Monday, August 31, 2009


Book Report
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Folks who have been 2Blowhards readers for more than a year might remember that I have been thinking about writing a well-illustrated book dealing with painters who were bypassed by art history -- many of whom I've been featuring here. (My most recent (I think) posting about the proposed book is here.) I was about to send a package of material (prospectus, contents, CV, a couple of sample chapters) to publishers last fall. Then the current economic crisis hit. I thought the uncertainty of the times would make publishers more leery than usual about accepting new works, so decided to hold off until things settled down. And, by golly, things have settled down to the point where the shape of the economy over the next year or so is fairly clear. It's not a pretty sight. But it's better than things seemed last October and, as noted, it's fairly clear. I might as well get the process started. Below are extracts from the "Subject" section of the three-page prospectus I'm still fiddling with. I hope it will give you a picture of what I'm up to in this project. Critiques and suggestions would be helpful. There seems to be a hole in mainstream histories of painting starting at the point where Impressionism entered the scene. Such histories usually focus on the various modernist movements beginning with Impressionism and continuing through (among others) Post-Impressionism, Fauvism, Cubism, Futurism, Dada, Surrealism, Abstract Expressionism, Pop Art, Op Art and so on up to today’s newest artistic thing. And the painters who didn’t participate in any of these schools? They are seldom worthy of mention unless they are so famous they can’t be ignored: think Edward Hopper and Andrew Wyeth. Also sometimes included might be painters such as John Singer Sargent, Joachim Sorolla and J.W. Waterhouse whose reputations have been on the rise for some time now. Perhaps the same could be said for non-modernist schools such as California plein-air painters active 1900-30. Indeed, there are many books about individual non-modernist painters and non-modernist painters grouped by geography and, sometimes, style. But apparently no one has tried to present a general history of non-modernist painting from 1870 to the present in book form. That is the task of this proposed book. After a few paragraphs outlining the history of modernism and non-modenrist reaction to it, I conclude my discussion of the book's subject as follows: The book proposed here is intended to provide coverage of many of the excellent artists who, for various reasons, failed to embrace modernism. The contexts mentioned in the preceding paragraphs form the framework for the presentation. Why does any of this matter? It matters because there is a good chance that modernism in its various guises lacks staying power. Arguments are presented in the enclosed draft of Chapter 1. But the gist is that modernism has strayed so far from basic human experience that future generations will not easily relate to it, unlike the... posted by Donald at August 31, 2009 | perma-link | (13) comments

Saturday, August 29, 2009


Gently Admitting Your Political Position
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- There is a good deal of wisdom in that old admonition that one shouldn't discuss religion and politics in social situations. I live inside the Seattle city limits, a place that is overwhelmingly liberal. Given my "elite" educational background, folks around here are likely to assume that their politics are my politics. A few days ago we happened to get an impromptu tour of a new house in the neighborhood. As we walked in, I noticed Keith Olbermann sternly staring from the television screen; clearly we had entered a strongly liberal place. Anyhow, the four of us had a jolly 20 minutes on the tour. The other couple discovered my educational and professional background, and I found out something of theirs. Now that I have finally learned to pretty well keep my mouth shut in such situations, they didn't learn that I am an apostate, seduced by The Dark Force. If the social relationship we established continues, a tiny bit of the truth will likely emerge by happenstance. Even so, I'll probably only hint at it and then try to change the subject. Perhaps my best tactic is to mention that I cast my first vote for John F. Kennedy and then mumble something about the Democratic Party drifting away from where it was in the early 1960s (the truth). Nevertheless, it's a tricky matter if you don't want to ruin your social life. Speaking of tricky, things are really dicey when you don't know where other people stand politically. While avoidance of political subjects remains the best policy, I do pay attention to possible clues and adjust my conversation accordingly. Of course a liberal would face similar problems if living in a conservative enclave. I'm pretty sure that many readers are a lot more experienced in dealing with politics in social settings than I am. So I'm curious what you do. Do you avoid the subject? Do you pretend that you agree with the people you are with? Or do you have effective ways of communicating your position without ruffling feathers? Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 29, 2009 | perma-link | (80) comments

Friday, August 28, 2009


More Finds
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Maybe saturated fat is actually good for you. * The excellent Eadeses have a tempting new book on offer. * Filmmaker and comedian Tom Naughton -- creator of the eye-opening, amusing, and very informative low-carb documentary "Fat Head" -- is interviewed: Part One, Part Two. * Why not add a little daring and bravado to the social mix? Before anyone gets prissy on me: Really, what else do most kids have to contribute but their mischief and their sex appeal? (NSFW) * Strikeout king Nolan Ryan is now raising cattle. * Novelist Lev Grossman thinks that, where the novel goes, the 21st century is going to see a revival of plots and stories. This is modernism-has-passed-its-sell-by-date stuff of a kind that I've been hammering away at for 7 years on this blog, sigh -- but still, it's nice to see these ideas starting to show up in the mainstream. * I've been finding the week of user-generated content -- recipes, tales, and exercise routines -- over at Mark Sisson's blog very enjoyable and inspiring. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 28, 2009 | perma-link | (13) comments

Blogging Note
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Aside from unusually heavy political news this month, the calendar still insists that it's August, which apparently has something to do with dogs, days and such. [Yawns] So, what to write about? Well, since it has been almost four years since I signed on as Second (in terms of posting frequency) or Third (in terms of active seniority) Banana hereabouts, I thought I'd mention a few things about 2Blowhards that might be of interest to newer (and perhaps to some long-time) readers. Over in the panel to the left is a segment with one-sentence descriptions of this blog's writers along with our email addresses. My name happens to be listed first because the names are in alphabetical order. This artifact leads some folks to think that 2Blowhards is my blog, so I occasionally get emails proposing advertising, link-sharing and other fabulous deals. I also get emails regarding everyday blog-related stuff. But [bad alphabet! ... naughty, naughty!] it's Michael who's the 2Blowhards proprietor and (unfortunately for him) should be the target for any pestering or (lucky him) be deserving of any kudos you want to pass along. As most of you know, Friedrich was the other member of the original 2Blowhards pair. He was a college pal of Michael and their email correspondence about the arts and such was the genesis of this blog. Business and family responsibilities were such that Friedrich had to cut back blogging activities, though he still contributes thoughtful, well-received postings. Fenster and Francis posted for a while after Friedrich changed his focus, but are inactive contributors (until they decide to post something). I don't know how how other "group blogs" -- those with more than one writer -- are organized. However, I suspect that their organization is pretty loose, as it is here. When I joined, Michael's main expectation was that I should contribute at least two posts per week -- one being longer, the other could be short. A little later he mentioned that, if one of us posted something that had taken a good deal of effort to create such as interviews, then the other bloggers would, as a courtesy, hold off a day or so from burying that posting with new postings. Since Michael lives in New York City, Friedrich lives in the Los Angeles area and I live in Seattle, we don't get together in person much. Actually, Michael and I have only met once, that being near Santa Barbara, a favorite 2Blowhards haunt. We've talked on the phone , but mostly when I was getting on board. We email once in a while to give the other a heads-up. For example, if Michael has an interview series in the works, he'll let me know. And I'll inform him if I'm going to be traveling and unable to blog at my usual pace of three or four postings a week. Otherwise, we work independently, monitoring future content using the "Entries" feature of the blogging software. Due... posted by Donald at August 28, 2009 | perma-link | (5) comments

Thursday, August 27, 2009


More Conservative Than Liberal
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- An interesting new poll from Gallup has found that -- despite the number of Dems currently in political office -- more Americans self-identify as conservative than as liberal in all 50 states. A not-suprising conclusion: "While Americans' party identification and political ideology are related, they are by no means one and the same." Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 27, 2009 | perma-link | (20) comments

Wednesday, August 26, 2009


Bagatelles
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Patrick Courrielche wonders if the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) is being politicized, urging artists to create works sympathetic to the Administration's programs (via Jude at the Hugh Hewitt blog). This leads me to wonder how much Franklin Roosevelt's employment programs for artists did something similar. There was a Progressive tinge to some government sponsored art in those days, but I haven't studied the subject enough to know whether it was something that bubbled up from artists with strong leftist beliefs (and was tolerated by administrators of the arts programs) or was actually encouraged by some of those administrators. * Even though some Progressives are really uncomfortable with advertising and marketing, others seem perfectly happy to push customers' hot buttons. Note the buzz-words painted on the wall PCC (Puget Consumers' Co-op) is a Seattle area food market cooperative (background info here) appealing to the Whole Foods and Trader Joe's crowds, but with the twist that it's non-profit. * Slogan seen on back of a lady's sweatshirt this morning: I didn't claw my way to the top of the food chain to eat vegetables Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 26, 2009 | perma-link | (9) comments

Weight and Brains
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * A new study shows that the brains of obese people deteriorate. * Michelle has lost more than 70 pounds by following a low-carbish / Primal-ish regime. Here's Michelle's own blog. * Read our q&a with Primal fitness guru Mark Sisson: Part One, Part Two. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 26, 2009 | perma-link | (7) comments

Bill Links
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Bill Kauffman celebrates the just-deceased Western novelist Elmer Kelton, and the hillbilly actor and '70s movie icon Warren Oates. Bill Kauffman himself is an exciting and significant cultural figure. Access all five parts of our interview with Kauffman from this posting. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 26, 2009 | perma-link | (0) comments

Tuesday, August 25, 2009


Finds
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * How did superstar photographer Annie Leibowitz wind up $24 million in debt? * Why are Paul Krugman and Niall Ferguson lobbing grenades at each other? (I wrote a posting about Krugman back here.) * Thanks to Bryan for spotting this provocative look at health care in America. * Nearly twice as many Americans are on antidepressants as was the case in the mid-'90s. (Link thanks to Razib.) * The Primal crowd shows off their breakfasts and lunches. Read our interview with Primal guru Mark Sisson: Part One, Part Two. * There's a website for everything. Best, Michael * UPDATE: What the Western-guy love of Asian chicks looks like from the point of view of a Westernized Asian chick. (Link found thanks to Days of Broken Arrows.) The gabfest continues at Half Sigma. (Link thanks to Peter.) Yet more.... posted by Michael at August 25, 2009 | perma-link | (32) comments

Monday, August 24, 2009


Ears Are Ugly
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- The punchline is the title of this posting. Have you ever given human ears a good, hard look? They're oddly shaped. Skin curling, folding, even drooping. All this concentrated into areas a couple of inches high and about an inch and a half wide. Tacked on the side of a smooth part of the head. And sometimes sticking out like air brakes on the sides of a F-86 Sabre jet fighter. I'll admit that some ears are less awful than most. Delicate ears that lie fairly flat against the head of a pert young woman can be tolerable -- especially in comparison to those of president Lyndon B. Johnson. Still, from a purely sexual-aesthetic standpoint, how did the human race survive with everyone sporting such seeming deformities? We should have become extinct due to mutual gross-out. I have a hypothesis: We tune them out. That's when they aren't explicitly hidden by being covered over by hair, as many women's hairdos do. When looking at someone's head we tend to focus on the eyes (especially), mouth, nose, chin and other features of the face itself. If one is within a couple of feet of the other person and focusing frontally on the face, features farther away, including the ears, fall slightly out of focus and therefore aren't being noticed. Hmm. Depth-of-field as a survival mechanism. Interesting concept. Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 24, 2009 | perma-link | (7) comments

Sunday, August 23, 2009


Popular History = Drama
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Longtime readers might recall that from time to time I claim inability to create works of fiction: to plot, in particular. That doesn't mean I ignore the craft of fiction. Occasionally I'll thumb (or scroll) through a how-to book or article on the subject. One source on science-fiction writing I recall from many years ago stressed putting the protagonist into a dramatic situation right off the bat; this advice was primarily for short stories, but applicable to novels also. There is good reason for such advice. People like drama -- but usually if the drama applies to someone else, I might add. Personally experienced drama can be upsetting or even frightening while its outcome remains uncertain. For example, how do you feel when flying through turbulent air and the airplane is lurching and skewing while its wings flex alarmingly? You might also recall that I'm a history buff. When I was young, I gravitated to the exciting parts. This was pretty much the same experience as when I watched U.S. Cavalry movies such as "Fort Apache" or "She Wore a Yellow Ribbon" -- I squirmed during the romantic scenes hoping the movie would quickly get to the Indian-fighting sequences. So my history reading focused on wars and other conflicts or adventures. For that reason, I've never paid detailed attention to U.S. political history between 1915 and 1898 except for the Mexican and Civil wars. If my interest concerns itself with science and technology, then other years and eras would apply. Nevertheless, I didn't get very far into Paul Johnson's The Birth of the Modern: World Society 1815-1830 because it dealt with a period I never really wanted to sink my teeth into. Please don't think my history reading focuses exclusively on 1861-65, 1914-18, 1939-45 and other strictly war-delimited periods. I've always been fascinated by the interwar (1919-1938) years, for instance. Moreover, I have read about plenty of non-wartime periods; it's just that this reading is comparatively thin compared to the action bits. And I do read biographies. But again, I tend to focus on important personalities associated with dramatic times. Examples include political personalities Louis XIV, Richelieu, Talleyrand, T. Roosevelt, F.D. Roosevelt and Churchill as well as military figures such as Napoleon, U.S. Grant, Foch, Eisenhower and Patton. I should admit that as I've gotten older, I've delved more deeply into nuts-'n'-bolts aspects of history. This is related to an increasing interest in what makes things in general tick. Too many people these days (I base this on anecdotal evidence) seem pretty ignorant of history. Biased me, I think this is a bad thing because history is what allows us to put current times into perspective, and lack of perspective likely leads to making more mistakes than otherwise. I think our president's current problems are partly due to his seeming ignorance of history (and economics). (Just what subjects did he take while in college? Does anyone know?) I might be wrong -- I'm relying... posted by Donald at August 23, 2009 | perma-link | (15) comments

Saturday, August 22, 2009


"Great Jobs" That I Wouldn't Do
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- I saw it embroidered on baby togs. And I've noticed that there's a beverage by that name. It's Rock Star. Got me to thinking. Thinking that just about the last so-called Great Job I'd want to have would be that of rock star. This assumes that I was young enough -- Mick Jagger's age, perhaps -- and had any musical abilities -- which I don't. Another Great Job I'd be happy to avoid would be White House Press Secretary. Yet another would be editor of Time magazine. Well, that's given the publication's current status of lacking any rational reason for continued existence. Forty years ago, and if offered a lot of independence, it really might have been a Great Job for little old me. Fine and good. But, Mr. Negative Wise Guy (so you are thinking), just what fancy jobs would you take? I wouldn't mind being a research director in a field I knew something about. Being a college professor would be okay too. What I really would like to be is a studio head in the styling department of a major automobile company. And you? Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 22, 2009 | perma-link | (8) comments

Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Ilkka's back! Brainy, droll, and observant, Ilkka was always one of my favorite bloggers. I'm very happy he's blogging again. * Randall Parker lays out some objections to the Cash For Clunkers program. * The excellent libertarian writer Karen De Coster (here's her blog; she also posts at Lew Rockwell) does workouts that you might characterize as Primal, or maybe Paleo, or maybe Functional. * Richard Nikoley has a reason why you might want to avoid the sugar. * Should the director of the struggling LA County Museum of Art really be paid $1 million a year? * In what ways do politicians resemble psychopaths? * An interview with designer Rob Janoff, who -- back in 1977 -- designed Apple's logo. Talk about having an influence on our shared visual culture. * Here's a talk with the brilliant (and controversial) screenwriting guru Robert McKee. * MBlowhard Rewind: I wrote about the art of narrative fiction (and praised Robert McKee) back here. Best, Michael UPDATE: The ballerina-author Toni Bentley writes a smart and funny review of a new book about sex for pay. Nice passage: Why is sex supposed to be free? It never is ... While good girls require dinner, trips, “commitment” or even an engagement ring for sex, here is a book by those who simply get the cash upfront. Even better: This collection is a wonderful reminder that good writing is not about knowing words, grammar or Faulkner, but having that rare ability to tell the truth, an ability that education and sophistication often serve to conceal. Take that, fine-writing connoisseurs. I raved about Toni's writing back here.... posted by Michael at August 22, 2009 | perma-link | (9) comments

Friday, August 21, 2009


Erotica Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Remind anybody else of their college years? * "My father always told me to do something I love," Danielle writes, explaining why she became an escort. * Roissy takes a jaunt around the internet. As always chez Roissy, the comments aren't to be skipped. * Ferdinand Bardamu takes a fun and smart swing at some of the same questions. * Also from the Roissysphere ... Hope offers some sensible advice to the gals on how to love men. * Alexa recalls getting pierced. * Alexa also turned up this informative history of the courtesan. * It's a new celebrity sex-tape! No, it's just three friends having fun! In the nude. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 21, 2009 | perma-link | (21) comments

Wednesday, August 19, 2009


Seattle Bags Bag-Tax
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Seattle "played against character" in yesterday's vote on a referendum regarding a proposed 20 cents per bag tax on paper and plastic bags of the sort your groceries are placed in. Seattle is a very liberal place. Its city council system is set up so that candidates are voted on by the entire city, not solely by residents of individual council districts. So if the electorate is pretty liberal, its city council has been distilled to be even more so. (Note to commenters: there's a fair chance righties would set up a similar mechanism were they in power, politicians being what they are.) Earlier this year the council stopped worrying about parks, police, sanitation and other trivia and decided to Save The Planet. So they voted on the bag tax mentioned above. (If they were serious about saving trees by reducing reliance on paper products, they also might have applied a massive tax on the paper used to print the Seattle Times. Oh well, maybe they planned to get to that matter next year.) Citizens were not happy, so a petition was quickly circulated and received more than enough valid signatures to place the council's ordnance on the August 18th ballot as a referendum. As of late last evening, with half the ballots counted, Seattle voters were turning down the bag tax 58 percent to 42. No doubt bag tax supporters will whine about "outside" money being spent to defeat their pet issue. But heavy spenders don't always buy elections; voters are not totally unthinking. Besides, the pro-tax arguments in the official voters' pamphlet and elsewhere stressed all the idealistic issues one would expect a well-educated, liberal electorate to embrace. I doubt that Seattle is on its way to becoming a cesspool of reaction. Besides, many grocery stores sell reusable grocery bags and I see quite a few shoppers using them. But all this is voluntary, not coercive. What a concept. Even in Seattle. Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 19, 2009 | perma-link | (39) comments

Tuesday, August 18, 2009


Jean Harlow Was Nice-Looking, Actually
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Jean Harlow was the first Blonde Bombshell movie star, dominating the Thirties scene until her death in 1937, shortly after her 26th birthday. Her only true successor in the Bombshell department was Marilyn Monroe. That's the legend, anyhow. My problem was that I couldn't quite buy it. Yes, Harlow had a nice shape, but her facial features seemed a little too soft. And then there was the 1930s fashion of plucked eyebrows replaced by a thin, penciled line. Not to mention the watered-down holdover of the 1920s' bee-sting lipstick application that narrowed the mouth while exaggerating the thickness of the lips near the mouth's midpoint. Yesterday I stumbled across the "real" Jean Harlow while reading up on the movie "Hell's Angels". It was released 15 November 1930, before the plucked eyebrow fad started. Let's make a comparison. Here are some photos of Harlow later in her career George Hurrell's classic bearskin rug photo A "glam" pose with penciled eyebrows Frontal pose with penciled eyebrows Here are photos from 1929 or the very early 30s Autographed photo Publicity photo "Hell's Angels" still - two-negative Technicolor From our 2009 perspective, Harlow looks more "natural" and, to me, far more attractive in the early photos than in the later ones. Fashion being what it is, there's a risk that I'm blinkered by current standards of beauty. Even so, I'm pleased to know what Jean Harlow really looked like before 1930s glamorization took hold. Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 18, 2009 | perma-link | (15) comments

More Econ Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Nicolas Gelinas offers an enlightening history of the "too big to fail" doctrine. * Dermot Quinn thinks that we could use a little help from Wilhelm Ropke (FWIW, my own favorite economist). * Readers Digest is filing for bankruptcy. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 18, 2009 | perma-link | (1) comments

Monday, August 17, 2009


Cars Should be X Times Taller Than Tires
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Even though I'm a frustrated, never-was automobile stylist, I do keep my eyes open. Or flatter myself thinking so. So I notice stuff. I also scribble car designs: been doing that since before I was in high school. Fairly early on, when blocking out the proportions of a dream car sedan or coupe I was designing, I hit on the proportion of the height of the car measured from the ground should be about twice the diameter of the car's tire. (Sports cars designs could ignore this ratio.) I've been using this rule of thumb ever since. Lately, I've been paying attention to photos of actual cars from various eras and checking that ratio. In general, the most attractive cars, other details aside, tend to have tire diameters that are half the height of the car -- plus or minus a small margin. American sedans for many years have tended to be a little taller relative to tire diameter than they "should be." During the late 1950s this might have been due to the tendency of stylists to ignore or de-emphasize wheels and tires, focusing instead on designs inspired by aircraft or even Buck Rogers and Flash Gordon space ships. Today's SUVs and Crossovers also tend to be a bit small in the tire relative to their height. To me, proportionally large wheels and tires suggest power and are appropriate for sports cars and performance sedans. Little tires I associate with small cars that are puny in the power department. Below are some examples to help me make my case. I'll start with some cars from the 1930s and then hop to recent cars with one significant detour. Gallery Bucciali TAV 12 - 1932 Bucciali was an expensive, low-production French car that, in its final guise, featured outrageous styling that I dearly love. The car is much shorter than twice the diameter of the tires, stressing power over theoretical beauty. Cord Beverly sedan - 1937 Cords for 1936-37 were heartstoppingly attractive -- for me, anyway. Like the Bucciali shown above, they demand an emotional reaction. Unlike the brutal Bucciali, Cords are sensuous beings tempered only by their "coffin nose" hood and moderne grille treatment. The Beverly pictured here is the least attractive Cord due to its bulging trunk, a feature added to counter complaints about lack of storage space in its Westchester sedans. I chose the Beverly photo because it allows one to check the height-diameter ratio -- which only slightly exceeds 2. Willys - late 1930s Willys retreated to small, inexpensive cars to ride out the Depression. The tire diameter is noticeably less than half the height of the car. Morris Mini - 1964 When the Mini was introduced, its tiny wheels and tires shocked me to the point where its other virtues (mostly in terms of its engineering design) escaped me. It seemed more like a toy than a serious car. If I were a rich car-collector, would I have an early... posted by Donald at August 17, 2009 | perma-link | (4) comments

Sunday, August 16, 2009


Econ Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Guy Sorman introduces Rama Cont, who argues that traditional economics fails to grasp the complexity and dynamic nature of financial markets. Interesting passage: While the mainstream view [of recent troubles] explains the crisis by a lack of regulation, Cont believes that misguided regulations, often applied by not-too-smart regulators, were also a major factor ... The regulation seemed clverly designed, Cont says, but proved useless in a real-life situation. * Robert Samuelson offers a reader's guide to the recession. * Whole Foods CEO John Mackey offers an alternative to Obamacare. * Obamacare and illegal immigrantion is turning into a minor issue. One angle I haven't seen much discussed where this topic is concerned is a favorite of mine. Let's say that, under the new system, illegal immigrants wind up covered. Won't we in effect be saying to all residents of Mexico, "Hey, if you can make it over the border, not only will we not chase you down and deport you, we'll give you a public education and free health insurance. Come one, come all!" * Meet Madoff's mistress. * Nassim ("Black Swan") Taleb and Nouriel ("Dr. Doom") Roubini, interviewed on CNBC: Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 16, 2009 | perma-link | (4) comments

Saturday, August 15, 2009


Dealing With Divided School Loyalties
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- For quite a while now some people have been foolishly trying to abolish human nature. Maybe they use themselves as examples by claiming to be "citizens of the world" and not of some grubby country. Perhaps they try to foster "noncompetitive sports" in the schoolyard. Or even promise, as did our beloved leader Barack H. Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign, that we would enter an era of post-partisanship if he were elected. Part of human nature is the tendency to create and join teams, and that tendency is hard to swat down. Poor us, this predisposition can be strong and has the potential to create problems when we are faced with a situation of competing loyalties. Or maybe team-choosing isn't much of an issue. While the tendency is there, its focus and intensity can be fleeting. Let's say you are a Chicago Cubs fan and that, by some strange circumstance, the Cubbies don't make it to the World Series. So what do you do? Forget about baseball till February? Root for the National League team (as a sort of extension of the Cubs)? Or cheer on whatever team happens to strike your fancy? My take is that while the potential is always there, it gets triggered by circumstances. Consider the matter of loyalty to a school, something that can range from strong to weak to even negative. Ordinarily this loyalty would be poised against a generic "other" or perhaps one or more traditional rival school (Michigan vs. Ohio State, Harvard vs. Yale, etc.). But if you attended more than one school (at the same educational level), which one do you root for most strongly? I'll have to go autobiographical at this point and leave it to commenters to add details. I had no conflicts until I was in grad school. I got a masters at the University of Washington (where I spent my undergraduate years) and then went to Dear Old Penn for a doctorate. So do I "bleed purple" for the Huskies or am I loyal to the "red and blue " of those ferocious Quakers? Tough call. I spent more years at Washington and live about three miles from campus, so the school remains pretty much in my face. Dear Old Penn, on the other hand, is across the country in Philadelphia, a town my wife loathes, so I seldom get there. Fortunately, the two schools don't play each other in football, the only sport I care much about; this means I don't have to make a choice regarding where in the stands to sit. Dear Old Penn has more prestige than Washington and I prefer its red-blue-plus-white colors to Washington's purple and gold. I suppose I favor Dear Old Penn slightly for reasons of snobbery, aesthetics, and perhaps because I attended there more recently. On the other hand, I'm not much pleased with either school and refuse to donate money because, like most of academia, they seem to be in... posted by Donald at August 15, 2009 | perma-link | (10) comments

Friday, August 14, 2009


Techie Opinions Wanted: Apply Within
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Yes friends, it's good ol' bleg time here at 2Blowhards. ("Bleg" is an occasionally-used term for begging on a blog -- get it?) I have questions and would appreciate answers, so here goes: * * * * * I use the Firefox web browser on my Windows computer and the built-in Safari browser on my Mac laptop. Firefox seems to do a better job, so I'm wondering if I should download it to the Mac. Does Firefox for the Macintosh have pretty much the same features as its Windows version? Do you prefer the Mac version to Apple's Safari? * * * * * My digital camera performs well in most circumstances, but has defects I find annoying. Its telephoto zooming is jerky when trying to frame a subject, and resulting pictures are often blurred due to user-induced wiggle (even when I think I'm holding the camera steady). When taking non-flash photos indoors and outdoors (in the evening or at night) with the flash switched off, I often get blurred results. What I would like is a sub-$400 camera that has decent (mechanical, not digital) stabilization along with smooth zoom operation. Charley Parker over at the Lines and Colors blog shopped for something similar a while back and describes his results here. Was Parker's choice a good one? Is there something better on the market (technology changes rapidly)? Anyway, let me know your thoughts and personal experiences. Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 14, 2009 | perma-link | (18) comments

Thursday, August 13, 2009


Q&A With Mark Sisson, Part Two
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- A couple of days ago, I introduced the eating-and-fitness coach Mark Sisson, who advocates what he calls the Primal Blueprint. I'm crazy about Mark's website, and I think his new book is downright sensational. (Buy a copy at Amazon.) Speaking from personal experience: I've obtained excellent results from doing my eating and my exercising in a more Primal way. Yesterday I ran Part One of my interview with Mark. Today -- in the second part of my two-part interview with Mark -- I talk with him about the Food Pyramid, "herd medicine," and what it's like to publish your own book. *** AN INTERVIEW WITH MARK SISSON Part Two Michael Blowhard: What sort of efforts do you and your team put into evaluating the studies and the science? Mark Sisson: My staff and I spend thousands of hours collectively going over the research every year, updating our knowledge base and refining our philosophy and our advice. No practicing physician today has a tenth of the time to do that kind of research. MB: What's it like to be out there in public on a regular basis? MS: That brings its own benefits. My blog has hundreds of thousands of visitors who are free to comment on or critique anything I write, which often forces me to further substantiate (or even alter or abandon) my position. Conversely, most research scientists are so engrossed in the minutiae of their particular specialty that they haven’t the luxury of a wide perspective to provide general lifestyle and health advice, let alone synthesize a world-view on that. MB: Many scientists do seem to have a narrow focus. MS: I certainly respect and admire the work they do, and I call upon many of those studies every single day. But I do so understanding that not all research provides an actual answer to a specific question. MB: Where health issues go, so much so often turns to be less certain than a civilian thinks it’s going to be. MS: For any health issue you posit we can each find opposing research to support our points. How do we know which one is correct? The lipid hypothesis of heart disease drove every well-financed study and every major new heart disease drug for 40 years, but there’s extremely solid research now that proves that the lipid hypothesis is wickedly flawed if not downright inaccurate. The USDA's Food Pyramid has had grains as the very basis of a recommended daily diet for 40 or 50 years. MB: The authorities seem to have driven themselves into a corner on that one. MS: Despite overwhelming new evidence that excess carbs (mostly from grains) have driven the obesity and type 2 diabetes epidemics, do you think the US government would ever admit to having given wrong advice -- even if it were shown to be 100% conclusive? The process of Public Health Policy decision-making is as inefficient, unscientific and perverse a system as could ever be... posted by Michael at August 13, 2009 | perma-link | (22) comments

Wednesday, August 12, 2009


Q&A With Mark Sisson, Part One
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Yesterday I introduced the eating-and-fitness coach Mark Sisson, who advocates what he calls the Primal Blueprint. I'm crazy about Mark's website, and I think his new book is downright sensational. (Buy a copy at Amazon.) Speaking from personal experience: I've obtained excellent results from doing my eating and my exercising in a more Primal way. Today -- in the first part of my two-part interview with Mark -- I talk with him about the downside of grain consumption, about the perils of overtraining, and about how basing your fitness program on evolutionary wisdom can bring fast and lasting benefits. *** AN INTERVIEW WITH MARK SISSON Part One Michael Blowhard: Hi, Mark. Fun to run into you again. I remember you as one of the best athletes at our boarding school, as well as one of the most health-aware people I've ever known. Mark Sisson: Yeah, I was pretty health-conscious as a kid, and that mindset certainly carried me through Exeter and Williams. Problem was, I had health issues largely as a result of my voracious reading, my training, and following Conventional Wisdom so closely. MB: What kind? MS: As a top runner, I was putting in far more miles than I ought to have, and I was fueling myself with a diet very high in complex carbs -- especially grains -- just as I had been told to do by some of the best coaches. I could perform pretty well on the track and the roads, but I was certainly not the picture of health. MB: Given how lean and fast you were, I'm surprised to hear that. MS: I had bad skin, chronic bouts of IBS that would often keep me from classes, constant upper respiratory tract infections and later started developing early onset osteoarthritis. It wasn’t until a decade later (a decade of competing at a very high level, yet doing more of the same in terms of training and diet) that the work load and the diet finally ended my competitive career. MB: Ouch. How’d you react? MS: I began to investigate the science behind training and peak performance, and realized that there wasn’t a lot of real science to back it all up. MB: Really? MS: Most of what was going on at the elite level was “monkey see monkey do.” God forbid you should log fewer training miles than the guys you were trying to beat. The high-tech carb-centric diet was based on the need to keep up the high level of training and not on what would promote health. As a result, many of my elite contemporaries have suffered health issues over the years. MB: What’s wrong with high-mileage training? MS: Humans were not meant to run long distances with elevated heart rates for days on end, like I and so many millions have done over the past few decades. MB: What were we built for? MS: Our genes -- the genetic recipe for a healthy, lean, fit... posted by Michael at August 12, 2009 | perma-link | (33) comments

Tuesday, August 11, 2009


Introducing Mark Sisson
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- As some visitors may have noticed, over the last few years I’ve been blogging a lot about food and fitness. Partly this has to do with having been laid off -- er, with having retired. As a downsizing casualty, I have the time and leisure to concern myself a lot more with quality-of-life questions than I once did. But it's mainly been because, despite having a lively-enough mind, I’ve always been a physical guy. I learned early in life that when I treat my body severely, or when I neglect it, I pay a price. Not only do aches and pains pile up, my soul starts to sag and moan too. When, by contrast, I make an effort to foster a respectful relationship with The Bod -- when I’m active, out in the world, and treating The Bod to some love and some pleasure -- my experience of life generally is much improved. I’m bright-eyed: alert, resilient, and optimistic. In the last couple of years I’ve found myself more and more interested in one particular branch of the food-and-fitness world. As far as most Americans are concerned, healthy eating is low-fat eating, and sensible exercise is either loads of cardio or regular sessions of wipe-you-out weightlifting. That’s the mainstream-expert antidote to the usual American-slob predicament. The people I’ve become fascinated by -- the low-carb people (my favorites are Drs. Michael and Mary Dan Eades); the Real Food and Slow Food crowds (especially Nina Planck); Dr. Barry Sears and his Zone Diet; the Weston A. Price Foundation; and the Paleo, Evolutionary, and Primal worlds (especially Loren Cordain, Arthur De Vany, and Mark Sisson) -- dispute all of this. They look at the usual American health-tips litany and wonder: What if lowfat eating contributes to diabetes, cancer, and heart disease? What if the heaps-of-cardio approach to activity produces not health and peace of mind but stress and boredom? What if, in other words, what’s usually thought of as the solution to the usual dispiriting American thing isn’t a solution at all? What if instead it’s contributing to the problem? So what does this crowd peddle as an Alternative Way? One thing they certainly share is a vision of the problem. They generally feel that many Americans are wildly out of touch with their innate rhythms, and that obesity, TV addiction, slobbiness, and distractedness are convincing evidence of this. (FWIW, I agree -- although I also feel that if anyone wants to live on chips and soda pop, spend his / her day driving from parking lot to minimall, and treat his / her brain to regular jolts of “American Idol,” it’s OK with me. It’s also none of my business -- at least until these people start imposing too many of their values and priorities on my life. Then it’s war.) The crowd I favor addresses the problem -- for those who experience it as a problem -- from two directions. One is paleoanthropology. Although some... posted by Michael at August 11, 2009 | perma-link | (9) comments

Monday, August 10, 2009


Terence Cuneo, Literal Artistic Icon
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Continuing the discussion of English illustrators specializing in transportation and military art (I wrote about Frank Wootton here), let's consider Terence Cuneo (1907-1996) whose work was so beloved in some circles that ... Princess Royal unveiling statue of Terence Cuneo in Waterloo Station Cuneo's drawing was more accurate than that of Wootton, but he sometimes got more hard-edge detailing into his paintings than suits my taste. Below are examples of his work beginning with a couple of train paintings -- the genre that led to his Waterloo Station statue. Gallery "Flying Scotsman" Steam engine emerging from shop I think it's a shop and not a train shed, but I might be mistaken. Both paintings avoid the excessive hard detailing I mentioned above. Sir Edward Heath Cuneo also painted portraits. I wonder who selected that blue suit -- the artist or Ted Heath himself. "First Air Post" Like Wootton, Cuneo did airplane illustrations. This depicts final preparations for the initial air mail flight by the RAF from England to the continent in 1918. "The Defense of Calais, 1940" Another Cuneo subject was combat scenes. This shows the British army's Queen Victoria Rifles fighting off German attacks on the Channel port that eventually fell just prior to the Dunkirk evacuations. An account is here. "The Snipe Action" (detail) This is a combat scene probably from the North Africa campaign, 1940-43. The quality of the reproduction isn't good, but offers some idea as to Cuneo's skillful, economical brushwork. "Bentleys at Le Mans, 1929" If Wootton could paint Bentleys (see link above), then Cuneo also could and did. The subject is the Bentley triumphant effort at Le Mans in 1929 where the marque claimed the first four places; race results are here. Cuneo and Wootton were contemporaries and in some respects competitors in that there was a fair amount of overlap in their subject matter. Wootton is best known for his airplanes and Cuneo (in Britain, at least) for his trains. From my standpoint, Cuneo is the better all-rounder thanks to his more accurate drawing, though both created very good paintings that made enjoyable viewing for fans of their genre. Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 10, 2009 | perma-link | (2) comments

Sunday, August 9, 2009


Health Care Reform and the Golden Rule
Friedrich von Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards, I happen to be in the process of reading Thomas Ferguson’s http://www.amazon.com/Golden-Rule-Investment-Competition-Money-Driven/dp/0226243176">Golden Rule: The Investment Theory of Party Competition and the Logic of Money-Driven Political Systems (1995, University of Chicago Press). The title’s a mouthful, I grant, but it’s a pretty interesting book. But as a consequence, when I picked up the L.A. Times today, and my eye fell on a column discussing healthcare reform (“Healthcare debate framed by fear-mongering ads” by David Lazarus), my recent reading of Mr. Ferguson sent off a few sparks. Mr. Lazarus in the L.A. Times says: …a key problem here is that most of us aren’t taking the time to understand the various parts of this admittedly complex equation. Instead, we’re leaving it to interest groups to call the shots, and the debate has devolved into a pathetic shouting match between partisan camps. This certainly struck a chord with what I had very recently read in Golden Rule. To briefly summarize, Mr. Ferguson begins his discussion of the 'investment theory' of politics by quoting Anthony Downs on the prohibitively high cost of gathering the information necessary for the ordinary voter to meaningfully participate in the political process: “The expense of political awareness is so great that no citizen can afford to bear it in every policy area, even if by doing so he could discover places where his intervention would reap large profits.” Mr. Ferguson then goes on to argue that: …in a political system like that of the United States, where even highly motivated voters face comparatively enormous costs when they attempt to acquire, evaluate, and act upon political information, effective electoral control of the government process by voters becomes most unlikely. He continues by asking: …if ordinary voters can’t afford to invest [the necessary large sums required to first understand what's at stake and then to influence] American political parties, then who can? And by virtue of their unique status, do not these “big ticket” investors automatically become the real masters of the political system? Mr. Ferguson explains that such big ticket investors normally amount to businessmen who can draw on corporate resources to pay for political activity and who have a large financial stake in the outcome that justifies the expenditure (unlike the Average Joe). This ‘mastery’ of the political system by large investors does not, of course, imply that voters are irrelevant. But according to Mr. Ferguson: …in situations where information is costly, abstention is possible, and entry into politics through either new parties or existing organizations is expensive and often dangerous…large investors try to assemble the votes they need by making very limited appeals to particular segments of the potential electorate. If it pays some other bloc of major investors to advertise and mobilize, these appeals [will] be vigorously contested… Gee, that “vigorously contested” sounds a lot like, um, what’s been going on in Florida. It has dawned on me that it would be of nice to have a detailed explanation of who... posted by Friedrich at August 9, 2009 | perma-link | (23) comments

Saturday, August 8, 2009


Jazz Goes Geriatric
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Today's Wall Street Journal includes the article "Can Jazz Be Saved" by Terry Teachout suggesting that jazz is going the way of classical music, if its audience is any indication. He cites results from the National Endowment for the Arts’ most recent Survey of ­Public Participation in the Arts done with the cooperation of the Census Bureau After citing a few statistics, Teachout offers the following: These numbers indicate that the audience for jazz in America is both aging and shrinking at an alarming rate. What I find no less revealing, though, is that the median age of the jazz audience is now comparable to the ages for attendees of live performances of classical music (49 in 2008 vs. 40 in 1982), opera (48 in 2008 vs. 43 in 1982), nonmusical plays (47 in 2008 vs. 39 in 1982) and ballet (46 in 2008 vs. 37 in 1982). In 1982, by contrast, jazz fans were much younger than their high-culture counterparts. What does this tell us? I suspect it means, among other things, that the average American now sees jazz as a form of high art. Nor should this come as a surprise to anyone, since most of the jazz musicians that I know feel pretty much the same way. They regard themselves as artists, not entertainers, masters of a musical language that is comparable in seriousness to classical music—and just as off-putting to pop-loving listeners who have no more use for Wynton Marsalis than they do for Felix Mendelssohn. ... Even if I could, I wouldn’t want to undo the transformation of jazz into a sophisticated art music. But there’s no sense in pretending that it didn’t happen, or that contemporary jazz is capable of appealing to the same kind of mass audience that thrilled to the big bands of the swing era. And it is precisely because jazz is now widely viewed as a high-culture art form that its makers must start to grapple with the same problems of presentation, marketing and audience development as do symphony orchestras, drama companies and art museums—a task that will be made all the more daunting by the fact that jazz is made for the most part by individuals, not established institutions with deep pockets. I've liked at least some classical music since about the time I started high school. I became interested in jazz about the same time, though this interest mostly had to do with swing bands of the late 1930s and very early 1940s. I thought Dixieland was too crude, liked some Bebop, but never could get interested in jazz created after the early 50s. For all I know, there is a lot of great music out there, but I can't bestir myself to find it. A problem I have with jazz is that it is extemporaneous. (It can't be anything else. Swing band music was based on written arrangements with slots available for on-the-fly solo riffs. So I don't consider it "real"... posted by Donald at August 8, 2009 | perma-link | (29) comments

Thursday, August 6, 2009


Budd Schulberg R.I.P.
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- A quick posting to note the passing of filmworld legend Budd Schulberg. Schulberg was probably best-known for writing the classic Hollywood novel "What Makes Sammy Run?" and the screenplay for "On the Waterfront." He was 95 years old. Carrie Rickey's short obit of Schulberg is very informative. Back here, I shared a few thoughts about "Sammy," which as far as I'm concerned is a great (and underappreciated) novel. It's also -- hallelujah -- a fast, smart, dirty-minded, and suspenseful read. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 6, 2009 | perma-link | (3) comments

Crime Fiction Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Newsweek's book critic Malcolm Jones reviews some of the strengths of noir fiction, and offers some recommendations in the genre. * A nice passage from Irish novelist John Banville, who writes both literary novels and (as Benjamin Black) crime fiction: I deplore the apartheid that has been imposed on fiction writing, so that in shops the "crime books" are segregated from the "proper" novels. Of course, there are bad crime novels, many of which seem to have been written with the blunt end of a burnt stick, but the same is true of so-called literary fiction. The distinction between good writing and bad is the only one worth making. * In an interview with Tom Piccirilli, Ed Gorman recalls his ornery early days. (I raved about one of Ed's western novels here. Here's Ed's own blog.) * Enjoy some fun visual interpretations of Donald Westlake's great creation, the brutal crook Parker. The LA Times' Geoff Boucher enjoys a new graphic-novel adaptation of one of the Parker novels, and links to a trailer for John Boorman's amazing 1967 Westlake / Parker adaptation, "Point Blank." UPDATE: Whisky Prajer offers a well-illustrated rave about that graphic-novel Parker. * MBlowhard Rewind: I praised the work of the brilliant Gold Medal crime novelist Charles Williams. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 6, 2009 | perma-link | (5) comments

Wednesday, August 5, 2009


Panoramic Windshields
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- For reasons of safety and allowing a car's driver and front seat passengers to better enjoy scenery, automobile makers keep fiddling with the design of cars' windshields. One solution tried between the early 1930s and early 1960s was the panoramic windshield. There are practical considerations that have always tempered blue-sky windshield design-sketch features on stylists' drawing boards on their way to the production line and dealers' showrooms. For one thing, a car's passenger compartment roof has to be strongly enough supported not to collapse in most roll-over situations; substantial posts are required. Yet there must be adequate openings for windows and doors. And those doors should be shaped and positioned to allow for convenient ingress and egress for passengers. Then there is glassmaking technology. Producing curved glass is much more difficult than making flat glass. There is manufacturing breakage; too much breakage drives up the cost of the windshield and, by extension, the price of the car. Moreover, the curvatures should not create optical distortions for the driver and passengers, insofar as possible. Panoramic or "wraparound" windshields, as they were usually called, became an American styling fad for much of the 1950s. But practical difficulties eventually led to their abandonment. I mentioned production problems above. I also noted distortion. My father shopped for a new car during the 1956 model year, so we test-drove a variety of cars in the mid-price range. He discovered that fully-wrapped windshields created distortions (along the axis of greatest curvature) that he felt were intolerable, though they didn't bother me much at the time. As a result, he opted for a DeSoto which had a less radical curving than that on General Motors cars. I'll deal with one more problem in some of the captions for the pictures below. Gallery Hupmobile Aerodynamic - 1934 This Hupmobile was styled by Raymond Loewy, the famous industrial designer, early in his career. Creating curved safety glass for automobiles was extremely difficult in 1934; the only American production car with a curved windshield that year was the most expensive model in Chrysler's Airflow lineup. As can be seen, Loewy had to resort to a three-pane design to widen the windshield opening and slightly curve it at the sides. Panhard Panoramique - 1935 The car shown above is a 1935 model, but Panhard introduced its Panoramique windshield feature in the 1934 model year. Panhard's solution was to use double roof posts nesting a small, tightly curved window that served to transition a passenger's view from the windshield to the side windows. Panhard Dynamic (late 1930s) interior view Here is an interior view of a late-1930s Panhard Dynamic sedan -- a later body design that incorporated the panoramic feature. My guess is that those corner windows created noticeable distortion. I've never sat in a Panoramique or Dynamic, so I don't really know. However, the photo hints that there is indeed distortion. Buick XP-300 dream car - 1951 In 1951, General Motors introduced two experimental "cars... posted by Donald at August 5, 2009 | perma-link | (0) comments

Tuesday, August 4, 2009


Anybody Complaining?
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- I'm on the road, so this will be brief. Driving up along the Columbia River where it forms the Washington-Oregon border, I've been noticing a number of power generation windmill farms. They definitely interfere with the scenic views of nature. Perhaps the worst visual polluting farms that I've come across are those near Altamont Pass east of the Bay Area and along Interstate 10 approaching the Palm Springs area from the west. Even though I think they're aesthetically awful, I can't recall much complaining about them in the mainstream press. Political (or ecological) correctness is suspected. Am I missing something? Do people actually complain about wind farms and see their complaints get a wide airing? Later, Donald... posted by Donald at August 4, 2009 | perma-link | (41) comments

Monday, August 3, 2009


Frank Wootton: Getting It Almost Right
Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- This obituary in The Independent contains a line asserting that Frank Wootton (1911-98) "has been called 'probably the finest aviation artist of all time' for his depiction of the Royal Air Force in the Battle of Britain and beyond." I'm not sure I concur with that claim even though I've enjoyed Wootton's work since I was high school age or even a bit younger. I have fond memories of leafing through his books "How to Draw 'Planes" and "How to Draw Cars" at the public library. His instructions were pretty skimpy, but the meat of these publications was in the reproductions of his drawings, as we shall see below. I even stumbled on a display of his paintings at the Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C. many years ago. That was long before I renewed my interest in art, so I didn't get as much out of seeing them as I would today. Wootton clearly received solid training in painting, especially having to do with the effects of light, shade and color. What he sometimes lacked was draftsmanship. This is particularly true for his aviation paintings: some aircraft are not correctly proportioned. The Battle of Britain For example, in the painting above, the fighters on the left don't quite look right. My guess is that the wingspan is too great. So some of the time he got things wrong, and other times got them right. I'm supposing that he freehanded planes, striving for effects rather than correct proportions and perspective. Wootton was essentially a commercial illustrator who created artwork for advertising while having a parallel career painting commissioned scenes for the Royal Air Force and organizations with a strong interest in British aviation. He painted landscapes and animals for his own enjoyment. I'm presenting his work here because he was a decent and very popular artist in genres I like. Below are some examples. Gallery Captions are descriptive and not the actual ones. Typhoons at Falaise Gap This is an imaginary scene of retreating German army units being attacked by British fighter-bombers in the aftermath of the Allied invasion of northern France in 1944. Wootton does a nice job of depicting German tanks and other equipment. Douglas Bader bailing out Bader is famous because, even though he lost parts of both legs in a pre-war flying accident, he returned to active duty in World War 2, claiming 22 combat victories. Unfortunately, he was eventually shot down, as the painting shows. But (fortunately) he survived and (unfortunately) spent the rest of the war save a few weeks at the end as a prisoner. Car at train station This drawing is from Wootton's book "How to Draw Cars." It's basically a sketch, an impression of masses defined by light and shade. Very nice. Car poster --> Bentleys Here's an illustration of Bentleys at an old car meet. Because it's necessarily more finished, I find it less satisfying than the train station sketch above. Even though... posted by Donald at August 3, 2009 | perma-link | (5) comments

Sunday, August 2, 2009


My Beemer's Bewildering Cockpit
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Some views of the options that my rental Beemer's steering wheel and stalks present: What an excess of bewildering-icon riches, eh? I suspect that somewhere in that thicket of clickers is a button that will take care of paying my electricity bill, and another that will set my DVR to record "American Idol." But which is which? Hey: Of the pictured absurdly-illegible icons, which is your favorite? I'm still trying to choose between (top pic) the "P" that appears to be shouting and (bottom pic) the sorta-clock that seems to be stuck at 11:30. Needless to say: After three weeks of using the car, I'm still iffy where basic turn-signaling and windshield-wiping go. My fault? Or BMW's? Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 2, 2009 | perma-link | (8) comments

Political Linkage
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Jewcy's David Kelsey thinks that Jews ought to oppose hate crime laws. He writes a good blogposting about Jews and mass immigration here. * Steve Sailer wonders what we're up to in Puerto Rico. Re the Skip Gates case, Steve coins a good term I look forward to using: "Affirmative Actionocracy." * The Republicans suck. Oh, and the Democrats suck too. * Matt Taibbi traces some of the ways that Goldman Sachs has screwed you and me. James Kunstler thinks that the time has come for Obama to fire the Goldman Sachs alumni that he has on staff. * Chris Dillow thinks that economists will never be able to predict the future -- and that that's OK. * Time to end the mortgage-interest deduction? Learn more here. * Randall Parker asks some good questions about Europe and its immigration policies. * MBlowhard Rewind: I shared a few thoughts about inequality and the rich, and pointed out that one easy way to mitigate inequality would be to get strict about immigration. Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 2, 2009 | perma-link | (6) comments

Saturday, August 1, 2009


The Fantasies That Women's Magazines Sell
Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Killing time waiting for The Wife at the hair salon, I leafed through some women's magazines. Not for the first time I found myself thinking: What a weird and terrifying world is the mental landscape of the human female! I had a good time noting down some of the fantasies the editors of women's magazines -- and presumably some of these magazines' readers -- enjoy indulging in: Spend a year in a foreign country, and you'll discover your true self. The right combo of leotard and jogbra top will make your workout easier. Applying the right lip gloss and eating some whole grains will solve whatever's bothering you today. Embracing who and what you are -- whatever that means -- will make you look ten years younger. Jobs aren't about selling something others are willing to pay for. Jobs are about personal fulfillment. Plastic surgery won't make you look weird. Driving a Prius and installing compact flourescent lightbulbs will save the world. Drinking green tea and pomegranate juice will ensure that you'll never get sick. Nevertheless, you're always just this far from discovering that you have breast cancer. Emotions -- no matter which, no matter when -- need to be faced and worked-through. Then you'll feel great. Following your instincts and your feelings will always work out for the best. You can eat yourself slim. The troubles of movie stars are just like yours. The right fabric patterns and colors will successfully disguise your fat ass. What did I miss? Best, Michael... posted by Michael at August 1, 2009 | perma-link | (45) comments