Category Archives: Americana

A modest proposel

Americana, Politics, War

tt151117

If you start to take Vienna, take Vienna. Napoleon Bonaparte

First, a disclaimer. I only understand what is happening in Syria in the most fuzzy and incomplete way. That said, it very roughly seems to be a civil war against the Shiite minority government of Syria by that country’s Sunni majority, a war by the Sunni minority against the ruling Shiite majority in Iraq, a war by the Kurds for their own territory, a war by Turkey on the same Kurdish separatists, a war between the Kurds with both the Iraqi Army and Shiite militias against the Sunnis who have captured what they consider their land, and a proxy war between Saudi Arabia and Iran. In addition, we are backing the Iraqi Shiite government, along with Iran, against the bad Sunni separatists but we are also backing the good Sunni separatists that – theoretically, at least – are against the Iranian supported Shiite government in Syria. In the middle of this is a group of Sunni fanatic thugs, ISIS, and disenfranchised Baathist military.

ISIS, it seems, wants to be fighting with everybody who is not their brand of Sunni extremist. They are killing Shiites, Christians, and random foreigners at home while blowing up Russian airplanes, killing Chinese workers in Africa, and killing people with guns and bombs in France, Mali, Yemen, Libya, and – it seems – any place else they can. Either they have no idea that their actions will result in retaliation and are killing people thinking they will not get hit back or their actions are in an effort to get us to strike out at them.

If ISIS is attacking and terrorising people all over the world for a reaction, it brings up the question, What do they want the reaction to be? When Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, the purpose was to shock us enough to keep us out of Southeastern Asia. In retrospect, that attack seems suicidal, all it did was enrage us. Seventy five years later, it is naive to think that ISIS  is making the same mistake. Much more likely is the scenario that they are trying to get us to strike back. Strike back at Syrian refugees so we make it harder for them to escape ISIS by leaving Syria, getting politicians to attack Muslims living in Europe and the United States so they will become alienated in their own country, and, of course, attack ISIS territory directly to help them solidify their rule. If we are really going to let ISIS suck us into this, how are we going to win? The scenarios range from doing nothing to nuking Mecca. The problem is that all the scenarios are bad and what we are doing now is one of the worst.

ISIS and alot of other people don’t like us because we invaded Iraq and terrorized a big portion of the population. We disenfranchised the Sunnis, especially alienating and pissing off the young Sunni men whose lives were trashed by the invasion. Now we are bombing them again, or, at least, some of them again, just like ISIS wants. This is the worst of all possible worlds, we are not doing enough to win but we are killing, mostly, innocent people and making more people hate us.

Bombing is not an effective way to win a war. During World War II, the Allies dropped more than a million and a half tons of bombs on Germany, killing between 400,000 to 600,000 civilians and we still had to move troops into Germany – or put boots on the ground if you prefer – to win the war. War can only be won, the enemy can only be conquered, by occupying the other’s territory and running the place. The ruler can rule directly or install a puppet regime but, either way, the ruler must be prepared to stay for a while.

The easy way to do this is to provide air support and let some local army put their boots on the ground. But which locals and how many boots on the ground? The Kurds are on our side and are pretty good fighters especially with our air support. However, the biggest reason the Kurds are good fighters is that they are defending their own ground and they are really only interested in regaining and protecting greater Kurdistan.

The Iraqi Army which is, primarily, a Shiite Army, along with Shiite militias and Iranian leadership and support, are pushing back at ISIS both to the north and east of Baghdad but they are not going to move into Syria and take over ISIS’s capital, Raqqa and we don’t want them to. They will have a hard enough time holding on to the Sunni parts of Iraq which, after all, is a major factor in Sunni deflections and ISIS’s ascendency. I doubt Saudi Arabia is going to put a million boots on the ground to kill Sunnis when all they want to do is defeat Iranian backed, Shiite ruler of Syria, Bashar al-Assad.

If we are serious that ISIS is an existential threat to our way of life, if we really think they are out to destroy us and our way of life and the only way to stop them is to, in Hillary Clinton’s words, defeat and destroy ISIS, then we are going to have occupy their territory.   The French seem game to help but it is doubtful that most of Europe will be offering up troops. That means we will have to make this war the national priority like our war against Japan and Germany. We can’t diddle around like we did in Afghanistan where we spent thirteen years and changed nothing but the price of rental housing in Kabul. The boots on the ground has to be lots of boots on the ground.

It is hard to believe that even Marco Rubio or The Donald really want to do that. What everybody seems to want to do is just poke at the problem hoping – I guess – that ISIS will change their mind and go away. But that is not going to happen.

I think we ought to do the opposite, I think we should withdraw our troops and drones from the region and continue Obama’s approach of blockading ISIS territory, stopping  them from selling oil and buying weapons. I think we should contain them. I want to quickly say that I know ISIS is loathsome, closer to the 1930’s Nazis than anybody else that comes to mind. They are great at propaganda and even better at perverting their host civilization. The leaders are thugs. They are killers and rapists and their behavior is attracting other thugs. If we leave, we leave a terrified country to be plundered and brutalized. That is sickening. If we really ran the world, we could wave a wand and have ISIS disappear or order some client state to defeat and destroy them, or cajole some ally, if you prefer, or convince a neighbor that it is their best interest to take them out. The problem is that, while it is in most countries interest to have ISIS gone, it is not in anybody’s self-interest to move the million troops into Syria to make it happen.

We should just get out, the world will not end any more than it did when we pulled out of Vietnam (and, remember, the hawks said that, when we pulled out of Vietnam, the neighboring countries would fall like dominoes, including Thailand and Japan). Will they try to convince alienated Muslim children to attack us, of course, and some will be successful, and that will hurt. It will hurt our country and, especially, the Muslim community, but it will hurt less than putting two million boots on the ground. We should just get out.

 

 

 

 

 

A couple of comfort movies

Americana, Art, Film
This photo provided by Warner Bros. Pictures shows, Anne Hathaway, left, as Jules Ostin, and Christina Scherer as Becky, in scene from the comedy, "The Intern," a Warner Bros. Pictures release. (Francois Duhamel/Warner Bros. Pictures via AP)
This photo is provided by Warner Bros.

There’s no denying that candy is comfort food and it’s affordable. Dylan Lauren, the daughter of clothing designer Ralph Lauren and owner of New York City’s Dylan’s Candy Bar

While Michele was improving her mind at Bioneers, I saw a Nancy Meyers’ movie, The Intern, at an early afternoon matinée, with a smallish group of other old people. I’m almost certain that there were only old people in the audience – it was 2 o’clock on a Friday afternoon which might be a small factor – and I think we were all there for the same reasons. To see a good upbeat movie – that requires very little exertion – done well and to watch a comfortable old guy be the hero (played by Robert De Niro channeling a bemused Gary Cooper). It lived up to my expectations .  

It was fun and very forgettable except that I am still thinking about it. The colors were bright, the music was great, and everybody lived in a perfect, very covetable, house or loft. As an aside, according to The New York Times  Nancy Meyers has an almost cult following, her interiors are fetishized by moviegoers and Architectural Digest alike. End aside. The movie stars Anne Hathaway, the CEO of a company that she started, with her likability and cuteness cranked up to eleven  and the plot revolves around her investors being worried that the company is growing too fast and they want to hire a seasoned CEO.

I liked Meyers’ terrific craftsmanship, the Norman Rockwell storytelling and optimism. There are no villains, only people who are misled and there is no violence. The movie starts with a great hall-of-mirrors video tape being made by De Niro and zips right along after that. If this sound like condemnation by faint praise, I don’t mean to, I liked the movie, it is the kind of movie that I am a sucker for.

Before I talk about Bridge of Spies, I have a disclaimer, in the spring of 1981, I went to a sneak preview of an unidentified movie (one of those deals where you fill out the form about the movie after the movie). We thought we were going to see something else which had been cancelled and we were given the choice of the sneak or go home so we watched the sneak. When we walked out, we agreed it was one of the worst movies of all time. It was only a couple of months later, when we learned the name of the sneak movie was Raiders of the Lost Ark which had come out to rave reviews. The New York Times said  ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark” is one of the most deliriously funny, ingenious and stylish American adventure movies ever made. Maybe if I had know it was a comedy, I would have liked it or, maybe, I just don’t have the same timing as Spielberg. I’m inclined to lean towards the latter so any comments on a Spielberg movie should be adjusted for that. Bridge-of-Spies-8

Last Saturday, at a late matinée, Michele and I saw Steven Spielberg’s Bridge of Spies in a packed theater. In many ways it was the polar opposite of The Intern, it was much darker, I remember it raining or snowing in almost every scene and the oppressiveness of the late 50s, early 60s America was claustrophobic. The cold war fear, with children practicing ducking under their school desks to wait for their doom, permeates the movie and it makes a judge not being fair, at least understandable if not likable. To Spielberg’s credit, he is able to both show that the fear is real and rational and that it is also imagined and paranoic.

When I think of Spielberg, I think of the suburbs, like in ET, but Bridge is urban. Somehow, with all the rain and snow, with the paranoia and fear, Spielberg still maintains his signature Midas-touch ability to find grounds for optimism everywhere, to quote theguardian. Spielberg is also able to lay down a dense image, especially a desaturated image, better than anybody. Tom Hanks – channeling Gregory Peck channeling Atticus Finch – is great, he is the decent man being fair in a world afraid to be fair or decent.

The movie opens with a Russian spy – we are soon to find out – Rudolf Abel, played by Mark Rylance, who played Cromwell in Wolf Hall, painting a self portrait. It is a wonderful opening sequence, The Spy in white shirt and tie, his Reflection in a dirty mirror, and his portrait showing a more relaxed, American,  Rudolf – maybe Rudy – Abel in an open shirt. Still, this is not a movie I loved. I really do think it is a matter of having a different sense of timing – or, maybe, degree is a better word – than Spielberg. It just seems to be raining a little too much, there are two or three too many cars in the street scenes. In a shot of the Berlin Wall being built, an obvious dolly shot just goes on and on until I started thinking,  how long does this fake wall have to be to make the point? how big is the set? just how big is this budget?

I guess, in the end, I admired the movie, I was engrossed, and I think it is 10% too obvious.

 

Frank Gehry and the out of town architect

Americana, Art, California

Gerhry (1 of 1)-3Your best work is your expression of yourself. Now, you may not be the greatest at it, but when you do it, you’re the only expert. Frank Gehry

Before I went, I thought that the whole purpose of my going to Los Angeles was to see the Frank Gehry show at LACMA – the Los Angeles County Museum of Art – but, on the way home, I realized that the highlight of the trip was just being in Los Angeles for a day. Like many people – actually, most is probably more accurate –  raised in Northern California, I was raised to look down on Southern California in general and Los Angeles in particular. We were taught that L.A. was crass, even vulgar, completely lacking the refinement of us Northern Californians.

As an aside, one of my favorite Northern v. Southern California stories is from Herb Caen, “Mr. San Francisco”,  who quoted a well known bon vivant from Santa Barbara (which really is in Southern California even though we Northerners sometimes try to claim it). The Santa Barbaian, let’s call him Bon,  told of a time he was in San Francisco visiting a schoolmate who was now a lawyer on Montgomery Street; it was summer and Bon was wearing a tan linen suit with white shoes, feeling very spiffy. As Bon was walking down Montgomery Street, he spotted two guys wearing sandwich boards that advertised a health food store. They were walking towards him, the one on the right was wearing a tomato costume under his sandwich board and the guy on the left was dressed as a carrot. He giggled to himself, thinking Only in San Francisco.  As they passed him, the carrot leaned over to the tomato and said in a stage whisper, “I can’t believe that idiot is wearing white shoes on Montgomery Street.” End side.

I wouldn’t say that Los Angeles is totally unlike San Francisco, but they are atleast a third of a culture apart; the climate is very different, even the light is different, the standards are looser – and, if that sounds pejorative, it is because that’s how I learned it, maybe a better way to say it is that the culture is more open to innovation and change – and the chaos is amped way up.

The Disney Concert Hall by Frank Gehry (picture from Wikipedia)
The Disney Concert Hall by Frank Gehry (picture from Wikipedia)

This difference shows itself the most in L.A.’s streetscape and architecture. The chaotic grid  covers hundreds of square miles and there are times when the out-of-towner has no idea where the particular disorganized spot where he/she/or it is standing is in relation to some famous landmark, identifiable place, or where they want to be. Every part of Los Angeles seems to be screaming for attention. It is this landscape and this light that educated the architects who matured in it. Yet, when Los Angeles wanted a Museum Of Contemporary Art, they chose an outsider, Arata Isozaki. He is from Japan and about as far away as they could get.

MOCA, picture from Wikipedia.
MOCA, picture from Wikipedia.

I don’t want to say that Isozaki is not a good, or even great, architect but when Michele and I went to MOCA about twenty years ago, we were very disappointed, it seemed too formal, too contained. Then we walked down the street to The Temporary Contemporary – now relabeled as The Geffen Contemporary at MOCA – which was a warehouse lightly redone by Frank Gehry and were delighted.

Temporary Contemporary. (not my picture)
Temporary Contemporary (not my picture).

Somehow, as simple as it was, this museum was more L A and everybody liked it. Even the New York Times’ art critic, William Wilson, liked it, saying it was a prince among spaces that was all set to embrace whatever princess came round the corner.  The space prompted, the Guggenheim to talk to Gehry about a remodel in a factory space at Bilbao for their new museum. That lead to the totally new Guggenheim Museum Bilbao.Gehry (1 of 1)

(1 of 1)
Gehry Bilbao (not my picture, duh)

As an aside, Gehry must have as much of a distortion field as Steve Jobs once he gets close. Many, maybe most, of his jobs started out small or as remodels and became bigger and more expensive.  End aside.

With Gehry living and practicing in Los Angeles , the Museum still felt it had to go out of town to get a prestigious architect. And that is the rub, it seems finding or showing or using out of town architects is considered better – better as in more prestigious, in a we are a world-class-town way, I think –  than using local guys. And that is not just in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art hired a guy from Switzerland who designed a building that not only doesn’t fit in but doesn’t work very well. Sadly, it is not just in signature museums that the out of town syndrome reigns, it is also the art in them. I have been going to museums all my life – dragged would have been a better term for the first dozen years – and the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art was the first museum that really spun my beanie. It was on the top three floors of the The War Memorial Veterans Building – designed by Arthur Brown Jr, a local guy who also designed the City Hall – and it was full of art I had never seen before. Some of it was the permanent collection but much of it was small shows of local, emerging, artists. 

That is not the case now (with some exceptions). The shows have gotten bigger and the artists have become more famous and often that means the artists are from somewhere else. I think the purpose of travel is to see a different place and the homogenization of art in museums, like the standardization of stores and restaurants, makes places seem less different.

As an aside, the only museum that I know about that fights this trend is the Oakland Museum. It only has local – by that, they mean California, so not local, local – art so the visitor is treated to a great Robert Arneson Robert Arneson (1 of 1)or a  Michael McMillen,  McMillion (1 of 1)

rather than a mediocre Jasper Johns. And that is good, because you aren’t going to see any McMillion in New York, only great Jasper Johns. End aside.

Racism and Anna Deavere Smith

Americana, Art, Local events

Anna Deavere Smith (1 of 1)An examination of traffic stops and arrests in Greensboro, N.C., uncovered wide racial differences in measure after measure of police conduct. Sharon LaFraniere, Andrew W. Lehren, and Susan Beachy in The New York Times 10/25/2015

Last Wednesday, we saw Anna Deavere Smith at the Stanford Chapel. I would probably only know her as the National Security Advisor on West Wing, if it hadn’t been for a fortuitous blind ticket buy about twenty years ago. We were in L A for my former partner’s widow’s 85th birthday and we decided to see if we could see a play – L A being a hotbed for great, small, local, theater companies – and we ended up in small theater watching  Anna Deavere Smith put on a performance about the Rodney King Riots, called Twilight: Los Angeles 1992,  in which she played all the parts.

To back up, what Anna Deavere Smith did was to interview various people that were involved in the riots, from young black men who broke windows and stole TVs, to a Korean shop owner who was robbed, to LAPD chief Daryl Gates and Congresswoman Maxine Waters. She then tells each part of the story, using the interviewees’ own words and attitude. We were blown away.

Now Smith is an Artist in Residence at Stanford and, last Wednesday, she put on a show that was billed as Letter from Birmingham City Jail. Of course, the center of the show was her reading of Martin Luther King’s Letter from Birmingham City Jail but what I found most moving was the first reading, Glass All Over My Clothes, which came from an interview with Charlayne Hunter Gault who was one of the first two African-American students to enroll in the University of Georgia. Gault told about how carefully she had packed, wanting her clothes to be just perfect – she had gone to Wayne State, in Detroit, for a year and a half and she thought her clothes looked very look cool and hip – and how a riot of white kids threw bricks through her dorm window, the only window with a light on because every other girl in the dorm had quietly been told to turn their lights off. Anna Deavere Smith embodied the nineteen year old Charlayne Hunter Gault’s feelings of isolation and fear just perfectly.

That feeling of isolation and fear, of not being an equal American – projected large by Anna Deavere Smith and Ta-Nehisi Coates in his writings and the drumbeat of cops killing young black men- are the reality of how we treat our fellow citizens. I might have never thrown a rock through a young girl’s dorm window, but in a Letter from Birmingham City Jail, Martin Luther King reminds me that the Negro’s great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizens Councillor or the Ku Klux Klanner but the white moderate who is more devoted to order than to justice. I have never thrown a rock through a young girl’s dorm window nor did I even know it was happening in 1957 but, I didn’t know and didn’t care only because I was looking the other way.

As an aside: a couple of days ago, I read a book review of KL: A History of The Nazi Concentration Camps by Nikolaus Wachsmann. The KL are not the Nazi Death Camps that we know through the holocaust, but slave labor camps and Wachsmann writes that even though they were not death camps, the mortality rate was about 50% annually. He goes on to say that the only comparable mortality rate was in prisons in the Southern United States after the Civil War in which about 50% of the black prisoners died annually (after about 1880, the death rate dropped to only about 15% annually).  I did not know that appalling fact. The only place that compares with Nazi slave labor camps is the United States, sixty years earlier. End aside.

As much as I want to exonerate the US or only blame people south of the Mason-Dixon Line for the way we have treated black people and, of course, by extension, exonerate myself, with Social Media that exoneration is now impossible. It’s not just slavery or Jim Crow in the South but redlining in the north, it’s California with a 6.6% black population having a black prison population of 29%. In reality, we have been disenfranchising, disempowering, marginalizing, and demonizing, black people since our country was formed. Formed on that grand principle that that all men are created equal and that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, by men who put the three fifths clause in the Constitution, by men who were more devoted to order than to justice.

The subtitle of  the Letter from Birmingham City Jail is The Negro Is Your Brother and the last performance of Anna Deavere Smith was a story told by John Lewis. Lewis was on the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, on Bloody Sunday and he was beaten by a what? civilian volunteer beater? bully? idiot? asshole? take your pick. Lewis goes on to say that the guy approached him about ten years ago, hat in hand. He apologized and asked for forgiveness and, of course, John Lewis forgave him. Lewis went on to say that they have met four times since and now they call each other Brother.

In Twilight: Los Angeles, Anna Deavere Smith quotes Cornel West on Optimism versus Hope, Optimism Is when you look out the window and think things are going well and Hope is when you look out the window and you go, “It doesn’t look good at all, but I’m going to go beyond what I see to give people visions of what could be.”  Looking at how we treat people of color, especially Americans of African heritage, Hope is as good as it is going to get.  Anna Deavere Smith (1 of 1)

A couple of thoughts while watching the Democratic Debate

Americana, Politics

Debate (1 of 1)I’ve been thinking about the Democratic Debate all week because one of these guys is who I will probably vote for for president, and my first impression is still how subdued it was. There just didn’t seem to be any crazies. Nobody touted a non-existent film and everybody believed in global climate change.

Starting stage right, I liked Lincoln Chafee and when he said  “I didn’t leave the Republican Party, it left me” – probably not quoted very accurately –  I thought, What a great guy for the Democrats to run for president, they can pick up the Reagan Democrats who are disillusioned with the Republican crazy. But Chafee completely blew the question of why he voted for the reduction of Glass Steagall – and that is a question he should have known was coming and be prepared for – and his “Solid as a block of granite” comment, at least twice, just seemed too contrived. But, when he pitched that his biggest plus was that he had no scandals, I knew he is not going to get this nomination – he couldn’t even get reelected as Senator from Rhode Island – and the fact that he seems clueless to that just reinforces how delusional it is to live in the political bubble.

On the other end of the spectrum, Jim Webb gave a great impression of what a sane Republican would look like. His credentials are solid working white blue-collar, if that makes sense, with a mother from Arkansas who worked in fields picking cotton. When he said he would have no problem with letting undocumented immigrants get on ObamaCare, I was a little surprised, but then he talked about his immigrant – from Vietnam – wife going from not speaking English to graduating from Princeton, I was completely convinced that he meant it. When Webb was asked about his position of being against Affirmative Action – he is against it because it has been expanded to almost everybody but poor white people – I thought This is too nuanced, but I almost completely agreed with his answer and when he talked about African Americans being special because of slavery and then, surprisingly, included Jim Crow, I thought This guy really does understand the problem. But when he was asked “What enemy defines him?” – or something like that – his answer of the Vietnamese soldier who tried to kill him was almost embarrassing. In the end, much of the time, Webb just seemed to come off as pissed.

After Bernie Sanders said something along the lines of being a Democratic Socialist, Anderson Cooper asked if anyone on stage besides Bernie Sanders wasn’t a Capitalist, nobody raised their hand but only Clinton spoke. The question was about Bernie, so he couldn’t speak but that nobody but Hillary seemed to want to speak, was telling. If nothing else, Hillary came across as really, really, wanting the Presidency and she is willing to bust her ass to get it. I thought her answers – like “I can find common ground and know when to stand my ground” or “I want to save Capitalism from itself” or “I’m a progressive who gets things done” (which is, technically not true) – were too canned but I think Clinton did a fine job in doing what she needs to do. Her main tasks were to keep her backers on board and to keep Joe Biden out and she probably did both (maybe, in the end, she won’t be able to keep Biden out, but she did make it harder).  I’m still not a Clinton convert, I’ll vote for her if she get’s the nomination, then I won’t have a choice, but there is something about both Clintons that is a little bit above the law and she is too much of a hawk for my taste.

Martin O’Malley was a complete unknown to me so the fact that he is much better known nationally is a big win. I keep thinking that he is running for Vice-president which may not be fair.

I turned on the debate wanting Bernie to win and, in the end, I still wanted him to win and I am still going to vote for him as long as I can. At one point he was asked – what could be called a gotcha question – on not voting for the Brady Bill and he started to explain a couple of details that he didn’t like but, unlike Chafee, his answer seemed to say Why are you asking me such a stupid question, ask me about the important stuff and I don’t think it hurt him. When Hillary was asked a gotcha question about her emails, Bernie had a similar reaction saying something like “Nobody cares about the stupid emails, let’s get to the important stuff like inequality.” His answer helped Hillary but I don’t think that he cared, I don’t think that was the purpose of his answer, I think that he just wanted to get back to his agenda.

At one point, everybody was asked “What is the biggest single threat to the United States?” and the various answers were interesting. Somebody, several, actually, said versions of Terrorism, Webb surprisingly enough said China, Hillary listed three or four things – that above the rule thing again – and Bernie, with a tone of voice that seemed to say duh!, said “Climate Change”.

Of course it’s Climate Change. The long drought in the middle east – is middle east still OK to say? or is it like Oriental? – has been a major fact in the violence, especially in Syria where farmers have been forced to give up their farms and have fled to the cities. In North Africa, the nomads are being driven south to what was traditionally farming country rapeing and killing as they go. The seas are rising which should make living in Seattle and New York interesting (not to mention our dear Bay Area). Bernie saying “Climate Change” and the way in which he said “Climate Change made me very happy.

But I don’t feel about Bernie the way I felt about Obama even though his positions and his priorities line up almost perfectly with my beliefs. I am for Bernie and I have sent him money – not much – but I am concerned that I’m only for him because I don’t think he will win. If he wins, I worry that he won’t be effective, he isn’t known for Playing well others after all. And I worry that I’m not the only one who feels that way. When I heard him on the Bill Mahre show, I started thinking that maybe Bernie feels that way too. I think he wants to energize the country, to push it in the direction it must go to survive, more than he want to be President.