Movie Reviews-The Hobbit: Desolation of Smaug

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug
directed by Peter Jackson

I finally decided to see this movie. I was initially apprehensive of the invented female character butt-kicking elf-warrior Tauriel (Evangeline Lilly) and her involvement in battle. However while watching the previews, I saw an ad for 300: Rise of An Empire, which is a sequel to 300. This film stars Eva Green as a well, butt-kicking ship captain, Artemisia. What some may not realize though is that Artemisia actually was a real life Greek Queen, who did indeed command troops and fight in battle, most notably at the Battle of Salamis.

Queen Artemisia supported the Persians and was responsible for the death of many Greeks. The Greek war leaders hated her, viewing her not only as a traitor, which was bad enough, but as something almost unnatural. A woman fighting and leading men in battle was considered sinful. The Greeks had a special interest in capturing Artemisia alive. This wouldn't have ended well for her. I don't know how the film will depict this but history tells us Artemisia survived the Persian defeat at Salamis. Most Greek sources agree that despite her treason she was a skilled commander. She was the only female leader among the Persians. I mention this just to remind myself that life can be stranger than fiction. We (I) shouldn't automatically dismiss fantasy interpretations of female warriors, rare though they may be in real life. I'll have more on Tauriel in a minute.

Moving along.

The fundamental problem with the Hobbit movies is that Peter Jackson decided or had it decided it for him, to make three near three hour movies from a book that is just under 300 pages, depending upon your edition. To quote Bilbo Baggins, this is like butter that is scraped over too much bread. There just isn't enough source material there. So Jackson and company made up storylines and characters. Some filling in of details is ok. The book The Hobbit is exclusively concerned with the adventures of Bilbo, the Dwarves and Gandalf. Nothing happens except through Bilbo's eyes. We occasionally get some exposition from Thorin or Gandalf or authorial insight. In the movie, Jackson decided this wouldn't work and so we see every little thing that was only implied in the book or was spoken of off-handedly in the LOTR appendices. It's when Jackson starts getting too enthralled with his additions that he runs into his second major problem, which is related to the first.

His tone's all wrong. It's the wrong tone. Now while I certainly don't suggest that anyone stab Peter Jackson in the face with a soldering iron, the fact remains that this is really more LOTR- The Prequel, than The Hobbit-a standalone children's book. Forbidden love in the LOTR? We have that here too. Hobbit poisoned with Morgul weapon? We see that again. The film contains tons of violent scenes which never occurred in the original book. It's not aimed at kids. Until the book's end, when there is a slightly jarring nod to the fact that yes, good people really can die, The Hobbit retains a cheery, whimsical tone. This spirit is completely lacking from THDOS. This movie is very deliberately a prequel to LOTR, sometimes annoyingly so.

THDOS is an adaptation though some purists might call it a butchering. So the interpreter has the right and duty to alter the source material for reasons of commerce and media and his own caprice. The Hobbit, as a book, lacks women characters. I don't automatically see that as a flaw but many people do. THDOS, as a movie, pulls in women and girl characters from the LOTR and makes others up. This might be okay if the writers and director didn't seem to think, as many modern filmmakers do, that a woman must be "kicking a$$" in order to connect with moviegoers. I'm not sure that's the case. If we're saying that the only way a woman can be valued is to do exactly what a man would be doing, isn't that internalized sexism? YMMV of course.

Nevertheless Tauriel wasn't as bad as I had feared. She didn't ruin the movie. She's just a symptom of Jackson's compulsion to pad running times and basically create fan fiction from The Hobbit.She's an invented character that doesn't work. Jackson severely alters canon characters in worse ways. Beorn, your not so friendly neighborhood lycanthrope is turned from a gruff, brusque, solitary mountain man who nonetheless is capable of laughter and humor into an ugly scarred paranoid PTSD survivor. The book's introduction of Beorn to the dwarves is humorous. The movie's is violent. Thranduil, the elf king, is a cynical liar. There's little whimsy or sense of seeing a bigger world, which is critical to the book.

And yet, I can't quite fall into the Megyn Kelly trap of sneering and snarling that the source material can and must be only the way I imagined it. If there are some women Hobbit fans who might enjoy seeing a woman character who actually has something to do besides look frightened and hide in the caves with the children while the men battle the orcs, who am I to gainsay them? Similarly, the filmed human population of Laketown actually includes some humans of African and apparent other non-European descent. They have no speaking roles IIRC but nevertheless there they were. That's certainly not canonical but then again Laketown (Esgaroth) is a trading town where people from near and far do business.

Anyway.

When last we left our intrepid heroes they were within sight of the Lonely Mountain, and thus their lost realm of Erebor. Thorin (Richard Armitage) can finally start practicing his various acceptance speeches for his inauguration as king. Unfortunately the orcs have also caught up with the dwarves, Bilbo (Martin Freeman) and Gandalf (Ian McKellen). Gandalf leads them to Beorn's stables and locks them in. Beorn (Mikael Persbrandt), in bear form, is not exactly happy to see them but the next morning in human form he's a bit less dangerous. He loans them horses and ponies to take them through Mirkwood. The orcs, being cowards, do not attack while Beorn is around. When they get to the forest entrance the party sends the horses back to Beorn as he is a vegan animal rights activist who would look unkindly on dwarves getting his friends hurt or killed in Mirkwood. That's when Gandalf, having been in secret mind-meld conversation with Galadriel (Cate Blanchett) gets the request, really more order (this isn't right as old and powerful as Galadriel is, she's NOT the head of the White Council and can't really give orders to Gandalf but whatever) to look into what's going on at Dol Guldur where some young punk wizard named The Necromancer has set up shop. No one has heard of him before and both Gandalf and Galadriel have a bad feeling about him. So Gandalf tells his buddies see you on the other side. He's got to leave. He warns them to stay on the path.

Of course the dwarves and Bilbo don't stay on the path. They get attacked by giant spiders. Bilbo saves them, using his magic ring, but just as they are about to be on their merry way they get ambushed by wood elves, including Prince Legolas (Orlando Bloom) and his guard captain/semi-love interest Tauriel. Elves aren't overly fond of dwarves, or vice versa, as Thorin is keen to point out. So the entire party is arrested and taken to prison. Thorin refuses to kiss King Thranduil's (Lee Pace) skinny behind, confirm his treasure hunt or offer Thranduil any treasure. That's just how Thorin gets down. Meanwhile Kili (Aidan Turner) is trying to convince Tauriel that the rumors about dwarf men aren't true, if you know what I mean. 

Bilbo arrives to rescue everyone before Kili can finish running his game but such is life. This kicks off the second half. We learn that Bard the Bargeman Bowman (Luke Evans) has some unresolved feelings about his dad failing to kill Smaug, that the dragon Smaug (Benedict Cumberbatch) doesn't recognize the smell of hobbits but knows dwarves all too well, and that Gandalf isn't the most powerful wizard of the Maiar. To sum up, if you liked the first movie, I think you will like this one as well. If you didn't like the first movie, there's not a lot here that is done better...EXCEPT for the pacing. It's 161 minutes and still too doggone long for me but it did move a little more quickly than the first film. The special effects were well done. I liked Cumberbatch as Smaug. If you haven't read the book I suggest that you do.

TRAILER

Does Dialect Map Quiz Correctly Predict Your Home?

I like hearing the different accents and dialects which people use. I did a post on this before but enjoy revisiting the subject. A 25 question NYT interactive quiz claims to show you your primary accent based on how you pronounce certain words. It also shows other regions you might be from or where people have dialects similar to your own. Some of these make more sense than others. I was correctly pegged as being from Detroit. As I have repeatedly pointed out, only somewhat tongue in cheek, people from Michigan generally and people from Detroit specifically don't have accents. It's the rest of you folks who have accents. Or so I was told.  =) My other close places were Maryland, which is where both of my parents spent some time and is within shouting distance of the Carolinas, which is where my maternal roots lie, and of all places Yonkers(???!).

Maybe Yonkers came up because I do tend to strongly pronounce the "au" sound in words like "aunt". I never understood how anyone could pronounce the word for an older female relative exactly like the word for a ubiquitous hardworking insect.  The "u" is there for a reason. It seems that distinction is still found among some in southern Appalachia, parts of New England, and of course in my particular Detroit circles. I retook the test and again came up with Detroit as home but this time had similarities to Grand Rapids and Buffalo. Interesting. "Caught" and "cot" are also different words to my ear, but apparently that's not the case for everyone. Anyway have a go and let us know if this quiz correctly predicts where you are from. Or mebbe yew doan tawk a like yore kin no more.
Take this Test

Was the test accurate?

Where are you from?

Do you think you have an accent?

Book Reviews-Wolfsangel, Sundiata: An Epic of Old Mali, Demon Shield

Wolfsangel
by M.D. Lachlan

Wolfsangel is a somber historical fantasy tale of the origins of the titular German rune and of the werewolf legend. It intertwines this with Viking action adventures and the ongoing battles among and between the Norse gods the Aesir. This was enjoyable but in a far different way than I had expected. Although there are a few scenes of extreme violence and horror, the book tends to avoid those to concentrate on mental agonies, worries and magic, much of which is wielded by women. So the action is actually relatively infrequent or at least I thought it was. M.D. Lachlan is the pen name for author Mark Barrowcliffe.

The Aesir are among my favorite gods to read about simply because they are almost all serious bada$$es. War and battle are their primary focus. This tends to be true even of those deities who represent more peaceful elements of human existence such as fertility, farming, love, travel, etc. The Norse eschatological myth, or Ragnarok, is similar to other Indo-European myths and indeed to some things that are described in Revelations. There will be horrible wars. Humanity's violence, lust and lawlessness will exponentially increase. Families will dissolve in violence and incest. People will murder and rape each other with glee. There will be seemingly endless winters which kill off large numbers of people. Eventually all the bonds restraining evil entities will dissolve. The forces of evil, giants, demons, etc will meet the Aesir and their chosen human heroes from Valhalla in the Final Battle. Unlike Revelations however the "good guys" are doomed to lose. Odin, AllFather, King of Gods and Men will be killed and eaten by the wolf Fenris, who is said to be so large that his lower jaw scrapes earth while his upper jaw reaches heaven. Other wolves will swallow and eat the Sun and Moon, putting out the world's lights. The fire demon Surtur will burn the world, indeed the entire universe, destroying everything. But the world will be reborn with new even more powerful gods. This fate can't be changed.

The father of Fenris, the evil trickster god Loki, was banished from Valhalla when he admitted his involvement in the murder of Odin's son Baldur. Loki was bound with his son's entrails at the center of the earth and placed beneath serpents dripping venom onto his face and eyes. There he will stay until Ragnarok. 


In Wolfsangel the Viking King Authun has a vision that a Saxon woman has a son destined by the gods for great things. He leads a suicide mission (for his men, not himself) to raid the village and seize this child to raise as his own. Authun is surprised when he finds twin babies instead. But he takes them both and returning to his land, raises one boy Vali, while giving the other, Feileg, to the witches. Vali eschews raiding and direct violence, preferring to win via tactics and trickery. Vali's considered the biggest coward in the North. Because Authun has a well earned reputation for being the hardest and most brutal man in the North, the prospect of a "weak" son inheriting his kingdom causes political and personal problems. Feileg is sold to wild men and literally lives as a wolf. As both brothers grow to adulthood it becomes apparent that there are magicians and non-human entities that watch them. Each brother has powers that are dangerous to their enemies...and their friends.

Wolfsangel has some interesting points to make about the nature of good and evil and whether one is possible without the other. Odin, who raises strife for his own amusement and is the patron god of berserkers, hanged men, and magicians, is perhaps not "good" at all, while Loki, who constantly torments and tricks the Aesir but rarely harms humans, may not be as "evil" as some might think. Or maybe eternal beings are by definition beyond good and evil. Even in the Abrahamic traditions we have God acting in ways which are opaque to humans. In a theme shared with Christianity and some other religions Odin sacrificed himself to himself and hung dead on a tree, his side pierced with a spear, for nine days and nine nights. He did this to gain more knowledge, particularly the runes. Wolfsangel suggests that the experience and the knowledge may well have driven Odin insane and made him even more brutal than before.

This was a good book, if not quite what I was expecting. it was different, I'll say that. It moves at its own pace. It will definitely take a moment to figure out what's going on. Hints are given throughout the story but I didn't think they were obvious ones. Magic is not shown as something easy that works quickly. It's slow, painful and may work in quite different ways than the practitioner intended, if at all. It's mostly associated with women and may be related to childbirth. The shamans wielding magic always have to pay a cost.






Sundiata, An Epic Of Old Mali
by D.T. Niane

The Mali Empire was a West African multi-ethnic superstate that lasted roughly 400 years. It was famous for its wealth, legal administration, education (Timbuktu was a center of learning), music, culture and war making abilities. It had standing armies with chain mail clad knights and specialized infantry famed for skill with spear and bow. The leading group of the Mali Empire was the Mandinka people. Eight current states of West and North Africa make up the former Mali Empire. The founder of the Mali Empire was a historical figure who has since taken on legendary qualities. His name was Sundiata. This is, as was traditional among his ethnic group, a combination of his mother's (Sogolon) and father's (Maghan Kon Fatta) names. It translates into English as something close to "Son of the Lion" or "Sogolon's Lion". That's a pretty cool name for a prince if you think about it. Anyway the story starts when a king of Mali (Maghan Kon Fatta) receives a hunter/griot in his court who has the gift of prophecy. The fellow is smooth. In fact he's so smooth that he may not only be a messenger from God but perhaps supernatural in origin himself. He tells the king that his true successor is not yet born. No the king must marry a supremely ugly hunchbacked woman. This woman will bear him a son who will lead the Mandinka to heights of power not yet dreamed of. Well the king thanks the visitor for the prophecy and doesn't pay a lot of attention to it. 

Some time goes by and the king is holding court outside when he receives some visitors from the outskirts of his empire. They are accompanied by a hunchbacked maiden (Sogolon) of surpassing ugliness. Sogolon is as ugly as the king is handsome. In fact she's so ugly people call her buffalo woman. Heeding the prophecy the king decided to marry her. She bore him a son, Sundiata, who was as ugly as his mother. Sundiata did not walk until the age of seven and apparently could not talk. Now the king already had a wife, the beautiful and ambitious Sassouma, and an heir, her son Dankaran. Neither was pleased with Sogolon or her son. Both made fun of them and tried to undercut them at every opportunity.

Shortly before the King died he told the seven year old Sundiata that he would be king after Fatta's death. The King also expressed that wish to his nobles and counselors. However when he died Sassouma convinced everyone to ignore those wishes and install her son as king instead. And she then conspired to kill Sundiata, his mother and his sisters. Eventually Sundiata and his family had to flee the royal court. And this starts an epic tale of magic, intrigue and plotting which sees Sundiata travel many lands and gain much wisdom and experience before eventually returning home to liberate his people. This is taken from oral traditions. It's a very short book without a lot of dialogue. My edition ran less than 100 pages. It's reminiscent of stories like The Illiad or The Silmarillion in that via a mix of legend and history it communicates the particular cultural values of one group of people as well as telling the common Hero's Journey that is found in every culture.








Demon Shield
by Bruce King

There are slightly different explanations among monotheistic religious traditions as to why Satan and his demons/devils war against God and despise man so much. Islam's take, which is echoed elsewhere, is that Satan and his rebellious angels were jealous of the gifts and love which God gave to man, whom they considered a lower form of being. Upon being ordered to love and serve man, Satan and company scornfully refused and initiated a war in heaven, which of course they lost. Being consigned to eternal hell and blocked from God's glory made them if anything angrier and more jealous of man, who having an eternal soul, has the possibility to join with God in heaven, something that is forever denied to Satan and his minions. So from pure spite the evil forces of the universe attempt to profane, mock and destroy God's shining achievement, humanity, and drag human souls down to hell with them.
That is the story told in Demon Shield. This was the writer's first novel but it certainly didn't read like it. Unfortunately the publisher went out of business shortly after this book was released. I never did get any other books by the author, though having re-read this, I would certainly like to do so. This book remains out of print. However if you like grim visceral pulpy horror that hearkens back to Stephen King's grimier stuff -- Bruce King wrote a note giving thanks to Stephen King and hoping that the book would scare him -- you might want to pick this up if you can find it online or in your local used book store.

A yuppie couple, Angelica and Robert Marsten (she's a bookstore manager, he's a law student and public defender paralegal) moves in next door to an abandoned church which has, via evil magic, become home to a Satanic entity. Via some stupid decisons, bad luck and personal weaknesses, the entity is able to start scaring, influencing, and ultimately possessing the wife, Anjelica. Ultimately mayhem ensues but the book takes its sweet time getting there. The demon is much more interested in savoring human fear and corrupting the human soul than it is in just killing humans, though obviously it enjoys that too. This particular demon's primary initial tool happens to be lust so the book is full of explicit and nasty sexual situations which become more and more outre. Demon Shield is subdivided into four parts , Foreplay, Penetration, Obsession, and Release. This is truth in advertising. If prurient in your face horror is not occasionally your thing, this is simply not the book for you. But if you love possession stories and battles with the devilish, this is worthwhile.

The couple's only hope is Merin Whitley, a magician/exorcist who has previously tangled with demons and has the literal scars to show for it. He lost his wife in the last serious dust-up. Merin is worn down from his long battles. Once he enters the fray he realizes that this demon is the one he's struggled against before.This is pretty hardcore horror that definitely won't appeal to the Twilight or True Blood crowd or anyone who's looking for misunderstood monsters. The monsters here are not misunderstood in the least bit. They are Evil. They don't like humans. Period. They don't like dogs either. The Marstens have a devoted Rottweiller which tries to warn them of what's going on.

Live Preliminary Exam for Theodore Wafer: Renisha McBride Killer

Watch live streaming video from freeplive at livestream.com

What's Your Excuse? Maria Kang Tells It Like It Is: Fat-Shaming or Truth Telling?

Smoking is bad for you. It causes and/or correlates with lung and throat cancer, hypertension, heart disease, yellowed teeth and fingernails, erectile dysfunction in men and several other nasty medical conditions in both genders. Smoking gives your hair, clothing and breath what I find to be an unpleasant odor. Being around smoke gives me a vicious headache. I don't allow smoking in my home. I avoid cigarette smoke as much as possible. Yes we all know of or have heard of someone who smoked three packs a day, had clean pink lungs and lived to be 107 or of someone else who never touched a cigarette and died at 31 hacking up his esophagus and lungs. But those are considered to be outliers. Most people, even many smokers, accept, grudgingly or otherwise, that smoking is bad for you. Although the anti-smoking crusade may have gone too far in some aspects, there aren't many groups, other than tobacco company fronts, who argue with a straight face that not only should you have the right to smoke but also that smoking is a positive good. If you smoke there are few support groups who claim that other people should stop trying to "smoke-shame" you. But oddly enough, many people see overeating as being different from smoking.

Despite consistent and increasing medical and scientific evidence that overeating, avoiding exercise and carrying excess weight is, generally speaking, bad for you, there are several people who won't accept that fact and don't want to hear other people raise it either. Sometimes their defensiveness slides into rage at a person's justifiable pride at being in shape. 

Exercise enthusiast Maria Kang found this out when she was temporarily banned from Facebook and had her post deleted for writing that while we shouldn't hate fat people neither should we normalize obesity. Her post brought about a firestorm of criticism, presumably from overweight women, and Kang's words were said to be akin to hate speech.

I am a firm believer that one should love their body in order to start loving and nurturing it. What I don’t like is the fine line we are walking today – which is love and accept your body versus love and progress your body.  We should celebrate any person who makes their fitness and nutrition a priority. There is no one-size-fits-all in fitness. It’s unfortunate that we don’t see more variety in the physiques that bombard our media streams. I get that. That’s why I’ve never posted a motivational poster with a fitness model attached to the message (you can now look at my FB history) because I don’t want to perpetuate the notion that ‘fitness’ looks a certain way.

Please start your keyboards now (as I know many are thinking I encourage people to look like me) because I’ve never said that. I am not a size 0 like most runway models and I don’t have a six pack like most fitness models. I am not a paid celebrity. I don’t work in a gym. I have a stressful life. I don’t have the perfect marriage. I have struggled with food addiction. And I was not blessed with the best genetics. I run when I’m tired. I avoid food when I’m stressed. I discipline my constant desire for chocolate. I am barely 5’4. I have stretchmarks. I have excess skin – and while not perfect, I know this is how my body (not everybody) manifests after children through consistent nutrition and exercise.

While fitness changes lives, the lack of fitness destroys lives. I hate the pain of watching my mother not take care of herself. I hate watching friends pop prescription pills for cholesterol, blood pressure and diabetes. I hate reading news about our healthcare crisis and I hate seeing people blame others for their lot in life.

LINK

 I know many people still get riled up with me and my convictions but the truth is I KNOW how it is to work your ass off and not have energy at the end of your day. I know how it feels to be overweight and not drop an ounce after years of disordered eating. I know how difficult it is to raise multiple children – all born a year apart – and make my fitness and nutrition a priority. Lastly, I know how it feels like to grow up with an unhealthy mother wondering if she will live to see your wedding day. I know it’s hard. I know it’s not easy to break habits and build new ones. I know your environment challenges you and I know making your health a priority amongst the many priorities to stay afloat in today’s world is difficult. But I will tell you this: IT IS WORTH IT.

Kang evidently didn't like seeing stories about lingerie for fat women designed to make them think of themselves as beautiful and perhaps similar stories of other bloggers attempting to spread fat acceptance. Curvy Girl Lingerie Owner Chrystal Bougnon reported Kang to Facebook for making "anti-fat" comments. "I want to be a safe place for women to talk about being fat," Bougon told NBC Bay Area. "People are sending in their photos and telling me they never felt beautiful until they found my page. I want to have a sliver of cyber space without people hating on us." Bougon feels that Kang – best known for her flat abs Facebook post in October with her kids, asking “What’s Your Excuse” – is “fat shaming” her and others who are overweight.
Bougnon, who has accused Kang of stirring up the controversy to sell fitness tapes, obviously also has a financial interest in keeping the pot boiling as she has used her Facebook page to promote what she sees as "real" (read overweight) women in all their glory and imperfection. I am aghast by the attempts by some "fat positive" activists to downplay or dismiss legitimate health concerns about weight or diet as "hate speech" or bully people into saying that fat women are always just as attractive as normal size women. Having read Kang's facebook and blog post I find nothing that's hateful.

There are a few points which I think are worth making.

1) The fashion industry, which excites so much attention from some women and subsequent rage at supposedly male derived beauty standards, is not in fact run or generally consumed by heterosexual men. The constant news about this or that celebrity mother's weight gain and loss during and after pregnancy is something that most men have little to no interest in. This is about competition between and among women. The women that heterosexual men idealize who are represented in the media are generally speaking a little heavier, often shorter, more feminine, and rather obviously differently shaped from fashion model types. Men are more accepting of women's weight than many women might think. And fat women get married, date, and have children like anyone else. And they seem to be increasing in number. Americans in general are getting fatter.

2) That said, everyone has an ideal of what's attractive in the opposite sex. That's life. Getting angry about this is like getting mad that when it rains you get wet. You can curse, scream and pout all you want but you're still gonna get wet. Since you can't control the rain, the smart thing to do is to get inside, wear a raincoat or carry an umbrella. This goes for both genders. The overweight or obese women complaining that weight related beauty standards disadvantage them could decide to lose weight OR they could find a man who, perhaps because he may not be what most women consider attractive, may be more accepting. Or maybe a larger woman can find that successful attractive man who just likes larger women. Those are the choices. Those choices are under the control of one or two people. But trying to change what millions of men find attractive, well quixotic doesn't even begin to describe that challenge. Good luck with that. Bring a lunch because I think it's going to be a while.

If you're overweight or obese, generally speaking it's because you are eating too much, eating the wrong foods and not exercising enough. It's simple math. 3500 calories = 1 pound. If you consistently eat more than required you will store the extra calories as fat. I don't know all the reasons WHY a person might be doing this. The reasons are as varied as the stars in the sky. But I do know math and mechanics. Burn more calories, consume fewer calories, reduce or eliminate bad foods, lose weight. Eat more calories, eat crappy calories, sit on your fundament all day, gain weight and eventually become fat. Obviously there are several external factors, what with subsidized sugar pumped into so much of our food supply, food deserts, and time constraints. However, an adult decides what he or she puts into their mouth. No one chased after a thin person, strapped them to a gurney and force fed them until they became obese.

It's probably compassionate to spare someone's feelings as you try to convince them to change something about themselves. I've done that myself for people I care deeply about and there are people who could honestly say they've done that for me. No one likes blunt criticism, especially from an intimate. Yes, the long term solution in solving someone's weight gain will involve finding out why they're eating more food than their body needs, not moving around enough and eating the wrong foods. There may be some deep emotional wounds that need healing. That can take some time and some pretty deft maneuvering around emotional and psychological landmines. But sometimes you must dispense with politesse and tell it like it is. If you are around (and I have been) when someone is undergoing diabetic ketoacidosis or experiencing a heart attack, it's too damned late to hold their hand and try to gently convince them that no they don't really need that extra sugar donut or that sodium and preservative laden fried food. No. If they are lucky enough to survive and wind up in the hospital the doctor will likely force them on a very limited diet that doesn't include the mentioned items.  And if they don't survive, well then you will have be proud that although you'll never see them again, at least you didn't hurt their widdle feelings. Wonderful. You were so freaking brave. You deserve a medal for your sympathy and empathy and compassion.
I've been there and done that.

Because of some painful experiences I have less and less interest in trying to spare anyone else's feelings on this topic, especially if they are people I care about. Being fat doesn't make you a bad person. I hope that is clear.Your problems are just more obvious than other people's. But being fat could and often does put you at higher risk for a variety of life threatening or life altering conditions. I've seen far too many people die, get permanent unpleasant conditions, suffer amputations or have eyesight issues. We shouldn't be silent about health issues just because some vain fat women wish to harangue people into attesting that fat women are beautiful. I don't believe that fat people must walk through life with people pointing and laughing at them. I've never done that and never will. But that just isn't what Maria Kang was advocating. The people who claim she was are just showing their own guilty consciences. When someone showing justifiable pride in her own accomplishments is accused of hate, our society is warped.

I think that people know that being morbidly obese is not a healthy or desirable state. And no amount of jawboning, guilt-tripping or whining about "fat-shaming" can make me think otherwise. But if someone disagrees that's fine. They can live their life as they see fit. If they want to desecrate the temple of their body, go for it. Eat buckets of ice cream and platters of donuts. Guzzle down high sugar drinks. Have not only dinner seconds but also thirds. Hook yourself up to a glucose drip if you like. Just don't tell me I must agree with or applaud such actions or their impact on your body. Because I won't.

Ever. Never. Ever.
If you're that rare person (and I know a few) who has underlying medical conditions which have caused weight gain that is obviously an entirely different kettle of fish. But most people who are overweight simply need to eat less and exercise more. As Kang said in a non-apology apology:

What you interpret is not MY fault. It's Yours. The first step in owning your life, your body and your destiny is to OWN the thoughts that come out of your own head. I didn't create them. You created them. So if you want to continue 'hating' this image, get used to hating many other things for the rest of your life. You can either blame, complain or obtain a new level of thought by challenging the negative words that come out of your own brain. "With that said, obesity and those who struggle with health-related diseases is literally a 'bigger' issue than this photo. Maybe it's time we stop tip-toeing around people's feelings and get to the point."

LINK

What's your call?

Was Maria Kang engaging in hate speech?

Should her facebook post have been removed?

Is "fat acceptance" a good idea?

How did criticism become "shaming"? 

If you're doing wrong, shouldn't you be ashamed?

Music Reviews-Phil Cohran, Bad Company

Phil Cohran

Kelan Phil Cohran has had a very productive musical life although I'm not sure that he's that widely known outside of the jazz/post-modern musical world. He's primarily a bandleader. His initial instrument was trumpet. He also plays cornet, psaltery, zither, French horn, frankiphone (an instrument he invented which is similar to a mbira), and various percussion instruments among others. Born in Mississippi he was a talented sideman for people as dissimilar as Jay McShann and Sun Ra. Cohran also was a founding member of the AACM (Association for the Advancement of Creative Musicians). The AACM became famous for its quality of musicians it attracted and for promoting what it called "Great Black Music", a melange of serious avant-garde jazz, blues, and almost every form of black diaspora music as well as classical and other forms of what would come to be referred to as "world music".  The AACM sought to challenge music industry exploitation as well as offer free music training to people in inner cities. The AACM gave classes in Hebrew, Arabic and Swahili as well as history. As was unfortunately the case during those times (and today?), the AACM attracted the thoughtful and negative attention of the Chicago Police Department and the FBI.

Cohran has spoken of learning a lot from Sun Ra, who he's said was the most advanced bandleader for whom he ever worked. But Cohran wanted to lead his own band and ground his music a little more firmly in blues traditions. Or to put it another way Sun Ra and many of his imitators or disciples played "out" most of the time while Cohran's compositions, while occasionally way out there, generally tended to have some quite noticeable links to traditional forms. Cohran is a historian and musicologist as well as a musician. He has lectured extensively on music's impact on the body and mind.  In any event the period from 1966 to 1975 saw Cohran's new music fit in quite nicely with the rising afrocentric stylings of the time. His first band ,called the Artistic Heritage Ensemble, initially included some people who would become quite heavy hitters later on in their career such as future members of The Pharaohs and Earth, Wind and Fire, Pete Cosey, the guitarist who became famous for his work on Miles Davis' early seventies albums, and conguero Master Henry Gibson, who later worked with Curtis Mayfield. In short if you were a working Chicago jazz or funk musician during the late sixties and seventies you probably were familiar with Cohran's band. And if you were among the best at your craft, you might have been in his group. Along with Miles Davis, Cohran was one of the first modern musicians to explore modal possibilities in jazz.

This music is not for everyone. Cohran doesn't write 3 minute pop songs. Because he often skips having a singer the compositions don't always follow the verse-chorus-bridge format. And with the large bands he was using, things could get somewhat dense. There's a lot of different things going on rhythmically. So it's something of an acquired taste. Fortunately from my point of view I did acquire a taste for this music and often play an entire release of his while I'm cleaning the house or exercising or doing some other repetitive task. It's easy for me to get lost in this music. It's not blues, afro-beat, jazz, North African, soul, funk, gospel, classical, Afro-Cuban, arabic, indian, flamenco but all of that and more. You could literally put Cohran anywhere on the planet and he would fit in musically. Obviously he has a extremely deep understanding of musical theory. Occasionally Cohran works with the band, Hypnotic Brass Ensemble, which includes his sons on various brass instruments. I LOVE their song "Cuernavaca". It's a must have as far as I am concerned. "Malcolm Little" is an old school blues. "The African Look" is a song about pride in yourself that wouldn't have sounded too out of place on "A West Side Story". If you were interested in what the marketing term "spiritual jazz" might mean, Phil Cohran was one of its progenitors.

Kilimanjaro     Theme  Cuernavaca (w/Hypnotic Brass Ensemble)  
The Spanish Suite  
Malcolm Little
Unity(Live)  Frankiphone Blues  El Haj Malik Shabazz  Minstrel  White Nile   
Cohran Blues Spin(w/Hypnotic Brass Ensemble)  The African Look
War(Hypnotic Brass Ensemble) 






Bad Company

I had a pretty interesting virtually idyllic childhood. I heard all kinds of different music not only because my parents were music educators and fans but also because I attended schools that had wildly divergent demographic profiles. One year I'd be in a school where James Brown, The Jackson Five or Freda Payne were what people knew and liked and a few years later I'd be in a school where The Doobie Brothers or Nazareth were the preferred listening material. And then I'd go home where jazz, gospel or blues were likely playing. I can probably thank one of my private school teachers for getting me hip to such folks as The Allman Brothers or Free. Back in the day FM radio was not quite as regimented or as segregated as it is now so I heard different styles there as well. One day I will have to do a post on legendary Detroit radio host/dj The Electrifying Mojo, who I think deserves a special mention. Anyway I write all that drivel to point out that although stereotypically I probably wasn't in the target demographic for Bad Company there was a time in the seventies and eighties when it was difficult to avoid hearing them in the circles I was then frequenting. 

When I purchased a "Best of .." release it was funny to me how many of their songs I already knew. The older you get the more stuff that is just rattling around in your head waiting to be triggered. Anyway the best thing about Bad Company was not really the guitar solos, which for my money were workmanlike and pedestrian but the vocals and, rarely, the songwriting. Bad Company had former Free frontman Paul Rodgers handling the vocals. I wouldn't go so far as to call him soulful but his voice was definitely earnest and very expressive. Basically to me he and Tom Jones sounded about the same, more or less.

Bad Company grew out of the ruins of Rodgers' former group Free. Obviously vocally the groups were quite similar but musically Bad Company leaned in a slightly more pop direction than Free did. Bad Company also had members from other groups such as King Crimson and Mott the Hoople. Bad Company was much more financially successful. After their initial albums the ratio of bad music to good music got a little too high for me but no one has a limitless supply of creativity to call upon. I liked some of their hits though. These included the Hendrix inspired elegy "Shooting Star", the ominous "me against the world" tune "Bad Company", the nod to funk of "Live For the Music", the hard rock boogie "Can't Get Enough ", the country tinged "Feel Like Making Love" , the ballad "Ready for Love" (this was used in "Supernatural" when Dean and the angel Anna got busy so I now associate the song with that scene), the ballad "Silver, Blue and Gold", the travelogue "Movin On" and many others. This wasn't quite a favorite group of mine. I won't be chasing down every note they ever recorded as I try to do for Hendrix or James Brown. But all the same if I'm driving and hear their music on the radio I will usually turn it up and sing along.

Michigan Republican Dave Agema makes new anti-gay remark

When you get together with your family do you ever encounter an older relative who theoretically deserves your respect but on the other hand loses any deference you might have given because of what they say or how they act? Maybe it's the crazy uncle in the corner who, upon seeing that you are temporarily not busy, wants to share his grand unified theory with you on how "THEY" are behind all the world's problems. Or maybe it's the loony cousin who only stops by at family gatherings to drop off her kids for some free babysitting while she goes out to party. Or perhaps it's the in-law who is just about to start up on his favorite anti (insert ethnic group here) rant and sees no reason to stop just because your date for the evening happens to belong to said ethnic group. Often times when people are our family we give them a bit more leeway to say or do things which we would automatically and fiercely oppose were other people to say or do them. That's human nature I guess. 

All the same sometimes even family can step over the line and need to be checked. I think that Michigan Republicans probably can relate to that necessity right about now. Michigan Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema, not content to limit his anti-gay remarks to Facebook, decided to go all in on how he really felt about gay people at a recent Republican meeting in West Michigan. He doesn't seem to understand that he's doing his pro-traditional marriage stance a serious disservice. Although I don't think that everyone who supports the one man, one woman form of marriage is a insane bigot Mr. Agema certainly seems to give credence to the idea promoted by the pro gay marriage side, that only bigots would want to limit marriage arbitrarily.

Gov. Rick Snyder has added his voice to the chorus of criticism directed at Republican National Committeeman Dave Agema over his latest antigay remarks. Agema, in a speech at a Republican meeting in Berrien County on Thursday, said that gay people manipulate the system to get free health insurance because they are dying from AIDS at a young age.

Agema cited his experience as a pilot with American Airlines, according to a transcript of his remarks published by the Herald-Palladium of St. Joseph and Benton Harbor. "I'm a flight attendant," Agema said. "You have AIDS. You come to me and say, 'Hey, tell them I'm your lover for the last six months.' You get on our health care. "American Airlines spends $400,000 before you die of AIDS. And he goes on to the next, and the next, and that's what was happening.

"Folks, they want free medical because they're dying between 38 and 44 years old. It's a biggie. So, to me it's a moral issue. It's a biblical issue. Traditional marriage is where it should be and that is in our platform, so people that are opposed on that issue within our party are wrong."

Media reports about Agema’s comments brought a storm of criticism and calls for Agema’s resignation. Last March, Agema came under fire for approvingly posting on Facebook an article that said gay people were sexually promiscuous, rife with sexually transmitted diseases and responsible for "half the murders in large cities."

LINK

Agema says his remarks were taken out of context but that he stands by them. I'm not really seeing what the proper context should have been but even if his data were correct HIV is hardly a major issue among gay women. So by that standard Agema should then support lesbian marriage, which he certainly does not. I'm not sure his comments would be as shocking in West Michigan as they would be in Southeastern Michigan, which does tend to be slightly more socially liberal but the world is changing, even including West Michigan. There are gay folks even in West Michigan, despite what Agema might think. And I think people can tell the difference between someone who just believes in traditional marriage and someone who has an active dislike for gay people. 

What do you think?

Should Agema resign? 

Can the Republican Party win in 2014 and beyond with leaders talking like this?