muses had some really cool costume changes throughout and they all looked amazing. 

One of the more impressive aspects of the show was the puppetry and special effects, which felt grounded in a more Greek theatre kind of style and I thought it worked very well. The puppetry of the monsters specifically was super cool. The Hydra looked fantastic, as well as the three Titans. This production of course wasn’t given a lot of money, but much like The Lightning Thief, they worked with it. They were in these cool pieces that different actors held and when they came together they looked great. They were bright and bold and drew on older theatre techniques which I liked a lot. The special effects, especially in the latter half, were also good. How they did the Underworld was simple but effective and made a wonderful stage picture, especially the moment when Hercules saves Meg from Hades. How they made his life string turn gold looked really cool as well. 

In terms of musical numbers, what worked best was the songs we all know and love. “Go the Distance” was simply staged, which made the emotion of the song far more effective. “Zero to Hero” was a blast and took all the best parts from the movie and put them on stage. “I Won’t Say (I’m In Love)” was divine, just as I expected it to be. “A Star Is Born” was genuinely uplifting and joyous, since they brought out all 200 members of the cast and everyone was so happy to be there and it was the perfect way to end the show. 

There were 5 new songs, and while I wasn’t a fan of most of them, I really really liked “Bolts of Thunder” and thought it was a fun way to musicalize the big fight scenes with the Titans towards the end. The Muses also wore these incredible 90s girl group inspired jumpsuits that were spectacular. 

Speaking of 90s girl group Muses, there were two moments when they heavily channeled this vibe and I wish they did more of it. “Bolts of Thunder” with the jump suits and the reprise of “Gospel Truth” after “One Last Hope” where they wore these late 80s/early 90s workout video outfits. Those moments were artistically bold and really emphasized what worked in the original movie, but I’m gonna talk more about that later in part 3. 

Of course my favorite part of this production was Roger Bart. He stole the entire show. Whenever Hades is on stage he has the best lines and the funniest moments and he just has a way of making every line feel both biting and passive aggressive. He was absolutely incredible and the perfect choice for Hades. This production gave us more Hades than the original movie, but I wanted even more Hades. Bart has always been an actor near and dear to my heart (Young Frankenstein was my jam) and I was so glad to see him onstage again. 

2. The Bad

Unfortunately, a good portion of the show feels clunky, both stylistically and in content. The book was perfectly serviceable, taking a good portion of its lines from the films. But it felt too slow in the first half and too fast in the second, which was also when things got more interesting. For example, there’s a whole song about Hercules not feeling accepted at the Agora and there’s a long scene after that song but later on when Hercules defeats Hades, that takes literally 2 seconds. Likewise, the show over explains certain exposition points (and is not subtle in any way, shape or form) and doesn’t explain other things. Though really there isn’t much exposition at all, as this show assumes you’ve watched the movie dozens of times. 

That doesn’t always work well.

I went with a friend who hadn’t seen it in a while and afterwards he asked about what happened to Meg that made her sign her soul over to Hades. I knew because I’ve seen the movie so many times, but the show kind of brushes right over it. If you’ve never seen the movie before, which will definitely be the case with some people, it might be a little difficult to keep up with. 

Stylistically, this show was all over the place. 

In my opinion, Public Works presented three versions of Hercules:

1. The gospel version

2. The 90s nostalgia version

3. The Greek inspired version

I’m going to go more into this later, but these three versions would have worked if they could have seamlessly blended into each other. As of now, it’s incredibly jarring and distracting and would sometimes take me right out of the show.

For example! Hercules wore a traditional toga. Meg wore this

Yes this is Mal from Disney’s Descendants and yes Meg wore basically this but she had shorter hair and purple heel boots instead of gray. Hercules’ toga and this together looked almost absurd to be honest. 

And side note: Disney has been on a kick recently where they think pants equals feminism? Someone needs to tell Disney that women can wear dresses and still be feminist

Anyways

The choreography was pretty basic, but it’s hard to fault them this when the choreography is meant to be for a crowd of 200 people with ages varying from 5 - 80. There were a lot of step touch and wave moments. There was one really cool dance break in “Zero to Hero” that made me think about how cool some of these big production numbers could be if they got some good dancers in there. 

I wish the Muses were better. They were so low energy during “Gospel Truth,” which made the evening start off on a lower note than it should have. 

The pop culture references were really weird and out of place, mostly because of their specificity. The pop culture references in the movie are purposely vague and more “modern” references than pop culture, which makes the movie timeless. The pop culture references here might date the show in the future. There’s two that stood out specifically, one being when Hercules says “I know the Wobble!” before doing it, the other when Panic starts doing the Hercules Mulligan rap (you know the one) from Hamilton when Hades asks him if he knows Hercules. 

The rest of the new songs weren’t great either, and I’m gonna talk about each of them separately

“To Be Human” - This one definitely felt like a first draft of “Go the Distance.” Interestingly enough, I feel that an edited version of “Proud of Your Boy” from the Alladin musical (also written by Alan Menken) would have worked a lot better. 

“Uniquely Greek Town Square” - bad

“Forget About It” - I’m all for giving Meg more songs, but this was decent at best

“A Cool Day In Hell” - I desperately want Hades to have a solo, but not this. It was cheesy and felt out of place. Roger Bart sold the hell out of it, but of course he did cause he’s Roger Bart and incredible and amazing

“Uniquely Greek Tough Town” - not to be confused with “Uniquely Greek Town Square,” this song didn’t feel uniquely Greek at all and was, well, bad

“To Be Human (Reprise” - fine, I guess. Jelani Alladin made it good but the lyrics weren’t great. They rhymed “fail” with “frail.” 

3. What I Think They Should Do Moving Forward

Like I said before, this show has so much potential! I think it could be so good! This is my favorite Disney movie so I really want it to go to Broadway! If they do, there’s a couple things I think they could benefit from.

The best Disney Theatricals productions draw heavily from the culture/country the story takes place in. The Lion King, which draw heavily from Kenyan culture and reinvents the source material is the best example of this. I think drawing on Greek theatre conventions/styles would work well here, especially if Disney threw some of that good Disney money at it. I’d also like to see them lean into the Greek myth aspect of it a bit more. 

However, what also made the original Hercules movie so fun was its modern flair that felt both timeless and very 90s, which was fun. In this way I think the Muses and all the supernatural characters should draw more on this 90s flair while the mortals draw more on the Greek theatre conventions. I think with incorporating some Greek into the 90s and some 90s into the Greek, this could work really well. During “One Last Hope,” all the ensemble members wore those fun workout video outfits. I think it would have been fun if they wore togas still, but with sweatbands and leg warmers. Something like that to blend them together more. A theatrical beauty blender, if you will. 

In all honesty, I just want something bold and inspired. Give me something interesting! 

The show would also benefit from heavy edits to the newer songs and a good troupe of dancers, but that would of course happen in a possible commercial transfer. 

Lastly, as with just about anything, throw some Disney money at it! Make it shine! 

Normally I’d end this with a “Go see it!” or a “Don’t waste your time on it!” but this run is already sold out and lottery winners have been predetermined. So if you’ve won the lottery and are going, you’re in for a treat! The show is so fun and so enjoyable. I only critique it so heavily because I love the movie so much and have been wanting a musical adaptation for a while now. But I also know it’s Public Works and it’s free and it’s in the park and it’s fun and you can eat ice cream while watching it. If you didn’t win but live in NYC, give the lottery a go! I saw the lottery crowd waiting for winners to be drawn and it was incredibly crowded, so be aware of that. 

Or, if you didn’t win the lottery/don’t win standby lottery, go over to the Belvedere Castle and you can listen in on the show. You’re only seeing their backs, but I saw a bunch of people there watching/listening the whole time! 

[bayoubashsims]

The Pleasants decided to visit Jeff’s parents’ ranch at autumn just as the holiday season started while Diane’s parents, the Danders, paid them a visit for a big family dinner. (click more to read my headcanon on their characteristics and share with me your thoughts please :D)

Les ‘Pop Pop’ Pleasant is a retired and opinionated army man and rancher with an affinity for ‘manly’ activities like fishing and hunting. He was tough on Jeff when he was a boy and that’s why Jeff raised his kids in a different way. Though he can be bigoted and conservative, he is generally a fun grandfather for the kids with lots of stories to tell, especially now that he’s in a wheelchair after breaking his hip while he was firing a shotgun at moles in his yard.

Kynda ‘Grammy’ Pleasant is a homemaker and former champion horse-rider in Appaloosa Plains in her youth. Nowadays, she mostly takes care of Les and watches crime dramas on television. Though she is a meddling mother in-law to Diane, she is especially fond of Daniel as the eldest grandchild, always spoiling him with treats and lunch money. Like her husband, she isn’t very nice, but she’s more passive-aggressive and cuts Les when his talk of politics are starting to bother people. 

Marshall ‘Granddady’ Danders was buddies with Les during their army years and so they go way back, but he is much more reserved and no-nonsense. He is a tall, dark, and handsome figure even in his twilight years and now spends his retirement with his wife Melinda traveling around SimNation on their globetrotting caravan. He loves old movies and shared this passion with his daughter when she was growing up. 

Melinda ‘Nana Mel’ Danders is a chatty busybody who often takes things personally. Nevertheless, she is a loving grandmother to her granddaughter Jennifer; both girls are thick as thieves and she enjoys taking Jennifer out for ice cream and walks to the park. Diane rather envies the relationship between them as Mel damaged her self-esteem, having grown up with her criticisms in her effort to be a ‘loving’ mother. Mel and Kynda are good friends and enjoy watching crime dramas together while criticizing Diane and cutting coupons.  Jeff Pleasant is a drill instructor in the army who is an intimidating and tough vet on the job. He does not bring his work home, however, and is a very loving father and dutiful husband at the Pleasant abode; at home, he immediately shifts into a quiet and kindly suburban father who keeps his dreams to himself. He spends his time playing soccer and other sports with his children, but when he’s alone he can kick back and have fun with the rest of ‘em; before he went bald and entered the military, he was a hip long-haired guy with a fondness for what they call ‘oldies’ music now. 

Diane Pleasant moved to the suburbs so that she could establish herself not as just a mother and housewife, but also as an independent woman. She actively participates in neighborhood activities such as fundraisers, petitions, and the welcoming committee, and is present in several hobby classes as well as a member of the PTA. She is a woman who fights for her ideals and strives for the ideal, having to ignore the naysayers which told her she would amount to nothing in life. Managers do NOT wanna see her. 

Daniel Pleasant is just busy being a teenager who simply wants to have fun playing sports and hanging out with his friends. He is a lot like his mother in the sense that he strives for ideals–he is popular, he’s good at sports, and his grades aren’t bad. The issue is, he doesn’t realize that he’s doing things merely out of ideals and not out of actual passion. Despite this, he idolizes his father. Both are very close and often talk about the outer space, so naturally Daniel wants him to be the first Sim on Mars.  Jennifer Pleasant is a tomboy who probably loves playing sports more than his brother as she couldn’t stop talking about it–rightfully so, because she dreams of being a soccer superstar and is very updated on the going-ons of SimCity’s sports. She is a firecracker and a delight to be around, but she can be rather cross when she loses–she’s inherited the temper from her mother’s side of the family. She really wants to have a dog of her own since she’s always been close to her Pop Pop’s old hound dog Bubba. 

[bmichael]

Tanis vs The Southern Reach

In order to talk about the Southern Reach (TSR) trilogy, you have to talk about Tanis. There are a few reasons, both personal and intrinsic to the work. The most basic is that I’d have never heard of TSR without being a part of the online Tanis community. They would come up whenever anyone asked about works similar to Tanis, but they were generally recommended wanly, with the ending being a particular weakness. (This is absurd, because --) This was enough recommendation to get me to buy the book, but it took the first book from the trilogy, Annihilation, being both film-adapted and involved with my day job, to give the final push for me reading the books. 

The second main reason the two go hand in hand is that, without exaggeration, the Tanis podcast has tried, mostly unsuccessfully, to adapt or steal every good idea found in Jeff VanderMeer’s TSR books. Looking into Tanis provides an accurate map of the books’ general brilliance in the manner of a photo negative. An abominable necromantic double.

Fairly everything TSR covers -- psychological sessions and hypnosis; mysterious sylvan phenomenon; shadowy, quasi-NGOs running roughshod; oh yeah, and necromantic doubling -- Tanis has taken and used to worse effect. Everything. Instead of being set in a vaguely southeastern forest region of the country, Tanis sets its drama in the northwest. Again, another mirror-image type play, and not enough to give any sort of plausible deniability of blatant rip-off. But that Paramount money probably smoothes over any professional displeasure VanderMeer holds for Terry Miles’ podcast series.

Tanis is easy to explain and difficult to describe. It’s a serial fiction podcast centering on the investigative radio journalism of Nick SIlver, for a fictional northwestern radio station (now) called the Public Radio Alliance. He investigates a phenomenon called Tanis, which is found in the woods of the Pacific Northwest. Its fourth season recently began. (Good timing?)

Going more into it, the story of Tanis unfolds glacially. The first season forms a relatively clean arc that doubles back upon itself using a neat trick of storytelling. From there, the Tanis podcast tells an essentially ten-page story over the course of tens of hours of audio drama (insert scare quotes) by 1- having characters speak slowly and repetitiously, using dialogue that moves in fits and few starts; 2- picking up various narrative strands like the suicides of Kurt Cobain and Elliot Smith; shod feet washing up on shore; necromantic doubles; Nikola Tesla; Baba Yaga; Manson Family-style cults; time dilation; exotic locales around the world that aren’t in the Pacific Northwest; etc. etc. etc. and never resolving or developing them past basically stating them as premises; 3- finally, falling somewhat under the first rubric but deserving special attention, the dramatically stunted narration/actions of Nick Silver, the protagonist. I can’t recall there being a more unlikeable yet vanilla character in any sort of fiction or literature I’ve experienced. The voice actor is obviously Canadian, which somewhat contributes to the blandness of the character. Throughout the podcast, Silver is supposed to be a journalist or investigative reporter or something, but he displays virtually no curiosity or initiative. He’s happy to passively be told (or not told) things by interlocutors, asking no follow-up questions save for repeating whatever he’s told back to them with a slight upturn of voice. It’s maddening and deadening and a perfect symbol for the total plot stasis and lack of narrative drive that surrounds Tanis like a noxious miasma.

So, while the second TSR book, Authority, is a little slow (by design), it’s nothing like the complete vaporlocked and broken narrative engine that is Tanis.  

Now, I stopped listening to Tanis after season 3, and even going through that was a slog. The podcast has recently taken up season 4, but I already have the work of Morton Feldman and Max Richter to help put me to sleep. It’s not that the narrative moves at a glacial pace; an overarching narrative thrust can proceed exquisitely slow and glacial if that’s part of an intentional narrative strategy. Kinetic pace and frenetic plot can serve some types of stories, but would be totally out of place for a piece that’s more about exploring space like, say, L'Avventura. The Southern Reach and Tanis are on the more meditative side of the dial, but I believe Tanis moves the way it does due to a lack of storytelling ability rather than design. Take a look at this piece of transcript from a season 2 episode. (The reader should note that things deteriorate rather steeply from season 2 to season 3, but I couldn’t find a transcript online for 3.)Two characters, Nic and Geoff (“Geoff”), are exploring part of an outdoor anomaly that is linked to, or possibly is, Tanis. They’re walking along a wall. After noticing a crow that he thinks is more than a crow (which he doesn’t elaborate on other than to say he doesn’t know why he feels this way), Nic says he sees something “interesting”. I understand that podcasting is an audio medium. For that reason, even more than for a written work, the narrative has to show and tell vividly. Tanis takes the opposite approach. Details are muted and obscure, the storytelling palette is limited to shades of gray. The bit-by-bit pieces of the story comprise a push-pull of exchanges like:— This is impossible.

— What? — This. — What is it? What? Here? — Yeah.

And you can read on above. It’s bad dialogue, sure. But also, given that it’s an audio medium, the eye can’t skim or travel quickly through soft focus detritus to get to the details of the bigger picture. There is no bigger picture, and all the details are like little croutons floating on top of a mushy, rotting word salad. Characters often can’t mutually decide, it seems, on what they’re seeing or thinking and exposition is stretched out to absurd lengths of what’s thises and who’s thats. This storytelling-by-stasis is my main complaint against Tanis, and 95% of the reason why I don’t listen to it anymore and would never recommend it to anyone. But it’s just the rotting frame that holds up an incredibly slender narrative idea, and I do think that’s by design. Very little happens in each episode. They’re edited such that several different storylines unfold in parallel, none of them very far, and they’re told so slowly and vaguely to mask how little happens. The first season had an arc with a beginning, middle, and end. If it had ended then, Tanis would have joined Limetown and Wolf 359 (which went on MUCH longer, though) as great narrative podcasts. But it’s continued drib drab storytelling over, now 4 seasons reminds me more of a modern “video game as service” than anything resembling a piece of fiction told by someone or someones in control of a story they’re telling. Every week you sorta log on to Tanis, see what minor things have happened, which for whatever reason takes 30 to 50 minutes, and you get to hear 4 or 5 ads as well. There doesn’t seem to be a larger point to anything, and that, I guess, is the point.

Most of the things that make Tanis a slog end up being positive features of TSR trilogy. The narrative metes out information in order to decontextualize and recontextualize different plot points and developments, sometimes in devastating fashion. Like most literary fiction TSR is about intergenerational family drama. The ways the past births already condemned presents and futures. When you’re finished reading it, you realize that the books told a relatively slight story powered about the mystery of Area X as it wove through a couple generations of the families who grew up in and around the environs of Area X. It’s not so different from various parts of Ulysses, where a minor event for one person is a major event in another’s life, which has a ripple effect for hundreds or thousands of other people in the environs of the plot. And when you experience the events through the different characters eyes, you experience a new meaning and significance.

I think, ultimately, I wanted to vent about Tanis and communicate that TSR is a significant improvement (or rather, that Tanis is a great degradation of it). Without spoiling (ugh) too much about TSR, it’s a propulsive story about ecological biomes and how change happens glacially and then all at once. This theme is somewhat reflected in the way the story is told, but it never drags and it generally always seems like the narrative energy is well-directed for the story it’s telling. Highly recommended. C+

[your-dietician]

NHL officiating in the playoffs has been nothing short of haphazard

New Post has been published on https://tattlepress.com/nhl/nhl-officiating-in-the-playoffs-has-been-nothing-short-of-haphazard/

NHL officiating in the playoffs has been nothing short of haphazard

You may be thinking of several more incidents left unmentioned. Maybe something from the Bruins’ playoff run?

Rage against the referees has been a part of hockey since the puck was a chunk of wood and the sticks were fashioned from saplings. There used to be a few cameras in the building, and now there’s a few hundred, and we can clearly see what the officials a few feet away miss, as the players skate by in a blur. Maybe we should accept that they’re going to miss some bad ones.

Judging by the numbers, nothing should change. On average, officials call more penalties in the playoffs than in the regular season. According to the NHL, playoff games in the last two seasons have averaged 8.33 penalty calls, compared with 7.05 during the regular season.

But that doesn’t sound right, does it? When the prize is greater, players battle harder, empty their tanks completely, finish checks more violently. Why aren’t there more penalties called?

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly, through a league spokesperson, told the Globe that players, not officials, determine the calls.

“Officials are directed and encouraged to call the same standard as in the regular season,” Daly said. “That’s always been the case, but it’s been an even greater point of emphasis in recent years. What changes in the playoffs is the way the game is played on the ice, and that changes how officiating is perceived.”

Not everyone buys that.

“It’s different from regular season to playoffs. The refs are letting a little bit more stuff go,” Vegas winger Jonathan Marchessault said, calling it “adversity that teams need to face in the playoffs. Good teams will find a way to go through it. Just have to battle through it. Find a way.”

More bluntly, NBC analyst Brian Boucher tweeted he was “tired of people crying about officiating. Deal with it!”

Sure … but … why? Do we want what amounts to a different rulebook for the postseason?

Does it make sense that Connor McDavid can go eight games over the last two playoffs without drawing a penalty, despite numerous clear-cut infractions against him? Analyst Rachel Doerrie said she watched every McDavid shift from the Oilers-Jets series and counted 30 non-calls. McDavid, as you’d expect from the league’s premier talent, had the most offensive-zone puck possession time of any player during the regular season, according to Sportlogiq. He earned 53 penalty calls in 120 games, ranking sixth in the NHL. Not one penalty call in the postseason?

Longtime NHL official Kerry Fraser, who retired in 2010, said the missed calls this year have been “troublesome,” pointing to a “regression” in the performance of veterans in stripes.

“This is painful to say, and to watch, because I know all these guys, and worked with some of them,” Fraser said on TSN 1050 in Toronto. “They’re good people. They don’t deserve the kind of work that they’re putting forth.

“That’s not fair. That’s not right. As a player, you would look at yourself first. But you would also look at the kind of direction you’re getting … you’ve got to look at the game plan.”

Paul Stewart, the longtime former NHL ref from Dorchester, noted in a phone conversation that officials don’t have regular pregame meetings during the season, but they do in the playoffs. That’s where all kinds of bugs can be put in their ears — like “No. 11 is cheating on faceoffs,” he said, conjuring an example that would perk the ears of Bruce Cassidy.

Though the league has denied it, “letting the players play” is a long-accepted practice. A few seasons ago (2017), the NHL told its men in stripes to focus on slashes to the hands. That’s how we get what happened in Game 4 of Vegas-Montreal: Joel Edmundson retaliated by cross-checking William Carrier into the boards (no call), Suzuki hooked Alec Martinez on the hands (penalty).

“This is an annual event,” Fraser said. “We have one set of rules in the regular season, and then a whole different standard in the playoffs.

“Yes, we like to let them play, but when you let the players decide the outcome of a game, which I never subscribed to, then you’re actually as a referee letting things go that could affect the outcome of the game.

“Draw the line. Players will play within it. They’re smart. But if you let the inmates run the prison, the warden might as well take his skates off and watch it on TV.”

Canada’s best

Canadiens an unlikely finalist, or are they?

Few expected to see the Canadiens in the Stanley Cup Final, but the Habs are four wins away from lifting their first Cup since 1993.Vaughn Ridley/Getty

This is as deep as the Canadiens have been in a generation. They have not been to the Stanley Cup Final since 1993, when they won the most recent Cup in their (and Canada’s) history.

And they got there on an overtime goal. The last time they went to the Final on an OT winner was … for the sake of anyone who remembers 1979, let’s not go there. Already too much discussion of penalties here.

But give the Habs their props. They took it to a Vegas team that rolled over the West Division, and now we have to question whether the West, not the North, was the weakest division in hockey. The Knights went a combined 33-6-1 against the Ducks, Coyotes, Kings, Sharks and Blues, two of which (Arizona and St. Louis) made the playoffs last year. They split with Colorado (4-4-0) and went 3-4-1 against surprising Minnesota.

Entering the postseason, the commonly held belief was that Colorado, Vegas and Tampa were the three best teams, and that an eventual Avalanche-Knights series would be a de-facto Cup Final. But the Avs flunked out, and the Habs shut down that raucous party in the scorching desert summer.

This, from a team that fired Claude Julien and finished 18th in the regular-season standings. Montreal was supposed to be blown out by Toronto in the first round. But after offing the Maple Leafs in seven (coming back from a 3-1 deficit) and sweeping the Jets, here they are.

Not enough offense? Young talent too unreliable? Carey Price is washed up? Oublie ça. Forget it.

A major key, to this eye: after Julien was fired in February, interim coach Dominique Ducharme — who last week gave way to assistant Luke Richardson because of a positive COVID-19 test — asked his team to play more passively in the neutral zone. Similar to the Islanders, the Canadiens play patient and reliable defense, work as a unit, and strike off turnovers. They don’t dominate the puck or own the offensive zone. It doesn’t matter. They had 14 different goal scorers, a dozen among the forwards.

Nick Suzuki is making plays all over the ice, showing why Julien liked to compare him with a Patrice Bergeron-in-training. Shutdown center Phillip Danault neutralized Mark Stone (0-0—0, seven shots) to a degree rarely seen, after having a similar effect on the Maple Leafs’ Auston Matthews. Brendan Gallagher, after missing the last six weeks of the regular season with a broken thumb, is back in his heart-and-soul role, irritating Vegas stalwart Alex Pietrangelo enough to draw consistent attention away from the play. Corey Perry is still an on-ice jerk, albeit one with some gas left in his tank.

Montreal leans heavily on four big defenders (Ben Chiarot, Shea Weber, Jeff Petry and Joel Edmundson), all of whom play 23-25 minutes a night. Jon Merrill (13) and Erik Gustafsson (sub-10) don’t see much action, the latter used mostly for power plays. Montreal is 11-0 this postseason when scoring twice. While Price has been stellar, he isn’t making a slew of spectacular stops. He’s seeing pucks.

It’s a team that blends age (Perry and Eric Staal, both 36; Weber, 35; Price, 33) with youth (Suzuki, 21; Jesperi Kotkaniemi and Cole Caufield, 20) and had enough grit to withstand whatever Vegas threw its way.

Caufield, the Habs’ version of Alex DeBrincat, scored four times in the series, including a Game 6 goal that showed his touch, acceleration, shot and verve. After Vegas netminder Robin Lehner shut him down on a Game 4 breakaway and cracked how five-hole or high glove were Caufield’s two moves, the rookie roasted him upstairs.

After sitting Caufield for the first two games against the Leafs (and Kotkaniemi for Game 1), Ducharme found one of the breakout stars of the playoffs. Game 6 was the ex-Wisconsinite’s 24th career game, his 14th in the playoffs. Caufield won the Hobey Baker some 10 weeks ago. He can still win the Calder Trophy next year.

If Tampa is next, Montreal won’t shrink. They enter the final having killed 30 consecutive power plays — a league-record 13 straight games without a PPG allowed — so why would the Lightning’s man-advantage scare them?

Abuse allegations

Ex-Blackhawks video coach accused of sexual assault

Think of the Chicago Blackhawks of the 2010s and what comes to mind? Probably the names of star players — Jonathan Toews, Patrick Kane, Duncan Keith — and the three Cups they won.

The legacy of that team might be shifting.

TSN recently uncovered stunning claims of sexual assault on the watch of the Blackhawks’ management. The Canadian outlet reported that two former Blackhawks reported to then-skills coach Paul Vincent in May 2010 that they had been abused by video coach Brad Aldrich, who went on to abuse others at subsequent career stops.

Vincent, of Beverly, told TSN recently his plea to Hawks management to take the allegations to Chicago police was rejected. He says he is willing to testify on behalf of the plaintiffs in court.

In May, two unnamed players filed lawsuits against the franchise, alleging the team covered up alleged abuses by Aldrich.

According to multiple reports, Aldrich was convicted of abusing a 17-year-old player in Houghton, Mich., in 2013. He resigned from his position as Miami University hockey operations months before, under suspicion of “unwanted touching of a male adult,” according to police records obtained by TSN.

A former Blackhawks marketing official told TSN that Alrdich would “routinely befriend young interns” and invite them to hang out at his Chicago apartment. The official said he was told to “steer clear” of Aldrich because he had “tried something” with a few players, and that “the entire training staff, a lot of people knew” about Aldrich’s behavior — it was “open secret,” the official said.

It is a situation the Blackhawks and the NHL must address. Neither entity has commented.

Raising awareness

Ex-Stars defenseman roller-blading for mental health

Former Stars defenseman Stephen Johns is roller-blading and road-tripping across the US to raise awareness for mental health.Ron Jenkins/Associated Press

Got big summer plans? Stephen Johns didn’t, until a couple weeks ago.

The former Dallas defenseman, who did not play last season because of post-concussion syndrome, retired June 13 and announced a new adventure: he’s roller-blading and road-tripping across the US to raise awareness for mental health.

Johns, from Wampum, Pa., reports he traveled from Pittsburgh to Wisconsin in his first week, logging roughly 40 miles a day. He’s on three wheels, with a helmet, elbow pads and wrist guards, and has a friend, Jeff Toates, driving alongside him, documenting the trip and carrying necessities. There has been lace bite and leg burn. In Chicago, the former Notre Dame standout skated to Lake Michigan and did a front flip into the water.

The genesis of the trip was Johns’s battle with depression, which sank him during a 2018-19 season in which he suffered a head injury during training camp in Boise, Idaho. He did not play the entire season. After 22 months away from the game, he returned to play 17 games in 2020, earning a finalist nod for the Masterton Trophy.

Johns recently wrote on Instagram that he was “tired of letting depression destroy my life,” and wanted to provide the same kind of inspiration to those facing their own battles.

“What I miss most about the game of hockey is providing inspiration,” he wrote. “If I can inspire one person to climb out of their hole, then that’s a successful trip.”

Loose pucks

Former Flyers coach Dave Hakstol is taking over the expansion Seattle Kraken ahead of their first season.Ken Lambert/Associated Press

Swerve in Seattle: Dave Hakstol, who coached the Flyers (and made a pair of first-round exits) from 2015-19 and was a Maple Leafs assistant the last two years, is the expansion Kraken’s first head coach. Hakstol did good work with Toronto’s defense (in two years, 26th to seventh in goals against). Bruce Cassidy and Mike Sullivan, among many others, would tell you that all you need is a second chance … Gerard Gallant, the Rangers’ replacement for David Quinn, wants to coach the “hardest-working team in the league,” which is a thing often said during introductory press conferences. Will GM Chris Drury add a few gritty types to fill out the roster? Are the Rangers a playoff team next season? We say yes, and no … Expecting some team to overpay for Vegas’ Alec Martinez, the defense-first, top-four defender with two Stanley Cup rings from Los Angeles. Same feeling about Tampa’s David Savard and Blake Coleman, and whichever UFAs the Islanders don’t re-sign on their fourth line … The Sedin twins are back in Vancouver, Canucks GM Jim Benning hiring them as special advisers to learn the management side. “We care about this team,” Henrik said, noting that he and brother Daniel have a lot to learn. Any fresh ideas on how to sign RFAs Elias Pettersson and Quinn Hughes, with $15 million in cap space and a roster that currently includes 15 skaters? … The NWHL’s Toronto Six made a splashy move, hiring Hockey Hall of Famer Angela James as an assistant coach … Who’s going to be a more interesting TV analyst: Wayne Gretzky on Turner or Mark Messier on ESPN? Not expecting spicy takes from either … RIP to René Robert, a member of the Sabres’ famed French Connection line, who died at 72. Robert gave Buffalo its first win in a Stanley Cup Final game by finishing Game 3 against the Flyers in 1975 with an OT strike in a foggy Buffalo Auditorium … Podcast recommendation: Bernie Corbett’s “Games People Play,” featuring lengthy interviews with a range of sports figures (including the Globe’s Bob Ryan and John Powers). Hockey subjects include Keith Tkachuk, Theo Fleury, Bryan Trottier and Eddie Johnston … Draft trivia: forward Cole Sillinger, a first-round prospect, is the son of well-traveled Mike Sillinger, who made an NHL-record 12 stops during his 18-year career. Cole was born during his father’s two-year stay in Columbus … The aluminum bottles and cans were likely empty — why would anyone waste a drop? — when Islanders fans celebrated a Game 6 win by giving the Nassau Coliseum sheet a silver shower. Throwing objects is normally a protest, not a celebration, but that’s life at the old barn in Uniondale. “That building coming into overtime was smelling like cigarettes,” mused winning goal-scorer Anthony Beauvillier. “Now it smells like beers.”

Matt Porter can be reached at matthew.porter@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter: @mattyports.

Source link

[pumpkins-s]

12 and 20 for each McClain sister (including Mavis and Slaos Lance cuz I'm thirsty)

OC Ask Meme: Describe Your OC

You are thirsty damn.

I got into some weird speculative-canon territory with some of these so just bear with me tbh.

Marcie:

12:  their romantic life

Marcie is probably the only sister who had an extensive/well-rounded love life at any point in her history, to be honest. She’s a romantic at heart, and very people-oriented, so on some level she definitely values at least the concept of a partner (though in reality she’s probably not prioritized the finding of one extensively, she’s a very passive “if it happens it happens” person).

Especially when she was figuring out her sexuality, Marcie probs had several girlfriends during/after high school. Nothing too serious or long term. Eventually, as she got older and felt she had more responsibilities in life both to her work and her family, she dated less. It’s definitely still a fantasy for her, but Marcie would need someone who’s capable of respecting the duties she sees herself having to her family, and someone who can ingratiate themself too and integrate well with her siblings/cousins. Otherwise it’s a no go.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

Oh she’d be over the moon. Marcie is the exact kind of romantic who’d see this as the height of affection, especially if it was lengthy in prose and done on fancy paper or something. Handwritten would appeal to her over a typed letter.

Marcie was definitely an (accidental) heart breaker in high school, so she probably got a few to be honest. Karen probably helped her suss out which ones were men so that they could go in the trash so that she could offer them a polite refusal (while Karen made a murder face at them over her shoulder). 

Karen: 

12:  their romantic life

If I remember correctly, Karen is the only McClain sister I didn’t expressly label as queer on some level or another (mostly because I never put significant thought into her sexuality tbh), but in truth...? She’s such a goal-focused person she doesn’t really have the time to date. Her first love is her sport of choice and doing things. She’s such an active and energetic person that unless she found someone willing to balance their schedule with hers in that regard, it probably wouldn’t work out. 

She probably went on a few dates here and there in high school and college before eventually just...forgetting dating was a thing she was “supposed” to do. She’d rather be bettering herself than wasting time making small talk at coffee shops.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

She’d be somewhat touched, but if she found it too florid/poetic it’d probably make her uncomfortable, and if the letter-writer never approached her she’d probably throw it away. She believes if you want something you need to go and get it, and that extends to people. She wouldn’t have much admiration for someone who pines at a distance. 

Igraine:

12:  their romantic life

I actually straight up had an outline for Igraine to have a love interest in SLAOS -- a translator she met in the military -- and ended up pulling it for time due to a whole host of other shit I needed to cover in Lance’s early teenage years. So there you go I guess.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

Extreme disbelief, a period of conviction that this must be for one of her sisters and got left for her by mistake, followed by an extensive manhunt for the letter-writer with a reluctant Lucas roped in to assist. 

If she couldn’t find the letter-writer, she’d probably be disappointed to be honest. What good is an admirer if you can’t chase after them?

Evie:

12:  their romantic life

You mean Evie? The aro/ace queen lol? I don’t think she’s ever had much of one. She probably went on one date to a school dance or something, recognized how distinctly uncomfortable it made her, did some research, and came to her “ah. am aro” conclusion pretty quickly. 

I doubt she experienced much disappointment in that conclusion, honestly. Their mother hardly put pressure on them to find romantic partners, and between the fact that (most of) her sisters didn’t date much, and she mostly hung around Mavis in her early high school years, who considered sexuality and relationships one part a joke and one part a manipulation tactic, she was hardly in a situation where she was the Odd One Out.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

She’d be flattered, even if she clearly didn’t/couldn’t reciprocate. She’d probably seek the person out or write them a note in return expressing her appreciation of their compliments, but that she wasn’t interested in a romantic partner, period.

Loraine:

12:  their romantic life

Loraine has elements of Marcie’s romantic personality, but given she’s demiromantic and mostly hung around Lance & Hunk, Mavis, or her sisters, she didn’t really have extensive opportunities to meet anyone she might develop an attraction to. I don’t think she ever sought the opportunity out, either. She appreciated the idea but she ultimately was significantly career/goal focused, as well as family-oriented. Romantic partners just weren’t a priority.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

A weird mix of flattery and discomfort. Someone saying nice things about her is always Good, but she’d feel awkward and bad about turning them down, while also more uncomfortable about the idea of trying to reciprocate. She’d have probably panicked in the face of one until Mavis contacted the person in question and told them to fuck off.

Lance:

12:  their romantic life

Uhhh I can straight up answer this in terms of canon, tbh -- 1. a fleeting affection that couldn’t work out. 2. a relationship with the capability to be incredibly healthy but complicated by the situation surrounding it (namely...Lance’s dealing w/a lot of external shit). And 3. the thing I’ve committed to endgame the story with, for better or for worse. 

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

Much like Loraine, he’d probably be both flattered and slightly uncomfortable, most especially because of his weird situation. As “a boy” he’d probably feel much more obligated to return the sentiment, even if he didn’t necessarily feel the same way and just told himself he should. Lance likes people, he likes the idea of a relationship, and he wouldn’t want to hurt someone else’s feelings if he can help it. Which can make something...awkward, for him.

Mavis:

12:  their romantic life

Fucking terrible. Mavis’s natural reaction to romantic interest in her is suspicion/an expectation someone has ulterior motives, which makes things harder for her. It doesn’t help she also doesn’t have a good understanding of what’s healthy for her, or comfortably asserting her boundaries if she feels she owes/needs someone. Hence: Jeff.

20:  their reaction to a mystery love letter

Laughter, and then unceremoniously throwing it away. She’d feel a little bit bad about it afterward, but she’d never admit to it.

[lucasdsimmonstx]

Boycott the Court of Master Sommeliers?

Is it Time to Boycott The Court of Master Sommeliers?

Is it time to say goodbye to the Court of Master Sommeliers? With eminent sommeliers quitting under protest and a wide array of accusations being leveled at the certification body, it’s time to consider the evidence. We’ve lain out what people in the wine industry are saying about the Court of Master Sommelier – Americas (CMSA). These include issues around racism, sexual violence, cheating, and political bias.

We also offer alternatives if you decide to not support the Court. There are equally good sommelier certification bodies available, so you can earn your sommelier pin with an agency that better aligns with your personal beliefs.

  The Court of Master Sommeliers has a Racism Problem

Tahiirah Habibi

“In order to speak, you need to call me master”

A Master Sommelier Examiner to Tahiirah Habibi

Tahiirah has recently published a heartbreaking recollection of blatant racism within the Court of Master Sommeliers.  We strongly recommend you listen to how the Court of Master Sommeliers nearly destroyed her love of wine and then callously exploited her.

It is unacceptable that in some CMSA circles there has been rhetoric around not being a political organization and wanting to remain neutral. There is no neutral. By doing nothing, one passively endorses the status quo — and the status quo for BIPOC in America has been, and remains, horrible.

-Richard Betts, MS

Such accusations have been lingering for a long time. Currently, less than 1% of all Master Sommeliers are black.

Diversity has long been an issue for the Court of Master Sommeliers, which skews the same way as most of the wine industry: male, and white. The problem, it seems, may not merely be about demographics.

Alder Yarrow, Vinography.

The Court of Master Sommeliers has a Sexual Violence Problem

In that past several years, we have had countless articles and two bestselling books that outline a disturbing and deeply ingrained culture of sexual violence within the sommelier world.

I no longer spend much time with the sommelier community because I find much of that culture to be toxic…For so long, I’d been obsessed with being part of this community of snobby, older (often white) men that just didn’t want me to join.

-Victoria James, author of Wine Girl in an interview with SevenFifty

In her book, James states that a restaurant owner raped her in the wine cellar. “I was young and insecure and thought that this was what women went through.” She is far from the only wine author to level deeply disturbing accusations. Bianca Bosker, the bestselling author of the book Cork Dork, recalled numerous examples of sexual violence and inappropriate behavior. She also pointed out that the restaurant industry accounts for more sexual harassment complaints than any other industry.

There was the blind tasting instructor who cracked off-color sexual double-entendres, nicknaming people who discussed a wine before savoring it “premature ejaculators,” or wondering“Did someone touch you inappropriately?” after a female classmate exclaimed at a wine’s aroma. There was the very senior sommelier who offered to let me stay in his “big” hotel room — not that I’d asked — and another who, while drunk, escalated from awkward attempts at flirting to full-out groping, despite knowing I was married.

Bianca Bosker, A Sommelier Opens Up About The Truly Gross Sexism She’s Faced In The Wine World, Refinery29

It doesn’t help that only 16% of all Master Sommeliers and only 14% of its board of directors are female. With women being the largest segment of wine consumers, it’s long past time for this to change.

I’ve come to understand that those by-laws have evolved in such a manner as to effectively prevent all but the old guard from running for the board of directors which is responsible for shaping policy. This is not the stance of a progressive or inclusive organization, it’s one of protectionism affording no reasonable opportunity for change.

-Richard Betts, MS

We call on the court to bring in a board of directors that more accurately reflects the community they serve, and that must include women as well as black and indigenous people of color.

The Court of Master Sommeliers has a Republican Problem

Just because a Master Sommelier is a Republican or is employed by one is not a cause to boycott the Court. Nor do we think it’s a problem if a Master Sommelier is a financial donors to the Republican party.  Everyone has the right to their own beliefs.

However, the Court of Master Sommeliers Americas (CMSA) is a nonprofit agency that claims to represent the industry as a whole.  If they appear to be a politically partisan group, that is a severe conflict of interest. In our reporting, we discovered that the  Board of Directors of the CMSA has a distinct Republican bias. Most of the board members are executives in businesses whose leadership donates heavily to right-wing causes.

Currently, 7% of the board either donated to or worked for someone who donated to Democratic Causes.  14% donated to both parties, and a whopping 57% donated solely to Republicans.  Dollar for dollar, the data is even worse. The money given to Democrats on average was less than $400, while the average donation to Republicans was over $10,000.  We believe this lack of representation of differing political views is one of the systemic problems facing the Court.

Republican Donors & The Master Sommeliers Board of Directors

Thomas Price, MS has worked for Jackson Family Wines for over six years. The company’s chairman Barbara Banke has donated over 2 million dollars to Republican candidates across the country.

Steven Poe, MS has worked for over a decade at the Big Canyon Country Club. This club is well known for being an exclusive bastion of  Republican politics in Orange County, California.

Ron Edwards, MS  is an executive at Winebow, which is owned by the Brazos Private Equity firm. Both co-founders (Randall Fojtasek and Jeff Fronterhouse) donate exclusively to the Republican party. Donations as of publishing are well over $10K.

Randall Bertao, MS has been an administrator at the Los Altos Golf & Country Club for over a decade.  His board of directors donates solely to Republicans. Of note is Andrew K Ludwick, the club’s Treasurer who has donated over $100,000 to Republican causes.

Christopher Bates, MS is now the owner of Element Winery. However, for 10 years he worked for Hotel Fauchère and Richard Snyder. Mr. Snyder had a long history of donating to Republican causes.

Virginia Philip, MS is the Vice-Chair of the Court of Master Sommeliers Americas. She is an executive at The Breakers hotel. CEO Paul Leone has ha long history of donating to the Republican party.

Devon Broglie, MS  is the current Chair of the Court of Master Sommeliers Americas. He has worked for Whole Foods Market since 2005. Mr. Broglie works with CEO John Mackey, a longtime Republican donor, including a Rand Paul Super PAC.

Democratic Donors & The Master Sommeliers Board of Directors

Peter Granoff, MS is the only member of the board to donate to a Democrat. He is the owner of Ferry Plaza Wine Merchant in San Fransisco.

Dual Donors & The Master Sommeliers Board of Directors

Brett Davis, MS works for Lux Wines, a division of E. & J. Gallo Winery. CEO Joseph E Gallo donates heavily to both parties.

Eric Entrikin, MS works for Germain-Robin California Brandy, a division of E. & J. Gallo Winery. CEO Joseph E Gallo donates heavily to both parties.

  The Court Accepts Big Contributions from a Far-Right Political Donor

The Court of Master Sommeliers has deep financial ties to  Barbara Banke,  the far-right political donor. She funds the CMS scholarship program under the name of her wine company, the Jackson Family Wines Scholarship.

We call on the court to sever ties with the Republican party and bring in a board of directors that more accurately reflects the communities they serve. 

The Court of Master Sommeliers Has A Cheating Problem

In 2018, a board member was caught giving answers to the Master Sommelier exam to one of his protegees.  This blatant cheating was uncovered because the protegee had second thoughts and consulted a lawyer after taking the exam, and passing.

Nobody knows how many people cheated on the September exam. The Court has only said a lawyer contacted them to say that a “member of the Court of Master Sommeliers, Americas disclosed confidential information pertinent to the tasting portion of the 2018 Master Sommelier Diploma Examination prior to the examination.”

-Frances Dinkelspiel, The Daily Beast

It is well-known that members of the board will tutor the very candidates they are supposed to be testing.  This type of advocacy is part of the Master Sommelier culture. While on the surface this may seem innocuous, consider that this gives the beneficiaries (who are mostly male and white) a huge competitive advantage over other candidates.

Master Sommelier and (Former) Board Member Andrew McNamara tutoring an Advanced Sommelier candidate – He and She On Wine.

This cronyism goes far beyond giving an unfair advantage to certain people: it has clearly encouraged outright cheating. It was a fluke that the fraud was exposed, and we have no way to know how long such cheating has been going on:  the Court continues to stonewall any outside investigation into the scandal.

This is not the only issue with cronyism. Board members are also allowed to change the scores after the exam to benefit certain applicants.

As highlighted in Uncorked, former CMSA board chairman Joseph Spellman, MS, wrote on social media that the CMSA exam committee “reserves the right to change the sequence or selection or point values/scoring of the wines”

Courtney Schiessl, SevenFiftyDaily

After clearly stating that the board will change scores for some candidates, he backtracked and claimed they would only do so “to adjust for exam flaws”.  After discussing this issue with multiple sommeliers who have conducted blind tasting exams, there seems to be no valid reason to ever change a grade after the exam has been conducted.

The Court of Master Sommeliers has refused to comment on these serious issues, despite being widely reported on in the media. At this point, it is illogical to assume there was only one case of cheating, or that altering final scores is only done “to adjust for exam flaws.”  It is entirely possible the premise of the Master Sommelier certification is a fabrication. 

The Court of Master Sommeliers Has A Money Problem

The Court is a nonprofit agency [501©(6)] under US law. In their filings with the IRS, it clearly shows that they make an average of five million dollars a year, almost all of it earned through entrance fees for sommelier exams.

Where does that money go?  According to the US government, nearly all that money goes to compensation and management expenses.

Compensation to the board and employees is 25% of their annual budget.

Management expenses (Including legal, accounting, occupancy, entertainment, and travel) are 44% of their total budget.

Having nearly 70% of a budget devoted to administration and expenses is a red flag, according to many nonprofit watchdogs.

The website SeriousGivers places nonprofits into three groups: green zone, yellow zone and red zone. The red zone is for nonprofits that spend more than 50 percent on fundraising and management. The green zone is for nonprofits that spend between 20 percent and 30 percent.

-Steve McDonnell, BizFluent

While these red flags are problematic, the Court is also not fulfilling its obligations as a non-profit.

The 501©(6) designation includes membership-based organizations or clubs that promote the business interests of their members… Typical ways that a 501©(6) nonprofit promotes the business interests of its members include gathering and presenting industry data to governmental bureaus and agencies and lobbying for legislation supportive of the group’s mutual interests…the organization must serve the “common interests” of those members and must not engage in business for profit.

Joanne Fritz, The Balance Small Business

According to its own documentation, the CSMSA  is not serving the common interests of the sommelier trade, as it is legally bound to.  It is only spending money to benefit its board of directors and employees. In its filings for 2018, the CMSA spent exactly zero dollars to support the sommelier community.

Alternatives to the Court of Master Sommeliers

Do you think it’s time to boycott the CMSA? There are several accreditation agencies in the wine trade that offer sommelier certification.  They offer the exact same level of certification as the Court.  You can check out a comparison chart of the three major wine trade certification bodies.

  The post Boycott the Court of Master Sommeliers? appeared first on SOMM • Reviews of Sommelier Courses and Wine Schools.

from SOMM • Reviews of Sommelier Courses and Wine Schools https://www.somm.us/boycott-master-sommeliers/ from SOMM https://somm3.tumblr.com/post/621399673203195904

[eng230summer2018]

“Countercinema” and “I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing”

Can an argument be made for the existence of a female gaze, or a “specific, identifiable” female aesthetic of film? Is I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing successful at achieving a truly feminist vision on film?

Introduction

Marilyn Fabe’s article, “Feminism and Film Form: Patricia Rozema’s I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing,” circles back to the very first reading in the course, which was Laura Mulvey’s “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema.” I find this very interesting that the final article talks directly about the first article we read. Fabe credits Mulvey with the idea that “most mainstream films assume a male spectator and play to male pleasure by visually objectifying and eroticizing the women on the screen.” In response, she “raises the issue of how women filmmakers can create alternative conventions to liberate cinema from male-centered practices of representation.” While an argument can be made for the existence of a female gaze, I don’t think this is what Mulvey and Rozema have in mind. They don’t cite the existence of a specific, identifiable, female aesthetic of film. Instead, they propose feminist approaches to making films, which is referred to as “counter cinema.” Fabe analyzes Mermaids as an example of counter-cinema. Her analysis can also be applied to other films we’ve studied, using some of the same concepts she explores.

“Plot synopsis”

In her article, Fabe reviews the history of feminist film criticism. She explains that “women on the screen are often nothing more than cultural stereotypes.” And these stereotypes are usually negative and “reinforce the idea of women’s inferiority,” she says. She then describes cinema-specific approaches to women in film. According to Fabe, feminist film theorists were able to “demonstrate how film’s unique means of representation and specific appeal help construct or naturalize denigrating ways of looking at women.” The film Dance, Girl, Dance features many of the conventional film narratives that feminist film theorists have criticized. The characters played by Lucille Ball and Maureen O’Hara represent a common cultural stereotype of woman as the burlesque dancer. Ball plays a sort of “femme fatale,” like the stereotypical “blonde bombshell” type. A recurring scene is when she goes behind a tree and pretends to be taking her clothes off; it’s a teaser for the audience, which is mostly male.

In contrast, Fabe points out how the plot in Mermaids “focuses on the concerns and desires of its female protagonist,” Polly. Instead of the usual male hero, Polly is a very unlikely heroine. Fabe says that “if the film is read as a fairy tale, then “Polly needs no prince to redeem her. The happy ending comes when she learns to value herself and discovers kindred spirits with whom to share her work.” The character of Polly is quite interesting and quirky. I don’t want to label her or make assumptions, but she seems to have some sort of “difference,” like Autism Spectrum Disorder (of which I am very familiar). This is never dealt with directly in the narrative, except that everyone calls her “simple.” When we see her interacting with other people, she is very awkward. One example is the scene when she’s at a Japanese restaurant with Gabrielle (the curator) and we see her trying to figure out how to sit down on the floor. And when Gabrielle orders sake, Polly orders milk, which is a very weird choice to make at a Japanese restaurant. But even though she’s portrayed as someone plain, in her daydreams she’s doing impossible things and she’s in impossible worlds – until something from the real world pulls her back to reality.

“Exploring women’s desires”

According to Fabe, one of the things that makes Mermaids an example of counter-cinema is “the depth with which it explores the dynamics of female psychology, specifically the inner worlds of women … a theme rarely treated in mainstream cinema.” In the film, we see Polly exploring her feelings for Gabrielle. She states that she’s had relationships with men before, but we don’t know if these were sexual or not. Many times, she describes how she’s romantically involved with Gabrielle, but there is an absence of sexuality. In a way, she seems asexual, but I don’t want to label her. The better term for Polly would be bisexual. She’s stated that she’s in love with Gabrielle, but she doesn’t want to have sex with her. And that relationship is never kindled.

Although it was filmed decades years earlier, Where Are My Children? also explores aspects of women’s desires, especially concerning whether they want to have children or not. The topic of contraception was culturally relevant at the time, but it was unusual for this to be the theme of a mainstream film produced in Hollywood. The film’s narrative about birth control - and how abortion is used as a method of birth control by the protagonist, Edith – was very controversial at the time. After the National Board of Review rejected the film, the director went through many edits before the final version was released. And although the film explored Edith’s desires about motherhood and her independent choices, the ending seems to offer the mainstream message that she was wrong to deny her husband the children that he might have had.

“Departures from mainstream cinema style”

Fabe describes how the cinematic style of Mermaids “undermines the mainstream film convention that aligns the spectator with an all-seeing camera eye (the eye of God) with access to an unmediated reality unfolding on the screen before us.” In Mermaids, this style is unusual because it is a person talking directly to the camera. This is similar to the style of some current TV shows such as “Parks and Recreation,” “30 Rock,” and “The Office.” These are all comedies and it’s very apparent that these are fictional but certain parts are played as if these were documentaries. In this way, fictional people are documenting fictional life. In Mermaids, Polly’s recordings operate in the same way. It’s evident what she’s doing and easy to follow along in the narrative. There’s a clear distinction between the actual movie and Polly’s discussions with the audience. At the same time, the style is very different from mainstream films.

A similar cinematic style is used in The Watermelon Woman but with less success, in my opinion. In this film, the style is a lot more confusing and hard to follow. For instance, there are cinematic angles where people are filmed in environments where they don’t see the camera. The style comes across as jumpy as if the story is going in way too many directions. It’s hard to make sense of it and sometimes it feels like a reality TV show to me. It was difficult for me to tell if the film was fictional or not; a lot of times it seemed like both. Many parts of the film made it seem like a documentary, which just added to the confusion. It’s further complicated because the director, Cheryl, stars as herself; so, the fictional version of Cheryl is making a documentary, too. Also, there are many other people in the film who are playing themselves, which blurs the line between fiction and documentary.

“Rethinking cinematic voyeurism”

Mulvey and Fabe argue that counter cinema “subverts most male-centered conventions of female representation by refusing the voyeuristic pleasure of objectifying or fetishizing women and it also interferes with the male-active, female-passive, dynamics of most mainstream films.” The male gaze is often the one that is pushed upon the viewer, as opposed to the female gaze. The intention is that the viewer is supposed to see females as objects, to objectify women. The more mainstream, traditional, approach to voyeurism is evident in the first film we viewed, Rear Window. In Rear Window, we only see everything from Jeffrey’s apartment because he is confined to a wheelchair. So, we can only see the other characters and events from his window and his point of view. Therefore, there are many instances in the film of how his male gaze objectifies women. One example is the ballet dancer who is only known as “Miss Torso” because that is what Jeff calls her. He doesn’t call her “Miss Ballet” or “Miss Dancer.” Instead, he objectifies her by naming her for her body part. And then there’s “Miss Lonely Hearts,” as Jeff calls her. He names her that because he thinks she’s lonely because she doesn’t have a man in her life. So, again, his nickname is more about objectifying her in relation to men.

Fabe discusses the cinematic gaze and how Mermaids takes a different approach to voyeurism. In the film, Polly exhibits a lot of voyeuristic tendencies in her hobby as a photographer. She is always looking for things to photograph. For instance, in the park, she follows the couple into the woods where they are making out. She likes the idea of seeing something new and different and she uses her camera to gather as much information about it as possible. She doesn’t just photograph people, either. For example, she will capture buildings and other touristy sites. We get an idea of all the types of things she photographs when the story shows her in her apartment developing photos in the darkroom. When she does take a picture of people, she wants it to be candid and not posed. An example is when she asks if she can take a picture of the woman with her toddler. In Polly’s photo, the woman is not smiling for the camera. Instead, she is smiling at her kid. So, they are not interacting with Polly’s camera. She wants to just capture a moment. It’s interesting because for Polly it’s like a window into other people’s lives.

Conclusion

Based on what we’ve learned from the films and readings, I do think an argument can be made for a female gaze but not a female aesthetic. However, I think I’ve Heard the Mermaids Singing is successful in presenting a uniquely feminist vision on film as counter-cinema. This is accomplished through: the choice of a female protagonist, who is quirky and different; the plot which explores the thoughts and romantic desires of the female protagonist; the cinematic style which falls in the gray area between fiction and documentary; and the way the protagonist’s passion for photography is used in the narrative to redefine voyeurism.