1. "Jesse Helms, Beacon of Conservatism, Dies at 86": Within hours of Bozo the Clown. (Thanks for pointing out the coincidence Facebook friend.) Balance it out a bit: John Fund's opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal.
["Jesse Helms, the former North Carolina senator with the courtly manner and mossy drawl who turned his hard-edged conservatism against civil rights, gay rights, foreign aid and modern art, died early Friday. He was 86."
From the Fund piece: "Most liberals delighted in baiting Helms and he reciprocated: He crowed about how disappointed CBS anchor Dan Rather looked in announcing his upset victory on election night in 1990. But liberals did pay attention to Helms, and gradually adopted some of his methods. It was Helms who first sent his own foreign policy advisers overseas to second-guess the executive branch's foreign policy. Many liberals have no qualms in doing the same today. One liberal consultant told me he learned from Helms's ability to distill complicated ideas to a level that connected with ordinary people. His mastery of new media techniques and technology convinced many liberals they had to invest in the Internet and build up the passions of their base."]
2. Via Jim Emerson at Scanners, Kathleen Murphy's "The Haunted Palace", a guided tour of Marienbad with segue through The Overlook as refracted through a letter from an unknown woman.
[".... Still, there's a horror movie at the heart of every film about love and art. Death's always abroad in these environs, a reaper whose scythe eventually edits everyone out of the picture. Our avid gaze consumes the images we love; if we take them in, perhaps we will become them. Movies are haunted houses -- full of dead people who come to life again and again for our pleasure."]
3. Two by Fernando: "Day of the Trifles" (on The Happening, Stuck, and The Incredible Hulk) and "Herzog, Pixar, and Assorted Bucketheads" (on Encounters at the End of the World, WALL-E, The Love Guru, and Get Smart).
["Not content providing the vocals to a puke-green merchandising monstrosity, Mike Myers returns to live-action with the authentically repellent The Love Guru. As Guru Pitka, an oily Deepak Chopra wannabe, the comic wears a putty beak, a mossy beard perpetually about to fall off but great for accumulating bits of food, and enough mocking-everybody-but-himself vanity to supply the rimshots to his own jokes. With an eye on landing a spot with the Oprah show, he takes an assignment with the Toronto Maple Leafs, helping a troubled player (Romany Malco) while falling for the owner (Jessica Alba) of the hockey team. Somehow, this makes it okay for Justin Timberlake to show up as a kind of Québécois John Holmes with a Céline Dion fixation, Verne "Mini-Me" Troyer to yet again flip viewers a stubby middle finger, and Myers to play a sitar version of "Space Cowboy" that feels as long as Berlin Alexanderplatz. I am still not convinced that any of this was even meant to be funny: When Myers deconstructs one of his deplorable jests ("Alligator soup, and make it snappy. Because alligators are snappy, and at the same time I want it prompt"), is he experimenting with a kind of so-unfunny-it's-lacerating style? If so, a shot of Ben Kingsley shouting "Drama!" into the camera while doing a cross-eyed goof on his Oscar-winning role is far more fertile. The Love Guru shows how grotesquely You Don't Mess with the Zohan might have turned out -- instead of that movie's spilling-over generosity, there's only the vacuum left by a comic's inflated ego."]
4. At GreenCine, David Hudson breaks down the latest issue of Film Comment.
["Why do cinephiles regard Manoel de Oliveira so highly, you may find yourself wondering as you begin reading Jonathan Rosenbaum major piece on the "Classical Modernist" in the new issue of Film Comment. The weaknesses, after all, are laid out with level-headed honesty - until, nearly halfway in: "If he deserves to be regarded as a master - and I believe he does - his mastery belongs partially in an eccentric category of his own invention, comparable to that of Thelonious Monk as an idiosyncratic jazz pianist. And it's a mastery of sound and image that took shape fairly early - even though, as a director of actors, his foregrounding of artificial styles of performance doesn't always enhance the technical gifts of his players." Then the "asymmetrical shape" is considered; Oliveira's collaborations; and of course, the political and historical context of his work; before a list is drawn up and reconsidered."]
5. "Man beheads Hitler waxwork": As long as they saved his brain.
["A man raced into Berlin's Madame Tussauds wax museum Saturday and ripped the head off a waxwork of Adolf Hitler, police said. Police said the 41-year-old entered the exhibit shortly after the museum doors opened and "made for the Hitler figure," scuffling with a guard assigned to protect it and the manager before tearing the head off the life-size statue. The man was arrested and is now in custody, Berlin police spokeswoman Uwe Kozelnik said. He told officers he wanted to protest the figure being included in the museum. Museum official Nathalie Ruoss said organizers would decide Monday what to do about the figure."]
Quote of the Day: Margaret Cho
Image of the Day (click to enlarge): The faked tiger photo now causing a furor. 
Clip(s) of the Day: The Jesse Helms "Hands" ad and a few words from Bill Hicks.
_____________________________________________________
"Links for the Day": Each morning, the House editors post a series of weblinks that we think will spark discussion. Comments encouraged. Suggestions for links are also welcome. Please send to keithuhlich@gmail.com.
Saturday, July 05, 2008
Links for the Day (July 5th & 6th, 2008)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
6 comments:
Re #1: Nice juxtaposition! Just shows that you don't have to put on a red nose and floppy shoes to be the bigger clown.
Re: 1... While I'm not a rabid Helms hater, the Helms/Bozo coincidence WAS too much to pass up.
Kudos on giving equal time with the Fund piece, BTW.
I'll add that it's interesting to see how obits for Helms, like Strom Thurmond before him, hit hard on their perceived history of "intolerance."
I say this because Sen Robert Byrd's (D-West Va) days are numbered and I wonder HOW much play HIS history as a "Keagle" for the Ku Klux Klan, (something neither Helms nor Thurmond had on their resumes) will be played out.
Generally, one only hear's about Byrd's long years of service and the fact that he's a Constitutional scholar.
@ GCCR:
The difference is that Byrd has publicly and repeatedly renounced his racist past, repented his Klan membership, and supported civil rights initiatives. Helms not only never apologized, but continued to oppose any progress in civil rights. He came to office warning darkly about "negros working beside your daughters", and spent his career opposing voting rights, siccing Hoover on MLK, opposing busing and affirmative action, and trying desperately to prevent MLK Day rom becoming a holiday (as well as engaging in plenty of smearing of King's reputation after his death). Along the way, he also found time to hate gays and lesbians, as well as to support some death squads (including supporting the Argentinian junta against the British) and brag about making the first black woman in the Senate cry by whistling "Dixie" at her.
If you'd said that Jesse Helms was an exemplar of American conservatism, I would've said that was an unfair canard. But judging from the conservative reaction, it's entirely fair. Whaddya know.
Hey Fuzzy,
First off, I'm not a particularly strong Helms supporter and I don't I don't disagree that Helms positions on a number of things, includeing Gay rights sucked (for what it's worth, being against busing and affirmative action worked pretty well for George Wallace as I recall).
However, Robert Byrd's denouncment of his past Klan membership doesn't mean shit to me.
I've ALWAYS felt that Byrd got a free ride over the Klan thing and I can only assume it's because he has a big "D" next to his name. If you can think of a better reason, I'm all ears.
Strom Thurmond, who, to be fair, was a Segregationist, nonetheless actually fought for legislation to stop unfair voting laws AND sought to toughen the punishment for those who practiced lynchings (like Byrd's friends).
Yet, Thrumond was the one was vilified by the Left while Byrd went virtually scot free.
Just a few years ago, Byrd was on a national Sunday talk show spouting the "N" word and didn't get half the attention Imus got with his stupid "Ho" remarks.
During the Clearence Thomas confirmation hearings, Byrd went out of his way to exress his opinion that he opposed the nomination because he found Hill's charges were completely credible.
I found it interesting that no one pointed out the irony of a former Klansman who thought that an African American was unqualified because of inappropriate sexual urges.
Whaddya know.
What the heck, let's keep going...
I think Byrd's public apology does make a big difference, especially in contrast to the gleefully unapologetic Helms. Lots of people Byrd's age were big, big racists back in the day, and we can't judge them too harshly for it---it's not totally morally neutral, since there were no shortage of people well aware that racism was bad from the very founding of the republic, but it's not quite the same as being David Duke today. So the big question becomes, as the country became more enlightened, did you join in the march of progress or dig in your heels and do everything you could to turn the clock back---Byrd did the former, Helms the latter. And yes, Byrd did use "the n-word" on TV, but it was in reference to white people---doesn't make it okay, but doesn't make it a racist rant (in contrast to Imus, who was using racist language to describe black people).
It's true, too, that the D also makes a difference. When it comes to absolving a racist past, supporting affirmative action does indeed go a long way towards helping, and opposing civil rights measures goes a long way towards hurting. I know many conservatives argue that affirmative action does more harm than good, but until that becomes the mainstream African-American view (rather than the province of a few bitter holdouts like Clarence Thomas), that argument will always have a distinct whiff of overclass condecension to it---"Now you folks wouldn't want special rights, would you? Then we wouldn't respect you!"
Thurmond is a much more complicated case. Throughout his career, he was fundamentally a kind of soft paternal racist---opposed to lynching, but for segregation. When the political weather changed, he seemed to change with it, but right up to the end, he denied that there had been any change in him, insisting that he had always wanted "what was best" for everybody. This makes him tough to absolve---since he insisted he had nothing to be sorry for---but his actions were never as monstrous as Helms'. I don't recall much vilification of him at his death, though---I think you're confusing it with the furor over Trent Lott's remarks that if Thurmond had been elected president in 1948, when he was running a loudly segregationist campaign, we "wouldn't have had all these problems".
Finally, as for the Clarence Thomas confirmation: Horse-pucky. To assert that Byrd opposed Thomas becuase his racism led him to believe Hill is to erase Hill's own blackness, not to mention the record of other testimony that Thomas had a weird obsession with baiting female employees. If someone just said out of the blue that a black man couldn't be trusted with women, then you'd have a case. But to take the word of another black woman that this man has been harassing his staff, well, ain't nuthin' racist about that.
Hey, next time we should do this over beer and cigars :)
I guess Robert Byrd has always gotten under my skin.
Okay, let's assume for the sake of argument that Jesse Helms was a huge prick (I probably disagreed with most of his positions on a case by case basis).
HOWEVER, to reply to your points (sorry to take them out of order):
I think Byrd's public apology does make a big difference, especially in contrast to the gleefully unapologetic Helms.
To have EVER had the capacity to hide under white sheets and associate with (and recruit for) the Klan seems a personal flaw so deeply buried in one's DNA that any public apology is rendered meaningless for me. Period.
Okay, I'm glad he was sorry -- but he should have went away years ago.
I teach Mkt and Mgt night classes at a Southeastern Michigan business school. Every year the college celebrates "Constitution Week." During that time, we spend an hour of each class talking about the Bills of Rights and such. I cringe whenever I see Byrd's name as one of the sponsors of the legislation that established the event. AND, you may well imagine, I make it a point of reminding students of Byrd's "Klan konnection."
I don't recall much vilification of him [Thurmond] at his death, though
I do. I remeber it because when it happened I was screaming at the TV: "WHAT ABOUT ROBERT BYRD?"
---I think you're confusing it with the furor over Trent Lott's remarks that if Thurmond had been elected president in 1948, when he was running a loudly segregationist campaign, we "wouldn't have had all these problems".
Nope. But you bring up a good point. A more pertinent example of the double standard in this regard would be how Lott (who, I don't care much for) was treated after his stupid remarks at Thrumond's birthday party versus how Chris Dodd's glowing praise of Robert Byrd on the SENATE FLOOR went virtually ignored.
Of course, if one accepts the notion that Byrd's apology absolves him, then I guess it does make sense.
Finally, as for the Clarence Thomas confirmation: Horse-pucky. To assert that Byrd opposed Thomas becuase his racism led him to believe Hill is to erase Hill's own blackness, not to mention the record of other testimony that Thomas had a weird obsession with baiting female employees. If someone just said out of the blue that a black man couldn't be trusted with women, then you'd have a case. But to take the word of another black woman that this man has been harassing his staff, well, ain't nuthin' racist about that.
The Thomas/Hill thing could take up an whole other thread. I was just pointing out the irony of Bryd's words that occurred to me at time.
Another "ironic" Byrd moment occurred more recently when he denounced Michael Vick for his brutal treatment of dogs. I wondered aloud how many dogs Robert Byrd and his pals had let loose on black people in their day.
I know many conservatives argue that affirmative action does more harm than good, but until that becomes the mainstream African-American view (rather than the province of a few bitter holdouts like Clarence Thomas), that argument will always have a distinct whiff of overclass condecension to it---"Now you folks wouldn't want special rights, would you? Then we wouldn't respect you!"
You make a valid point. However, I'm a bit uncomfortable with the notion that the litmus test of the correctness of one's philosophy on race relations depends on what side you take on the Affirmative Action debate.
Of course, another ironic point would be the fact that a vocal opponent of Affirmative Action (Clarence Thomas) was one of it's most prominent beneficiaries.
And yes, Byrd did use "the n-word" on TV, but it was in reference to white people---doesn't make it okay, but doesn't make it a racist rant (in contrast to Imus, who was using racist language to describe black people).
I have to disagree. For those who didn't hear it: Byrd, while trying to demonstrate his racial progressiveness, said that as a young boy, his grandmother had once reminded him that there were "White niggers too."
I wouldn't call it a "rant." But just as the term "White Trash" has always seemed racist to me, so did this (only more so).
Post a Comment