Ed Driscoll

By Ed Driscoll

Bio

Get Updates From Ed Driscoll
An Army Of Davids

Boxing the Bourgeois

March 2nd, 2011 - 7:03 am

Establishing a foothold in the world of art and design isn’t easy, but watching your career become exiled to Siberia certainly is. A pair of new posts this week explore what happens when épater le bourgeois goes horribly wrong.

We’ve referenced the concept of “épater le bourgeois” a few times around here over the years, but for those unfamailar with the term, let’s let Roger Kimball explain:

It’s a lot of fun being an artist these days. Only a tiny percentage makes any money, but there is a big consolation prize in the form of attitude. Back in the late 19th century, many aspiring French artists were out to “épater le bourgeois.” The great problem going forward was that almost all artists were themselves part of the much-maligned group, the bourgeoisie. How, then, to amaze and startle oneself?

Early in the last century, Marcel Duchamp pioneered the two main strategies: the boring and the bizarre. To the first category belongs such “ready-mades” as “In Advance of the Broken Arm,” a “work” that consists of an ordinary snow shovel which, because Duchamp had the wit (or was it only the effrontery?) to exhibit it in an art gallery, suddenly achieved the transfiguring nimbus of Art with a capital “A.”

Duchamp’s second innovation aimed not to anesthetize viewers but to shock them. “Fountain,” an ordinary urinal displaced from the bathroom to the exhibition hall, was the founding gesture of that large gift to perpetual adolescents.

We’re much more sophisticated — at least, we’re much coarser — nowadays, so we are no longer shocked by the exhibition of a plumbing fixture. But in its time “Fountain” was every bit as shocking as (e.g.) Andres Serrano’s photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine.

There were plenty of titters, and probably other, less agreeable, sounds when Duchamp pulled his pranks, but what a large opening he created for those coming after him!

Of course, these days, there’s no traditional bourgeois left to shock, and to build on Roger’s comments above, with a century of repetition behind it, épater le bourgeois is better described in Yiddish than French. It’s shtick, and I dare say that most of us on the right are long-since immune to these techniques. And these days, it’s the art world itself that’s far more bourgeois than bohemian these days, to borrow David Brooks’ bobo formulation. (QED.)

First up a look at how to do it the horribly wrong way. Found via the Manolo, Linda Grant of the Guardian describes how former Christian Dior designer John Galliano epatered himself right out of the business:

According to fashion journalist Melanie Rickey, of the Fashion Editor at Large blog and Grazia, for years the industry has pushed Galliano to greater and greater extremes: “All everyone has ever wanted from John is transgressive fashion, and to use his excessive ideas to sell nice handbags and perfumes,” she says. And once you are set on a path to break taboos, it is almost impossible to find new ideas. So how on earth do you shock, when you have already exhausted S&M dungeons for ideas for haute couture? The great taboo in France and Germany is antisemitism. On this ground Jews were murdered or transported to be murdered. Watching the video of Galliano slumped alone at his bar table hurling insults at a woman who evidently asked why he didn’t make clothes that all women could wear, he spits out rage. She is ugly, he loves Hitler, he invokes the gas chambers. It’s a toxic mix of hate-speech, of racism and misogyny. How is it possible to go further than this?

If you are breaker of taboos, then antisemitism is only another taboo, no different from any other. It’s the saying of the unsayable. It has become the last frontier for those demanding freedom of speech, for whom everything, even the Holocaust, is fair game. Is Galliano an actual antisemite who hates Jews? Who knows what passes through his mind, but by invoking the name of Hitler and gloating about the gas chambers, he is only doing what others have always paid him to do: shock.

It’s Galliano’s fortune and misfortune to have been named as a genius. He wants to go to the S&M clubs of the Parisian underworld and bring back chains and put it over a black leather bag and call the bag Bondage? Why not? Who would dare tell him that he has no idea what he is talking about when he says he loves Hitler, or that there is something the matter with abusing women in bars? Around him are innumerable yes men and women, bowing to his great thoughts.

Which highlights how old and boxed-in the game of épater le bourgeois has become, and how tired and exhausted those who wish to practice it seem these days.

And speaking of boxed-in, here’s how to do it right — or at least, from the right. But first, some background. As Tom Wolfe wrote in The Painted Word back in 1975, an artist who hope to make a name for himself had to abandon whatever pretenses he had towards developing his own style, hop a Greyhound from Ohio or Iowa to the Village, and begin what Wolfe described as the “Apache Dance:”

During the 1960s this entire process by which le monde, the culturati, scout bohemia and tap the young artist for Success was acted out in the most graphic way. Early each spring, two emissaries from the Museum of Modern Art, Alfred Barr and Dorothy Miller, would head downtown from the Museum on West Fifty-third Street, down to Saint Marks Place, Little Italy, Broome Street and environs, and tour the loft studios of known artists and unknowns alike, looking at everything, talking to one and all, trying to get a line on what was new and significant in order to put together a show in the fall . . . and, well, I mean, my God—from the moment the two of them stepped out on Fifty-third Street to grab a cab, some sort of boho radar began to record their sortie . . . They’re coming! . . . And rolling across Lower Manhattan, like the Cosmic Pulse of the theosophists, would be a unitary heartbeat:

Pick me pick me pick me pick me pick me pick me pick me . . . O damnable Uptown!

By all means, deny it if asked!—what one knows, in one’s cheating heart, and what one says are two different things! So it was that the art mating ritual developed early in the century—in Paris, in Rome, in London, Berlin, Munich, Vienna, and, not too long afterward, in New York. As we’ve just seen, the ritual has two phases:

(1) The Boho Dance, in which the artist shows his stuff within the circles, coteries, movements, isms, of the home neighborhood, bohemia itself, as if he doesn’t care about anything else; as if, in fact, he has a knife in his teeth against the fashionable world uptown.

(2) The Consummation, in which culturati from that very same world, le monde, scout the various new movements and new artists of bohemia, select those who seem the most exciting, original, important, by whatever standards—and shower them with all the rewards of celebrity.

By the First World War the process was already like what in the Paris clip joints of the day was known as an apache dance. The artist was like t he female in t he act, stamping her feet, yelling defiance one moment, feigning indifference the next, resisting the advances of her pursuer with absolute contempt . . . more thrashing about . . . more rake-a-cheek fury . . . more yelling and carrying on . . . until finally with one last mighty and marvelously ambiguous shriek—pain! ecstasy!—she submits . . . Paff paff paff paff paff. . . How you do it, my boy! . . . and the house lights rise and Everyone, tout le monde, applauds . . . The artist’s payoff in this ritual is obvious enough. He stands to gain precisely what Freud says are the goals of the artist: fame, money, and beautiful lovers. But what about le monde, the culturati, the social members of the act? What’s in it for them? Part of their reward is t he ancient and semi-sacred status of Benefactor of the Arts. The arts have always been a doorway into Society, and in the largest cities today the arts—the museum boards, arts councils, fund drives, openings, parties, committee meetings—have completely replaced the churches in this respect. But there is more!

There is, but you get the gist. (You can read more from an excerpt of Wolfe’s The Painted Word online at Wolfe’s Website.) But woe betide the artist who shines a light upon the whimsies and peccadilloes of his benefactors or his peers. Remember, you’re in the club — the rest of the world outside is fair game, but never your fellow club members.

Pages: 1 2 | Comments Off bullet bullet

Rockford Illinois knows the clock is ticking on its 15 minutes of fame:

The Rockford Area Convention and Visitors Bureau is seizing upon a moment in Wisconsin history. It’s using the budget battle being waged in Madison as a way to encourage people to “Hideaway in Rockford.”

In a news release, they say, “whether you’re a state senator or not, you can come to Rockford to explore ‘hideaway hotspots’ and take advantage of ‘runaway rates’ at local hotels.”

As you can see in the YouTube clip’s still shot, Cheap Trick’s Rick Nielsen, a longtime resident of Rockford has some fun in the video as well. No word yet what Bun E. Carlos thinks of the town, though:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Did They Dub Him Worst Person in the World, Too?

February 5th, 2011 - 10:59 am

“NBC Ruins The Fun, Fires Employee Over ‘What Is Internet’ Video,” according to Matt Burns of the CrunchGear tech blog:

By now you’ve probably seen the Katie Couric and Bryant Gumbel pondering the wonders of the Internet. It’s a bit hokey and of course shows the NBC hosts talking nonsense about something outside of their expertise. Well, NBC clearly didn’t find it as cute as everyone else and reportedly fired the employee that uploaded it. Best Buy almost did that once. Remember how that turned out?NBC went and pulled most of the videos from the Internet. The video we embedded is dead. But of course they couldn’t get them all. Simply searching Google for Katie Couric and Bryant Gumbel pulls dozens of copies. Nothing ever goes away online. NBC should know this by now. It’s called the Internet.Seriously, NBC. No one was laughing at your then-star hosts. We were all laughing with them. It’s not like they were asking questions about the Internet now. This was 1994. No one outside of universities and X-Files watchers had any clue about the Internet. The video simply served as a nice reminder that the Internet grew in importance so rapidly that even some of the world’s most versed newscasters were simply clueless in the early days.

Talk about backfiring — instead of allowing viewers a minor laugh at two employees who aren’t even with NBC anymore (though there were rumors this past summer that Katie could return), NBC beclowns itself via its heavy-handed tactics. Though as CrunchGear reminds us, plenty of copies remain online, such as this one. At least for the moment:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Comments Off bullet bullet

Sarah Palin made an obvious Insta-reference in her speech on Friday, as Sissy Willis notes:

There isn’t one replacement for Reagan, but there are millions who believe in the great ideas that he espoused,” Sarah Palin told her Young America Foundation audience — and the world — in her keynote speech kicking off Young America’s Foundation’s “Reagan 100 celebration” at President Reagan’s Western White House Rancho del Cielo in Santa Barbara Friday evening:

There’s a whole army of patriotic Davids out there across this great country ready to stand up and to speak out in defense of liberty, and these Davids aren’t afraid to tell Goliath “don’t tread on me.”

There’s a great book title in there somewhere, I’m sure, though Katie Couric and Barbara Walters could not be reached for comment.

Incidentally, Palin had another terrific line on Friday, in referencing Sacramento’s continued attempt to punish the farmers of California’s Central Valley region:

“Right here in California some of the nation’s richest and most fertile farmland lays fallow. And the livelihoods of thousands of family farmers are destroyed. And, they’re destroyed because some faceless dem government bureaucrat took away their lifeline, their water. And they claim that it was in order to protect a two inch fish… Now where I come from we call that bait… And there is no need to destroy people’s lives over that bait.”

Watch here:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

And one more from Tammy Bruce, who attended the speech in person and then tweeted, “Hope u caught this metaphor tonight — @SarahPalinUSA noting she enjoyed walking the trails Reagan cleared himself ;)

Related: At City Journal, Kay S. Hymowitz looks at “Sarah Palin and the Battle for Feminism.”

Shhh — nobody tell the MSM about that aspect of the Tea Party movement, “which is heavily female.”

Back in December, I wrote:

Even as a judge rules large chunks of ObamaCare unconstitutional, Michelle Obama — of course – pulls out the moral equivalent of war canard to defend her hectoring and puritanical war on obesity:

“Military leaders … tell us that when more than one in four young people are unqualified for military service because of their weight,” the first lady says in the prepared remarks, “childhood obesity isn’t just a public health threat, it’s not just an economic threat, it’s a national security threat as well.”

Freud called it displacement.

I was wrong. Obesity is a national security issue as well:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Hint: It’s Not Peanut Butter

February 1st, 2011 - 8:13 pm

Gizmodo asks the important question of the day: “How the Hell Do You Pronounce GIF Anyway?”

Choosy programmers choose “gif” or “jif”?

The pronunciation of “GIF” is specified in the GIF specification to be “jif”, as in “jiffy”, rather then “gif”, which most people seem to prefer. This does seem strange because the “G” is from the word “Graphics” and not “Jraphics”.

So there you have it—the peanut butter pronunciation is technically the correct one to take. But don’t worry if you decide to go against what the creators of the GIF established anyway—the Oxford English Dictionary has your back because it declares both both the hard g and soft g pronunciations correct.

Nuh-uh. Sorry, I’m sticking with my old school spiral bound/slipcase 1996 first edition version of WiredStyle: Principles of English Usage in the Digital Language, From the Editors of Wired, Edited by Constance Hale, which I purchased at the late lamented Computer Literacy Bookstore on North First Street in San Jose, when the dot.com bubble was just being inflated.

Page 133 says:

GIF

graphic interchange format

Use the acronym and pronounce it "giff" ("jif" is for the peanut butter). GIF is CompuServe's file compression format for images. It has acquired a new life as a synonym for online images or photographs that are compressed as GIFs. It also appears sometimes as .gif in reference to the standard lowercase format of filenames: fetish.gif. Lawyeritis is causing GIF to be rapidly replaced by PNG and JPEG.

And that was the glory days before Wired magazine was purchased by Condé Nast and then completely imploded and beclowned itself by placing a hyphen into the word ‘email.

Don’t even get me started on that.

Update: The audio pronunciation guide at Merriam-Webster.com also puts a hard-g on the word.

‘What is Internet, Anyway?’

January 31st, 2011 - 11:51 am

“Katie Couric, Bryant Gumbel circa 1994: ‘What is Internet, anyway?’”

Internet circa 2011: What is Katie Couric, Bryant Gumbel, anyway?

Note email address foreshadowing eventual corporate role of MSNBC displayed on screen back then: violence@nbc.ge.com

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Related: Drudge headline: “NEWS TO HER: COURIC LOUNGES IN SOUTH BEACH AS EGYPT IN TURMOIL…”

As Virginia Postrel writes, “A joyfully nerdy video from my youngest-ever intern, the lovely and talented Dorian Electra, now a student at Shimer College,” rocking a pair of prescription Ray Ban Clubmasters and “In Love with Friedrich Hayek:”

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Comments Off bullet bullet

Disappointed in the Cooking of the Duck Meat

January 2nd, 2011 - 9:41 pm

Everybody’s already linked to Mike Stoklasa’s awesome deconstruction of Revenge of the Sith, the last of the Star Wars prequels, so we might as well jump on the bandwagon as well. Particularly since we linked to the first round in late 2009. As I wrote back then:

Let’s flesh-out the logical explanation for the prequels’ woes proffered in the YouTube series’ last segment. In the 1970s, Lucas had only directed two features before Star Wars, and only one of those (American Graffiti) was a hit, and was spending time with an awesome coterie of fellow movie brats, including Francis Ford Coppola, Steven Spielberg, Brian De Palma, and even, back when Hollywood still allowed such a rare beast, a token conservative, John Milius. They provided crucial input on the first drafts of the Star Wars scripts, which were just about as incomprehensible, in their dialogue, their characters and their motivation, and their plotting, as The Phantom Menace. Plus Lucas had to convince a skeptical 20th Century Fox why they should part with 10 million dollars — a fair chunk of money for a movie in the mid-1970s.

Flash-forward to the mid-1990s. Lucas is a zillionaire, who could either self-fund his movies, or get on the phone with 20th Century Fox and almost instantly be handed a blank check and final cut for a film that’s as bankable as any ever made. There’s nobody on his staff to say no, or to argue that the emperor’s script has no warp power.

In short, Lucas got to live out young Orson Welles’ wildest dreams.

As Allahpundit noted on New Year’s Eve at Hot Air, in the last of the three clips, there’s an interesting comparison between Lucas and Welles. Which makes sense of a few levels — they both achieved their success at relatively young ages, and both produced awesome early films that they spent the rest of their careers chasing — and never being able to live up to.

We don’t think of Citizen Kane as a special effects movie, and yet it truly was. Welles pushed Linwood Dunn, the inventor of the optical printer, who was also the head of RKO’s special effects department, to use that device — think of it as the celluloid precursor to Adobe’s After Effects, as a story telling device. Decades before directors such as Francis Ford Coppola began to use the layering of shots in to create impressionist collages for Apocalypse Now, Welles used the optical printer to create seamless dissolves between scenes, and to seamlessly composite live action, miniatures and matte paintings to produce images that would have otherwise been impossible on the medium-sized budget RKO had given him. But unlike Lucas, Welles had a solid story written by Herman J. Mankiewicz, his veteran Mercury Theater ensemble cast, and years of theater training as the foundation of his film. Or as Stoklasa says in part three of his video, “Welles used extensive special effects to tell his story, and Lucas used his story to extensively tell special effects.”

And that, as an elderly little green man might say, is why he fails. Along with a host of other flaws that Lucas hoped would be rendered invisible by quick pacing and blow-out action scenes. But if you don’t care about the characters, the action scenes become simply the latest chapter for the ILM demo reel. Which they don’t need these days to get the gig.

(Incidentally, language alert; oh and things gets rather scatological near the end of the second clip.)

My Blackberry is Not Working

December 21st, 2010 - 6:49 pm

It may have run out of juice.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Comments Off bullet bullet

Quote of the Day

December 20th, 2010 - 3:19 pm

A front-running presidential candidate once promised us:

“The biggest problems that we’re facing right now have to do with George Bush trying to bring more and more power into the executive branch and not go through Congress at all. And that’s what I intend to reverse when I’m president of the United States.”

– Sen. Barack Obama, March 31, 2008

Feel free to start any time now, Mr. President.

‘Is Politics a Liberal Game?’

December 18th, 2010 - 4:31 pm

That’s the question that “Lady Kurobara” is asking at Ricochet.com:

Over on Dave Carter’s thread, “What Say You?” Ricochet member Freeven offered a brilliant observation — so good that it deserves its own thread.  So I am posting it here on Freeven’s behalf (without his knowledge or permission, let it be noted):

Alas, government is a Liberal’s game. The best conservative candidates, almost by definition, never get off the bench. They have better things to do. Liberals will ultimately prevail because they’ve got their All-Stars matched up against our second stringers.

That point deserves a lot more attention and warrants a lot more discussion.  I have noticed the same phenomenon.  Liberals and Democrats always seem to be more deeply involved in politics, and the level of their emotional commitment is downright unhealthy.  Plus, liberals are far more likely to view politics as a livelihood.  A liberal acquaintance once explained it to me very succinctly: “There is a feeling among Democrats that, if you don’t win, you don’t eat.

Speaking of comments, a comment to her post is worth quoting as well:

Democrats are the modern version of the people who hung around the King’s court seeking favors.  They are the astrologers, mathematicians, scholars, artists, entertainers, and sycophants who live by providing services to the King.

The Republicans are the Bourgeoisie, performing useful work, but not having time to spend the whole day at court. They are useful to the King when the King needs money, but otherwise held in contempt by the aristocratic coterie.

One of the reasons why the president and his media courtiers were so eager to smear the Tea Parties six ways to Sunday is that they represent a sea change in American political thinking. Recall P.J. O’Rourke and Andrew Ferguson’s classic riff on leftwing protest movements 20 years ago in Parliament of Whores

“How come,” I asked Andy, “whenever someone upsets the Left, you see immediate marches and parades and rallies with signs already printed and rhyming slogans already composed, whereas whenever someone upsets the Right, you see two members of the Young Americans for Freedom waving a six-inch American Flag?”

“We have jobs.” said Andy.

…And then what Rick Moran wrote about the mammoth Glenn Beck-Tea Party-9/12 rally last year: “the first truly conservative mass movement in American history:”

What makes Saturday’s massive turnout around the country so significant is that it is the first truly conservative mass movement in American history. The amorphousness of conservatism until the 1950s probably had something to do with that. Conservatism prior to then was rather clubby and its “leaders” had very little interest in developing a mass movement like labor, socialists, or communists were attempting to do. Even the candidacies of Goldwater and Reagan were more party-oriented than ideological in nature, although there is little doubt that conservative activists learned how to organize an effective movement by being involved in both those races.

I think it unfair for the media or the left to characterize this movement as “Republican.” The fact that GOP politicians are seeking to hijack the movement for their own purposes should tell you that they themselves feel the separation and are drooling over the prospect of tapping the enthusiasm, the anger, and the commitment of the protestors for electoral gain.

It is definitely an opposition movement, however. Certainly there is mass unhappiness with President Obama and his policies. And there is opposition to the Democrats in Congress. But does this really translate into electoral strength for Republicans? I am going to go out on a limb and say no. The anger here is a reaction (reactionary?) against a growing government, higher taxes, and the sense that the country that they grew up in is slipping away right before their eyes.

And as Kevin Williamson wrote yesterday at NRO, proffering “A Few Words In Praise of Fear:”

Funny what catches the notice of politicians. I was a newspaper editor for years, and I’ve had at least a dozen politicians tell me: “We don’t really give a damn what you write about us in the editorials. We don’t even really read them. But if we start seeing letters to the editor, we notice. Any time one constituent is ticked-off enough to take the time to write a letter, that’s significant. One guy writing a letter means that there are 500 more who agree but don’t take the time to write.” One guy writing a letter represents a few hundred people in the mind of Joe Congressman. Those Tea Party rallies, too, loom a lot larger than the raw numbers would suggest, impressive as those raw numbers have been. Joe Congressman does not want to see that crowd camped out on his doorstep.

The second reason used to dabble in witchcraft. Say what you like about Christine O’Donnell and her incompetent nut-cluster of a campaign, she showed the Republican establishment that the Tea Party, and the fiscally discontent at large, are willing to run a kamikaze candidate against any RINO target of opportunity. And not all of the challengers are going to be O’Donnell-type buffoons. Sharron Angle was a much more serious candidate and ran a much more serious campaign. Pat Toomey chased Arlen Specter out of the Republican party and then put the smackdown on his Democratic opponent — a retired admiral, let’s remember, not some wild-eyed hippie — in the general. Pat Toomey scares the old guard. They do not want to see a dozen Pat Toomeys showing up in Republican primaries next time around. Kay Bailey Hutchison does not want some Stetson-wearing Toomey showing up in her backyard.

So “Is Politics a Liberal Game?”

For the moment, yes. Whether it continues in that direction is up to you.

Quality Control is Really Slipping at ILM

December 6th, 2010 - 5:02 pm

Assuming it’s legit, and not a deliberately crude-looking parody, something tells me that this crazy video represents the finest in Ugandan digital effects:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Oh and that default Adobe Premiere Pro CS2 font at the end? That’s quality movie making right there.

When I was nine or ten, presumably like every boy, I wanted to make super-8 versions of the crime dramas I watched on TV. If I had access to the digital versions of the elements the pros use to simulate gun shots, blood spurts, smoke, and explosions, which are now available to anyone for purchase as stock footage to be composited later, the special effects would have looked a little like the above video.

Still though, quality aside, the guys who made this are clearly having fun, and it shows — are there any more clips of Tebaatusasula online? Or should I hold out for the extended director’s cut?

Personally, I’m not sure if this is the most appropriate font for this post:

You have bags under your eyes so big you’d have to check them in at Heathrow Airport

You watch the superbowl just for the commercials

You can spot bad typography from 100 yds away

You are pro-facebook because 95% of the myspace accounts burn your retinas

You can name more than 200 fonts in under five minutes

You are completely immune to subliminal advertising

You look upon a well-designed project with either:
sympathy OR extreme jealousy

Your hand is permanently stuck in the shape of a mouse

You tell stories of exacto-knife inflicted wounds with grizzled sort of pride

You practically take caffeine intravenously

You have an appreciation for everything unique

You’ve been spending three days non-stop on a project and it still looks like s***. You find yourself overcome by Deathlust.

“You find your pulse increase at the sight of a lovely ligature, glasses steam up when an unusually elegant arm, leg, or tail comes in view, and a well-kerned paragraph is apt to make you break into a sweat with excitement.”

“You know you’re a Graphic Designer when… you buy a CD or DVD for the artwork, even if you have no idea what the actual music or film is like”.
(even worse, you don’t actually watch or listen to it, just stare at it for hours and hug it in adoration)

“You know you’re a Graphic Designer when… you look at the clock and see it’s about midnight and think ‘I’ll go to bed now’… and you actually go to bed about 2-3am”.

“You know you’re a Graphic Designer when… you need someone else to point out that you’re sitting in a room in front of the computer with all the lights off, and haven’t noticed”

“…when you know what “kerning” is and you really, really like it.”

“… when you wear two [ke] [rn] pins on your bag, and only you know what the mean. To others its probably a band of sorts..”

Forget the boy-wonder and the man of steel; your heroes have names like ‘Tibor Kalman’, ‘Stefan Sagmeister’, ‘Paul Rand’, and ‘Paula Scher’.

You don’t wear black to look cool, you wear it to hide the gauche.

You have a thing for chairs. You don’t know why.

Back in the 1990s, I wrote a piece for Modernism magazine on Mies van der Rohe’s pioneering MR10 tubular steel chair (sadly the text isn’t online, but it’s mentioned here), before writing an article on Mies himself for National Review Online. Does that count?

But Does Ricky Pule’s Have Free Wi-Fi?

October 29th, 2010 - 4:57 pm

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Monty Python, circa 1970 on the “Hairdressers’ Ascent up Mount Everest:”

Patrice: Well, we decided to open a salon.

Announcer: It was a tremendous success.

(the following is accompanied by pictures of great mountaineering heros upon whom are pasted elaborate Marie Antoinette style hairdos)

Announcer: Challenging Everest? Why not drop in at Ricky Pule’s, only 2400 feet from this cinema. (A huge pink neon sign reading ‘Ricky’s’ appears on the mountain.) Ricky and Maurice offer a variety of styles for the well-groomed climber. Why should Tensing and Sir Edmond Hillary be number one on top, when you’re number one on top?

The London Telegraph, circa today: “High speed internet is now available on top of the world after a Nepalese telecom first launched the first 3G services at the base camp of Mount Everest.”

So who will be the first to Twitter from 29,000 feet? And will he have sufficient mousse?

Seth Godin writes:

If you want to get elected in the US, you need media.

When TV was king, the secret to media was money. If you have money, you can reach the masses. The best way to get money is to make powerful interests happy, so they’ll give you money you can use to reach the masses and get re-elected.

Now, though…When attention is scarce and there are many choices, media costs something other than money. It costs interesting. If you are angry or remarkable or an outlier, you’re interesting, and your idea can spread. People who are dull and merely aligned with powerful interests have a harder time earning attention, because money isn’t sufficient.

How is new media changing the news in old media? This self-deprecating video highlights how a local Dallas station is still working out the bugs:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

More seriously though, what happens the palace guard of old media is forced to actually interact with someone in new media? The results are often not pretty to watch, though Hannah Arendt wouldn’t be at all surprised.

(H/T: Patrick Ruffini.)

“Our universities haven’t taught much political history for decades,” Peter Berkowitz writes in the Wall Street Journal, adding, “No wonder so many progressives have disdain for the principles that animated the Federalist debates:”

For the better part of two generations, the best political science departments have concentrated on equipping students with skills for performing empirical research and teaching mathematical models that purport to describe political affairs. Meanwhile, leading history departments have emphasized social history and issues of race, class and gender at the expense of constitutional history, diplomatic history and military history.

Neither professors of political science nor of history have made a priority of instructing students in the founding principles of American constitutional government. Nor have they taught about the contest between the progressive vision and the conservative vision that has characterized American politics since Woodrow Wilson (then a political scientist at Princeton) helped launch the progressive movement in the late 19th century by arguing that the Constitution had become obsolete and hindered democratic reform.

Then there are the proliferating classes in practical ethics and moral reasoning. These expose students to hypothetical conundrums involving individuals in surreal circumstances suddenly facing life and death decisions, or present contentious public policy questions and explore the range of respectable progressive opinions for resolving them. Such exercises may sharpen students’ ability to argue. They do little to teach about self-government.

Or as the Professor writes:

Well, studying political history is almost as boring as reading that Hayek guy, whoever he was. Or knowing what Herbert Hoover actually did. Squaresville, man.

UPDATE: Yes, the Hayek thing is a reference to this: “He’s so unhip, when you talk about Dylan, he thinks you’re talking about Dylan Thomas. Whoever HE was. The man ain’t got no culture.” Now I’m going to have that going through my head for the rest of the day. Andy Warhol, won’t you please come home?

Andy’s a notoriously difficult interview subject to find these days, but at least one of his proteges is still carrying on his tradition of épatering le bourgeois.

Blowup

October 16th, 2010 - 11:24 am

Then, David Hemmings as a cool swinging London fashion photographer in a Hitchcock-esque murder mystery. Now? Airheaded journalists who practice magical, inflatable thinking:

The frequently-maudlin Ann Curry outdid herself on Wednesday’s Today show. Narrating a short video item about Russia unveiling a new set of inflatable weapons designed to fool spy satellites, Curry chirped: “Wish all weapons were like that.” (Video below the fold.)

Her flower-child moment brought to mind how another morning show anchor, ABC’s Charles Gibson, confided to Larry King shortly after the 2003 invasion of Iraq how he and his wife had “a little framed sign hanging in our bedroom, my wife and I, that said, ‘War is not good for children and other living things,’ and I believe that. So I don’t like covering war and I hate to see them occur.”

Fortunately, some more modern journalists are a bit more practical when it comes to these matters than the helium-filled Curry.

Rule #5 Friday

October 15th, 2010 - 6:24 pm

From my perspective, Blog World 2010, #BWE10 for those on Twitter, is shaping up rather nicely, to paraphrase a veteran agent (like myself) in the British Secret Service:

Hugh Hewitt, whose radio show I appeared on earlier today during a segment recorded at Blog World, looks like he agrees:

The girls were here to promote The Palms Casino; not surprisingly, this was a rather successful promotion, considering how many stopped by to meet, greet, and be photographed with the bunnies.

Watch for more from Blog World, including my interview with Hugh for PJM Political, coming next week.

(What’s Rule #5? Stacy McCain tells all.)

Coming Soon to a Galaxy Near You…

October 4th, 2010 - 2:34 pm

Yes, it will likely be longer than the original movie. Yes, pizza rolls will be served. Yes, just as before, you will watch every minute:

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt