http://www.2blowhards.com/ en-us 2008-05-09T19:18:59-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/crew_vs_crew.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- A cool new cultureform -- the YouTube dance-off: challenge, response, response-to-response. Lots of mischievous choreography, sharp-witted direction, cute kids, and astounding hiphop acrobatics. (And that Lacey Schwimmer is one racey Mormon. Vavavoom!) Lots of work for chiropracters and surgeons around five years from now too, I'm guessing. Hey, has anyone else been following Bravo's "Step It Up and Dance"? God, I do love watching dancers. I managed to get through an episode and half -- a new reality-TV-watching record for me. Here's a funny spoof of that Miley Cyrus / Vanity Fair photoshoot. Best, Michael... Music, Dance, etc. Michael 2008-05-09T19:18:59-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/fact_for_the_da_20.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Nearly twenty five percent of Los Angeles County’s welfare and food stamp benefits goes directly to the children of illegal aliens, at a cost of $36 million a month. (My emphasis.) Source. Best, Michael... Politics, Economics, Education Michael 2008-05-09T15:56:22-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/responding_to_t.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- On an interesting thread over at GNXP, Thursday issued a challenge. I'd been goofing around, writing that "novels themselves were quite disreputable at the outset -- the reality TV and tabloid-TV of their day. It was only in the second half of the 19th century that some novelists started putting on airs." Here's Thursday: Bullshit. No less a "serious" personage than Jean-Jacques Rousseau wrote a novel and a very good one too. Novelists like Richardson, Fielding, and Burney were considered serious writers right from the beginning. Haven't you read Boswell's life of Johnson. I have a hard time believing Jane Austen didn't take her meticulously planned and written books as high art. Tom Jones is planned to classical perfection. Critics like Hazlitt and Coleridge took the novelists like Richardson, Smollett, Sterne and Fielding seriously right from the start. Stop trying to rewrite literary history as if no-one had any clue what was high art and what wasn't. OK then: Time to get serious myself. Here's my response to Thursday: You're making a basic mistake. You're projecting current-day critical rankings back onto past eras. You're assuming that what we now consider great was self-evidently Great at the time. No. Look, what a work's reputation is today often has zip to do with how it was taken (and what it represented) when it was produced. What we now consider great was often taken for granted at the time, or looked-down-on. Defoe's novels are just one example. At the time they were published they weren't taken to be novels in our current sense. They were made-up fantasies that pretended to be works of reportage -- in other words, they were aesthetically and morally dubious productions akin to today's scandal sheets and reality TV, or maybe even to those books that turn up every few years about alien encounters in Australia. It took more than a century before many people started wondering if maybe "Robinson Crusoe" wasn't a pretty good novel. Works often become "literature" in hindsight, not at the time of their production. No matter how great we recognize "Tom Jones" to be today -- and I'm a big fan myself -- the early British novel was a scrappy and aesthetically scorned form, far more akin in its time to what journalism and TV are these days than to today's "literary fiction." The early English novel was a middle-class market phenomenon, not a serious or intellectual or literary one. We've learned to see structure, complexity, grandeur, and depth in these books only in retrospect. From Wikipedia's "literature" entry: "Early novels in Europe did not, at the time, count as significant literature, perhaps because 'mere' prose writing seemed easy and unimportant." From an online resource about Jane Austen: "In Jane Austen's era, novels were often depreciated as trash ... In Jane Austen's day, novels actually had something of the same reputation that mass-market romances do today." No matter what your opinion of Austen's books these days, and no... Art, Architecture, the Econ of Art Michael 2008-05-09T13:44:32-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/shouting_thomas.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Shouting Thomas goes public with his new CD. Down and dirty cover-band music, baby -- let the party begin. Best, Michael... Music, Dance, etc. Michael 2008-05-08T13:07:47-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/julians_place.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- PatrickH and Benjamin Hemric are raving about the new place that painter / filmmaker Julian Schnabel has created in New York City's West Village. Thanks to Benjamin for turning up this page of info and pix. I haven't visited yet, but from the photos Schnabel's place looks like overripe decadent boho bliss of a very high order. (FWIW, I don't care for Schnabel's paintings, which I find bombastic and silly. But I think he's a very talented filmmaker. Start with his biopic "Basquiat," which features a great performance by Jeffrey Wright, and which does a peerless job of conveying the intoxicating / nightmarish quality that life in the NYC visual-arts world can have.) One non-fan has this to say about Schnabel's new place, though: "He's obviously trying to pretend that this looks somehow Florentine or Venetian, when, really, it looks like a Malibu Barbie house that exploded." Best, Michael... Art, Architecture, the Econ of Art Michael 2008-05-08T12:33:29-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/elsewhere_304.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Polly Frost confesses that she's just a "genre slut." * As though it wasn't bad enough to get cancer at age 33, the cancer that star Chicago chef Grant Achatz developed was on his tongue. Can you say "Beethoven" and "deafness"? Jennifer Tanaka has the story. * Did Roman gladiators eat too many carbs? * An excellent collection of interviews -- audio and transcripts both -- with James Kunstler. * Tyler Cowen volunteers a list of his country music faves. Commenters leap in with many more suggestions. * Daniel McCarthy takes stock of the Ron Paul campaign. * Is drinking fruit juice really all that healthy? * Jock Sturges: highbrow pornographer, or upholder of classical standards of beauty? * Lester Hunt watches Leni Riefenstahl's "Triumph of the Will." * Does the Russian ballet establishment abuse its female charges? * Dark Party Review interviews Glenn Mercer, frontman for the legendary early-'80s punk band The Feelies. * A fabulously sexy NSFW link prompts a a not-bad question. * MBlowhard Rewind: I tried to make some sense of how best to approach the word "intellectual." Best, Michael... Miscellaneous Michael 2008-05-08T11:32:59-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/personality_cha.html Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- During the weeks leading up to Tuesday's presidential primaries in North Carolina and Indiana, there was scattered commentary that Hillary Clinton had been battered by the competition process into being a better grounded, more likable candidate. No links here 'cause I'm writing this in my Chicago hotel room and will need some sleep soon. In any case the true, or even perceived, persona of H.R. Clinton isn't the focus of this post. But let's begin by assuming that Hillary was indeed changed by her confrontation of reality on the campaign trail. The question is, would such a change be permanent? That is, if she got to be President, would she be the "old" Hillary we know and love from the Clinton White House years or the "new" Hillary that is actually even more lovable. I think we would have the old Hillary. That's because short-term stress in most cases isn't strong enough to create large-scale, fairly permanent personality changes. Especially if the subject returns to his comfortable pre-stress environment. Living in the pampered White House environment of servants and yes-men seems to be an excellent means of personality regression. Perhaps some of the campaign-induced changes might stick, but by "some" I mean "almost none." Here is an example from my past. When I was a frat-rat in college we ran Hell Week initiation rites. On a few occasions we had doubts about some of the pledges who might be initiated. Do we black-ball them or let them become members? One argument for letting them participate in Hell Week was that the experience would "shape them up." So through Hell Week they went. And for a few weeks or a month thereafter, they had indeed "shaped up." Then they regressed. By the end of the school term they were their own not-so smooth selves. This is not to say that hardship can have an effect. It can. But it probably needs to be exceedingly severe (short -term) or else a lengthy process. And the previous environment also needs to have been altered enough that regression is harder to do. Or so I think. What do you think? Later, Donald... Miscellaneous Donald 2008-05-07T22:52:47-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/steve_on_art.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Steve is asking all kinds of Sailer-esque, so-basic-they're-dangerous questions about art and art history. Best, Michael... Art, Architecture, the Econ of Art Michael 2008-05-07T16:59:43-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/the_human_touch.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- A little fun with comparing-and-contrasting. In our first pairing, the theme is outlines and shapes. The top building, the traditional one: Check out the variety and quantity of shapes. Trace the outline of the building with your finger -- takes some concentration and time, no? Incidentally: You may or may not know the names and histories of all the architectural elements playing roles in this composition. It really doesn't matter, unless you're (shudder) a scholar or a pedant. The important thing is to sense that they're embedded in western art history. And how is it possible not to do that? The bottom cluster of modernist buildings: a buncha shoeboxes covered with graph paper. One of them has been given a twist -- that's what too-often qualifies as "architectural creativity" these days. Trace these outlines with a finger -- it's fast, easy, and majorly boring. We're in a world of simple geometry and dumb abstraction, in other words, with no connection to anything of substance or depth, especially pre-1900 western art history. An analogy. Traditional architecture is to modernist architecture as traditional handmade art is to Adobe Illustrator images. In a handmade image ... ... you feel the presence of a person. There's subtlety, texture, depth. In many Adobe Illutrator images ... Well, they certainly pop. This image is what people in the media biz might call "a quick read" -- it's all edges, planes, gradient fills, and color swatches. But -- despite the whirliness and effects -- one glance at this image and you're done with it. Like the modernist buildings in the photo above, the Illustrator image has all the personality and lovableness of a bureaucracy. (Small aside: Doesn't it often seem that everything in our culture is doing its best to turn into spinning TV graphics?) Our next theme is color, scale, and texture: Top image: Warm colors. A structure that relates to your scale as a physical being, and that coexists easily with nature. Imagine reaching out and touching the stucco, the red tiles of the roof, the canvas of the awnings (awnings are architecture too): Nubbliness, weight, age ... It all makes me want to settle in, sip wine, and enjoy the day. Bottom image: So far as colors go, it's all neutrals. So far as scale goes: a kind of ballooning overwhelmingness. Put a tree in the midst of that scene and it'd look pathetic -- this world is a completely paved-over one. As for the materials ... Well, imagine reaching out and giving these surfaces a touch: slick and cold glass and metal; post-industrial surfaces made of god only knows what. To me, the scene resembles a loading dock full of computers and keyboards cast off by giants. It's one of the last places where I'd be tempted to take my ease. Hey, another analogy: The adobe-and-red-tile-roof building is like this pot: unmistakably hand-made, and redolent of character and culture. (In the case of this pot, Native American.)... Art, Architecture, the Econ of Art Michael 2008-05-07T12:16:35-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/vacation_workin.html Donald Pittenger writes: Dear Blowhards -- Do you pack some work or even semi-work along when you go on vacation? I do, and I'm not sure why. That's because I almost never actually work on the work stuff I bring. Which is silly, because all I'm doing is dragging around an increment of needless weight. My "work" can take several forms. For instance, I usually bring some sketchbooks and possible reference material for planning paintings. Other times I'm likely to toss in a book that I think I Really Ought To Read. And for our 7-17 May trip to the Midwest (by the way, thanks for the travel tips, readers), I copied a book project file from my desktop computer to my laptop in the far-fetched hope that I might do a little writing or editing. Why don't I follow through on my intentions? I can't rule out laziness. Or to put it another way, Laziness Rules!! Besides that, travel is a busy time that's also costly. Given the investment, it seems foolish to hole up in a motel room and do stuff that can more easily be done at home; so why not actually sightsee and experience such exotic places as Springfield, Illinois and Dayton, Ohio. Moreover, travel can get tiring when one is in his geezerhood. That boils down to being too ground down to do much more than indulge in light reading in the evening. That's my sad story. Are any of you realistic enough to know that work and vacations don't mix and therefore leave work stuff at home? Or are you a stalwart who actually manages blending work and vacationing? As a parting shot, I really, truly, positively plan to blog while on this trip provided I don't have computer or other trouble. Honest. [Uncrosses fingers] Later, Donald... Miscellaneous Donald 2008-05-06T20:12:21-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/mccain_on_hispa.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- John McCain, setting out to appeal to a certain much-coveted voting bloc, says: "Everything about our Hispanic voters is tailor-made to the Republican message … I know their patriotism, I know the respect for the family, the advocacy for pro-life, I know the small business aspect of our Hispanic voters.” Vdare's Marcus Epstein takes a look at the actual facts: * Only 34% of Hispanics eligible for US citizenship choose to take the necessary steps to take it -- less than any other immigrant group. Of that group, only a third of Hispanics who are American citizens consider themselves Americans first. * Respect for the Family: Half of Hispanic births in the US are out of wedlock. * Pro Life: Hispanics are 2.7 times more likely to have an abortion than whites. * Small Business: Hispanics make up 15% of the population and only 6.6 percent of all businesses. Best, Michael... Politics, Economics, Education Michael 2008-05-06T17:34:32-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/milk_linkage.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- Raw milk: telltale issue of our time? (Link thanks to visitor Steve.) Best, Michael... Politics, Economics, Education Michael 2008-05-06T15:51:01-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/dog_linkage.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * The Rawness shares a hilarious quick dog video. * Thinking of adopting a retired racing Greyhound? Here's an informative, 19-part guide. I wonder what Gil Roth -- who recently adopted a retired racer -- thinks of the advice. * Patrick Burns writes that dog owners don't need to haul their pets to the vet as often as they're being told to. Best, Michael... Miscellaneous Michael 2008-05-06T15:32:33-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/iraq_war_linkag.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * The embassy that the U.S. is currently constructing in Baghdad covers 104 acres and consists of 21 buildings. It's the largest U.S. embassy in the world. When complete, it will have cost $740 million. It'll cost $1 billion a year to run. Just a hunch, but it sounds to me like we aren't in Iraq for a short visit. (Link thanks to Randall Parker.) * What could you buy for the cost of the Iraq War? Best, Michael... Politics, Economics, Education Michael 2008-05-06T00:30:16-05:00 http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/2008/05/education_linka.html Michael Blowhard writes: Dear Blowhards -- * Pres. Bush's Reading First program: a big bust that has had zero impact on kids' reading scores. The cost? A mere billion a year. * Since 1986, the price of public education has been rising faster than the price of gasoline. * Busing may be coming to an end in Milwaukee. It has accomplished little, and at a cost of $57 million a year, according to officials. * Charles Murray and Steve Sailer point out a basic fact that educators seem to have a hard time grasping: Half of all kids are sub-average in academic terms. Me, I think that Americans over-obsess about college, and under-acknowledge the value of vocational training. * MBlowhard Rewind: I argued that writing teachers make too much of the "show, don't tell" command. Best, Michael UPDATE: Mike -- whose wife works in special ed -- comments.... Politics, Economics, Education Michael 2008-05-05T23:55:48-05:00