Sunday, December 30, 2012

Les Misérables, the movie—my thoughts


So, I just saw Les Mistoday. And yes, I’m gonna complain and bitch about stuff I didn’t like. I’ll try to mention some things I did like too.

My first reaction is about the piece—the score and lyrics and “script”. The songs are really great. The recitative-like bits aren’t so great. They just don’t feel natural. Am I wrong in thinking there’s a lot of “new” stuff added in? I’m somewhat familiar with the show, but I don’t KNOW it, the way I know shows that I’ve done. But there were a lot of little bits here and there which I didn’t recognize and which were kind of clunky and awkward, much like the “recitative”.

I had issues with several little bits of “dialogue” which seemed like ad libs. Maybe they aren’t. As I said, I’m not intimately familiar with the show, but that’s how they seemed to me. I’m not opposed to ad libsas a concept, but these spots I’m thinking of didn’t seem necessary, nor particularly great—they didn’t make it better, in my opinion, or convey anything that would otherwise be missing, so why not leave them out?

Also, I had some with the voices. Generally, I thought everyone “acted the songs” well without adding on a lot of stuff that didn't come from the text, etc. Everyone, that it, except Javert and adult Cosette, both of whom I found boring. But that may be an issue with the writing. Also, frankly, I felt that some of Anne Hathaway’s Fantine was a bit histrionic.

This is another writing issue: except for Valjean, I don’t feel that there’s really much to know about the characters, so I don’t care about them. And I think I’m expected to care about them pretty quickly as soon as we meet them.

So, about the singers...

I just hated Javert's voice most of the time. It was awkward and not natural. I think it's a technical issue with the placement. And, to me, it seemed Russell Crowe wasn't at ease with singing.

Hugh Jackman. He seemed very comfortable with singing. And that was great. He did a great job of “acting the songs”. And his last scene, at the very end, did move me to tears. (Not outright bawling or anything. Come on, this is me.) However, I thought his placement was strange maybe half of the time. Toward the end of the movie (3/4s through it) it occurred to me that maybe the role is just too high for him. Not that he can't sing those notes, but it sits fairly high much of the time. I found myself thinking he might’ve made a better Javert, certainly better than Russell Crowe. (I also found myself thinking that he was so strong because of the adamantium laced-bones.)

Eddie Redmayne as Marius. I thought his voice sounded good, but that shaky jaw tension thing was annoying to watch.  Really annoying.

When the Thénardiers appeared, I just thought, “Ug”. Weren’t they satisfied with their roles in Sweeney Todd? I just was not that crazy about either Sacha Baron Cohen or Helena Bonham Carter. They were alright, but I just saw them and not the characters.

When Amanda Seyfried sang (Cosette) I kept wondering if that was a real voice or some computer-adjusted thing. Especially when it went high. It was odd, maybe a bit like a boy soprano or something.

Anne Hathaway sang well, but as I said it was a bit much at times.

I think that covers all the famous people, right? All the “stars”. Everyone who I didn’t recognize, the non-stars, was great. Aaron Tveit as Enjolras (the “leader” of the revolutionaries—I had to look up both the actor and character names) was great. I actually thought he should’ve played Marius. Daniel Huttlestone as Gavroche (the little boy revolutionary) was wonderful. Samantha Barks was fine as Éponine, although I did find the character uninteresting.

I thought that the bishop was really excellent. It’s not a big role (yes, there ARE small roles), but he was great. Ohhh...No wonder. I just looked it up, and he was played by Colm Wilkinson. Colm Wilkinson was the original London and Broadway Valjean, as well as various other stage musical roles.

A general note concerning the accuracy of musical performances in this film. I fear that this film may piss off various music directors and music teachers and accompanists for several years to come. Because there seemed to me to be a hell of a lot of inaccurate rhythms and pitches, and rushing. (“Rushing” means going faster than you’re supposed to so that you get ahead of the beat.)  And now that it’s recorded in this way, it’s set, tons of singers and actors will learn it that way.

(This is part of a general gripe of mine about how many actors learn music—by only using a recording when they apparently don’t have the ability to decide if that’s the way it’s supposed to be. In fact, I know an actor/singer who used to think that since people went to so much trouble to make a recoding, often with the composer involved, that it must be the way it’s supposed to be. Not true. A recording, like any production, usually involves compromises. You loved this one take, except there was that one spot which was a little off. Or, you love how this actor performs this role, except they have trouble with the range or maybe have trouble with learning tricky rhythms or whatever. You make compromises. Anyway...)

Okay...what else?

The sets and costumes were great, although, I didn’t like the Thénardiers costumes. They just seemed a bit...I don’t know, not ridiculous, but they sort of took me out of the story. Look, comic relief is great and absolutely useful in a drama. But to me, they were too much. Sorry, this isn’t about their costumes so much as about their performances.

The women in the factory and “Lovely Ladies” scenes I found kind of annoying, and the choreography in the factory seemed contrived to me. Like suddenly they were doing a number. And that generally was not the feel of the rest of the movie (except “Master of the House”...again, the Thénardiers). And the “Lovely Ladies” scene seemed almost an odd, stylized thing unlike the rest of the movie.

I liked how the opening just began, no Overture, no bumbling around, just start. I did not like the long (CGI?) camera shot from far away and above. I similarly did not like the couple of shots at the end of songs (“Stars” and “Bring Him Home” I think) that pulled up and away from the singer, both visually and aurally, so that the last note, the last word, didn’t end, but faded instead. The first time that happened I laughed out loud. And the couple of times Javert was pacing somewhere up high above the rest of the city seemed strange to me.

There was one shot I though odd—with young Cosette and Madame Thénardier. It was where Cosette was hiding behind a wall, and you saw only her eyes and mouth, alternating with Madame Thénardier’s hair and eyes and nose, but not her mouth. That image of Cosette was a really great, striking image, but it just struck me as odd within the film—I don’t recall there being other such striking images.

There were a lot of shots that seemed off-center a bit—almost more diagonal than horizontal. I feel certain that those were done on purpose, but I don’t know why. They just made me feel a little dizzy. And there was a lot of cutting back and forth between 2 or more shots in solo songs, which was also a bit dizzying. I would’ve appreciated more shots where the camera was set in one spot or moving in a longer shot with the singer.

Re: Javert’s suicide—it was so incredibly obvious to me from before his last song even started what he was going to do. There was no working it out, no questioning, nothing like that. Just a long, drawn out “I’m confused and I can’t live like that, so I’m gonna do it. I’m not even trying to convince myself or justify it. I just have to get through this hurdle of a song and then I’m done.” So, the whole time I was just sitting there thinking, “Yeah, do it. Now. Don’t make me suffer through any more of your dreadful singing. Do it.”

Wow, that sounds kind of callous. But, in my defense, from the beginning of the movie I found his voice annoying and I didn’t care about his character at all. So what else was I supposed to feel about that song?

Okay. Well...I’m not sure what more there is to say. Obviously these things are a matter of taste and opinion, like much of what I’ve mentioned here. Then again, it is me writing my reaction to the film. I’m certainly open to questions or responses. 

Sunday, December 23, 2012

LOTR, the ending(s)


Ya know, some movies and stories just don’t have much of an ending—no denouement, just climax-and-we’re-done, like a dude who falls asleep the moment he’s done having sex. But that’s okay; The Lord of the Rings trilogy has a few to spare.

(A.k.a, so, the Ring of Power is destroyed, the dark army is defeated, and Frodo and Sam are saved by giant birds. Movie’s done, right? Nope.)

1. Frodo wakes up (in Rivendale?) and sees all his friends., a.k.a. The Wizard of Oz ending.
2. Aragorn is crowned King, everyone appluads, he gives a pretty speech, and he gets to make out with his girlfriend, a.k.a, the “It’s good to be the king” ending.
3. Frodo narrates that the Hobbits made it back home, a.k.a., the “all’s well that ends well” ending.
4. Samwise finally chats up the hot Hobbit chick from early in the first movie, cut to their wedding day, and all the Hobbits are happy, a.k.a., the traditional-comedy-ends-with-a-marriage ending(?).
5. Frodo narrates some more, writes in Bilbo’s/his book while melancholy music plays, complains to Samwise about his wound, narrates some more and accompanies decrepit Bilbo to the Elves ship, then Bilbo gets to make a last funny comment about the Ring, a.k.a., the sad but cute ending.
6. Gandalf gives a goodbye speech, a.k.a., the wise old dude ending.
7. Frodo leaves with the Elves (along with Gandalf and Bilbo) after a tearful goodbye to the other Hobbits, a.k.a., the actual sad ending, OR the long, drawn-out ending.
8. Samwise goes back home to the Shire (hot Hobbit wife and Hobbit kids), while Frodo narrates some more about life and the future, a.k.a., the actual ending, OR the unnecessary ending unless there’s gonna be a sequel—perhaps called Hobbits the Next Generation, or maybe Son of Sam...wise.


Saturday, December 22, 2012

Survivors



I just finished reading Survivorsby James Wesley, Rawles. Yes, that’s his name: James Wesley Comma Rawles. He’s a former-military, conservative Christian, survivalist blogger/author/consultant.

It was very disappointing. I bought this book mainly because I liked the cover-art and the description suggested a slightly different story than what I got.

It kept me reading, because from the beginning there was a sense that something big and awful, perhaps awesome, was going to happen. It took a long time setting it up, which only increased the tension. But the closer I got to the end, the less I liked it. There was never a pay-off—no truly big, exciting episode, and no real ending. Also close to the end, the author introduces new characters that seemed as though they should’ve been someone we met before, and there was a several-page episode with new characters in a new location that never reappeared nor had anything to do with any other characters.

There was one character who at the beginning was a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan and who worked his way back home. Along the way he kept encountering people who spoke pretty-good English. So that was a big help. Plus all the gold and silver coins he happened to have hidden away.

Basically this book was just a description of how several (presumably fictional) characters and their families survived an economic collapse—mostly because they were prepared ahead of time with a lot of guns and ammunition, as well as gold and silver coins stored up in readiness for such a collapse. It included a lot of description of guns and other equipment. Also prayer and Bible verses, but certainly nothing that really indicated “God” actually exists or was listening or helping them out. 

I think it was shelved in the sci-fi/fantasy section of some bookstore. But it should’ve been in the Christian fiction section, if there was one. 

Sunday, November 18, 2012

Let the airing of grievances begin!


Ya know, I wonder about the seeming increase in the length of the Christmas/Holiday Season...apart from the horrid consumerism aspect, which I think on a lot.

Already? Ug.

Perhaps as time goes on in this failed way of life* we have, there’s more and more of a need for some big escape from it all. Like the stakes are getting higher. Like it’s more and more vital to make “the holidays” more and more meaningful. And it’s all to distract us from how generally unfulfilling our lives are—our way of life.

* You know—this civilization of totalitarian agriculture/we control the world and it
needs our control/everyone has to live like us because it’s the one right way to live... etc.

I don’t know if this holiday escape is something that we the people unconsciously perceive the need for, or if it’s perpetuated by the mechanisms continuing our way of life, i.e., those selling us all the shit, etc. Probably it’s bi-partisan effort.  


Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Dear country...


Dear country,

Now that the election is done, can we please start dealing with the uncomfortable truth that we are destroying the planet? It’s not just us, here in the United States, but we’re definitely a huge part of it.

See, it’s the way we’ve been living and consuming all kinds of stuff—stuff that doesn’t really make us happy, stuff that often makes us less happy, but stuff that certainly makes the planet less happy.

We’ve built cities that require mechanical transportation to get around, and we burn oil to get from place to place.

We make and purchase and use cheaply made products—often not easily recyclable—which fall apart or become “obsolete” when the new version comes out a few years later. So we toss it. We throw it in a bin, put it out on the road where it’s conveniently picked up weekly by a loud, stinky truck.

Meanwhile, our rich people keep getting trickle-up richer, and many of the rest of us keep believing that if we stay in this broken system of ours, we’ll eventually win and be rich ourselves.

We don’t have to be this way. But the thing is, before we can start to make a change, we have to admit that there is a problem. We have to look at ourselves and recognize and say, “Hey this isn’t good, this isn’t healthy, this isn’t sustainable. We have to stop this madness if our children and grandchildren, perhaps even we ourselves, are going to be able to survive on this planet.”

Then we need to make some serious changes. And it would really, really help matters if we had leaders who could admit this stuff to themselves and to us. Leaders who would stop focusing on the election cycle and start doing some real work for the people.

Either that, or somebody needs to invent some magical sci-fi tech and find some other planet where we can relocate. And then we’ll start in raping that planet too. 

Monday, November 5, 2012

Do not vote for this man.


Here’s something I’ve been mulling over for a while.

I have a hard time imagining ever voting for Mitt Romney. 


I find him to be untrustworthy. I’ve had this feeling about him for maybe a year or two. How long has he been running for president?

It’s not just the “flip-flop” on positions. And it’s not just the “lying” or offering misleading information. It’s more basic than that. The man seems disingenuous. He does not seem honest or true or upright. When I watch him speak, I feel that he isn’t being true to himself. I don’t believe him, because he doesn’t seem to believe himself. He doesn’t seem to be himself, he doesn’t ever seem comfortable.

It’s like he’s not just being there, in the moment, speaking, like a person does. It’s more like he’s watching himself and reacting to himself and controlling himself based on what he sees himself doing. I find that disturbing.

And I’m surprised that I haven’t heard this from anyone else. I suppose this is what other people have referred to as Romney’s robotic quality. But I don’t think of it as a robot thing. It’s more of a lack of comfort with one’s self. I’ve known other people like that, and I find them disturbing.

Even if I were a conservative—which is just impossible to imagine—I think I would feel the same way about him. Of course, maybe if I were a conservative I wouldn’t care about that kind of stuff. Maybe the party platform, etc., would be more important. I don’t know. I really have a hard time understanding conservatives. It’s like crazy-talk to me.

Spoiler alert!!! ...2

I’m watching Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban. It’s on HBO, which I have here at the beach.


When Scabbers, the rat, turns into Peter Pettigrew, he’s wearing clothes. 


Okay, fine. It’s magic. The clothes he was wearing when he last turned are still with him.

Also, it’s a kids’ story/movie.

I can accept that.

Except that several minutes later, when he turns back into a rat, he shrinks out of his clothes and leaves them behind.


So which is it? I vote for nudity. It makes sense. 

Spoiler alert!!!


Last night I watched The Hangover part II


The guys from the first movie went to Thailand for a wedding. They had a few drinks then woke up the next morning with no idea where they were or what happened the night before, and they had to piece it all together in order to find a friend they’d lost somewhere along the way.
Same basic plot as the first movie, just with different details in a different setting.

Oh, there was a scene with some penises.

The gang finds a strip club in Bangkok where they’d apparently been the night before. They were talking with one of the girls, and, well, she turned out to have a penis, as did all the “girls” there.

Early in the scene, before the big “reveal”, I knew they were going to have penises. It just seemed the obvious thing to me. So, then when I did see the penises, they had basically no impact. I assume it’s supposed to be hilariously shocking. Or shockingly hilarious? It was neither.

Was it just that I saw the “joke” coming so it wasn’t funny? Am I jaded? Or just immune to the humor of the penis?

Or, was it just not that funny?

Anyone? Anyone?

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

reading & coffee



This is what I’m doing this morning. I’ve piddled around online a bit, but this is the plan—keep doing this.


Yesterday I finished The United States of Atlantis by Harry Turtledove. It’s the second in a set of three (so far). I liked the first a lot, but this one was so-so. A lot of repetitious dialogue, etc., and a good bit of the time it just seemed like he was setting up the situation for the next book.

If you’re not familiar with Harry Turtledove, he writes mostly alternate history. It’s like historical fiction, except there’s always a “what if” element that creates the setting. Like, what if the South won the American Civil War? Or, in the case of these Atlantic books, what if the eastern chunk of North America—from the east coast to roughly the Mississippi River—were actually a separate continent out in the Atlantic Ocean? And then he writes a story set there. He’ll often use some actual historical characters along with fictional characters. In The United States of Atlantis there are fictional characters who are analogous to various historical characters from the American Revolution.

Anyway... I just started Ray Bradbury’s Something Wicked This Way Comes. And that’s my plan for the rest of the morning, which, at this point, isn’t very long. So, maybe it’ll also be part of my afternoon—that, and coffee, and being naked.  Whee!

Friday, September 28, 2012

2 dreams


So I had 2 dreams the other night that I remembered. (I usually don’t remember them at all, so it’s sort of extra odd.)


Dream 1:

I was traveling around with a group of people, and we were fighting these creatures. I don’t think we ever had a name for the creatures. I guess they were mostly like vampires—the creatures, not my group—although, they didn’t seem like vampires to me: no vampire cheesiness. I don’t think they had fangs; they didn’t fly nor turn into bats and fog; and I don’t think they were nocturnal. And they just seemed to want to go around infecting other people. In that sense, they were more like zombies. The infection or whatever when the creatures bite someone turns the person’s skin black. I don’t mean black like African; I mean a dull, solid, non-shiny, coal-like blackness. So even “black” people turned really black.

Anyway, my group was pretty good at “vampire”-slaying. Like I said, we were travelling around fighting these things. We ended up in a church, where there was a service going on. We were suspicious at first, because everyone there seemed to be acting like there weren’t vampire-zombie-creatures everywhere. But there also seemed to be no infected anywhere. When you were infected, you immediately turned—no waiting period. Just BOOM!—your skin turns black and you’re a creature.

So we took a break, sat there in the chapel while the church-folk were doing their thing.
And then there were suddenly creatures everywhere, and we suddenly kinda sucked at fighting them. And the church-folk weren’t any good either. So we were overcome, or at least I was, by the creatures. One of them bit me, and I turned.

I didn’t really feel any different. Usually the creatures were very aggressive and mean, but I didn’t feel that at all. I was just sort of there. Actually once I was turned, I think everyone else was turned too. Not like I was the last human standing, but they just overwhelmed us all at once, I suppose. So I guess there was no one to be aggressive towards. In fact, we creatures were all very “loving” toward each other. And by that, I mean there was suddenly an orgy. Yep, lots of charcoal-black vampire-zombie-creatures, all doin’ their thing. Yee-haw! (Actually there was no “Yee-haw”.  I don’t recall much sound at all at that point.)

And then suddenly that dream was over. That was disappointing, as it was just getting to the good part.

I don’t know if I woke up between the dreams. But they did seem to be distinctly separate dreams, not one dream that morphed into another.

-    -    -    -    -

Dream 2:

This one was set in a post-cataclysmic world, which is rough, but not quite as bad as a post-apocalyptic situation. It was a bit like that TV show Jericho, which I really liked and was sorry to see it end—cancelled. Boo!

Well, in the post-cataclysm, I was with some group trying to defend our town or neighborhood or territory, and there was another group—not sure if they were neighbors or more of a nomadic group—trying to get in and take our stuff. So that went on for a bit—you know, fighting at our make-shift battlements.

Then, toward the end of the fighting—we were definitely winning—I saw someone I know. She’s a singer who was in one show I did the last time I lived in Mississippi. I think she wasn’t actually with the main group we were fighting off. It seemed like she was just trying to get inside, maybe for protection or to join us. But we had strict rules that we couldn’t let anyone in. So, I ended up trying to keep her out and eventually fighting her.

And that was it...

Okay, yes, the fighting did lead to making out. (If that person is reading this...sorry. I didn’t mention that part.) And then I woke up before it went any further than that. I promise.

-    -    -    -    -

Well.

The clear implication of these two dreams is that I want to do some fighting and then I want to get it on. And yes, those two things are certainly missing from my life, and have been for a while. 

Saturday, September 22, 2012

One Year Old



Happy Birthday!


...or Anniversary!


My first post on this blog was one year ago today. And I’ve been posting every day since then.
Okay, I did cheat a couple of times. One time I forgot and another time I fell asleep before posting a blog for the day. Both those times I posted within half an hour or maybe an hour at most of midnight. And then I back dated the blog an hour or so.

Last month I was on the road for several days, and I wasn’t sure I’d be able to get online to post. So before I left, I did posts for those several days and set them to post automatically on those days I’d be gone. But I don’t consider that cheating.

Anyway, with those exceptions, I’ve posted something every day for a year, some days more than one post. And I have to say, it’s not always been easy. There’ve been several times when I doubted I’d be able to keep up the daily posting rate. And there’ve certainly been days when I was lazy and posted something that took relatively little effort. But I’d challenge anyone to do a daily blog that dealt with a specific subject matter and was not just a re-blogging thing, like tumblr can be.

I think the chief difficulty is that I’ve generally wanted to do something worth posting, something different than previous posts, and something as good or better than previous posts. I don’t think I’ve always succeeded in that. But I accept that always doing something different and better isn’t possible. I think that’s just part of the nature of such frequent output: it’s probably inevitable that quality will vary at times.

I was chatting with a new friend recently about the blog. She was looking at it for the first time and was telling me posts that she liked, and a favorite so far. I’ve done so many posts that I’d have a hard time selecting a favorite. Then again, in life I’ve often been reluctant to pick favorites, unless it’s something with a small number of options—like seasons. (I think my favorite season is fall.)

But I’d love to know what posts are other people’s favorites, and why. Or least favorites—also instructive.
-    -    -    -    -

Earlier this year, in the spring or early summer, I decided that I would keep up the daily posting until today—you know, assuming that I made it this far. I did, so yay me! From here on, I will not be posting every day. But I am not ending the blog, nor taking it down. I’ll keep posting whenever I have something to post.
-    -    -    -    -

One big thing that’s come out of this blog is an increased interest in photography in general. I’ve been taking lots of pictures of various things. But mostly that’s been a solitary endeavor. And I’d really like to make it less solitary—work with people, take pictures of people (naked or not), and share pictures with people. I don’t know where I’ll end up in the future, but if I’m near you, get in touch and maybe I’ll take your picture.
-    -    -    -    -

So...Happy Cake Day
Now, send me presents. You know, submissions and suggestions and, of course, comments. 

Friday, September 21, 2012

Naked Opera 9 (a miscellaneous threesome)



So, I’m spring cleaning, in the fall. Well, almost fall, so last-day-of-summer cleaning.
Also, I’m not sure I have enough to say about these three clips to make them separate entries.



Wagner’s Parsifal at Teatro La Fenice in Venice, 2005:



I don’t know what’s going on here. I don’t know why there’s a mix of clothed and naked people. But it does conform to an often-seen approach to nudity in opera—that is, the singers are clothed, and it’s non-singing extras or dancers who are naked.



Gounod’s Faust (I don’t know the production info. Anyone?):



Another not-unpopular choice—one or two naked people, again, not singing, surrounded by clothed principals and clothed chorus.



Verdi’s Rigolettoat the Royal Opera House in London, 2012:



Ah...what every opera needs—an orgy. 

Thursday, September 20, 2012

Aftermath



So, to briefly continue from yesterday’s blog...what now?

I’d planned to move, I’d already turned down a little bit of fall work where I had been living. Well, I wasn’t gonna move to Mississippi without the job at that school. But the reasons for wanting to leave are still true: not enough work, and the “rut” of my personal life. There’s just not much there for me, nothing really keeping me there where I was living. And I’d mentally prepared to leave. So, I still feel that I should leave.

I moved out of my apartment at the end of last month, and I’ve been staying with a friend in another town for several weeks. I’m going to visit some other friends this weekend and visit my parents for a few days. Then, I’m going back to where I was before, mainly to house-sit and pet-feed while some folks I know are gone for a couple of weeks. But after that, I have no idea where I’ll go.

I had looked into another accompanying job at another university, but they hired someone else. And, honestly, I’m not even sure if I want that sort of job right now. I think I need to find a place where I want to live and then look for some work that I can stand to do. I’m not exactly sure how to go about doing that. I really can’t afford to go try out a bunch of cities to see which I like.

Bleh.


Yesterday I watched a TED talk in which the speaker (Stefan Sagmeister) was recommending that people take sabbaticals from their jobs. They increase productivity, etc. 

Maybe I’ll do that—just go away for a few months...again. I did that several years ago; I went to the beach for part of the winter, after having met this incredible woman by whom I was “undone”.

The idea is appealing. But I will need to find some work, some kind of income before too long.
If only I could get someone to pay me to be naked.

Hmm...art class modeling? I should look into that. 

Wednesday, September 19, 2012

So, what happened to Mississippi?


Okay, this is gonna be a long one. Take your time.
I’ve put off writing about it for a while, as I knew it would be quite a lengthy entry, and the thought of typing it up and trying to put it into some order that makes sense was a little daunting. 
So, I may ramble a bit. Sorry.

-   -   -   -   - 

I was planning to move to Mississippi a month ago, on August 20th. Later that week I would’ve been starting work at a public state university there. It was the school where I went to college, and I had worked there before, most recently 2½ years ago.

Now, I wasn’t super-excited about Mississippi—I mean, it’s Mississippi. But I’d been feeling like I was in a rut where I was living the past few years, and there was work in Mississippi. Along with the “rut” of my personal life (or lack thereof) I’ve been significantly under-employed for a while. And they were “desperate for accompanists” to quote one of the voice teachers at the school there. So, I was going back there, with the idea that I may look into New Orleans as a possible place to live and work in the future.

I had been talking on and off during the summer with the faculty member who organizes and assigns accompanists at the school. (Accompanists are pianists who accompany other musicians. That’s part of what I do for a living).
I had given my notice to my landlord here in North Carolina that I was leaving, and I’d told people here that I was leaving and wouldn’t be around to accompany here, nor to do shows, etc. in the fall.
I’d gotten rid of a bunch of my stuff which I didn’t want to move.
I had gone down there a few weeks before and found an apartment, signed a lease and all that.
Everything was set.

Then on the Friday afternoon before I was supposed to leave I got an email from the director of the music department.

It said, in part, this:
I need to inform you that due to my knowledge of some recently discovered material on your social media site I am not comfortable hiring you in any capacity at this time.  If you have any questions or wish to discuss my decision you may call me at my office number next week.
Now, I had no intention of waiting around all weekend to get more info. I’d made plans. I’d made financial obligations securing an apartment and setting up cable, electricity, etc. So, I called the music department director’s office—no answer—and then his cell phone. I had his cell phone number from before when I was there.

He said that it wasn’t the best time for him, but I needed to know if there was any chance that this was something we could work out. I needed to know right then if this was a definite thing. Because if it was definite, I needed to get working right away on an alternate plan.

So we talked briefly.

I don’t remember everything exactly how he said it. My mind was spinning around with a sort of “what am I gonna do now!?” quality. But he did make it clear that I would not be working there. He also seemed to be clearly saying that someone in Human Resources had become aware of this, had contacted him, and that HR wouldn’t be willing to hire me—it wasn’t just him. He seemed unwilling to specify what it was that made him uncomfortable. I said something like “I assume this is about my blog”. He said yes.

Now, I do have more than one blog, and I didn’t specify, nor did he, anything about this blog, about nudity, etc. But it’s quite obvious to me that he meant this blog, and the subject matter one can find here.

I asked if there was some particular policy about this, and he replied with various comments to the effect that it was bad to post such things, etc. The clear impression I got was that he thought I should be ashamed of myself. He didn’t use those specific words. I really wish I’d taken notes, or recorded the conversation. But the things that I took from the conversation were that the decision was made and that wouldn’t change, that Human Resources was involved in the decision, and that he was personally disapproving of me.

Well, I called my landlord, arranged to stay a little longer, through the end of the month if needed.

So that Monday, instead of moving, I wrote the head of the music department this:
I have a couple of questions, or requests, perhaps.
Could you give me the name of the person in Human Resources who informed you of this situation, or who made the decision to not hire me based on materials I've published on the internet?
Also, in our phone conversation Friday afternoon, I believe you did not actually answer my question: is there some particular rule or policy at the university which I would be violating if I worked there and published such materials? And if there is such a policy, could you tell me exactly what it is and where I might find it listed?
Thank you.
His reply the next day:
Sorry for the delay, but school starts tomorrow and I am slammed.  When you called Friday... I wasn't prepared for the conversation and was definitely distracted.  So, with that said allow me to be clear.  The decision not to hire you was mine and mine alone.  I am responsible for all hirings in the School of Music.  As the person responsible for those hirings I have to use my best judgment, based on all the information available to me, to hire people that I feel reflect the values, character, good judgment and integrity I expect from all our faculty.  I also need to ensure that our students are in a safe learning environment.  The offer to hire you was rescinded and no further explanation is necessary.
You don't need a name in Human Resources, as they did not make this decision.  They only counseled me on my options.  As you were never an employee there were no policies to be violated.  This was my judgment call.
Well, I thought that was rather insulting to me. I mean, the obvious implication was that he feels I’m lacking in values, character and integrity, and that my being there would create an unsafe environment for the students. I really don’t know how he’d get that from this blog. I actually think this blog shows character and integrity, as well as an artistic frame of mind. The “integrity” thing I find especially insulting. I would challenge him to find anyone I’ve worked with in the past for any significant length of time who would say I was lacking in integrity. Or probably character, for that matter.

And I’m not sure what values the job, any job at a public university, requires. Perhaps a decent work ethic? Showing up, doing your job well, etc.? And I certainly do that.

So. The unsafe environment issue: I feel certain that he is reacting to a relatively small amount of what’s on this blog, and that a more complete understanding of what the blog is would not cause someone to react that way. 
(I’ll address this a bit more later.)

That leaves “good judgment”. Okay, yes. I suppose that is a real issue. I concede that it’s not unreasonable to ask if my doing this blog, and posting links on facebook, reflects good judgment. However, I don’t post to everyone on facebook. I post to my “friends” with some exceptions, those exceptions including most of the people who I currently work with. And if someone meets me and googles my name, I don’t think they’ll actually find this blog with my name. Maybe I’m wrong there, but I’m fairly sure about that. My name isn’t actually on this blog. And I’m fairly sure that people have found my other blog (which does have my name) while trying to find this blog by searching for “naked blog” with my name.

Anyway...
Let’s see...where am I?
Ah.

Now, since this department director had never actually referred to this blog nor specified the material that he found problematic, I responded with:
I certainly understand about the beginning of the semester. And I thank you for the clarification.
One further clarification would be helpful and greatly appreciated.
I want to be sure that we're talking about the same thing and not just obliquely referring to it; I want to be sure that I am not making any assumptions here about what you're saying. In your email from Friday you referred to "material on your social media site". Well, I do post a lot of things online, and I can imagine various people taking issue with various things I've posted. And I do not know you especially well.
So, can you be specific about the material I have published online which you find problematic, which causes you to find fault in my character and integrity, and which you fear would create an unsafe environment for your students?
Again, I just want to be certain that there is no misunderstanding between us on this issue, as I consider openness, directness, and honesty to be very important.
Thank you for your time.
Now, I feel that was a reasonable question. He and I are both educated adults, who should be able to have an open conversation about this. He rescinded a job offer that I had been counting on, and because of which I had made plans and obligations.

He didn’t answer.

I wrote once more a week or two later, just saying basically the same thing.

He still hasn’t responded.

I don’t really expect him to respond. I think he’s made his decision and, from the end of his last email to me, doesn’t think anything more needs to be said about it.

I, however, don’t let go of some things easily. I want to actually hear him say (or read his writing) what he finds problematic, and how exactly this reflects so poorly on me, how exactly my being there would be a threat for the department.

Because I think he is reacting based on fear. So, I want him to actually explain that he sees open and honest nudity and discussion of nudity as a bad thing (perhaps a sin?), and that he is afraid that the person who is naked and putting that nakedness online has a sexual/predatory agenda.

Yes, those are assumptions, but he leaves me no choice but to make assumptions. I would gladly apologize for an incorrect assumption if he would actually have this conversation and convince me that I’m wrong about his motivations.

See, I think that anyone who is an artist and/or an educator (or even a reasonably well-educated person) should be able to look at this blog and understand what it is.

This blog is, in fact, many things. At times it’s a personal and artistic exploration; it’s sometimes political and social commentary. This blog sometimes talks about news or current events; it contains reviews or responses to books, film, theatre—arts and entertainment—that I’ve read or seen, etc.
I don’t require that everyone like it, or support it, or even approve of it. But I do ask that people try to understand what it is and appreciate it for that.

But this man—despite his being a musician and a teacher—is not acting in this situation as an artist, nor even an educator. He’s acting as an administrator. As “the man”. He’s filling a role that has historically often been at odds with the artist: the guy upholding and defending the status quo; the guy making sure that everything is squeaky clean and doesn’t challenge anyone; the guy who wants “art” to be comfortable. Well yes, sometimes art is nice and comfortable and non-threatening. But often it is not. Art can be ugly and uncomfortable and challenging. Art often needs to be those things.  

I simply think he is wrong in his response to the blog—I assume it’s the blog, the nakedness in the blog, anyway; because he won’t say it; like it’s a cursed word: naked or penis or whatever.
I honestly don’t know what else I might have “published” online that would elicit the comments that he did make, nor to speak to me in our phone conversation in a manner which made me feel that he was trying to shame me.
I’m sure it’s the blog.

And this man’s apparent unwillingness to talk about it reminds me of a former friend who stopped talking to me and wouldn’t tell me why. And another former “friend” who, based on third-hand knowledge of something I did ranted on facebook about my actions and motivations, then unfriended me as soon as I got her to admit she was talking about me. And all the former facebook friends who silently unfriended me in the several months after I started posting links to this blog on facebook. It also reminds me of the feeling I’ve gotten that some people now think of me as only a naked person—as if now that I’m doing this blog, everything else about me, everything that we could’ve had a conversation about has now disappeared and I’m just “the naked blog guy”.

I’m still the same person.  
I have considerable integrity.
And the only danger I would pose to students is that I might encourage them to learn and think and question and be critical; to read and look and listen; to investigate; to not just blindly (or deafly) accept what they’re told.
Yes, I do actually recognize the danger in that.

I guess I’m an idealist in that I’d like to think the head of the music program at my alma mater, or at any school, would not be someone who can’t or won’t understand what I’m doing. But I suppose schools are not really in the business of encouraging open and honest discussion and exploration.
I find that sad.

Uh...what else?
Right.

On the legal issue...
Several people have suggested that I contact a lawyer about all this. But it’s not as if I want to force them to hire me. At this point, I don’t want to work for that guy. Maybe if I were already there in Mississippi might be more likely to look into those kind of avenues.
But I do see this as a clear First Amendment “free speech” issue. If I was already working there, and they fired me over this, I could probably win a lawsuit against them. 
I didn’t have an actual contract. But I never had a contract with them 2½ years ago. I don’t think they do “contracts” for accompanists. However, when I was applying for an apartment there, the woman I’d been in contact with at the school sent the realtor some kind of statement confirming that I would be working at the school. However, she, like her boss, has not replied to my messages asking about it, and the realtor won’t send me a copy of it either.

Ya know, If I were gay and this were a blog exploring and advocating homosexuality, or if I were a conservative Muslim and this were a blog discussing and advocating conservative Islam (but not violence or terrorism), then the school and this department head would be on much more precarious footing in withdrawing a job offer based on material I’d put online. 

-   -   -   -   - 

Okay, enough. 
See, it was long.

Feel free to comment or ask questions. (Or express outrage?)

Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Topless Duchess No More



(See yesterday’s blog “Topless Duchess” as this is an update to that story.)

The French court ruled today in favor of the Prince and Duchess against the French gossip magazine. The magazine is ordered to pay 2,000 euros in damages and face a possible fine of 10,000 euros per day for not turning over the pictures and files, etc. to the lawyers or representatives of the royal couple. The magazine is further banned from republishing or selling the photos at the risk of a 100,000 euro fine.

From The Telegraph today:
The ruling cited article 9 of the civil code that states that “any person, whatever his fame, his present or future functions, has the right to the respect of his private life and image.”
The photos were taken from a public road several hundred metres from the private residence where the couple were staying. The court agreed that the couple “could legitimately suppose (the residence) was sheltered from prying eyes” and that the violation of their privacy was “particularly intrusive”.
It described the magazine’s use of the photos as a “brutal exhibition” of their intimacy.

Meanwhile Prince William and Duchess Kate continue their Far East & South Pacific tour.

from The Huffington Post

from The London Evening Standard

Monday, September 17, 2012

Topless Duchess



British Prince William & his wife, Kate (Duchess of Cambridge) have gone to court—well, their lawyers have—in France to ask that recent topless pictures of the Duchess be prevented from further use. And they’re suing for damages, apparently calling the publication a “grotesque” invasion of privacy. 

The pictures were published in the French gossip magazine Closer, and can be found online. 

My feeling is this: she was sunbathing topless on a balcony which was viewable from some publically accessible place—granted, the photographer seems to have used a significantly high-power zoom lens—so they shouldn’t be so insanely outraged that these pictures have come out. If you’re that concerned about the public being aware that you do, in fact, have breasts and nipples, then you should always keep them securely covered up when near cameras and when outside or near any windows or mirrors that might be in line of sight of windows. 

Seriously, this is just about preserving the traditional, uptight, “proper” image of the British Royal family, which is an outdated institution in my opinion. To pretend that these are not people, but rather iconic demi-gods who’d never engage in any untoward behaviour is just craziness. It perpetuates an unrealistic ideal of behaviour which could, in time, contribute to unhealthy or perhaps more extreme behaviours by members of the royal family. Pushing down impulsive feelings, by saying “we can’t behave this way or that way, doesn’t make those impulses go away. They just get channeled into other areas, and it all comes out somehow, somewhere, at some time. 

Come on, that’s just PSYCH 101.

The Telegraph, the online version of The Daily Telegraph (a 150+ year old conservative British newspaper), published this video & article, in which the young royal couple visited the Solomon Islands...


...where topless native women in traditional dress greeted them:

Sunday, September 16, 2012

Ursula Martinez, I love you



Ursula Martinez:


I love her.

Okay, not really. I don’t know Ursula Martinez. I imagine she’d be an interesting person to know—smart and funny and not uptight. Or maybe not.

Anyway, I do love this piece of hers called “Hanky Panky”. It’s a magic trick/striptease.


I first saw it online somewhere maybe a year ago or more, and have come across it a few times since then.

I thought it was hilarious.

Still do.

Now, despite dabbling a little as a kid, I am not a magician. But I would guess the magic trick involved in “Hanky Panky” is probably not all that complicated. It’s her performance that makes it great. The music choice, the choreography, her facial expressions, the nods and winks to the audience...they’re all perfect.

Well. She had always kept it as a live performance piece, and not put it online herself. But a video of “Hanky Panky” was apparently made and put online without her permission. Then she started getting creepy emails from men in response to it (along with some not-so-creepy emails from men & women.)

A few years later, in response to the whole thing, she created a show called “My Stories, Your Emails”.  



Here she is talking about it in an interview:


I was going to post that original “Hanky Panky” video. Buuuut...in light of what she has to say about it in the interview, I decided against it. (If you’re really interested, I’m sure you can find it online easily enough.)

Her website, ursulamartinez.com, describes some other pieces she’s done. 

I’d love to see any of those, really.

“A Family Outing”

“Viva Croydon!”


“Curing Homosexuality”

...Or to meet and actually get to know her. Then, who knows? Maybe one day I really could say “Ursula Martinez, I love you.”


Friday, September 14, 2012

fear of bridges



I was reminded yesterday, while walking around a trail at Hemlock Bluffs Nature Preserve, that there was a time when I was afraid of bridges.

(No, not that guy.)


(Yes, yes...very scary, right?)


At some point when I was a child I read or heard or saw some version of “The 3 Billy Goats Gruff”. 



So for some time after that I was afraid that if I crossed a bridge, a troll might grab me and try to eat me.

(Not that kind of troll.)


(Uh...no.)


(Okay sure, close enough.)


Anyway, I really don’t recall how old I was nor for how long this went on.

This fear applied to big bridges that you would drive over, or in my case, ride over, as I was clearly too young to drive. But smaller bridges that you’d walk over—those were scary.

I don’t remember it being a huge issue, like I don’t think I was scared enough to not go over a bridge, but I was very nervous about it. 

Thursday, September 13, 2012

“Dawn Gets Naked”

I happened upon this last night, after posting yesterday’s entry:

“Dawn Gets Naked”

It’s a 1-hour BBC “special”...well, maybe it’s not all that special. It’s one of a series of shows in which Dawn Porter, a British TV “presenter”, explores various issues.



Anyway, it’s not bad. She does ask a few interesting questions.

But I’ve noticed more and more videos online that seem to be British TV programs exploring nudity. I wrote about another such show not long ago, “My Daughter, the Teenage Nudist”. I wonder if this general topic is just being used for the titillation effect and to boost ratings. Or does it reflect a broadening interest in nudity among the young (and no-so-young) folks watching the BBC? Maybe both.

The video above is part 1 of 4. Here are the other 3 parts:



Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Sancta Susanna (naked opera 8)


Sancta Susanna by Paul Hindemith




I believe this is from a production at Opéra de Lyon with Agnes Selma Weiland as Susanna 

and Magdalena Anna Hofmann as Klementia.


I had never heard of this opera until this evening when I was looking for something to write about. 

And now, I only know what I’ve read on Wikipedia (see the link above, at the top).

It sounds interesting. Has anybody out there ever seen a production?