|  |
 |
|
The prosecution in the case of a man who ran a Khmer Rouge prison responsible for the deaths of thousands of Cambodians asked for a sentence of 40 years. The defendant, Kaing Guek Eav ("Duch") has apologized numerous times, apparently since turning over a new leaf as a born-again Christian.
Is there anything these people don't do? Christian evangelical missionaries seem to think they own a patent on forgiveness. As long as you turn yourself over to God, you don't need to be held responsible for anything here on Earth. Fuck that! This motherfucker needs to burn. His apology doesn't change what he's DONE. His conversion to bullshit Christianity doesn't account for the thousands of people who are no longer alive because of his complicity in one of the most heinous events in human history.
From the article, "Duch, 67, asked the court to consider his actions in the context of the time, saying the torture and killings were inevitable..." Is this the kind of shit Born-Again-Christianity teaches people? "If your crimes were "inevitable" and you apologize to the families, your slate is wiped clean! Sucking the forgiveness cock of our white God is the equivalent of a Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card! Enjoy."
I could get pissed about the prosecution's lame-ass attempt at promoting a sentence by asking for only 40 years when the guy should have gasoline poured on him and lit on fire. But, since he's already 67, I don't see how 40 years is too different from a death penalty anyway (except for the cost, of course - and that he'll probably be murdered in prison).
I think more people need to look at this kind of shit as the face of fundamental/evangelical Christianity instead of just a story about a criminal.
6 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Sassy! I get to go to the Twin Cities premier of the pilot episode of "TH3M!" Why? Because Bethany's FREAKIN' IN IT!!! It's at the Seven Ultralounge if you can get in, though I'm only there as a guest and would have no idea how to get in myself, were it not for being Bethany's low-grade arm-candy.
Now, for a sneak preview (might want to turn the volume down, and yes, that's Bethany on the preview pane):
In addition, I just updated my website with my first ani-gif. I'm now, officially, not completely low-tech. I also added a few plays to the "Writing/Links" page in pdf files. While I was at it, I generated a gif for the Prufrock website, too. So I got that goin' for me... which is nice.
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Wow, I didn't realize I hadn't posted about Landscape at all. Um, go see this!
We've worked really hard on the promotions for the show and on the website. Make sure to check it out! You can buy tickets online, via phone, or at the door. It CANNOT sellout in advance, so if you forget to reserve seats, you're still able to get in. We only list 75% of the seats online. I'm helping produce it and I designed sound for the first time in 5 years. It was a little hairy at first getting back on that bicycle, but it came out REALLY well. It's a freakin' great show, which has garnered a lot of praise, not to mention a few healthy reviews. In other news, still no job and the car died, but I had a phone interview with RBC which may result in a real interview. So, here's hopin'! Also, I updated my website, so be sure to check it out and tell me what you think of the new layout. Hope to see you soon!
3 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
| 2009-10-27 22:53 |
| Panhandlers |
| Public |
 really fucking tired |
| Radiohead - "Jigsaw Falling Into Place" |
| work, wtf |
|
I love riding the bus. I really love the convenience and the lack of responsibility on my part. I just show up, and they drive. If that means I have to walk a couple blocks. Fine. It's just so bloody convenient.
What I cannot stand is the fact that I still manage to get people begging me for money. Sure, I get the occasional dude who offers me Vicodin, but at least he's offering something in exchange for my money. I just told him I was fine for now and he was cool. What kills me are the people who look at a hapless, bus-riding, mid-day commuter and think, "Yeah! He's totally got cash!"
These people don't even guage their targets anymore. My shoes are falling apart, my coat is dirty and old, and I'm wearing a dirty gray hoodie. I'm also clearly trying to avoid them by listening to my iPod (kept in my pocket so they have no idea it's not a walkman, though iPods aren't that rare anymore). And yet, they ask me anyway.
I've just gotten fucking tired of it. Some pretty clean-cut looking white guy asked me for change yesterday morning while I was waiting for my bus. I interrupted him and said, "I don't have any fucking money." He backed off pretty quick and walked away. Then, today after work I was standing on the corner waiting for my bus while listening to my iPod and a woman walked up to me, tapped my shoulder and said, "Excuse me." I rolled my eyes and stopped my music. She asked, "Do you have a dollar I could borrow?" I just said, "No, I don't," in a really annoyed tone and turned around again. She said, "Okay! I'm sorry to bother you."
Sorry to bother me?! How ridiculous a statement is that? No, you're not sorry to bother me. You're sorry you got barked at, but you're most certainly not sorry you bothered me. You intended to, and will continue to intend to every time you ask someone for money. If you had bumped into me, that would have been unintentional and worth apologizing for, but this was ON FUCKING PURPOSE. Don't apologize.
One other thing, though. Borrow? I'm never going to get that money back, so why don't you just ask honestly. Your odds won't change, but you at least won't be a liar.
Fuckers. I keep wanting to give them my sob story and say, "Hey! I'm unemployed! You wanna ask me for change now? If you're getting unemployment or welfare, then I recommend you thank your lucky stars for it and try to make do until you get a job, but quit trying to profit, tax-free, on this unemployed dude. Okay?"
16 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
That's right, I'm not kid-friendly.
Attention all U of M douche-tools suckling at mom's teat on your way to Spin on Thursday night 18-and-up night!
THE 16 IS A CITY BUS, NOT YOUR OWN PERSONAL PARTY BUS!!!! You little fuckers better just be happy I wasn't drunk and angry. As a much happier side-note, I learned Ingrid Michaelson's Breakable on guitar tonight. Very pretty tune. ALSO! Weekend #2 of TRP's Rebecca kicks off tomorrow night, and I get to run the FOG MACHINE! Oh yeah, and I'm in it, too. You should come!!!
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
A review is not a review if all someone does is tell us the plot points and character names. That's a fucking book report. If you're not going to say anything specific about the production, shut the fuck up and quit wasting interweb ether, you morons.
What the hell is wrong with reviewers in this town? Why would anyone work in a business where they're paid for their opinion, then refuse to give it?
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
I know I stole that from you, ![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif) antrobus178 so I'm apologizing up front. But seriously! WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK?! As if getting laid off, having a 5th wisdom tooth removed, having a permanent hole in my sinus because of it, and being near bankrupt weren't enough... now the fucking car breaks down. For good. The engine's blown. The "knocking" sound finally converted into a "clunking loose metal around" sound last night to the wafting scent of constantly igniting 5w30 High Mileage motor oil.
Then, Bethany had an audition this morning we were late to because the asshole bus driver on the 4B couldn't find the gas pedal, or the straps to secure a wheelchair-bound passenger. Seriously, 5 minutes at one intersection while a driver is fucking around with straps he should know full-well how to use is utterly ridiculous. He snapped at me for not knowing I couldn't get out the back door at the Hennepin/Johnson St. bus stop, shouting, "The OTHER front door!" So, on my way past him, I said, "You're criticizing me when you don't even know where the fucking gas pedal is, asshole. Nice."
I don't believe in karma, but if I did I would have to think it would turn around soon, right? Either that or I murdered someone in a past life and I'm just now paying for it. I know it doesn't do any good to bitch, so I'm getting it out now and refocusing again. Got a show tonight, so I can't be too wrapped up in my pending homelessness. Okay, that's a little dramatic.
6 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Not like most of you didn't already know this, but apparently, brevity isn't my strong suit.
Created by OnePlusYou - Free Dating Sites
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
 |
|
So, in a previous Bible post I had sarcastically alluded to The Godfather without much of a second thought. However, it turns out I wasn't that far off.
Most of 2 Samuel revolves around David's kingship, and the unfortunate struggle for the throne between David and his son Absalom (who had raped his own damned sister at one point, but I digress). At the end of 2 Samuel, David gets old and calls a census (which is against Deuteronomical law) and causes a three-day pestilence in the land of Israel. Upon proper apologetics, the plague ends and David is allowed to age in peace.
1 Kings kicks off when David's older son, Adonijah, assumes the throne even before his father's death. However, David had promised the kingdom of Israel to his younger son (by concubine nonetheless), Solomon. When Solomon's mother, Bathsheba and David's other servants come to him to plead the case of Solomon, David orchestrates a massive ceremony celebrating the installment of Solomon as king, ending with Solomon sitting on the throne of Israel.
Adonijah and his buddies slink away to their corners, and David tells Solomon to treat Adonijah with respect and love. This is the "Godfather" part of the story. Like Vito, David instructs his son Solomon on how to treat both foreigners and members of the kingdom of Israel. Solomon, like Michael, placates his father until David dies, then does what's actually best for both his family and for Israel. Adonijah uses Bathsheba in a meager attempt to manipulate Solomon. Solomon doesn't fall for it and has him immediately put to death. While it sounds harsh, it's actually a pretty savvy move. So, with Fredo... Adonijah out of the way, Michael... (damnit) Solomon goes about praying to the Lord for wisdom, which the Lord (with his usual slew of caveats) grants.
After a short time, there is peace in the land, all the heads of the five families report to Don Solomon, and he rules wisely over a vast empire of casinos and drug-traffiking enterprises. He is respected enough that the King of Lebanon disagrees with him to his face, but doesn't dare speak poorly of him to his back. The queen of Sheba comes to him to pay obeissance, and all is right with the family. Never take sides against the family.
By the way. There is a LOT of Biblically-approved "forced labor" in the old testament. Solomon and the king of Lebanon use over 30,000 slaves to build the Temple of Solomon. Dicks.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Hi, I really hate to do this, because I feel like I should be able to find this stuff through the proper channels. However, I seem to be running up against a brick wall at locating jobs with non-profits in Minneapolis. I know they're out there, and ideally, I'd like to work with some sort of financial or credit counseling agency, but my Google-fu seems to be failing me (as well as Classified-fu... etc).
Anyone out there know where to find these things?
If I can't find a meaningful job with a non-profit, I can always go back to working for the man, but I'd like to take this current unemployment opportunity to try to do better.
14 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Why are conservative Christians so against the public-option healthcare bill? Now, I'm not questioning the motives of people who are against it and aren't Christian. However, anyone who's Christian (and has read the damned book) should be a HUGE fan of the public option.
Now, I know that Christians are not particularly good at reading what's actually in the Bible. However, isn't helping the poor and destitute a running theme? As a matter of fact, it is. There are numerous references in the Old Testament which prohibit farmers to reap their entire yield, leaving the outer edges of the field and anything that has fallen for the poor and for travelers. In fact, there's even a mention of how much you are allowed to take:
Deuteronomy 23:24-25 "If you go into your neighbor's vineyard, you may eat your fill of grapes, as many as you wish, but you shall not put any in a container. If you go into your neighbors standing grain, you may pluck the ears with your hand, but you shall not put a sickle to your neighbor's standing grain." So, I was pleased when observing my father's Episcopal service yesterday to discover that the readings were precisely about how people should treat the poor. Proverbs 22:1-2, 8-9, 22-23 "A good name is to be chosen rather than great riches, and favor is better than silver or gold. The rich and the poor have this in common: the Lord is the maker of them all. Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of anger will fail. Those who are generous are blessed, for they share their bread with the poor. Do not rob the poor because they are poor, or crush the afflicted at the gate; for the Lord pleads their cause and despoils of life those who despoil them." Two phrases stick out at me, " ...the Lord is the maker of them all," and " Those who are generous are blessed, for they share their bread with the poor..." Apparently, the Lord's Old Testament blessing isn't worth much to Christians anymore (which is high-level hypocrisy considering how much they quote Leviticus, but I digress). So, let's see what yesterday's New Testament reading says about it. James 2:1-4 "My brothers and sisters, do you with your acts of favoritism really believe in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ? For if a person with gold rings and in fine clothes comes into your assembly, and if a poor person in dirty clothes also comes in, and if you take notice of the one wearing the fine clothes and say, "Have a seat here, please," while to the one who is poor you say, "Stand there," or "Sit at my feet," have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil thoughts?" Obviously, the emphasis is mine, but I haven't edited any of the wording. There's more to that reading (goes up through 2:17), so if you would like to check it out, it's good stuff. However, this is just one mention of providing for the poor and discouraging acts of favoritism. The New Testament is even more repleat with it than the Old Testament is. How can anyone who calls themselves a Christian be against the public option without being a blatant, ignorant, self-serving hypocrit? The fact of the matter is, they can't. Anyone who calls themselves a Christian must, for the purposes of following their own bloody religion, support the public option. If they don't, I'd prefer they stop going to church in the Christian faith and start attending one in the Rand faith. And, quite frankly, they're welcome to it. This is, after all, a nation of religious freedom.
2 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
Everyone should get the chance to go to at least one. I've now gotten to attend three of them. Ironically, despite my own religious and spiritual proclivities, those are the three weddings I've been to where I could look at the bride and groom and say, "Yep, they're gonna make it work."
I can't imagine having my own, and I don't know how many more I want to attend. It's pretty unweildy with 250 people (and no freakin' handicapped entrance). I'm glad I went, but gladder still that I'm now at my folks' place chillin' and having free food.
Amusing note, the Catholic priest that officiated the service and my father are buddies. So, since my old man is also a good friend of the bride's family, they had my father do the Gospel reading and the homilee. It was a great sermon, but there was something infinitely humorous about watching an Episcopal priest give a sermon to a bunch of Catholics in a Catholic church! Okay, I'm done. Back to lounging. Will be on the plane at 6:30. Hooray, cheap air fare!
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
This article indicates, "The Sunday Times has reported that the British government decided that releasing the Lockerbie bomber would be in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom, as a major oil deal between Libya and BP was being negotiated." Oh Really?!
"Prime Minister Gordon Brown has denied that he gave any assurances to Libya's leaders that the bomber would be freed in exchange for oil contracts." RIIIIIGHT! Mr. Brown, are you seriously telling us that negotiations for oil contracts only surfaced in the time since the Lockerbie douche was released on August 20th? No? Then, you clearly knew about the negotiations prior to the release of the terrorist in question.
Let's assume for Occam's sake that Gordon's telling the truth. In that case, how could he (and the rest of the fucking British/Scottish government) NOT have foreseen that this would look like impropriety? If the oil deal was really going to go through anyway, why would you not advise your Scottish officials to hold on to the terrorist for a whopping three more months while the oil deal finalized?
If he really only has three more months to live, and the Lybians weren't requesting his release, then it certainly wouldn't spoil the deal. I'm sure the oil company's American and British counterparts would have been happy to put the oil deal on their Fourth quarter books for 2009 or First quarter books for 2010 - either would be a bigger boon to stockholders than additional Third quarter profits, when people are spending more on petrol anyway.
This reaks, you know it, and you should 'fess up that it was bunked up if it was, or admit that you're lying through your teeth. Jerks.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
Ruth serves as the first iota of feminism in the Bible... which is quickly squashed by Ruth finally picking up a replacement for her dead husband by being overtly submissive to a man, but that's not the point. I'm not sure what the point of Ruth is, but it's a very pretty little story about three women (Naomi and her two daughters-in-law) finding a life after the death of their collective husbands. Ruth and her sister-in-law are Moabite, which according to earlier parts of the Bible is probably the reason the husbands died - they shouldn't have been marrying outside of their fellow Israelites.
Still, God deems Ruth worthy of remarriage into the Israelite fold and she is paired up with a slightly older man, named Boaz. Actually, Boaz tries to marry her off to a younger kinsman first, then relents to bagging her all on his own. Cute story, eh? I think it's basically a buffer between the action sequences of Judges and 1 Samuel, though, as 1 Samuel reads more like a modern Hollywood action script.
Samuel is the first son to a woman (Hannah) who was previously barron. When her plumming finally gets unclogged, she doesn't rejoice by keeping her kid and raising him to be the bearer of her husband's name, she drops him off at the monkery and gives him to God. Neat, huh? Well, the story basically plays like English monarchal history, and is something our more modern sensibilities are much more wetted for. Once Samuel is firmly installed in Israel as the official seer of God's word, he becomes kinda like Buckingham, the kingmaker. Whoever he says should be king, becomes king.
Now, he warns the Israelites, "God doesn't want you to have a king. He wants you to recognize GOD AS KING, DUMBASSES!" But, they insist. So, they get this tall, handsome drink of goat-milk named Saul to inhabit the first throne of Israel. Yep. He's a douchebag. He doesn't follow God's orders, and gets paranoid when Samuel goes out and finds himself another king, David. Yes, that David. Now, history has made a lot of the story of David and Goliath, but when you read it, it doesn't sound like Goliath had much of an advantage to begin with.
He was huge, unweildy, and likely because of what we have come to understand as a pituitary condition known as gigantism. When you consider David was about 14, spry, and an expert with the slingshot*, and that Goliath was older, worn-down from three days of battle, and wearing almost 50 lbs of armor, the advantage goes heavily in David's favor. David didn't have to get anywhere near Goliath to kill him, and Goliath needed David to be within reach to have a shot at him. 8-feet tall or not, no one's got a reach long enough to swing at a guy with a sling shot. *Curious note about David's experience with the slingshot is that he claims to have saved himself and his sheep numerous times from lions and bears. Now, I suppose the indigenous animal landscape may have changed over the last 3,000 years, but I've never heard of either bears or lions in that part of the world. I would LOVE some help with this. So, David is heralded as a hero for taking advantage of a lumbering hulk of flesh, and Saul freaks out. He tries to kill David numerous times, which God eventually repays with the death of his sons, the loss of the kingdom to the Phillistines, and his eventual death from falling on his own sword rather than being captured.
Meanwhile, David had been on the run from Saul for a couple years, marrying his enemies' wives, and joining ranks against his own by siding with the Phillistines. He gets a pass on that one, though, when the Phillistine king Achish tells him that he's kicking him out since none of his officers trust David. Close shave, eh? Upon returning home from almost-war with the Israelites, David discovers that his wives, his soldier's children and wives, and all their livestock have been captured and their city burned down by the Amalekites. I'm assuming at some point in history, someone became smart enough to leave a few big dudes behind to take care of business... this wasn't it.
So, David goes off with two-thirds of his men (yes, one-third of them stayed behind, supposedly exhausted, to guard the ruins of their burned-down city) to chase down the raiding party and get their kids and women back. They succeed, and kill all of the Amalekites they could get their hands on in the process. With all of the excess spoils of the raid, David sends a good-will gift to each of the heads of the five families of Israel... uh, I may have mixed in another story there. At any rate, he sends good will gifts, presumably to ensure safe passage back to Israel when he comes back to claim the throne Samuel promised him. And that's where 1 Samuel leaves off.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
But I'm going to comment on raising them, anyway. I was having a beer last night with my (now ex) boss and he was regaling me with stories of how his parents now spoil the shit out of his daughter (he has a son, too) and it drives him up the wall. He's trying to maintain discipline, but he's basically going through the Bill Cosby thing of, "These are not the people I grew up with! This is an old man who is trying to get into heaven now!"
At any rate, it led me to think that not to long ago (and probably still common in a lot of areas) a standard parenting device for raising young men was, "Well, boys will be boys..." It's a kind of laissez-faire approach that, I believe, has led too many "boys" to garner their own, frequently negative methods for getting what they want. In young adults, it results in date rape... among many other douche-y types of behavior.
Now, do I believe I know more about parenting than my friends/family who are parents? Absolutely not. However, none of them approach parenting with that lax sort of attitude, either. It's just something that occurred to me while listening to Wade tell me about how his daughter has her grandparents wrapped around her little finger. I thought, "Good for her!" and then thought how I would feel if they had treated the boy that way instead.
I still think I'm happy for the girl to get spoiled a bit. However, looking at it from a perspective of a society that's been run (into the ground some might say) by a patriarchal structure which, for thousands of years, has allowed "boys to be boys" without having any consideration for their fellow person/woman as an equal, has a different tint to it. It's a practice that allows corporate CEOs to destroy lives and retirement savings. It allows financial salesmen and social-climbers to treat everyone else like dirt on their shoe. And, it allows boys and young men to treat women like property.
I'm not blaming the parents of these people for starting the "boys will be boys" ethic. However, I do think they have a responsibility for buying into it. Hopefully, in another 100 or so years, that will have died off. Getting a president who's big on personal responsibility of the upper-class is a big start. Sadly, they (and the rednecks who blindly follow them... off a cliff) don't see the value in respecting their fellow man just yet. But, we can always dream, right?
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
Two days left at the asshole factory. Granted, I'm not exactly "jacked" at the prospect of prolonged unemployment, but I don't think I would have lasted another week. There were a few customers the last couple days who should thank their lucky stars they're on the other end of a phone instead of right in front of me, because I might have shown them the corner of my desk if that were the case.
On a lighter side, In the Mood For Love is one of the most awesome movies EVER!!!! You should see it.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
I know it's been a while since I posted about this. Nothing bad happened - I just haven't had the chance to read it for... two years.
At any rate, I picked back up in the book of Numbers where I left off. That was kinda boring, but after a while you just start feeling sorry for these people. I mean, they get dragged out into the middle of nowhere for... what 40+ years with nothing but an angry dude in a cloud and some manna. I'd start worshiping other deities too!
So, Moses felt bad for them, so he got his rights to the land of milk and honey revoked. He could lead them to the Jordan and look over the river, but that's it. That's where the book of Deuteronomy comes in. Moses spends most of the book repeating (numerous times) all of the rules everyone is supposed to follow, then proceeds to tell them, "But I know you're going to fuck it up anyway, so here are the curses God will lay on you when you do..." Nothing like a little encouragement, right? From Deuteronomy 28:47 - 28:68 is one of the most awesome detailings of curses you'll ever read. Holy crap is it graphic!
Basically, God is jealous, and you can pretty much commit any sin you want, but worshiping other gods is the big one. And, Moses dies, leaving the "taking of the promised land" in the capable hands of Joshua. Such ends the Pentatuch. Quite frankly, you could end Joshua there, too. You'd think for a book about war, Joshua would be far more exciting, but it's not. Suffice it to say, they take about 75% of the promised land. Then, Joshua kicks it. He should have stuck around for the other 25%, though, because (as the book of Judges proves) that last 25% is a bitch.
Judges is way more interesting than anything else in the bible thus far, including the second significant reference to homosexuality. Why the neo-con Xtians don't use this one as their battle-cry instead of Leviticus, I'll never understand. It's far more explicit, and results in the death of all but about 600 men of the tribe of Benjamin. Behold Judges 19:22. A Levite priest brings his concubine into a town in the territory of Benjamin called Gibeah. Upon staying with a friend, another story of hospitality unravels (much like the story of Lot's guests in Sodom). Hilarity ensues: "While they were enjoying themselves, the men of the city, a perverse lot, surrounded the house, and started pounding on the door..." No, that's not a euphemism. There's more, "They said to the old man, the master of the house, 'Bring out the man who came into your house, so that we may have intercourse with him..."" Not a lot of grey area in that one.
To sum-up, the Levite priest and his Gibean host resolve to chuck the concubine out the door into the sex-crazed mob, which proceeds to rape her to death. No, I'm NOT making that up. This starts a civil war between 10 1/2 other tribes of Isreal and the tribe of Benjamin. Benjamin is nearly annihilated until some woman starts crying about the loss of brotherhood... yada, yada... So, they FUCKING ABDUCT WOMEN TO BE FORCED INTO MARRIAGE WITH THE REMAINDERS OF THE BENJAMINITE ARMY SO THEIR TRIBE CAN CONTINUE!!
So, wait a minute. Rape caused the civil war AND cured it. And the lesson that's completely missed is that the damned Levite priest shouldn't have willfully sacrificed his concubine to those douchbags in the first place. Yes, I realize we're talking about an entirely different ethic based on the understanding of a patriarchal, ancient culture... etc. Oh! One thing I really liked about Judges was the very last sentence, "In those days there was no king in Israel; all the people did what was right in their own eyes." Admittedly, that's a pretty decent posture of objectivity.
As usual, all discussion and further analysis is welcome.
7 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
My computer keeps crashing. Everything's backed up, so it isn't tragic, but I can't find any viruses and the system disk says everything's in perfect working order when I boot to the CD and run the diagnostic tests.
So, two questions: - If I reformat the hard drive, I'll need an operating system. Any suggestions on what I can get for free?
- How can I fix what I have without reformatting the hard drive?
I'll take any suggestions anyone can offer (including where else I could post this to get additional help). Thanks!
6 Comments | Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
You know, I was going to type up a bunch of "Best of" lists of this year's Fringe, but I couldn't figure out how to write it without begging the question, "Who's ass are you trying to kiss?" So, I'll leave it at this.
I saw some incredible individual performances, ensemble performances, and musical acts. I saw some fantastic original scripts, some brilliant re-workings of established scripts, and some very brave people who chose to work without one altogether. More importantly, I saw 46 Fringe shows that very nearly filled up a void of art that's been gaping for quite some time due to a lack of funding.
That's all. And, I look forward to next year. I'm out.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
I missed yet another time slot at 1pm on Sunday because there was just too much to do around the apartment. I felt bad for missing a show, but what needed to get done got done.
 For my 2:30 slot I snuggled into a really uncomfortable Bryant Lake Bowl seat for Full Frontal Improv produced by Swandive Theatre. Apparently, I got to see the one performance that very nearly lived up to its name, what with an impromptu de-pantsing. Sadly, the performer was quick enough to catch their pants, and the show went on - hockey fight and all.
Look, improv is hard. There's a reason why the really good ones are good - years of experience. This show had more testicular mass than any other show in the Fringe (at least in my mind) because none of the performers are actually improv actors. They started developing their skills just for the Fringe, and went out there metaphorically naked. So, while the title is clever and the photo alluring, it's also apt, just not in the way you'd initially think. While the moxy was there, the polish wasn't. Huge kudos for the performers for having the stones to do it, but it just wasn't that entertaining. Keep working on it and please keep everyone informed when you re-mount it.
 Believe it or not, you can bike from the BLB to The Southern in 25 minutes (via the Greenway and the Hiawatha line). There, I got to witness a fantastic performance from Christopher Kehoe in Theatre Pro Rata's production of Monster. Christopher deftly shifts from one character (personality) to the next, taking the audience with him all the way, despite a less than stellar script. The concept is good, and the production benefits from having a good actor at the helm. Where many actors would have had trouble delivering some of the lines and making us believe them (particularly at the end), Kehoe succeeds. I don't know that I would like to see an expanded version of this show, and even at 1 hour it was a bit long. The sound, lights, and other design elements are tight and subtle, and combined with Kehoe's performance earn the show a 3.5 out of 5 stars. I just couldn't get over the script.
 Next up was The Harty Boys In the Case of the Limping Platypus. There's really nothing I could say about this show that hasn't already been said, but I think particular credit should be paid to Sulia Altenberg, who plays the young girl with all the brains. She was quick, well-rehearsed, and exhibits great comic timing. Overall, the show was a solid 4 out of 5 stars for its delightful send-up of both the Hardy Boys mysteries and the narrator-style of theatre.
 And that was the last of sctructured theatre for this year's Fringe. My 7pm slot was filled by Noah Bremer's Untitled Duet With a Houseplant. I was highly amused with the beginning of the show, where Bremer chucks snacks and beverages into the audience until I started thinking, "Were it not for his disarming cuteness, I'd be inclined to demand more for my $12." Yes, I know I have an Ultra-Pass, and at 46 shows, it actually comes out to $3.26, but stay with me here. The show eeked up slowly over the rest of the hour, culminating in the title activity, but not by much. It pretty much consisted of one hour of Bremer being cute and doofy. He's wonderful at it, but it wore thin and I started to nod off. 2 out of 5 stars.
 Okay, I didn't see John Munger's 3rd Rabbit piece this year, but I've seen his stuff before. The fact that I spent my encore slot at the Ritz watching Thrower of Light instead of My Body Made Me Do This tells me that I still have a lot to learn about dance. While I could tell the dancers involved were extremely talented, dedicated, and skilled performers, I couldn't get over the feeling that it was just a bunch of pretentious hooey. If someone wants to shout at me, "Hey! You didn't get it!" I'll be the first to shout right back, "Obviously!"
This works better if I have one hand on your shoulder and the other hand holding a drink while pointing at you as I slur my speech, but over the internet, you'll just have to imagine that scenario. "I struggle to like absurdist theatre (but don't). And, I'm learning to enjoy dance. This was absurdist dance, man!" I felt like I'd been fed Lima beans and cottage cheese. How this show scored the encore, I don't know, but I think it's indicative of really not understanding the genre. 1.5 out of 5 stars.
Post A Comment | Add to Memories | Tell a Friend | Link
|
|
|
|
|
annoyed
distressed
self-righteous