The full dataset viewer is not available (click to read why). Only showing a preview of the rows.
The dataset generation failed
Error code: DatasetGenerationError
Exception: ArrowInvalid
Message: JSON parse error: Missing a closing quotation mark in string. in row 32
Traceback: Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/packaged_modules/json/json.py", line 153, in _generate_tables
df = pd.read_json(f, dtype_backend="pyarrow")
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pandas/io/json/_json.py", line 815, in read_json
return json_reader.read()
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pandas/io/json/_json.py", line 1025, in read
obj = self._get_object_parser(self.data)
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pandas/io/json/_json.py", line 1051, in _get_object_parser
obj = FrameParser(json, **kwargs).parse()
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pandas/io/json/_json.py", line 1187, in parse
self._parse()
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pandas/io/json/_json.py", line 1403, in _parse
ujson_loads(json, precise_float=self.precise_float), dtype=None
ValueError: Trailing data
During handling of the above exception, another exception occurred:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1997, in _prepare_split_single
for _, table in generator:
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/packaged_modules/json/json.py", line 156, in _generate_tables
raise e
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/packaged_modules/json/json.py", line 130, in _generate_tables
pa_table = paj.read_json(
File "pyarrow/_json.pyx", line 308, in pyarrow._json.read_json
File "pyarrow/error.pxi", line 154, in pyarrow.lib.pyarrow_internal_check_status
File "pyarrow/error.pxi", line 91, in pyarrow.lib.check_status
pyarrow.lib.ArrowInvalid: JSON parse error: Missing a closing quotation mark in string. in row 32
The above exception was the direct cause of the following exception:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/config/parquet_and_info.py", line 1529, in compute_config_parquet_and_info_response
parquet_operations = convert_to_parquet(builder)
File "/src/services/worker/src/worker/job_runners/config/parquet_and_info.py", line 1154, in convert_to_parquet
builder.download_and_prepare(
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1029, in download_and_prepare
self._download_and_prepare(
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1124, in _download_and_prepare
self._prepare_split(split_generator, **prepare_split_kwargs)
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 1884, in _prepare_split
for job_id, done, content in self._prepare_split_single(
File "/src/services/worker/.venv/lib/python3.9/site-packages/datasets/builder.py", line 2040, in _prepare_split_single
raise DatasetGenerationError("An error occurred while generating the dataset") from e
datasets.exceptions.DatasetGenerationError: An error occurred while generating the datasetNeed help to make the dataset viewer work? Make sure to review how to configure the dataset viewer, and open a discussion for direct support.
pred_label
string | pred_label_prob
float64 | wiki_prob
float64 | text
string | source
string |
|---|---|---|---|---|
__label__cc
| 0.727882
| 0.272118
|
From the Olive Tree - Moynihan/O'Leary Duo CD buy direct!! See Discography
Moynihan / O’Leary Duo
"An authentic and musically profound ensemble" - Guy Traviss, Classical Guitar Magazine, London.
“A talented duo whose rapport was immediately captivating” - The Sunday Business Post
"The soprano Deirdre Moynihan, and the guitarist, Alec O'Leary, are sensitive, experienced artists, with a wide range of repertoire from the early nineteenth century to the present day. The songs are interspersed with guitar solos to provide an enthralling evening of music of varied moods and colours."
- Graham Wade, Classical Guitar Magazine, London.
Deirdre Moynihan (Soprano) and Alec O’Leary (Guitar) are recognised as one of Ireland’s leading duos. They are an engaging and energetic ensemble with a unique performance style that is charming yet dynamic. Having sculpted their individual musical identities for many years as soloists, they came together in 2010 to perform as part of the Galway Music Residency concert series. Since then they have played many high profile concerts nationally and on the international stage. They have commissioned new pieces and arranged many works for voice and guitar including traditional Irish songs, film music and well known repertoire from Spain, Italy and beyond. Deirdre has received much acclaim as a Baroque soloist with International Record Review describing her voice as “unfailingly beautiful in tone” and Music Web International referring to “a beautiful voice, which is perfectly suited to baroque music”. Alec, co-founder and director of the Guitar Festival of Ireland has performed many times on both national radio and television and has been described by Hotpress Magazine as “one of Ireland’s most talented and accomplished classical guitarists”.
‘From the Olive Tree’ is out NOW!! BUY NOW
19 Jun 2020 Leo Brouwer world premiere of Irish Landscape with Rain - Dundalk — An Tain Thetre
Copyright Alec O'Leary 2020 Milford Arts
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line3
|
__label__wiki
| 0.588167
| 0.588167
|
Senate panel decries planned ‘emergency power bill’
Chairman of the Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Samuel Anyanwu, has described the reported ‘Emergency Power Bill’ being packaged for the President as an attempt to kill the institution of the National Assembly.Anyanwu, who spoke yesterday in an interview with journalists at the National Assembly, said the Bill, if approved, would confer absolute powers on the President, a development he said, would enthrone full-blown dictatorship in Nigeria.
According to the lawmaker, President Muhammadu Buhari currently wields sufficient powers and does not require additional ones to tackle the nation’s economic problems, adding that the bill would amount to an attempt to usurp the responsibility of the apex legislative body.
He said: Well, I haven’t seen any bill to that effect, but let me say that I’m for any bill that will enhance the economy of the country. At the same time, any bill that will give absolute power to the President, which by the way he already has, and doesn’t need extra powers, would lead to dictatorship. I think we shouldn’t be talking about emergency powers for the President.
“When you are talking of emergency powers, it means you are already taking the responsibilities and functions of the Legislature, which of course, I wouldn’t subscribe to because what it means is that they want to kill this institution
The media early this week was awash with reports of impending move by the President to solicit emergency powers from the National Assembly in a bill entitled “Emergency Economy Stabilisation Bill 2016.”
According to the reports, the bill, which will be sent to the National Assembly by the President upon resumption from its yearly recess, is seeking unfettered powers to set aside some extant laws and simultaneously be empowered to come up with an economic recovery initiative within the next one year.
The bill allegedly seeks, among others, to empower Buhari to abridge the procurement process with a view to guaranteeing stimulus spending on critical sectors of the economy; make orders to favour local contractors/suppliers in contract awards; abridge the process of sale or lease of government assets to generate revenue; and allow virement of budgetary allocations to projects that are urgent without a recourse to the National Assembly.
It also seeks to amend laws such as the Universal Basic Education Commission (UBEC) Act so that states that cannot access their cash trapped in the commission’s accounts as a result of their inability to meet the counterpart funding can do so.
3 Killed, as Attacks in Kaduna Communities Continues
Benue: Ortom offers N5m reward for info on arrest of ex-amnesty boss
We’ll Continue to Provide Humanitarian Assistance in Northeast Despite Attack – UNICEF
Only Forest Guards Can Curtail Activities of Cattle Rustlers – Professor Garba
Don’t take Military action against Niger Millitants – Dickson begs Buhari
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line4
|
__label__cc
| 0.570144
| 0.429856
|
Decision Making, ICSID Arbitration, International Law, Investment agreements, Investment Arbitration, Investment Treaties, VCLT, VCLT Jubilee, Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
Celebrating 50 Years of the VCLT: An Introduction
Esmé Shirlow (Assistant Editor, Investment Arbitration) (Australian National University) and Kiran Nasir Gore (Associate Editor) (The George Washington University Law School; Law Offices of Charles H. Camp)/ December 2, 2019 January 16, 2020 /Leave a comment
The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT) was adopted and opened for signature on May 23, 1969, and entered into force on January 27, 1980. In the fifty years since the VCLT was opened for signature, it has become universally regarded as one of the most important instruments of treaty law. It has been ratified by 116 States and even some non-ratifying States (such as the United States) recognize parts of the VCLT as a restatement of customary international law.
This year marks the VCLT’s golden jubilee. In commemoration, we are devoting this week on the Kluwer Arbitration Blog to the VCLT’s history, evolution, and future. Today, we start with an introduction to the VCLT’s history and development, followed by an overview of its content, legacy, and achievements. We then conclude with a brief preview of the posts you will see throughout this week as part of this commemorative series.
The VCLT: Its History and Development
Following World War II, the customary international law rules relevant to the negotiation, validity, and interpretation of treaties had grown to become a fairly comprehensive body of rules. In 1949, the International Law Commission (ILC) of the United Nations, at its first session, identified the law of treaties as a high priority topic. The ILC’s approach and effort is well-documented in the UN’s Audiovisual Library of International Law, which includes a series of preparatory documents and photographs providing a snapshot into the various meetings of the ILC which ultimately led to the VCLT. But even this documentation simplifies the complexity and magnitude of the task faced by the ILC.
The Commission appointed four successive Special Rapporteurs for the topic: J. L. Brierly, Sir Hersch Lauterpacht, Sir Gerald Fitzmaurice and Sir Humphrey Waldock, and kept the topic of the law of treaties on its agenda from 1949 through to 1966. In its sessions, the ILC considered the Special Rapporteurs’ research and work product, information provided by governments, and documents prepared by the United Nations Secretariat.
Despite this focus, the path to the VCLT was not direct. As noted in the report of the ILC’s eleventh session in June 1959 – ten years into its work – the ILC’s Special Rapporteur envisaged that its work might culminate in “a code of a general character”, rather than one or more international conventions:
“the Rapporteur believes that any codification of the law of treaties, such as the Commission is called upon to carry out, should take the form of a code and not of a draft convention. There are two reasons for this. First, it seems inappropriate that a code on the law of treaties should itself take the form of a treaty; or rather, it seems more appropriate that it should have an independent basis. In the second place, much of the law relating to treaties is not especially suitable for framing in conventional form. It consists of enunciations of principles and abstract rules, most easily stated in the form of a code; and this also has the advantage of rendering permissible the inclusion of a certain amount of declaratory and explanatory material in the body of the code, in a way that would not be possible if this had to be confined to a strict statement of obligation. Such material has considerable utility in making clear, on the face of the code itself, the legal concepts or reasoning on which the various provisions are based”. (Report of the ILC on the work of its eleventh session (1959), A/4169, ¶ 18)
This approach was premised on the view that “the law of treaties is not itself dependent on treaty, but is part of general customary international law”. (Id., emphasis in original).
Yet, the decision as to the ultimate form of its output only crystallised with the work of the last Special Rapporteur, Sir Humphrey Waldock. Appointed in 1961, Sir Humphrey focused on preparing draft articles which could serve as a basis for an international convention. (Report of the ILC on the work of its fourteenth session (1962), A/5209) The ILC limited the scope of its draft articles to treaties concluded between States. That is to say, the ILC carved out treaties between States and other subjects of international law (e.g., international organizations). It also decided not to deal with international agreements not in written form.
Over the next five years Sir Humphrey generated six reports. By 1966, the ILC submitted to the UN General Assembly a final draft set of articles, with a mandate to convene a convention, in Vienna, on the subject. The Vienna Convention was duly convened during 1968 and 1969. As noted in the UN’s Audiovisual Library of International Law, the VCLT was the “last great codification conference” that employed a majority-rules voting method. Its “achievement was helped by two circumstances. On the one hand, the customary law covering the more technical side of treaty-making was, except for minor details, practically undisputed. In respect of the potentially more controversial chapter concerning the termination of treaties, on the other hand, many States had achieved a moderate position by balancing, in view of unknown future eventualities, the wish to escape a treaty obligation against the wish to have it kept”.
The VCLT: Its Content, Legacy, and Achievements
Today, the VCLT applies to ‘treaties’, which are defined in Article 2(1)(a) as “international agreement[s] concluded between States in written form and governed by international law, whether embodied in a single instrument or in two or more related instruments and whatever its particular designation”. It is non-retroactive and only applies to treaties concluded after its entry into force (27 January 1980 for original parties). Even if the VCLT does not apply (for example, because the instrument in question is not a ‘treaty’ within the meaning of Article 2, or because it is a treaty concluded prior to the VCLT’s entry into force), many provisions of the VCLT are accepted by States to reflect customary international law.
As finalised, the VCLT addresses a range of topics that are fundamental to the law of treaties. It incorporates rules related to: the conclusion and entry into force of treaties (Part II); the observance, application and interpretation of treaties (Part III); the amendment and modification of treaties (Part IV); and the invalidity, termination and suspension of the operation of treaties (Part V), amongst others.
The VCLT has been influential for courts and tribunals in a range of contexts. This week’s series of posts focuses primarily on how the VCLT has informed investment tribunals in their interpretation and application of investment treaties.
Indeed, the VCLT has informed the deliberations of numerous investment tribunals. Investment tribunals have repeatedly recognised that the VCLT rules on treaty interpretation in Articles 31-33 reflect customary international law. Investment tribunals have also recognised that other provisions of the VCLT reflect customary international law, including the Article 26 principle of pacta sunt servanda, the Article 28 principle of non-retroactivity, and the principles on third party rights/obligations in Articles 34 to 36. Investment tribunals have similarly referred to the VCLT when determining the impact of purported reservations to investment treaties. Tribunals confronted with the interaction between investment treaties and the treaties of the European Community have also drawn on the VCLT (particularly Articles 30 and 59) for guidance.
The importance of the VCLT to investment arbitration has been a recurring topic of coverage on the Blog. Many past posts have considered how investment tribunals have used the VCLT in response to both technical issues and matters relevant to broader debates. As these posts have pointed out, the VCLT has often played a pivotal role in the resolution of a range of issues. This includes, inter alia:
the validity of intra-EU BITs in light of Article 59 of the VCLT and the autonomy of EU law,
the appropriate resolution of disputes involving more than one applicable investment treaty and the implications for arbitration procedure in light of Article 30 of the VCLT,
the continued operation (and future termination) of intra-EU BITs or of ‘first generation’ treaties (including of Poland and the Netherlands) in light of Article 54 of the VCLT,
the amendment of investment treaties in light of Articles 11 and 39 of the VCLT,
the relevance of the VCLT to interpreting joint interpretive statements under BITs, particularly in light of concerns about potential abuse of such statements by treaty parties, and
the importance of Article 31(3)(c) of the VCLT to respond to issues of fragmentation.
A Preview Into Our VCLT Series
Each day this week, a different contributor will spotlight an aspect of the VCLT’s enduring nature, exploring uses of the VCLT in the reasoning and decision-making of tribunals resolving disputes through international arbitration. Reflecting the importance of the VCLT to treaty interpretation, many of the posts in the series focus on uses of the VCLT (and its underlying principles) to the interpretation of investment treaties.
First, in Tuesday’s post, Dr Roberto Castro de Figueiredo will explore the relevance of the VCLT to the ICSID Convention’s notion of “investment” and the so-called Salini test. Dr Castro de Figueiredo’s analysis will elucidate the risks of misinterpretation and misapplication of the VCLT’s principles.
Next, we will have two posts which examine issues of temporal interpretation. On Wednesday, Dr Mary Mitsi will provide a preview of the methodology and research encapsulated in her new book, The Decision-Making Process of Investor-State Arbitration Tribunals. In particular, Dr Mitsi will consider the interpretive tools provided by the VCLT and investment arbitration precedent to explore this emerging and specialised practice. On Thursday, Dr Julian Wyatt will explore how investment tribunals have used the principle of contemporaneity in treaty interpretation. Dr Wyatt’s post emphasises an important cross-cutting issue associated with the VCLT and treaty interpretation, highlighting how the same principles of treaty interpretation might be used by different international courts and tribunals in quite distinct ways.
On Friday, Dr Esmé Shirlow and Professor Michael Waibel will examine how tribunals have approached defining and regulating the use of ‘supplementary means’ of interpretation under Article 32 of the VCLT. The post identifies some key challenges associated with using such materials in the interpretation of investment treaties and offers a framework to better regulate their use.
These posts will be followed by two further posts during the weekend which examine uses of the VCLT in associated contexts. On Saturday, Deyan Draguiev will explore lessons learned through the recent Vattenfall decision on jurisdiction. Mr Draguiev will conclude that this decision, and the Achmea saga more broadly, provide a prime example of the need to apply the interpretive guidance of Article 31 of the VCLT to ensure the consistent reading of a treaty. Last but not least, on Sunday, Marike Paulsson will examine the interaction of the VCLT with the New York Convention. In particular, Ms Paulsson will emphasise the obligation of national court judges to properly interpret and apply treaties, rather than following their own “hunches”, which may risk breaching a State’s treaty obligations.
We hope this series will highlight the consistent invocation of the VCLT in the interpretation and application of investment treaty law. This demonstrates that, despite certain trials, the VCLT has been able to withstand and offer solutions to some of the very many major challenges facing the past, present, and future of this field.
We look forward to you joining us in this celebration!
To see our full series of posts celebrating the 50th jubilee anniversary of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, click here.
Celebrating 50 Years of the VCLT: The Legal Reasoning of Investment Arbitration Awards: A Decision-Making Perspective on Interpretation
Mary Mitsi (Assistant Editor) (University of West London)/ December 4, 2019 November 29, 2019
The EU Plurilateral Draft Termination Agreement for All Intra-EU BITs: An End of the Post-Achmea Saga and the Beginning of a New One
Nikos Lavranos (NL-Investmentconsulting)/ December 1, 2019 November 30, 2019
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line12
|
__label__wiki
| 0.907558
| 0.907558
|
B-Metro > Features > Hear Me Out” John Scalici
Hear Me Out” John Scalici
By Lee Shook
Some people march to the beat of their own drum, but for local percussionist John Scalici it’s more of a world music infused polyrhythm that has set him apart from most of his peers here in town. A longtime fixture in the local music community here that’s seen him pursue everything from cover bands and blues rock to tribal beats and high tech sample-based fusion, Scalici has developed into a one man band and inspirational drum teacher whose life has been dedicated to helping others find their own cadence through live performances and educational workshops.
A Birmingham native and self-taught musician who spent his formative teenage years playing along to records while dreaming of one day being in his own bands and playing on bigger stages, after starting his career in the mid-80s with Black Jacket Symphony founder J. Willoughby and bassist Rob Thorworth in the popular group The Newboys, it wasn’t until the band’s dissolution in 1990 that those lofty ambitions would become a reality after Scalici formed the blues-based power trio Gravy with Thorworth (now on guitar) and bassist Jay Johnson from the Plaid Camels in 1992. Mining material inspired by modern firebrands like Stevie Ray Vaughn, although the band got their start in the Magic City, it wouldn’t be until they moved to Destin, Florida in 1993 that they would find their first taste of success after becoming a mainstay at The Red Bar in Grayton Beach playing as one of the house bands alongside James Brown alum John “Jabo” Starks’ weekly jazz group, slowly building an audience for their hot new take on one of the roots of American music. Eventually moving back to Birmingham, upon arriving home the group would get signed to local startup label Kudzu Records, recording their first and only album, From The Hip, at his parents’ home and starting a touring regimen that would see them open up for everyone from Buddy Guy and the Allman Brothers to Gov’t Mule and Widespread Panic.
Although a promising young outfit, the group would soon run its course, coming to an end in 1997 and leaving Scalici ready to leave home once again to continue his deep dive into the genre he had begun exploring with the band and start life anew, but this time in Memphis. Quickly finding himself at the epicenter of one of the great musical heritage hubs in the country hanging out at the Blues City Cafe and working at the Center for Southern Folklore, it was there that he would start his next great adventure with the junkyardmen after meeting local harmonica player Billy Gibson. Recruiting guitarist Jesse Hoggard and bassist Kevin Sheehan to round out the group, the quartet would find minor success playing their own original music, as well as backing up legendary bluesmen like Hubert Sumlin, James Cotton and Pinetop Perkins, furthering John’s appreciation for the form while also garnering them a steady-growing fanbase. Hooking up with pianist Mose Vincent along the way, they would record their first album, Scrapheap Full of Blues, with the elder statesman, which would go on to be nominated for a Grammy in 1999 for “Best Traditional Blues Album.” Although they didn’t win, the group would become a presence on the regional blues festival circuit and record one more album before also calling it a day, leading Scalici to ultimately return to Birmingham again in 2000 following a divorce from his first wife and death of his then father-in-law.
But the influence of both Memphis and Vincent wouldn’t end there. Having worked with Mose as part of a music education program through the Memphis Arts Council where he would shuttle the pianist to schools around the city teaching children about the history of the art form, it was through those interactions and experiences that he got the idea to start his own company here in Alabama, named Get Rhythm in honor of the iconic Sun Records song by Johnny Cash, where he would develop a robust array of instructional material that utilized drumming and its roots in world culture— particularly in Africa— that could be taken into both classrooms and corporate offices to help foster creativity, communal unity and interpersonal dialogue. Having been encouraged to pursue the career by legendary drum maker Remo Belli, and engaging in his own studies as a djembe player under the tutelage of master musicians like Fomadou Konate’, it would prove to be his life’s calling and serve as a template for award-winning work as a music teacher. Having also performed with local dance troupes and continuing his own musical ambitions through groups like the Scalici-Alley Project, the Magic City has been fortunate to call him its own for most of his adult life, making him an invaluable member of the local music scene and a respected elder of his own, finally bringing his journey full circle.
Posted on Sunday, September 29th, 2019.
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line14
|
__label__wiki
| 0.726002
| 0.726002
|
Love Psychic Reading Primer
Lisa Williams Psychic Medium
March 21, 2017About PsychicsComments: 0
++Accurate Psychic Empaths Are Available Right Now!++
Birmingham, England native, Lisa Michelle Williams is known around the world as a self-proclaimed medium, psychic, clairvoyant and healer. She has had a profound impact on the lives of thousands of people with her mystical abilities to reach out to loved ones who have passed.
In Her Blood
Williams says she began to see spirits when she was very young, not realizing she was interacting with people that had died. She seems to have inherited this supernatural gift from her grandmother, the popular British medium, Frances Glazebrook. Lisa also believes her mother and aunt probably had the gift as well. In the beginning, her beloved grandmother was the only one in her family that seemed to believe what she was seeing was real, and not the overactive imagination of a child. This was especially true of her father, who is still skeptical today.
Sharing Her Gift
Lisa Williams did not open up about her rare abilities to anyone, other than immediate family, until her grandmother passed away in 1996. Once she did begin to share her secret, she was met with acceptance from some and skepticism from others, as is expected by any clairvoyant. The believers began to talk, and it wasn’t long before she had a large enough following to become a full-time psychic medium.
Lisa began traveling all over England and eventually ended up traveling to the United States, mostly for personal reasons, but also to showcase her unique talents. Williams felt the U.S. was more openminded to the work of psychic mediums. This is when she was introduced to the great Merv Griffin, who changed her life forever. Mr. Griffin was impressed with her ability to speak to those on the other side, deciding to help her market herself publicly.
Professional Television Career
With the help of Merv Griffin, Williams was able to host her own show Lisa Williams: Life Among the Dead. Her first series was aired on the Lifetime Network for two seasons from 2006 – 2007. Lisa Williams: Voices From the Other Side, her second television program, premiered in 2008. She also appeared on one episode of the popular game show Deal or No Deal in 2008. Lifetime Network later brought Williams back for a guest appearance on the series America’s Psychic Challenge. She has also been interviewed by Oprah, Larry King, Jimmy Kimmel and Good Morning America hosts. Her reality TV shows were popular among viewers and now air internationally.
Lisa Williams – The Author
Williams has penned a few intriguing reads you will want to check out. Life Among the Dead is a memoir that explains what life has been like existing among spirit beings. The book gives you an intimate look into her life as a medium, wife, mom and television personality.
The Survival of the Soul gives an intriguing insight of what life is like on the other side. Williams uses various ways including, psychic readings, meditation and her own personal brush with death, to channel into the journey of one’s soul through the different stages of afterlife. She discusses her belief in reincarnation, that death is only a transition into a world beyond, one that we should not fear.
I Speak to Dead People, Can You, is William’s latest best-selling book that is designed to help those that can communicate with spirits develop their skills. She teaches those interested to be more sensitive and recognize the signs that you are surrounded by loved ones that have passed.
Where is Lisa Williams Today,
Williams resides in Southern California with her son Charlie and two beloved dogs, with no plans of returning to UK (to live) anytime soon. In 2012, she became an ordained minister of the Universal One Church. She continues to do private readings to help people connect with their loved ones. Williams also has an international tour where she teaches spiritual development courses. She has even started her own spiritual development school, the Lisa Williams International School of Spiritual Development.
Information regarding Lisa Williams, her events, readings, books and courses can be found on her personal website http://www.lisawilliams.com/. The popular psychic hosts her own radio show every Wednesday afternoon on http://www.blogtalkradio.com/lisawilliams. You can also connect with Lisa on her personal Facebook page https://www.facebook.com/lisawilliamsmedium/.
I’m a young psychic empath, opening up my first Website! Helping others is my passion, because i know how dark the path can become. My forte is reading the cards & i would love to do it for you! I’m currently allowing one free question for every new customer. Just visit my contact page.
IMPORTANT: It can take quite a while for me to answer (Depending on my workload). If you need an answer now, click here for one of my colleagues.
Beratla
About Psychics
Divination Methods
Healing yourself
Love Psychic Advice
Psychic Reading Help
Sacred Sensuality
Ask a Free Psychic Question | askyourguide © 2020
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line18
|
__label__wiki
| 0.767693
| 0.767693
|
ATLRetro
Your Guide to 20th Century Atlanta in the 21st Century
About ATLRetro
Retro Archives
Classic Couture & Flashback Fashion
Kool Kat of the Week
Metal Memories
Really Retro
Retro Home
This Week in ATLRetro
Tis the Season To Be…
Vintage Vacation
Wednesday Happy Hour & Supper Club
Kool Kat of the Week: Author and Filmmaker Frank Perry’s Official Biographer Justin Bozung Dishes on Atlanta’s Frank Perry Retrospective Presented by Videodrome
Posted on: Mar 28th, 2017 By: Anya99
by Melanie Crew
Justin Bozung, Atlanta author and transplant from the far reaches of the north is working closely with Videodrome staff as they present their Frank Perry Retrospective via their JavaDrome film portal, which kicked off in January 2017. The most recent in the series, THE SWIMMER (1968) screens Friday, March 31, at 8:30pm, and will include an introduction and Q&A with Bozung, as Frank Perry’s official biographer. Prior films in the series included MOMMIE DEAREST (1981); PLAY IT AS IT LAYS (1972) [never released on home video]. The series’ finale will be Perry’s LAST SUMMER (1969) screening in late April 2017 [yet to be released beyond its ‘80s VHS release].
Bozung has an expansive resume delving deep into the retro fantastic! He’s assisted in book projects documenting and analyzing Stanley Kubrick, has conducted over 400 interviews for several book projects, documentaries and magazines including Fangoria, Paracinema, Phantom of the Movies’ Videoscope and more. ATLRetro caught up with Justin Bozung for a quick interview about his work as the official biographer for Frank Perry, his extensive knowledge of Stanley Kubrick’s THE SHINING and Norman Mailer, and the importance of preserving film history.
ATLRetro: While we are a bit biased here at ATLRetro about this wacky little city of ours, what is it about Atlanta that drew you to our neck of the woods?
Justin Bozung: My wife! She received a job opportunity that was too good to pass up. So we sold our house and packed up in Ann Arbor, Michigan in late 2014 and drove toward Atlanta. As a freelancer, I’m pretty open-ended and am able to work from anywhere so it made sense for us to leave the cold and snow behind. And I’ve always been fond of Georgia; having spent some time here over the years during various travels and vacations in the south. I’m a big soul, funk, and jazz music fan. So being able to come and live where Curtis Mayfield had his own record label, but also, be within driving proximity of where James Brown was born and lived many years of his professional life and owned his own radio station is great. Central Georgia also owns The Allman Brothers and Otis Redding—so living in the South is really a soul music lover’s dream come true! Memphis, the home of the great Stax Records, isn’t too far away either. And I’m completely fine–I’m not ashamed–in saying that as a Michigan-born guy, I’ll take Memphis and Stax Records any day of the week over anything produced at Detroit’s Motown. There’s something about the water down here that gives the music a special quality, something that Motown doesn’t have that Stax does... And let’s not even get started on the subject of Athens, Georgia and R.E.M.–
As Frank Perry’s official biographer, can you tell our readers a little about why you think he is one of the many undervalued and underappreciated filmmakers and why you wanted to spread the Frank Perry love via Videodrome’s JavaDrome film events?
Well, there’s a pretty easy answer to that. The internet is interested in Frank Perry. Fortunately, today, with the rise of social media and bloggers pulling active duty–interest in Perry and his films has really grown in recent years. He made some really wonderful films, and it’s important to note that Perry was the first independent filmmaker to be nominated for an Academy Award. He was nominated in 1963 for his independently-financed and produced DAVID AND LISA (1962), which shot for approximately $200,000 in Pennsylvania. Perry was nominated for Best Director but he lost out to David Lean, who won for LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1962)! Perry’s little film went up against LAWRENCE! Jean Renoir, said “I feel that this film represents a turning point in the history of film.”
Prior to Perry, where there had certainly been others producing independent films on the East Coast– John Cassavetes‘s SHADOWS (1959) being the touchstone–others like Russ Meyer and his THE IMMORAL MR. TEAS (1959), and H.G. Lewis in Chicago with his “nudie cuties” were also bringing independent film to attention. Perry was the first to make a “respectable” independent film and to be noticed by the mainstream. In his way, he changed things. Even with someone like Cassavetes, who by 1959 was a well-known and very established Hollywood film actor–his film SHADOWS still didn’t afford the average guy the idea that maybe he himself could just go out and raise the money and make his own film as a profiteer. Perry had no experience as a filmmaker, really. On the first day of shooting DAVID & LISA, he couldn’t figure out how to turn the camera on. And in pre-production he read several books about film directing. His film school was the library. It really makes one remember what was going on in independent film in the late 80s or early 1990s with directors starting out like Robert Rodriguez. While Perry had come from the Actors Studio and done some Second Unit work for hire prior, he had not really directed anything on that scale before. His gift was in working with actors. I consider him a conscious, classical director. He worked very much like George Cukor who loved working with actresses and literary adaptations. Frank set the wheels on fire and got indie film some important notice in Hollywood. DAVID & LISA made the studio system, although on the verge of completely crumbling, sit up and take notice that things were shifting culturally.
On March 31, JavaDrome will screen Perry’s The Swimmer (1968). Were there any particular reasons you chose the films that are slated for screening?
Well, the guys at Videodrome split the selections down the middle for this retrospective on Perry’s films. I hand-picked two and Matt Owensby picked the others. THE SWIMMER was a film that Matt really wanted to show as part of this retrospective. It should be stated that this retrospective on Perry’s films here in Atlanta marks the first multi-film retrospective of his work in the USA since the mid 1980s. In fact, I can’t help but suggest that the recent Los Angeles retrospective of his work last month, put on by Quentin Tarantino at his New Beverly, was directly inspired by our own little retrospective here in Atlanta–knowing how Tarantino seemingly likes to monitor video stores all around the United States and see what they’re up to.
Videodrome is our little purveyor of the forbidden fruits of the video and film world and are avid supporters of film preservation, which of course is why they hold a sweet spot in our hearts. As a historian, can you tell our readers a little bit about why you think film preservation is important and how important businesses like Videodrome are to the preservation of film?
I’m just starting to get acquainted with a few of the guys that work at Videodrome. The fun part about going into the store is that they really have a massive selection of titles, but more importantly, Matt and John and the rest of the crew really embrace you. And they’re not elitist or snobs either. They care about and endorse the films of Truffaut just as much as they love and admire the films of Greydon Clark. The latter–preservation, is important as well, certainly. I’ve been struggling with that myself working with Frank Perry’s Estate. Frank made two films that are impossible to see. The first, I recently discovered the master materials for in an archive in California. We’re talking with some film preservation folks now about financing the restoration of one of these, his JFK: ONE MAN SHOW (1984)–which was made and shown on PBS twice before vanishing off the face of the earth, it seemed until I located it. And then there’s his 1968 documentary that Perry fans aren’t even aware of that he made about political unrest in the Middle East, because it’s mysteriously not listed on his IMDb page. The Estate has access to the last print that is known to exist. Just to use these two instances as an example, if there weren’t people “out there” tracking down films or storing prints or whatever–archiving cinema–we may all lose out in the future. So it’s the key to film studies, really.
You also collaborated with Colorado’s Centipede Press in putting together a large volume entitled Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining: Studies in the Horror Film. Can you tell our readers what role you played in the process? Did you learn anything enticing with this publication that isn’t common knowledge about Kubrick or The Shining?
The book came out in the early spring of 2015 and sadly, it’s already out of print, I believe. It was a massive 750-page book on the making of the film. I was involved with the book, as a project, very early on, researching and getting clearances for many of the previously-published essays and interviews that are included. I also dug up some visual ephemera, and conducted about 45 hours of interviews with most of the cast and the crew from the film itself—which are all included in the book. I interviewed or was in touch with the entire crew and most of the living actors that starred in the film. The book was edited by Danel Olson, but, 350-400 or so of those 750 pages are my contributions to the volume. The book is filled to the brim with new information about Kubrick–things that people didn’t know about him and the film itself including line items about his attention to detail, his admiration for baseball, his love of driving cars fast and more. There’s information in the book about what went on behind-the-scenes of the film that has never come to light prior and addresses his notorious reputation, but also looks at his craftsmanship. It’s page-after-page with new information on Kubrick. I tried to debunk many rumors that have been swirling around in the zeitgeist for many years about Kubrick and I used the interviews in an attempt to give readers a doorway onto the set in England for 13-months back in 1978/79. When it came out, ROOM 237 was really on everyone’s lips–so there’s a lot of talk in the book about that documentary as well. It’s a great book, though. I’d suggest that it’s an essential addition to any film lover’s library. Michael Dirda of The Washington Post called the book “a major advancement in film studies,” or something like that.
We see that you’re also involved with author Norman Mailer’s estate and that you work on several projects dedicated to him. What can you tell us about those projects?
I become involved with Norman Mailer in early 2014 and made a 12-hour audio documentary about his much-maligned 1987 film, TOUGH GUYS DON’T DANCE, my favorite film. I interviewed most of the crew members and some of the actors and visited some of the shooting locations in Provincetown, MA. My interest in the film came out of my friendship with TOUGH GUYS actor, Wings Hauser. He first introduced me to the film in 2011, when I was about to interview him for a magazine. The documentary was released online, and the Norman Mailer Society invited me to talk about the film in the fall of 2014 at Wilkes University. Shortly after that, they asked me to become involved in several projects that they were working on. One was Project Mailer, and another was archival search-related. I created a Mailer podcast for them, which runs bi-monthly on ProjectMailer.net. Basically, I just present audio from the Mailer Archives ala podcast format ala the old Grateful Dead Hour with David Gans. In early 2015, I started putting together a dense, academic study on Mailer’s films.
He made 6 films from 1947-1987. I love his films, even though, most of the Criterion Collection audience doesn’t. Criterion released Mailer’s 1960s films through their Eclipse series in 2013. They scratch their heads as to why CC would put out such “awful” films. They’re very important works of art that not only comment and inform on Mailer’s influential texts of the 1960s, but also, in their way, influenced his writing in the process of crafting them. They also have historical context in relationship to the direct cinema movement of the mid 60s with films by D.A. Pennebaker and the Maysles Brothers. There, likely, may never have been an ARMIES OF THE NIGHT without WILD 90 (1968), for example. Mailer wrote himself into that book as a character–in the third person–directly out of the influence that the editing of his first film, WILD 90, had upon him while he was writing that Pulitzer Prize-winning “novel as history, history as novel”–to use Mailer’s description. He said, and I’m paraphrasing, “I was looking at myself as a character,” during the editing of his own movie.
His film MAIDSTONE (1971) is a obvious pre-cursor to reality television. I certainly do not lay the blame on reality television on Mailer, but he was creating that type of aesthetic tension and propaganda–and recording it–on film, some thirty years before reality television came along. Cinema was in Norman Mailer’s blood. He had a keen interest in cinema, and a fine grasp of cinema aesthetics very early on in his life–before he became the writer enfant terrible of the 1960s that many remember him as today. He was a frequent guest at Amos Vogel‘s legendary Cinema 16 in New York City. He saw the films of Brakhage, Kenneth Anger, Warhol, Mekas there. He helped to fund the films of Robert Downey Sr. and Ron Rice. Mailer’s writing is profoundly cinematic, and the cinema is one of his strongest and most-used metaphors in his writing and it’s throughout his texts. His ideas on film are really in sync with filmmakers that would be his peers of the era. My book, The Cinema of Norman Mailer: Film is Like Death comes out this September via Bloomsbury. It’s available for pre-order on Amazon now. And this September I’m starting work and collaborating with the Mailer Estate on another book on Mailer, but this time around, it’s about the writer, not Mailer: The filmmaker.
As a film buff and historian, what was your gateway drug into the land of cult film, or film in general?
I’ve always been interested in film, for as long as I can remember. I grew up as a classic, indoor-type of kid. I grew up in the VHS and pay cable era of the 1980s. My parents gifted me with HBO, Cinemax, and Showtime. I recorded everything off and watched it over-and-over. Film has always been very important to me as an art form. I love all film. I don’t pay attention to genres or labels. Film is film. There aren’t any “good” or “bad” films, just films. I love Larry Buchanan, Michael Bay just as much as I do Delbert Mann, King Vidor and Jerry Lewis.
You’ve also published several articles and interviews in magazines such as “Fangoria,” “Paracinema,” “Shock Cinema” and “Phantom of the Movies’ Videoscope.” If you had to choose a favorite interview and/or article that you contributed, which would it be and why?
I’ve done a lot of interviews over the years. I think around 400 or so. I may be the only person you’ll meet who has done over 75 interviews with various crew and cast members from several Stanley Kubrick movies, hundreds of hours logged, and all on tape. I imagine myself as being in the Guinness Book of Work Records under “Most Interviews Done Associated with Stanley Kubrick.” My favorite though….I have two. The first was with actor Wings Hauser, because we became great friends out of the experience. The other is with comedy legend and screenwriter Bill Richmond. Richmond wrote almost all of the Jerry Lewis solo movies like THE PATSY (1964) and THE NUTTY PROFESSOR (1963). He wrote for TV shows like The Carol Burnett Show, Bewitched, All in the Family, Welcome Back, Kotter, Blossom etc… He was a mad genius of comedy. It was just one of those great one-in-a-lifetime experiences, where, consequently, we stayed friendly with each other after it was over. Bill sent me the best birthday present the year after even…and when he passed away last year—that was really sad for me.
Can you tell our readers a little about your Frank Perry biography and any other current projects your working on, and where our readers get their hands on your published works?
The biography on Frank will be published mid-2018 and is a full-scale biography blended with some analysis. I’m finishing it up now. I’ve been working on it since early 2015, but there was a full year where I didn’t work on it at all, due to some legal tangle with his Estate and an outside party. It is the first book, first study on Perry. I’ve been working closely with Perry’s family and estate on the project and I worked closely with his wife, Barbara, before her recent passing. But also, Tom Folino, Perry’s long-time friend, assistant-turned producer. I’m in touch with his surviving family members and as with all of my projects, I’ve got about 200-hours of interviews in the can with various crew members and actors, family friends in support of the work itself. The book looks at Perry’s life and his films, but also looks closely at the projects that slipped through the cracks–like his near adaptation of Terry Southern‘s naughty-satire novel Candy which looked like it was going to be made as early as 1964 into a film. This, of course, lead to Perry making of THE SWIMMER, but I’ll talk about how that all happened this Friday at the screening with Videodrome. Your readers can find all of my work on Amazon here. This year I also expect to finish up an academic volume on Michael Bay, called Michael Bay: High Art / Low Culture.
Do you have any advice for those writers just starting out?
Quit wasting time on Facebook. Write every day. Research and research. When you think you’ve found everything. Stop. Then wait 2 weeks and research some more. You’ll always find something extra. If you say you’re going to write tomorrow, then you better do that. Don’t put it off, because it damages your unconscious, and that’s where all the words come from–from inside of you. Don’t piss off your unconscious. Don’t write anything for free. Your time is valuable. Writers should say something new; they need to formulate new and profound ideas. So do that. And last but not least, opinions are so very rarely ideas.
Can you give us five things you’re into at the moment that we should be reading, watching or listening to right now—past or present, well-known or obscure?
Well, I’m more of a reader than I am anything else these days. I read one magazine currently–Philosophy Now. It’s my favorite. Some things I’ve enjoyed tremendously this year so far would be Ernest Hemingway: A Life Story by Carlos Baker. It was published in 1968 and it’s probably the greatest biography ever written; Free Fall by William Golding –a classic, but undervalued work of existential literature; Jurgen by James Branch Cabell — one of Margaret Mitchell‘s favorite novels published in 1919; Margaret Mitchell: Reporter reprints Mitchell’s pre-Gone with The Wind Atlanta journalism; Claire Vaye Watkins‘s Battleborn–a fresh, newer voice in short fiction with family ties to The Manson Family; Altamont, Joel Selvin‘s incredible recounting of the dark, metaphysical Rolling Stones 1969 Atlamont music festival; and Manly Health and Training by Walt Whitman. As far as music goes I’m really a jazz and soul guy, so anything by John Coltrane. My favorite Coltrane record is GIANT STEPS although I’m very attracted to his metaphysical explorations like ASCENSION. Anything Sun Ra. Sonny’s album NUCLEAR WAR is relevant with today’s political climate. His writings are wonderful as well. James Brown‘s REVOLUTIONS OF THE MIND, the new Otis Redding: The Complete Whiskey A Go Go Shows Box Set is always on my stereo or phone! Films I’m currently into are Michael Bay’s Director’s Cut of PEARL HARBOR (1999) shows Bay in his Abel Gance-meets-John Ford glory. Vincente Minnelli’s TEA AND SYMPATHY (1955), Paul Morrissey‘s 1980s trifecta: FORTY DEUCE (1982), MADAME WANG’S (1981), and MIXED BLOOD (1984) are important works. Morrissey is the last great absurdist of the 20th century. Paul and I have talked some over the last couple years about doing a book together, and I would love to do a book on Morrissey, but he’s too cantankerous. Melvin Van Peebles’ THE STORY OF A THREE-DAY PASS (1968), James Bridges’ MIKE’S MURDER (1984) are masterpieces, and PICASSO: MAGIC, SEX & DEATH, a 4-hour 2001 documentary is a must-see!
And last, but not least, care to share anything that our little world of Atlantans don’t know about you already?
I don’t want to share anything else about myself, but I would like to suggest this little hiding spot out in Smyrna, Georgia that I visited recently. A restaurant called Vittles. It’s a hole-in-the-wall restaurant that still allows patrons to smoke inside while you sit there eating. Not that I’m standing up for smoker’s rights here, but it’s cancerously-nostalgic. It’s like stepping into a small-town diner in the early 1980s. You can get 4 massive buttermilk pancakes covered in butter, two huge deep-fried pork chops in corn flake crust, and two eggs scrambled all for $6.99. Their claim to fame is their gift shop, which is basically a garage sale that is going on every day concurrently while food is being served. You can buy cement statues of dogs and “Man with No Name” poncho sweaters. It’s a pretty awesome place that I highly suggest visiting for the delicious food and the bargains. You can fill up and then spend a few hours huffing it over on the Silver Comet Trail which runs from Smyrna to well into Alabama. Forget about Krog Market or Ponce, Vittles is where you need to go!
Photos courtesy of Justin Bozung and used with permission.
Category: Kool Kat of the Week | Tags: amos vogel, Andy Warhol, bill richmond, brakhage, Criterion Collection, curtis mayfield, danel olson, David Lean, Frank Perry, george cukor, greydon clark, h.g. lewis, James Brown, javadrome, Jean Renoir, john cassavetes, Justin Bozung, Kenneth Anger, mekas, Mommie Dearest, New Beverly, norman mailer, norman mailer society, Otis Redding, paul morrissey, project mailer, quentin tarantino, robert downy sr., Robert Rodriguez, ron rice, room 237, Russ Meyer, Stanley Kubrick, stax records, the allman brothers, The Shining, The Swimmer, truffaut, Videodrome
Retro Review: BARBARELLA, Take Two, or Today, I Watched Jane Fonda Narrowly Escape Death-by-Orgasm in the Excessive Machine; How Was Your Day?
Posted on: Jan 25th, 2013 By: Anya99
BARBARELLA (1968); Dir: Roger Vadim; Screenplay by Terry Southern; Based on a bande dessinee by Jean-Claude Forest; Starring Jane Fonda, John Phillip Law, Anita Pallenberg, David Hemmings, Milo O’Shea, Marcel Marceau; Plaza Theatre, Saturday, January 26 at 10:00pm; presented by BLAST-OFF BURLESQUE’S TABOO-LA-LA with live stage show before the screening including raffle of 10 8×10 signed photos of Fonda as Barbarella from Jane Fonda’s personal collection; Trailer here.
By Andrew Kemp
Today, I watched Jane Fonda narrowly escape death-by-orgasm in the Excessive Machine. How was your day?
Although I’d never seen BARBARELLA (1968), the infamous sci-fi sex romp produced by Dino de Laurentiis and directed by Roger Vadim, before today, I definitely knew about it. Almost everyone knows about it. BARBARELLA is a movie with more reputation than respect, a movie that, depending on who you ask, is either awful or awfully amazing. Just its name invokes a few key images—that amazing poster by Robert McGinnis; Jane Fonda’s buxom, uh, hair. I grew up in a post-STAR WARS world, when just the sight of a science-fiction ray blaster promised a particular brand of space fantasy and action, but combine aliens and thrills with the promise of a naked, beautiful woman? There’s not enough concrete on Earth to build a wall an adolescent boy can’t climb.
But I never made it over that wall. Yes, it’s true that young boys can sniff out nudie films like pigs root up truffles, but you guys have never met my mother. I once got a few short minutes of FLASH GORDON (1980) and its adventurous female costumes on the TV before she stomped into the room, feeling a psychic disturbance, I suppose, in her son’s mind. She played goalie effectively until around the time I entered high school, and by then I had found other ways to see boobs. And so, somehow, Barbarella and I had never met.
Durand Durand (Milo O'Shea_ tries to defeat Barbarella (Fonda) with death by orgasm. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
BARBARELLA was a famous flop at the box office, but its racy content, goofy cheerfulness about sex and outrageous set design—the spaceship is lined with shag carpet!—fit snugly with the mood of the late 1960s, at least with certain segments of the youth. The film quickly gained a cult infamy, especially as its star, Jane Fonda, transitioned into A-pictures and won an Oscar for the popular detective film, KLUTE (1971). There’s always been kind of a funny dividing line between mainstream film and exploitation, and it’s thrilling when some star gets a weekend pass to play on the other side, whether it’s Bruce Campbell showing up in SPIDER-MAN (2002) or Jane Fonda taking her clothes off. It was impossibly tantalizing to know that a major actress had once bared it all in a sex adventure, especially before home video, when the only way to see something like BARBARELLA was to catch a revival screening, and there weren’t nearly enough of those. Lack of availability helped grow the film’s legend, and it soon became trendy and cool to latch onto its camp appeal. Even by the early 1970s, a club named Barbarella’s existed in the UK, and it became a key location in the developing punk scene, hosting bands like The Sex Pistols and The Clash. One rising band that played frequently at the club even sampled clips and songs from the film into their music, tweaking the name of the film’s villain, Durand-Durand, into their own name, Duran Duran.
But it was the 1960s; everyone was taking their clothes off, right? There were plenty of sex movies in the world. What is it about BARBARELLA that keeps it going? “I just remember seeing that strip tease during the opening and being in love with the world,” says Max Shell, director of the undead-chicken cult movie THE DEVIL’S COCK. “Dino’s [de Laurentiis] Euro Sci-Fi is about ‘getting it on!’”
Melanie Magnifique of Blast-Off Burlesque takes a more esoteric approach. “I was traversing the spirit lands, when this film was released in conventional space-time. When I first experienced it, many years later, it was still the powerful tale of a girl doing what a girl’s sometimes got to do!”
The famous poster by Robert McGinnis.
Aha! If there’s another narrative to the BARBARELLA appeal beyond sex, it’s girl power. The film came at this neat little intersection of the free love ‘60s and the peak of the misogynist spy fantasies like James Bond. There had simply never been a female action hero who freely used and enjoyed sex while saving the day. (Hell, it’s still hard to find a character like that today!) Perhaps this explains why Barbarella became a feminist icon, and a popular cosplay target for over 40 years. It’s common to see Barbarellas walking the floors at comic book shows and sci-fi conventions, and the heroine’s legend is so large today that the film lives under constant threat of remake, with the most recent major attempt fronted by director Robert Rodriguez as a vehicle for Rose McGowan, who he’d already cast once as an ass-kicker in his GRINDHOUSE entry, PLANET TERROR (2007).
Does BARBARELLA deserve its infamy? I finally sat down to watch the film today, and I was kind of amazed with what I found. Despite its legacy in the sexual revolution, BARBARELLA can sometimes be cruel, and other times naïve. After the famous opening strip scene (described in wonderful detail here on this very site), we learn that Fonda’s secret agent is a wide-eyed wonder. A child of a civilization that has evolved beyond violence and pain, she greets the world with simple joy and, when confronted with the bizarre horrors in an “unevolved” part of the galaxy, she simply pushes through and perseveres, using far more optimism than skill. Melanie Magnifique rightly describes Barbarella as “a female protagonist who wants to do the right thing, but is sometimes a little confused about what that thing is.” Fonda’s earnest devotion to her mission is entertaining, even if that mission sometimes devolves into bizarre, disconnected segments. She’s nearly devoured by carnivorous songbirds, for crying out loud.
As for the sex, my adolescent self would have enjoyed Fonda’s matter-of-fact approach to her body and to the sexual beings she encounters. She’s more or less willing to have sex just for the asking, which works both for and against her feminist reputation. On the one hand, the film is full of scenes of sexual aggression or sexual bartering. Sex is a currency that gets Barbarella from place to place, and there’s an unsettling trend towards sexual torture. It’s easy to read the film as misogynist, using Barbarella as a doll to act out aggressive male fantasies. But, on the other hand, there’s something charming and empowering about how Barbarella, after having been introduced to real sex (in the future, evolved beings do it with a pill) by an impossibly masculine hunter, Barbarella blossoms as a sexual being, pursuing sex with the chiseled angel Pygar and showing frustration when a bumbling freedom fighter (the awesome David Hemmings in the film’s best supporting role) wants to do it with the pill.
Although the film sought mainstream success, BARBARELLA is a movie destined for cult status. Like every good cult flick, there are moments that you simply can’t believe you’re seeing, scenes that should be impossible in a well-budgeted studio film, and yet here they are. This is a film for an audience, if simply so you can turn to the person next to you to share a laugh and one of those “holy shit” looks. This movie should be *ahem* a shared experience, not a solo trip. Even with all the sex, there’s something incredibly innocent about the film, and it serves as a window into a more optimistic, good-natured time. It’s fitting, then, that it’s being hosted at the Plaza this weekend by Blast-Off Burlesque. Burlesque itself is an art form that walks that beautiful line between sweetness and spice, and BARBARELLA is their kind of movie. When asked about the links between burlesque and BARBARELLA, Melanie Magnifique agreed: “It contains many simple theatrical tricks which are used to achieve special effects (we do that a lot).”
“Oh, also, we love to smoke Essence of Man.”
The show starts at 10 pm on Saturday with music, a dance party and complementary signature cocktails, but says Magnifique, “Come early to get your groove on!”
And be sure to read our other Retro Review: Jane Fonda Has No Clothes On: Stripping Down Our Love Affair with Psychedelic ’60s SF Camp Cult Classic BARBARELLA in Time for a Blast-Off Burlesque Taboo-La-La at the Plaza Theatre by Robert Emmett Murphy Jr.
Category: Retro Review | Tags: Andrew Kemp, Anita Pallenberg, Barbarella, Blast-Off Burlesque, cult movies, David Hemmings, death by orgasm, Devil's Cock, Dino di Laurentiis, duran duran, essence of man, excessive machine, Flash Gordon, grindhouse, James Bond, Jane Fonda, John Phillip Law, Klute, Marcel Marceau, Max Shell, Melanie Magnifique, Milo O'Shea, Planet Terror, Plaza Theatre, Pygar, Robert McGinnis, Robert Rodriguez, Roger Vadim, Rose McGowan, sex pistols, Star Wars, Taboo-La-La, The Clash
Retro Review: Jane Fonda Has No Clothes On: Stripping Down Our Love Affair with Psychedelic ’60s SF Camp Cult Classic BARBARELLA in Time for a Blast-Off Burlesque Taboo-La-La at the Plaza Theatre
Posted on: Jan 21st, 2013 By: Anya99
By Robert Emmett Murphy Jr.
Special to ATLRetro.com
BARBARELLA is a special kind of cinematic disaster. A lavish space-opera comedy released in 1968, the most important year in SF cinema since 1951, it had a $9 million budget, making it only modestly less expensive than the same year’s 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY ($10.5 M) and more expensive than that year’s PLANET OF THE APES ($5.8 M). Meant to celebrate the era’s new found sexual freedom and the changing role of women in society, BARBARELLA is one of those films in which the first five minutes tell you everything you are going to get, as well as promising you all the things it should’ve given us and simply failed to deliver.
The opening image is a lovely array of stars, and hanging within it an improbable and more than slightly feminine-looking space ship. We move in closer until we can see through a portal into the fur-lined cockpit…
Full stop. Christ, I can’t believe I just wrote that: “fur-lined cockpit.” You know that whoever came up with that idea was thinking ahead to an exhausted film reviewer of a more innocent age, sometime after midnight hammering out copy and tearing his hair out screaming, “HOW CAN I GET THIS PAST THE EDITORS!”
Jane Fonda as BARBARELLA. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
OK, so we can see through a portal into the fur-lined cockpit where a space-suited figure floats in a really excellent simulation of zero-gravity (also a simple illusion, the astronaut is filmed from above while lying on a plexiglass platform). The identify is hidden behind a featureless metal helmet. But the material transforms from metal to clear plexiglass (another fine piece of simple FX, the reflective metal is actually a liquid in a space within the helmet’s bowel-like structure. It’s merely drained through the bottom.) revealing the “spaceman” is actually a not-quite-yet-30 Jane Fonda, never looking more beautiful. Her expression not only evokes a potent come-hither sexual promise, but more importantly, pure delight.
The music comes up. The song is deliberately silly (unafraid to rhyme “Barbarella” and “psychedella”) but quite catchy, celebrating the film’s title character’s sex appeal in a way that is far more joyful than crass. Though the film is based on a French comic book, it’s geared to an American audience, so before we hear her name (already legendary across the ocean), the singer compares her to our more familiar Wonder Woman.
Fonda/Barbarella strips off her space suit. It’s a sectional outfit revealing her progressively, teasingly. She is completely naked beneath. The animated titles escape the seams of the garment like venting gasses, swirling around her, protecting her immodestly. Except when they don’t. They keep trying to obscure, but she is happy to reveal. And the wantonness is now more than just promise; she expresses ongoing sexual pleasure (perhaps the caress of the letters?). Finally, wholly naked, she presses a button, tumbles down the luxurious furs, and she clearly is sated.
It’s one of the greatest stripteases in film history.
The next four minutes aren’t half bad either. The dialogue is witty and provides a lot of narrative context without excessive exposition. Barbarella immediately gets a call on her video screen from Claude Dauphin as the President of Earth. Their greet each other by saying “Love,” in what is clearly a political party’s salute.
Barbarella: “Just a minute. I’ll slip something on.”
President: “Don’t trouble yourself, this is an affair of state.”
In short order we learn that Barbarella is a secret agent in a future so perfectly utopian and groovy that she is rendered childlike in her naivete. She is assigned the mission to find an evil scientist named Durand Durand (yeah, that’s where the ’80s band got their name from) and stop him from supplying weapons to primitive peoples and threatening to disrupt the proper social order.
Barbarella (Jane Fonda) strikes a dangerous pose. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
Barbarella: “Weapon? Why would anyone want to invent a weapon?…I mean the universe was pacified centuries ago.”
President: “What we know of it…We know nothing of Tau Ceti.”
Barbarella: “You mean they can still be living in a primitive state of neurotic irresponsibility?”
Sweet Barbarella seems only vaguely familiar with the concept of secrets (yeah, I know, she’s supposed to be a “secret agent,” but whatever) and can’t even say the word “war,” but instead babbles absurd multisyllabic euphemisms like “archaic insecurity” and “selfish competition.”
We’re now nine minutes into the film. After this point, there’s not a single Goddamn scene in the film that follows that compares, either in its sexiness, warmth of performances, generosity of humor, playful satire or technical achievement.
So why watch the remaining one and half hours?
I can think of three reasons:
1) The wonderfully creative and over-the-top costumes. Especially Fonda’s, who goes through a wide variety because since she’s constantly undressing, she is therefore constantly redressing.
2) The sets and props, which are even more impressively inventive than the costumes. I especially liked the aforementioned fur lined cock pit, the ice craft, the bird-shaped bird-cage that is the size of a small bus- well, the list goes on. Though the film showed little interest in evoking the title-character as she was presented in Jean-Claude Forest‘s comic strip, they did hire Forest as a consultant on the visuals. As wrote Graeme Clark: “[T]he film-makers’ maxim seems to have been, if it looks cool, if it looks weird, then put it onscreen.” And Gary Morris wrote, “[G]audy, colorful sets, looks like it was shot in the bowels of the Playboy mansion — especially our heroine’s spaceship, with its fur-lined walls that reek of ’60s softcore chic.”
3.) Maybe, deep down in your heart, you hate Jane Fonda, and want to just sit back, watch her flounder, and feel superior.
David Hemmings and Jane Fonda in BARBARELLA. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
Yes, Fonda has never been more beautiful, but there’s no doubt this is her career worst performance. Despite being charming in the first scene, her performance quickly degrades, as she becomes increasing wide-eyed, vacuous and cold. I have to wonder why she gets worse the farther she gets into the film. I do know it was made in France at the most important transition point in her acting and political career (her follow-up film, the same year, THEY SHOOT HORSES, DON’T THEY? earned her first Oscar nomination, and by the time BARBARELLA was released, she’d embraced feminism and thrown her support behind the Native American occupation of Alcatraz Island). What I think happened is that in between takes she started listening to the babble of French intellectuals who analyzed the film’s actual content (and I should say, this is a film that shouldn’t be analyzed for content), and they revealed to her some uncomfortable things:
First, the bad guys are led by an arrogant intellectual who insidiously infiltrates and corrupts a primitive culture with the goal of undermining the larger community of peace-loving, wealthy, advanced societies. Meanwhile the good guys, also foreigners, are forced to intervene and also engage in infiltrating and saving the backward indigenous peoples through a nobler, but still newly introduced, ideology, military training and supplying advanced weapons. The good guys turn the indigenous people into a “third force” that will create a society more cooperative to the ideals of more civilized foreign powers. The overarching message is that if you want to preserve universal peace, start a proxy war. It’s almost Robert Heinlein-esque in the way the heroes are “forced” into engaging in foreign interventions. In other words, the movie is pro- the kind of Third Phase Imperialism that led both the USA and the USSR into the Vietnam conflict.
Ugo Tognazzi plays Mark Hand, the heroic Catchman, the guy who introduces Barbarella to the wonders of really good primitive sex. But he also spends most of his day using corporal punishment to discipline nasty, unsupervised, disrespectful children. He then rounds them up so they can be properly indoctrinated into their responsibilities to society. In other words, BARBARELLA the movie hates the youth culture.
And it didn’t like homosexuals much either.
Women are completely objectified, and the heroine is an utter bimbo (which the comic-book heroine was not). Though she does heroic things, she doesn’t have an idea in her head or a goal worth pursuing that wasn’t planted there by an older, dominant male. Also, after arriving on the planet, almost all the “sexy” scenes concern her being captured and tortured. In other words, the movie is amazingly misogynistic right at the dawn of American feminism.
Also, I think even French intellectuals probably thought that director (Fonda’s then-husband) Roger Vadim, was a sleazy creep who was ruining her career with films like this. Vadim’s life reflected the films bizzaro sexual anti-liberation. He was a serial husband with a penchant for woman barely more than half his age and made a habit of trading eachwoman in as soon as responsibility reared its ugly head. Prior to Fonda was Brigitte Bardot (probably the inspiration for the comic book Barabarella in the first place), who was 15 to his 22 and whom he drove to several suicide attempts before their divorce. He left Bardot for the more age- appropriate Annette Stroyberg, but then abandoned her with a two-year-old child for Catherine Deneuve who was 17 to his 33. He was already involved with Fonda during that third marriage – when Fonda and Vadim first met she was 18 to his 27 -and when Vadim abandoned Deneuve, with their two-month-old child, to move in with Fonda she was 26 to his 35. The two would separate not long after BARBARELLA, leaving yet another child too young to walk. During that separation he would get involved with Catherine Schneider who was 26 to his now-44. There would be another two marriages after that.
Fonda would eventually disown the film. At the San Francisco Film Festival in 1994, she was asked “Where was her head?”
“I don’t know – up my armpit, I guess,” she replied. “We all make mistakes. In my case, I keep getting my nose rubbed them.”
Worse still, Fonda turned down the role of Bonnie in BONNIE AND CLYDE (1967) to do this stinker. Faye Dunaway eventually got that role, and an Oscar nomination. Fonda should’ve listened to Virna Lisi. When Lisi was told to play the part of Barbarella, she terminated her contract with United Artists and returned to Italy.
Jane Fonda changes costumes again as BARBARELLA. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
Episodic in the same way J.R.R. Tolkien’s work was, BARBARELLA lacked the master’s flair for the actual episodes, as well as being completely lacking in forward momentum. It displayed none of Tolkien’s warmth or affection for his characters, and notably Tolkien’s much-maligned female characterization was far better than what we see in this film with a higher percentage of prominent female roles. It wasn’t even close to Tolkien’s capacity to pull the divergent threads of plot into a meaningful climax.
BARBARELLA was panned in its day but has grown into a cult classic. Today, many critics are generous towards it because of its camp value, of which there is a great deal (It’s listed with the “Top 100 Most Amusingly Bad Movies Ever Made” in THE OFFICIAL RAZZIE MOVIE GUIDE), but I can’t help but be put off when watching a film that contains much to snicker about, but when it tries to tell an intentional joke, it generally falls terribly flat. Forest’s original comic book was fun, and the movie’s original script was by the great Terry Southern, but later critics seem unanimous that Vadim was more interested in his sexual obsessions than Forest’s swashbuckling adventurism or Southern’s omni-directional satire. As a result, no one in the cast seemed to be having any fun, and lines that really should’ve been been amusing come off stale:
Barbarella: “Make love [in a manner that involves actual physical contact]? But no one’s done that for hundreds of centuries!”
“This is much too poetic a way to die!”
“A good many dramatic situations begin with screaming!”
Mark Hand: “Are you typical of Earth women?”
Barbarella in a revealing costume made all the more so because it was shredded: “I’m about average.”
Pygar the angel (John Phillip Law, who if anything, a worse actor than Fonda in this movie):
“An angel does not make love, an angel is love.”
“But you’re soft and warm! We’re told that Earth beings are cold.”
And explaining why he saved the evil queen who tortured him: “An angel has no memory.”
Pygar the angel (John Phillip Law) gives Barbarella (Jane Fonda) a ride. Paramount Pictures, 1968.
I will credit one cast member with carrying on like a true soldier. David Hemmings, in an underwritten part as the inept freedom fighter Dildano, was quite good. He offered some hints of what this film could’ve been.
Also very fine was a captivating soundtrack by Bob Crewe and Charles Fox performed by The Glitterhouse which featured Pink Floyd guitarist David Gilmour.
Vadim wanted to do a sequel to BARBARELLA, but that dream died with his marriage to Fonda. He then talked about a remake right up to his death, toying with leading ladies like Drew Barrymore. Other directors have expressed interest in the remake project, notably Robert Rodriguez.
In closing, I would like to recommend an exceptionally sophisticated homage to this really dumb film. CQ (2001) written and directed by Roman Coppola (son of Francis Ford) takes us back to Paris of the ‘60s where a young American filmmaker, Paul (Jeremy Davies), is trying to made personal art film/love letter to his girlfriend Marlene (Elodie Bouchez) but all that the honest camera can do is document her depression and resentments. So he gets a job assisting the director of an a cheesy sci-fi that is clearly a better version of BARBARELLA. That film’s director, played by Gerard Depardieu, is turning the project into a complete train wreck because he can’t come up with an ending, but really, can’t cope with the fact that the fantasy of revolution and liberty he creates on film will never translate to the real world. Paul gets drawn into the director’s lunacy through his growing infatuation with the film’s sexy star, played by Angela Lindvall, who remains the same impossible ideal of sexuality and liberty even when Depardieu’s camera is not rolling.
Robert Murphy is 47 years old and lives in New York City. Formerly employed, he now has plenty of time to write about movies and play with his cats.
Category: Retro Review | Tags: 2001 a space odyssey, Alcatraz, Angela Lindvall, Anita Pallenberg, Annette Stroyberg, bande dessinee, Barbarella, Blast-Off Burlesque, Bob Crewe, Bonnie and Clyde, Brigitte Bardot, Catherine Deneuve, Catherine Schneider, Charles Fox, Claude Dauphin, comic book, CQ, cult movie, David Gilmour, David Hemmings, Drew Barrymore, duran duran, Durand Durand, Elodie Bouchez, French, fur-lined cockpit, Gary Morris, Gerard Depardieu, Graeme Clark, Jane Fonda, Jean-Claude Forest, Jeremy Davies, John Phillip Law, Marcel Marceau, Milo O'Shea, Official Razzle Movie Guide, Pink Floyd, Planet of the Apes, Plaza Theatre, psychodella, retro review, Robert Emmett Murphy, Robert Heinlein, Robert Rodriguez, Roger Vadim, Roman Coppola, San Francisco Film Festival, sci-fi movie, science fiction, striptease, Taboo-La-La, Terry Southern, The Glitterhouse, They Shoot Horses Don't They, Tolkien, Ugo Tognazzi, Virna Lisi, Wonder Woman
Bikers, Bigfoot & Buxom Babes in Nixon Masks With Machine Guns – DEAR GOD NO! Pushes the Limits of ’70s Exploitation at the Plaza Theatre All Week Long
Posted on: Oct 20th, 2011 By: Anya99
When DEAR GOD NO! launched its world premiere at the Plaza Theatre last month, the Star Bar must’ve been empty. But while cast, crew and Kickstarter contributors filled many seats, the enthusiastic crowd also included plenty of curiosity-seekers, wondering if this homegrown homage to ’70s exploitation movies could deliver the over-the-top shocks it promised. From the enthusiastic audience response, it did and then some, making even this blogger, who has a high tolerance for cult flick violence, want to shout “DEAR GOD NO! they didn’t go there!” Now those who didn’t make it out will another chance to see it on the big screen when it starts a one-week run at the Plaza Theatre this Friday Oct. 21 through Thursday Oct. 27.
Shot in 16mm with ’70s period-authentic effects, DEAR GOD NO! follows outlaw motorcycle gang The Impalers on a tri-state rape and murder spree which culminates in a bloody massacre with rival club Satan’s Own in a dive bar (actually Tucker Saloon) with the added bonus of strippers in Richard Nixon masks with machine guns. Still keen to continue their rampage, the survivors invade a mountain cabin occupied by a scientist and his geeky daughter. And that’s when the depravity really begins as the bikers realize the scientist is mad, his wife is madder and the monster that lurks in the wilderness outside is maddest of all. Those who’ve been around the Atlanta alt-garage, Redneck underground and horror movie scene for a while will recognize plenty of familiar faces in the cast and crew including Shane Morton (Silver Scream Spookshow, Gargantua, Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse), Jett Bryant (Bigfoot), Nick Morgan (Splatter Cinema), Bill Ratliff (Truckadelic), Madeline Brumby (if you missed last week’s Kool Kat on Madeline, which includes her DEAR GOD NO! experience, read it here), Jim Stacy (Starlight Drive-In, Palookaville, Get Delicious!, AM Gold) and many more.
For the uninitiated, B-movies date back to the beginnings of film-making, but the ’60s/’70s variety – also called “grindhouse” movies thanks to the seedy cinemas they often played (when they weren’t at the dying drive-ins) – pushed the limits of onscreen sex and violence in such an audacious way that they gained a cult following and a new generation of contemporary imitators from Quentin Tarantino, who, with Robert Rodriguez, even produced a double-feature called GRINDHOUSE, to the makers of last year’s HOBO WITH A SHOTGUN. It may be tempting to dismiss DEAR GOD NO! as just the latest in that subgenre, but the level of affection, craftsmanship and fun (yes, strange words perhaps to be paired with an ultraviolent flick) elevate it – that is, if you have a strong stomach and buy into the filmmakers’ sense of humor. Yup, this movie is NOT for everyone.
Since last month’s opening, director/screenwriter/executive producer James “Jimmy” Bickert has taken DEAR GOD NO! out on the road to two festivals and it’s won at least one award. We caught up with Jimmy recently to find out more about how DEAR GOD NO! is exploding Atlanta onto the underground film map, go behind-the-scenes during production and find out what’s next for the movie and its makers.
ATLRetro: Since the sold-out world premiere in Atlanta on Sept. 9, you’ve taken DEAR GOD NO! to two film festivals. What’s been the reaction there?
Insane. I knew a party would break out with the home team, but the reaction in Tucson & Las Vegas was equally outrageous. People were sneaking in cocktails, yelling, laughing, cheering, applauding and even giving me free beer and shots in appreciation. We picked up an award for Best Exploitation Film at the Arizona Underground Film Festival. I received so many handshakes and pats on the back in Vegas [Pollygrind 2011] it felt like we were running for office. Haven’t heard if we won anything there yet. I just got back. It’s starting to gain momentum as an ultimate party movie. Film festivals are rescheduling us at midnight, and that’s perfect for an exploitation film.
Let’s start in the beginning, what’s the story behind how you came up with the idea for DEAR GOD NO! and got it off the ground?
Shane Morton, Nick Morgan and I were tossing around some ideas and came up with the idea of a Bigfoot vs. Biker crossover exploitation film. Something you would see at the end of a genres cycle. Originally we were going to attempt to make a lost film from the ‘70s that had somehow resurfaced on DVD, but as I began writing it, the pacing was too fast for a ruse. It almost becomes an action film. I’ve always been a big fan of ‘70s exploitation trailers so I tried to create something that would incorporate the fun ballyhoo they delivered and sustain it for a feature-length running time. DEAR GOD NO! gives you bikers, horror, sexploitation, cool cars, blood, laughs, gross outs, explosions, boobs, Nazis, Bigfoot, lofty themes, crazy dialoguw and incestual lesbian rape! Never seen that one before? Well, we got it. According to the reviews, it all works. Whew!
What classic exploitation and horror films served as inspirations for DEAR GOD NO!?
It’s hard to pinpoint all of them because many are subconscious. The ones I’ve noticed the most coming through are DEATH WEEKEND (a.k.a. HOUSE BY THE LAKE) and I DRINK YOUR BLOOD. But there are some moments from Something Weird Video collections of stag loops, SAVAGE SEVEN, WEREWOLVES ON WHEELS and NIGHT OF THE BLOOD BEAST. We even rip on SCHINDLER’S LIST. The film is packed with obscure exploitation references, but they only enhance the script. If you don’t catch a reference, it won’t hinder the experience. Visually there are many pop culture influences like E.C. Comics and Men’s Adventure pulp magazines.
With DEAR GOD NO!, you push the limits for onscreen violence, nudity and gore. What were your parameters for what was too extreme, does anything in the movie make you uncomfortable, and is there anything you filmed that went on the cutting room floor because it was too much even for you?
I don’t feel anything is off limits if it fits the story. DEAR GOD NO! has ‘60-‘70s style nudity and gore so it may push the boundaries for what some people expect from that time period, but it never enters the realm of what critics currently call the torture porn genre. We crossed over into that realm with one scene involving a pregnant character. I kept enough in to give the audience a good jolt but most of it hit the cutting room floor. There has to be a good balance to keep things fun for the crowd and it was starting to push into nausea. The genre is packed with that stuff now and it’s not what DEAR GOD NO! is about. We’re more John Waters than HUMAN CENTIPEDE 2. It’s suds cinema for drunken friends and not porn for loners in raincoats.
OK, bikers and Nazis are classic ingredients for exploitation movies, but why Bigfoot?
Bigfoot is a staple of the Southern drive-in, and I wanted to cast him in a good movie for a change. He has been getting crappy roles since NIGHT OF THE DEMON. Atlanta has the ultimate Sasquatch/Yeti in Jim Stacy, so we had to exploit him.
What was your favorite scene in the movie to shoot and why?
The squibs were the most fun to shoot because the extras love it. There is such a look of shock when it goes off and everyone on set breaks into applause. I could shoot squibs all day. It doesn’t get old. My favorite scene in the film is when the inebriated biker gang runs across a hillbilly kid who has them completely perplexed. Even after seeing it 100 times, I cannot watch a festival screening without laughing out loud.
Why did you decide to shoot DEAR GOD NO! all in Super 16mm with equipment from the ‘70s? Were there any specific effects which you’re particularly proud to have accomplished in the traditional way, versus CGI?
I wanted it to be authentic as possible, and we really immersed ourselves in things from the era. There were props that didn’t make it on screen from the ‘70s, but it helped create the illusion that we were making a film in 1973. I want to go back as soon as possible. We were all pretty proud of our van explosion. That’s a classic practical effect that Hollywood has been getting away from by using computer overlays in After Effects. There’s a poorly [executed] CGI explosion in MACHETE when a car blows up but doesn’t move or fall apart. We couldn’t have that, and what good Southern film doesn’t have an explosion in it? Not much that I want to see.
The cast and crew boasts a who’s who of Atlanta grassroots indie scene of actors and artists including many of the same folks behind the Silver Scream Spookshow, Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse, Splatter Cinema, Starlight Drive-In, etc. You’re the writer/director/exec producer, but are you proud to share the credit with a homegrown team, especially as DEAR GOD NO! gets screened across the country and around the globe?
When we show up at a festival, people know we are from the ATL. We ran up such a large tab at the gay bar next door to PollyGrind 2011, the owner said he should change his theme by replacing the rainbow flag with an Atlanta Falcons banner. Shane Morton and I drank a torture porn crew from L.A. under the table in Tucson. We even had an 8-hour start on them. Yeah, they know where we are from and we’re proud of it.
There are a ton of talented people in this town. I’m still amazed we got them all together. One of the aspects of DEAR GOD NO! that I’m most asked about is the music by The Forty Fives and the score from Richard Davis of Gargantua. There is a whole cast of musicians like Johnny McGowan, The Biters, The Booze, Adam McIntyre and Kris Dale involved that essentially come from The Star Bar including our lead actor Jett Bryant from the band Bigfoot and actor Billy Ratliff from Truckadelic. Just about everyone from Dusty Booze and The Baby Haters was involved. You will see a ton of Atlanta musicians as extras and Gargantua’s Creepy Kenny even built us a flame wand now in use at The Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse. There is a very big Star Bar connection with this film.
Seems like typical movie investors might get squeamish funding something this extreme, so it’s not surprising that to hear you used Kickstarter to raise some of the money and pulled some out of your own pocket. What was the budget and how was it funded?
You’re right. We had cast and crew drop out because they didn’t understand what we were attempting. Many people thought we were making porn or God knows what. It’s hard to convey that you are making a unique exploitation film when they don’t understand any of the references. Even worse if you’re asking someone to invest money.
It’s hard to really gauge the budget because so many talented people contributed time for free. Jonny Rej (Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse /The Plaza) gave us some free film and equipment, Slopes BBQ fed us, Fuji North America gave us ½ off on film stock for shooting a feature. It went on and on. It was a very quick shoot with a massive amount of preplanning between A.D. Michelle McCall, cinematographer Jonathan Hilton and I which helped keep cost, time and favors down. We didn’t wear out our welcome too bad. I do have a budget number, but I save that information for when someone buys me a beer.
After the Plaza limited engagement, what’s next for DEAR GOD NO! More festivals? Is there a distribution deal and when will it be commercially available on DVD/download? Is it true there’s going to be a sequel?
We currently have a quite a few distributors interested from all over the world. At the end of our festival run, we’ll sit down and start seriously negotiating which rights and territories we want to part with. We currently have festivals lined up in Raleigh, Erie, Mobile and Bogotá, Colombia. Theatrical screenings (mostly midnight) are booked in Portland, Ottawa, Toronto, Hamilton, Las Vegas and London. We’re adding screenings every week, and people can keep up to date by liking our Facebook page or checking the website at www.deargodnomovie.com. If you live in a town that shows midnight movies, ask for us or send me information about the theater.
It’s true there is a sequel in the works called FRANKENSTEIN CREATED BIKERS. It will have your jaw on the floor….again.
All art and photos courtesy of Big World Pictures.
Category: Features | Tags: 70s movies, AM Gold, Arizona Underground Film Festival, Atlanta Zombie Apocalypse, b-movies, Bigfoot, Bill Ratliff, Dear God No, drive-in movies, exploitation films, Gargantua, Get Delicious, grindhouse, Hobo with a Shotgun, Impalers, James Bickert, Jett Bryant, Jim Stacy, Jimmy Bickert, Madeline Brumby, Nick Morgan, Palookaville, Plaza Theatre, polygrind, Richard Nixon, Robert Rodriguez, sasquatch, Satan's Own, Shane Morton, Silver Scream Spookshow, Splatter Cinema, Star Bar, Starlight Drive-In, Tarantino, Truckadelic, Tucker Saloon
Subscribe to ATLRetro
Atlanta Film Guide Daily
ATLBoy.com
Coffee Shop of Horrors
Etsy Coupon Codes
Plaza Theatre
Southern Fried Burlesque Fest
Wrestling With Pop Culture
© 2020 ATLRetro. All Rights Reserved. This blog is powered by Wordpress
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line22
|
__label__wiki
| 0.540503
| 0.540503
|
Bits of Books - Books by Title
The Captured Economy
How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality
Brink Lindsey and Steven M. Teles
More books on Politics
The progressive narrative about America’s skyrocketing levels of inequality goes something like this: Since the 1970s or so, conservatives have racked up a series of victories in rolling back government's role in taxing and regulating the rich and powerful. As a result, the rich and powerful - who often lavish conservative politicians with donations - have run roughshod over poor and middle-class people, sucking up a horrifying proportion of the nation’s wealth in the process.
In their new book The Captured Economy: How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality, Brink Lindsey and Steven M. Teles argue that this is only part of the story. 'What this approach misses is the role of government action itself, rather than the government's mere failure to act, as a cause of inequality,' they write. This means that anyone concerned about addressing inequality should be focusing on the many ways in which government policy itself actively redistributes money upward.
Lindsey, vice-president and director of the Open Society Project at the Niskanen Center, and Teles, a fellow at the Center and a political science professor at Johns Hopkins, focus on four key areas in which, they say, government policy has been ruthlessly taking money from the have-nots and bestowing it upon the haves: finance, intellectual property (that is, the patent system), occupational licensing, and land use.
Whereas the standard progressive narrative about inequality and government inaction is fairly intuitive, Lindsey and Teles's arguments are sometimes a bit more nuanced. Take their occupational-licensing case study, for example: They argue that many state licensing laws pertaining to physicians and attorneys are much more about artificially constricting labor supply in these fields than any sort of compelling quality-control argument, which in turn drives up the salaries of physicians and lawyers (the desired effect from the physicians and lawyers who lobby for strict licensing laws), which in turn drives up costs for consumers, which in turn cuts off the access poor and middle-class people have to the sometimes literally life-saving services of a good attorney or physician.
What this and other examples show is that sometimes the 'conservative' argument that deregulation and a scaling-back of government intervention can reduce inequality is, well, true. It's just complicated, and depends on a lot on context. There’s no one-size-fits-all approach to solving anything as complicated as America’s inequality crisis.
In a recent email Q&A, Teles answered some questions about his book’s theses and the ways he wished progressives would reframe their thinking about inequality.
I think the ways in which conservatives get inequality-talk wrong are pretty well-documented among progressive-minded folks - among other things, they have a delusional amount of misplaced faith in the power of 'the market' itself to bring about fair outcomes. But what's your elevator-pitch version for the ways in which progressives might reconsider their own positions by reading your book?
Progressives have a hard time seeing how much government policy actively contributes to inequality by redistributing upwards. Progressives typically think of inequality as the natural result of unrestrained markets and see more government power as the solution. Yet in many important cases - in our book we focus on financial regulation, intellectual property, occupational licensing, and land-use regulation - misused government power is the problem and greater reliance on markets is the egalitarian solution.
Progressives have no problem recognizing the political power of big corporations and the rich, yet curiously their implicit assumption is that this power is wielded with amazing restraint. They understand that the rich and powerful can unfairly dominate the policymaking process, but their main worry is that they will use their power to restrain government - to keep their taxes and regulatory compliance costs inappropriately low. But doesn't it make sense that if you have all this power, you'll use it for more than just playing defense? If you’ve got that power, you can go on offense as well, empowering government to restrain competition from outsiders so that the rich and powerful benefit at the expense of everybody else. And that is precisely what has happened.
Maybe one reason for the progressive blind spot you mention is that government regulation used to have much more progressive distributional consequences - that is, it did a lot of redistributing from richer to poorer. You argue that the main action is now in the other direction; in your words, 'rent-seeking,' or lobbying for special privileges, 'has moved upmarket.' Explain what’s happened.
What economists call rent-seeking is bad for economic efficiency by definition: it's the attempt to make profits through the political process rather than by creating value for customers. The effects on the distribution of income, however, are unclear: rent-seeking could be progressive, regressive, or a wash. When the era of activist government really kicked off during the New Deal, lots of regulatory interventions in the economy - some of which we consider bad policies that stifled competition and cartelized industries - nonetheless had progressive consequences. Think rent control, universal service requirements, and of course pro-union labor legislation. Even when policies favored big business, those businesses frequently had large, semi-skilled, unionized workforces, so some of the rents got shared with workers in the form of higher pay. In more recent decades, though, regulatory interventions that favor the rich have been the norm.
One reason is the decline of unions: nothing has replaced them as a muscular lobby for government interventions on behalf of the less-well-off. Meanwhile, the biggest, most technologically progressive industries (which are usually the focus of regulatory activity) now hire mostly highly skilled workers. So subsidies to these companies don’t leak out much to ordinary workers.
Isn't it simply the case that a ton of powerful progressives benefit greatly from the rent-seeking you document in the book? I don't expect the doctors and lawyers and finance types who provide the Democratic Party with a big chunk of its funding, for example, to be all that sympathetic to the idea that they’re contributing to the inequality some of them rail against every two or four years. This seems like a pretty serious impasse.
When we were writing the book, we joked that we were doing our best to antagonize the very people most likely to read a serious nonfiction book from Oxford University Press: doctors, lawyers, financial professionals, and affluent homeowners in big coastal cities. But you're right, we're also picking fights with some of the biggest funding sources for the Democratic Party: Wall Street, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley. You can see our book as a critique of progressives from the free-market left. The Affordable Care Act didn’t do nearly enough to address doctors’ inflated fees and incomes; Dodd-Frank didn’t do nearly enough to roll back the regulatory subsidies for financialization and excessive risk-taking.
Of course what we're proposing is difficult. It’s never easy to take privileges away from a well-organized lobby, especially when it represents the interests of extremely rich and powerful people. We don't say reform is easy; we say it's necessary. And given the immense frustration in the electorate, on both the left and the right, and the sense that governing elites are failing to help anybody but themselves, we think there are possibilities to channel that frustration into a sustained political assault on upward redistribution. Every victory, however, will be hard-won.
Toward the end of your book you present this fascinating idea from political science that one of the main reasons various special interests wield so much influence in D.C. is simply because they are able to present the government with useful-seeming information - and the government's capacity to produce this information for itself has degraded over the decades. Why did that degradation occur and what can be done about this fundamental asymmetry?
Worrying about lobbying and special-interest influence is nothing new, but almost all the focus has been on somehow reducing the power of lobbyists - and, in particular, reducing their power to spend money on candidates and causes they favor. We argue that looking at the other side of the equation is long overdue. In other words, rather than trying to disarm lobbyists, we should fortify policymakers so they are less dependent on special interests for the information they need to govern. At the same time that the scope and complexity of government policies have been increasing, we've been cutting congressional staff and analytical capacity throughout the executive branch. Conservatives were behind this trend, thinking they were cutting unnecessary bureaucracy. In fact, they were just increasing the information asymmetry between rent-seeking special interests and policy-makers trying to regulate in the public interest. A Congress staffed by smart but relatively inexperienced, overworked young people is one that is easy pickings for lobbyists armed with data purportedly showing that a change in policy would cause the sky to fall. Boosting the government's brainpower - its internal capacity to generate and process policy-relevant information - would help to reduce that asymmetry and produce better policies as a result.
Books by Title
Books by Topic
Bits of Books To Impress
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line24
|
__label__cc
| 0.51129
| 0.48871
|
Jasmina Anema. Photo by: Sara Herbert-Galloway
Jasmina Anema's Bone Marrow Drive
March 7th,2009. New York City. I was pleased to be amongst the 1600 New Yorkers to participate in the bone marrow drive that took place at P.S.41 school (116 W. 11th Street, Manhattan), in hopes of finding someone who may be a match for kindergarten student Jasmina Anema. She is suffering from a rare and deadly form of leukemia. My friend Barry Klarberg and I got our cheeks swabbed in hopes that one of us might be the match needed to save Jasmina's life. It was very touching to see how many people care and how organized the volunteers were. Jasmina, who just turned six, is adopted, so her doctors are unable to turn to blood relatives for bone marrow transplants and her family and friends have been trying to draw attention to the drive. To learn more please go to her website oneforjasmina.com. Her mother said earlier this week, "I need thousands of people to come," and called Jasmina, who was three days old when she was adopted, "the love of my life." The drive is also to raise awareness about registering as a potential bone marrow donor; here's more information about eligibility requirements.
Actress Jill Hennessy (Law & Order, Crossing Jordan), whose son attended school with Jasmina and who was one of the many P.S. 41 parents who helped organize the drive said,"I'm blown away by the number of people who came to help Jasmina. It shows what kind of wonderful community we have here in New York City." Other celebrities involved are Rihana, New York Knicks center Chris Wilcox, Paul Pierce of the Boston Celtics and Tyson Chandler of the New Orleans Hornets, some have visited Jasmina in the hospital. Grammy award winning singer Kelly Rowland made a very special visit to Jasmina's hospital room on her sixth birthday and spend hours with her. She sang Happy Birthday to Jasmina and decorated cupcakes.
If you want to sign up to be a donor, you can do so by mail (check over the eligibility requirements). There is also a donor kit available by mail. Katharina Harf of DKMS Americas, a non-profit organization that helps people find bone marrow matches was quoted, "It's very hard for African-American patients to find a matching donor, because they are under-represented on the national registry and their tissue type is more varied, so it's very hard to find a donor." Jamina's mother Theodora Anema was amazed at the turnout and told the News, "This is beyond anything I could have imagined."
Two months ago Jasmina's mother took her to the doctor for a cut on her toe that would not heal. That was what led to the discovery that she has leukemia.
For more information about becoming a bone marrow donor, contact www.DKMSamericas.org , a non-profit marrow donor center: 866.340.3567. Some donor candidates paid a voluntary $65 to cover costs others who could not pay made contributions. Once registering data is entered into the National Marrow Donor Program registry, in anonymous form, so doctors can search for a donor for their patients.
Some Facts:
Each year more than 140,000 people are diagnosed with leukemia, lymphoma and other Blood cancers.
Leukemia is the most common disease children in the U.S. die of, a bone marrow transplant may be their only chance to live.
Only 2 out of every 10 patients will receive the transplant that could save their lives.
Information gathered by Sara Herbert-Galloway
sara@blacktiemagazine.com
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line25
|
__label__cc
| 0.580687
| 0.419313
|
OpenCourseWare making an impact
Justin Pope from the AP has written a nice article describing the impacts of the open education movement, in particular the Open Courseware Initiative: Internet Opens Elite Colleges to All
But MIT's 2001 debut of OpenCourseWare epitomized a key insight: Elite universities can separate their credential from their teaching — and give at least parts of their teaching away as a public service. They aren't diminishing their reputations at all. In fact, they are expanding their reach and reputation.
It turns out there is extraordinary demand for bits and pieces of the education places like MIT provide, even without the diploma.
OpenCourseWare's site gets more than 1 million hits per month, with translated versions getting 500,000 more. About 60 percent of users are outside the United States. About 15 percent are educators, and 30 percent students at other universities. About half have no university affiliation.
"I think the fundamental realization is that distance learning will solve the problem of access to certification, but there's a larger problem, which is access to information," says Steve Carson, director of external relations for the MIT initiative."
The Open Courseware Initiative is six years old. It's hard to believe that there are only three Land-Grant universities, with their "democratic mandate for openness, accessibility, and service to people" that have gotten solidly behind this movement. A tremendous opportunity has been squandered, but then again, it's never too late to do the right thing.
Posted by Kevin Gamble at 11:07 AM
Labels: ipr, ocw, oer, open education
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line30
|
__label__wiki
| 0.508986
| 0.508986
|
Home » European sales 2017 first half: Limousine segment
European sales 2017 first half: Limousine segment
August 15, 2017 by Bart Demandt 3 Comments
Sales in the limousine segment in Europe increased 4% in Q2 of 2017, and as a result the segment is up 5% in the first half, to 23.337 sales. However, 4 models out of the top-5 and 7 out of the top-10 show double digit declines in the second quarter as only one model more than makes up for all of their losses. Segment leader Mercedes-Benz S-Class sees its share of the segment thaw from a dominant 45% in the first half of 2015 to 38,7% in the first half of 2016 to “just” 32,8% now. Its segment leadership still cannot be touched, although we have to mention that its figures include sales of the coupe and convertible versions, so in terms of pure sedan sales, the BMW 7-series could be either very close or even ahead. Worryingly, the 7-Series is already down 19% in Q2 despite being still in its second year of sales. The main culprit of its early demise may the the new generation Porsche Panamera, which sold a healthy 2.670 copies in the second quarter, less than 500 sales behind the 7-Series. In fact, the Panamera was the segment leader in June, holding 31,2% of the segment that month and selling 200 more copies than both the Mercedes and the BMW. And this is before Porsche has launched the Sport Turismo version, a kind of shooting brake/station wagon version which should boost its popularity further.
Note: clicking on the model name opens the sales data page for that model; clicking year in the legend turns the display for that year on/off
The Audi A8 is down to 4th place as its next generation is just arriving at dealerships, showing Audi’s new design language. It should start to pick up pace in the second half of the year, but it’s very unlikely to finish 2017 on the segment podium. After a stable Q1, the Jaguar XJ loses a quarter of its volume in the second quarter, while its British rival Bentley Flying Spur adds 21% in Q2 for a 40% gain year-to-date. That puts it ahead of the Maserati Quattroporte, down by a quarter in Q2, while the Bentley Mulsanne loses 28% as it cannot capitalize on the model change of its main rival Rolls Royce Phantom. Nor can the smaller Rolls Royce Ghost with sales down 44% in the second quarter.
Also check out the limousine segment in the US, where the Cadillac CT6 has made a splashing entry into second place, while the Genesis G90 is in an impressive fifth place.
Click on any model to see its annual sales from 1997-2016 and monthly sales from 2012 to 2016, or use the dropdown menu in the top right of this site.
Limousine segment 2017-H1 2016-H1 Change Share
1 Mercedes-Benz S-Class 7.657 8.607 -11% 32,8%
2 BMW 7-series 6.451 7.027 -8% 27,6%
3 Porsche Panamera 4.736 1.213 290% 20,3%
4 Audi A8 / S8 2.531 3.179 -20% 10,8%
5 Jaguar XJ 958 1.080 -11% 4,1%
6 Bentley Flying Spur 392 280 40% 1,7%
7 Maserati Quattroporte 309 388 -20% 1,3%
8 Bentley Mulsanne 107 114 -6% 0,5%
9 Rolls Royce Ghost 90 99 -9% 0,4%
10 Aston Martin Rapide 68 58 17% 0,3%
11 Rolls Royce Phantom 30 45 -33% 0,1%
12 Volkswagen Phaeton 8 145 -94% 0%
Segment total 23.337 22.235 5%
Car sales statistics are from the following countries: Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland.
Sources: Manufacturers, ANDC, JATO Dynamics.
Limousine segment 2017, Aston Martin Rapide, Audi A8 / S8, Bentley Flying Spur, Bentley Mulsanne, BMW 7-series, europe, H1, Jaguar XJ, limousine, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Porsche Panamera, Q2, Rolls Royce Ghost, Rolls Royce Phantom, sales
About Bart Demandt
Bart is a 36-year old Dutchman who's always had a thing for cars, the automotive industry and statistics. He’s combined these passions by writing about them on CarSalesBase.com. His daily driver is an Alfa Romeo GT 3.2 V6 which he just can't seem to say goodbye to thanks to the mesmerizing exhaust note, despite approaching 300.000km which probably makes this the most experienced GT 3.2 in the world.
You can find all his articles Here.
Losange says
Lexus isn’t even on the list anymore…
Hi, what about Lexus LS?
Bart Demandt says
Lexus LS sales are marginal in Europe. Our source doesn’t even publish the figures monthly, only annual. Toyota only publishes “European” data including Russia, Turkey and some other countries, so that’s not comparable to the rest of the segment.
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line35
|
__label__cc
| 0.555396
| 0.444604
|
Cecil County Councilor Joyce Bowlsbey Announces Election Run for District 2 Seat in 2014; Appointee to Face Voters
Cecil County Councilor Joyce Bowlsbey, who was appointed earlier this year by County Executive Moore to fill the balance of Moore’s term in District 2, announced Thursday night that she will be a candidate for election to the seat in the 2014 election.
“I’ve decided that I owe it to this county to continue to bring this county forward,” Bowlsbey said in announcing her decision to run before a Chesapeake City gathering of about 150 people organized by the Cecil Business Leaders for Better Government. Bowlsbey had previously said she did not intend to run for the seat but in recent weeks re-evaluated her position, and was strongly encouraged to run by members of the local business community.
“I didn’t then, and I don’t now, have political aspirations,” said Bowlsbey, a leader in various civic, charitable and business groups for many years before her appointment to the Council in January.
But her concerns for continuing the efforts of the current Council majority to advance programs and policies to promote the county’s future prompted her decision to run as a candidate.
Before her appointment to the Council, Bowlsbey had compiled a lengthy resume of business and civic involvement, including heading the local panel that drafted the new county Charter that was approved overwhelmingly by voters in 2010.
Bowlsbey, a Republican, was appointed to fill the remainder of Moore’s Commissioner/Councilor term after Moore became the first County Executive under the shift to Charter government. The appointment generated a political firestorm from the “Smipkin” political organization, which had hoped to control who was named to the seat through the local Republican Central Committee that is dominated by loyalists of Del. Michael Smigiel (R-36) and former state Sen. E.J. Pipkin.
But Moore shifted her party registration from Republican to “unaffiliated” shortly before resigning her legislative seat, thus removing the GOP panel from the power equation. Then the County Council, with only four members, deadlocked even on the process of how to proceed in filling the vacancy so, under the Charter, the decision was left up to Moore.
Smigiel filed a lawsuit against Moore and the county government in January seeking to block the appointment of Bowlsbey, but the case has dragged on and a decision by a visiting judge is expected soon.
Bowlsbey has been a key member in the current majority line-up of the Council, usually joining Councilor Alan McCarthy (R-1) and Council President Robert Hodge (R-5) in votes and policy decisions—most notably, the recent decision to acquire the Basell site in Elkton for a new county vocational and technical school. (Hodge and McCarthy won election to their seats last year so their seats will not be on the ballot in 2014.)
The two remaining members of the old “Three Amigos” group that controlled the Board of Commissioners for two years—Councilors Diana Broomell (R-4) and Michael Dunn (R-3)—opposed the Basell project. Both of their seats are at stake in the 2014 election.
The Cecil Business Leaders (CBL) group endorsed and worked to support the successful candidacies of Moore, Hodge and McCarthy in 2012 and David Williams, chair of the group’s board, said Thursday that CBL wants to expand its membership and its role in recruiting and supporting local candidates in 2014. The group strongly endorsed creation of a new vo-tech school and seeks to foster a pro-business climate and economic development in the county.
“Do you believe we can make a difference,” he asked the crowd, assembled in the expansive yard of his home. “YEAH,” they shouted in response.
“I believe Cecil County’s best days are ahead of her,” Williams said. CBL currently has 169 members and hopes to expand the roster to 500. The group also has a political action committee that can contribute to candidates or place ads endorsing its preferred candidates.
Although Dunn and Broomell’s names were not specifically mentioned, it was clear that members of the group consider their seats targets in 2014.
Mario Gangemi, CBL’s vice-chairman, noted that the opposition to the Basell school site by the old Commissioners’ majority had cost the county nearly $4 million—since the county had to pay a higher price now than it would have if the project had been allowed to proceed in the past.
“They’ve got to go,” Gangemi said. He added that the CBL group would also be recruiting and vetting candidates for the local political parties’ Central Committees. (Seven of the nine seats on the local Republican committee are occupied by Smipkin loyalists, and a closely linked political action committee frequently attacks Moore and the current Council majority on policy issues.)
Broomell recently told Cecil Times she intends to run for re-election to her Council seat. Dunn, who usually sits in silence at Council meetings, has not disclosed his political plans.
While Bowlsbey will be a first-time candidate in the 2014 election, she brings a wealth of experience and knowledge about county issues to her campaign.
She retired after 20 years service with W.L.Gore & Associates, where she was a corporate customer service and sales representative who traveled internationally for the company. After her retirement, she had a whole new career as a community volunteer for a wide range of charity, government and business organizations.
She was a member of the board of directors of the Cecil County Chamber of Commerce for five years and until her appointment to the County Council served as the chair of the Chamber’s Government Relations Committee. In that capacity, Bowlsbey attended most County Commissioners meetings and weekly worksessions for several years, giving her a broad knowledge of the issues facing the county government. She also served as a member of the county’s Planning Commission and the Economic Development Commission.
And she was on the winning side in the 2010 elections when she led a “friends of Charter’’ group that successfully convinced an overwhelming majority of county voters to approve Charter government—after multiple failed attempts to change the county’s form of government in the past several decades.
Tags: 2014, Alan McCarthy, CBL, Cecil business leaders, County Council, david williams, E.J. Pipkin, election, GOP, Joyce Bowlsbey, Mario Gangemi, Michael Smigiel, Politics, Republican Central Committee, Robert Hodge, Smipkin, Tari Moore
18 Responses to Cecil County Councilor Joyce Bowlsbey Announces Election Run for District 2 Seat in 2014; Appointee to Face Voters
Bob Amato on September 27, 2013 at 8:29 am
Excellent news. She was a tireless worker on behalf of Cecil County for many years and has continued as a Councilor. She has extensive knowledge of county issues and carries out her duties in a very enthusiastic and professional manner.
Betty on September 27, 2013 at 11:14 pm
It is a shame that this group, Cecil Business Leaders did not do what they promised and support qualified candidates for both political parties. This is a Republican support group and should call themselves such. They state a “mistake” was made when they did not vet all qualified candidates for both party elections but this was brought to their attention beforehand and was ignored.
Stupid Intolerant on September 28, 2013 at 7:37 pm
Dear Betty, Mrs.Bowlsby was appointed not elected. Sad truth is ignorance is easy to ignore.
Bill De Freitas on September 28, 2013 at 12:22 pm
Betty, David Williams and I were the founding members of the Cecil Business Leaders; our intentions were then and now to make the group a nonpartisan organization. Though I am not on the Board anymore I am a dues paying member of Cecil Business Leaders. Being a new organization back then we made some mistakes in the vetting process and I think to this day we would agree to that.
I have to say though, myself being in the independent voter group, we (the Board) found it very difficult to get Democrats to volunteer for the Cecil Business Leaders Board. The couple who did come on the Board within a few meetings decided that they were too busy or weren’t willing to spend the time convincing their other Board members of their opinions. CBL can not kidnap Democrats and force them to be involved.
It’s very easy to sit on the outside and complain that CBL is not non-partisan but I challenge you to get 3-5 Democrats who are wiling to put in the time and money to help pick our next candidates. I know for a fact that the Board would welcome a 50-50% balance if that were possible, and independents also. Point being made with the challenge is have those Democracts call me personally at 410-392-9170 so we can talk and possibly get them on the Board quickly.
Bob Amato on September 30, 2013 at 11:00 am
A very simple formula determines the amount of property taxes we pay. Assessable base x tax rate = revenue. There are minor predictable adjustments for such things as Homestead Tax Credit, but the basic formula holds true. It is also true that commercial and industrial properties require less government expenditures for services than residential properties. Therefore, the county needs to attract businesses in order to increase the tax base and provide employment opportunities for residents.
We need active involvement by business leaders who understand practical economics and business management. Infrastructure in the designated growth corridor is vital. Councilor Broomell has set the county back many years and cost us approximately $100 million by her single-handed destruction of the wastewater sale to Artesian.
The new tech school is an opportunity to establish partnerships with businesses in order to provide employment upon graduation. We need to reject the “Ceciltucky” moniker by planning for the future.
Joe C on September 29, 2013 at 7:32 am
Joyce has done much good for Cecil County in volunteer organizations. As councilwoman she must remember she must represent all the citizens, not just the “business leaders” wishes.
Voting to plunge Cecil County into 70 Million dollars in debt on top of the already 142 million dollar debt is not in the best interest of all citizens, just the ones who will benefit from this largess. Next year will certainly be an interesting election season.
Ron Lobos on September 30, 2013 at 9:49 am
Joe, keep in mind that much of the debt that we face is a result of a state Public Service Commission meeting appearance that D. Broomell made, prompting Artesian to back out of a contract that the county now has to fill the void on. Councilwoman Bowlsby is here to help pick up the pieces of Broomell’s boondoggles.
Joe C on September 30, 2013 at 7:53 pm
Please stop parroting what you hear and do some simple research. Look at the list of projects slated for this effort and you will see very little has to do with putting infrastructure on RT 40. The ENR costs could have been $11 million but the current council is set on a more expensive system because of the flawed thinking that we are going to run out of capacity. Not likely.
Just remember the plant at Seneca Point went on line in 1973, and is now, after forty years, only at 800K gallons per day. Artesian is a company run by persons with good business sense, and they walked away from the sewer deal because it was a bad deal, not because one commissioner scared them off.
Anyway there is no justification for plunging the county into debt, that cannot be paid back without raising taxes.
Ron Lobos on October 2, 2013 at 11:47 am
Joe, you are assuming too much. That is not what Artesian said as to their reason for leaving.
Rick O'Shea on October 2, 2013 at 6:21 pm
Artesian specifically blamed Broomell’s interference at the PSC for cancelling the contract. Joe C should check his facts.
Joe C on October 3, 2013 at 6:56 pm
They may have said that was the reason, but if it was a good business deal they would not have walked away. They knew that there was little profit margin and a lot of headaches with the sewer system. The mistake was made selling them the water without making them take the whole deal. The county needs a better negotiator when they get involved with these big deals. Ask yourself this question, why does Artesian not buy the sewer system now, it is the same system and the board is not controlled by Ms. Broomell? A bad deal is a bad deal!
Rick O'Shea on October 4, 2013 at 9:17 am
Artesian was willing to take the wastewater operation in order to get the water operation. Broomell killed the wastewater deal by breaking the terms of the overall agreement. Broomell made it a bad deal for the county.
So they (Artesian) got the gold mine and we got the shaft. She won’t be able to spin the facts in the next election.
How did she kill the wastewater deal? You are irrational because you state she broke “the terms of the overall agreement”, if this was the case then the water operation deal would have been broken. Artesian did their due diligence and determined it was a bad deal, Ms. Broomell just provided an excuse, plain and simple.
Joe C, My facts are correct. She broke the terms of the contract by going to the Public Service Commission armed with a letter from her mentor Delegate Smigiel asking for a postponement of the hearing. Broomell gave them an escape from the less attractive operation. You can call it an excuse, but she caused the loss of the sale, costing the taxpayers millions of dollars. You should perform “due diligence” before making accusations.
Ron Lobos on October 7, 2013 at 5:07 pm
Just wondering what Broomell’s motive was in her appearance before the PSC? Were her intentions honorable or were they self serving. I honestly believe that we all know the answer to that question. Spin it as you may, but even if you put lipstick on a pig, it’s still a pig.
Stupid Intolerant on October 7, 2013 at 9:59 am
Dear Mr. C, Your suggestion the county needs a better negotiator than Broomell is obvious. If she is the benchmark then that bar is on the ground. She hired legal counsel (at our expense) and interjected herself unbeknownst to other commissioners as well as the county citizens and sabotaged the contract.
We shouldn’t be surprised. She was standing on her principles, which are anti-business/anti-development, as witnessed by her positions on Aston Pointe, Seneca Point, Carpenters Point, Tier Map 4, Basell as well as the aforementioned Elkton West to name a few.
These are some of the issues that will cost the citizens of this county for years. Ironically she tries to block the funding to clean up these messes.
Joe C on October 17, 2013 at 7:56 pm
I was not talking about her being a negotiator. I was talking about those who were in charge that let Artesian walk away with the water and not the sewer. They want the water because there is no more water left in Delaware. They want to suck out of the Susquehanna Sewer and Carpenter’s Point but the state blocked that move.
At least she has principles. Talk about a mess, the Tier maps that Ms. Moore submitted fill that role perfectly. Wait until the property owners of Tier III ground that should be Tier IV find out they cannot do major subdivisions because of the lack of acceptable Tier maps in the eyes of the Office of Planning. Tari will be a real hero then.
Ron Lobos on October 8, 2013 at 7:45 am
Dear Stupid Intolerant, you make a lot of good points. However we have an opportunity to correct, at least partially, one of these issues. That would be the Basell property purchase.
We will give the Cecil County Public School system approximately $1B over the next 20 years. That is the same period of time that the County Executive is proposing that we float a bond for. If the CCPS can cut just 1.2% from their yearly budget, they can pay for it within their own budget instead of possibly raising taxes to pay for it.
Simple calculations showing that a 3.7% bond on $11.4M comes to about $557,000 which is just 1.2% of the school budget. To make this happen, all we need is for the CCPS to contribute just $3M from their $8.5m Fund Balance and cut $1.2% from their budget. All other funding of the project would be left in place.
So far, the county executive and county council have shown no interest in exploring this solution. I think everyone (except the school board) will agree that there is not one single government agency that can’t cut at least 1% from their current budget.
Leave a Reply to Ron Lobos Cancel reply
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line39
|
__label__wiki
| 0.859195
| 0.859195
|
‘About Bruce’: How Bruce Jenner's Transition Made the Kardashians Unexpected Role Models
An emotional Keeping Up With the Kardashians special on Bruce Jenner’s transition proved why the reality TV stars are more culturally important and necessary than we thought.
Kevin Fallon
Senior Entertainment Reporter
Updated Apr. 14, 2017 10:46AM ET / Published May. 17, 2015 11:39PM ET
Nothing has surprised me more, in all of the pop culture that I’ve covered, than this turn of Kardashian events. I’ve always been an apologist of theirs, of their branding and business acumen, but this has now reached a human level.
People have a common knee-jerk reaction to the Kardashians: a scoff, a groan, and a “who cares.” These past few months have shown why we should be so glad that we do.
With their vulnerable, sensitive, intelligent, and honest handling of Bruce Jenner’s transition, the Kardashian family, previously beacons of pop culture’s nadir, has become the essential, enlightened role models for us all.
Keeping Up With the Kardasians: About Bruce, a two-part special dealing with how the First Family of Reality TV is handling the transition of their patriarch, Bruce Jenner, into a woman, reiterated how brave and respectful the Kardashians have been in this process. And more, it solidified how important they’ve become as figures in a watershed moment in the LGBT movement.
The Kardashians are changing the world. And, who’d’ve thunk it, they’re changing it for the better.
The special, which aired three weeks after Jenner publicly came out as trans in a widely watched and surprisingly nuanced and educational TV interview with Diane Sawyer, began with a note from Jenner.
“Families of trans people often feel they need to grieve the loss of the person that they thought they know,” he said. “My family’s feelings are included here in the hope that other families will know that they are not alone, and to show that families move on from this grief. Today my family loves, supports, and accepts me as I am—and I am so grateful.”
As one might expect from that introduction, the hour that followed was filled with tears. Tears that were earned, because they reminded us that an experience we've disgustingly turned into a tabloid story is a very personal one that affects real people.
And because the Kardashians are reality TV stars, they’ve signed their deal with the devil: to grapple with every emotion that accompanies such a dramatic experience in front of the entire world. The refreshing thing about all of it is how the Kardashians aren’t viewing that duty as a chore, but as a responsibility and, more, as an opportunity.
And though there were tears and though there were arguments, the most abundant thing in this Keeping Up With the Kardashians special was an abiding love for Bruce Jenner, and an acceptance—albeit some more tentative than others, and some more confused than others—of what he’s decided.
Brilliantly, and touchingly, the first scene of the special was Khloe, who Jenner himself has said has had the hardest time with his transition, wrapping some extra-large pairs of high heels to gift to her stepdad.
An act of love. Then, quickly and frequently, came the tears.
Kendall wiped her eyes as she recounted finding makeup when she was growing up and thinking that her father was having an affair. Once, she walked in on him at 4 a.m. dressed as Her, the name Jenner told Sawyer he is using publicly to talk about himself as a woman. (Jenner has said that he wants the media to continue, at least for now, to use male pronouns when referring to him.)
“I just feel bad,” Kendall said, sobbing. “Like, if that’s really what makes you happy and you had to sneak around at like 4 a.m. because you didn't want to like scare me and Kylie?”
Kim talked about how she kept Jenner’s secret for 12 years after catching him in woman’s clothes over a decade ago. Khloe, right off the bat, showed the value of a special like this. She tripped up using “he” versus “she” to talk about Bruce, just like many of us have and will.
“I don’t know if I’m saying the right thing, if I’m using the right terminology, if I’m offending somebody,” she said.
That’s the thing. This is very much unfamiliar territory for all of us, especially someone like Khloe who is very personally being affected by a trans person. It requires education, and conversation, and talking through confusion and frustration and naiveté. That begets progress and acceptance. It’s something you’re seeing with Khloe, and, thanks to the openness of the Kardashian family in the past weeks, with society, too.
Khloe is actually the most combative in the episode, upset that Jenner has decided to transition fully within the year, but has kept it from his kids. “I don’t think it’s fair that you don’t tell us how close this is in the near future,” she said. “We’re still your kids.”
“But I’m not going anywhere,” he said. “It’s not the same person!” she shouts.
Home videos of Jenner raising the Kardashian clan were shown, and may be one of the most important segments of the special.
They showed Bruce Jenner as these girls’ father. It’s such a simple, but necessary, thing to remember, and the thing that so many of us have forgotten as we’ve voraciously consumed as much gossip-y reporting as we could get on our hands on of Jenner’s transition and circled the Kardashian girls like vultures to get them to spill on what it’s been like to have Jenner come out as a woman.
The home videos reminded us that this is a father, that they are his kids, and that this is a relationship that we haven’t respected—and need to more. They also introduce the excellent point, and the point that the girls find themselves grappling with throughout the course of the episode: Bruce Jenner may be transitioning into Her, but he’s still their father.
Those memories and moments aren’t gone. They aren’t tarnished, and they aren’t lies. It’s a complex thing to handle, and something we’re watching five brave girls handle in real-time. What an unbelievable thing to do.
There’s a lot of humor in the episode. After Bruce revealed that he has gone to the movies dressed as Her, Kourtney ribbed him about his wardrobe. “What’s your casual style like? Is it like denim on denim?” Bruce showed Kim a pedicure that he did on himself. “Your feet are actually way more feminine than I ever imagined,” she said.
These moments hint at why Jenner choosing E! to do his docuseries with this summer is more than just loyalty to the network that helped build his family's empire. It’s a smart programming choice.
Maybe it will capture more of the humor in the transition, like those exchanges above. Maybe it will show him having fun and living his life with this kooky brood of people. It’s lighthearted, carefree moments like those that humanize what’s become a news story. When we view Bruce and Her as human, it’s a step toward tolerance and acceptance of the trans community—a community that also loves fun and loves humor, too.
About Bruce wasn't the pageant of infallible acceptance that I think many of us expected it to be, a parade of Kardashians acting like high-minded angels with no qualms about Bruce. They all spoke about the struggle they’ve had with his transition, and the tension they’ve all felt balancing their acceptance and love for the man who raised them with understandable feelings of betrayal. They all wept as they talked about feeling resentful toward him and sad over what this experience has been like for their mother.
Still, Kim encapsulated the goal of the episode, which I’d say it achieved marvelously. “We want to understand his struggle,” she said. “We want to learn about it. We want to relate to it in some way.”
Bruce Jenner and the Kardashians have been criticized, and perhaps rightfully so, for grossly exploiting Jenner’s transition for ratings and publicity, first with the Diane Sawyer interview and now with this two-night special. Sure, these things are ratings gold. But they’re not gross. And they’re not exploitative.
The family is seizing control of the story and the message from the tabloids. They are doing what we’ve demanded of them—spill about how this experience is affecting them—but they’re doing it on their own terms, and they’re doing it sensitively and with nuance and with respect to an entire community whose lives their actions and comments will affect.
Of course the Kardashians are living this moment out on TV. And thank god they are.
Monday night’s second half of the special will include Kourtney talking about not wanting to tell her kids, Kris and Bruce having a highly emotional conversation about the whole thing, and Kim helping Bruce pick out clothes. Raising important questions, speaking raw and uncomfortable truths, and all with a little humor: Who knew Keeping Up With the Kardashians could be such quality viewing?
Toward the end of Sunday night's episode, Jenner said, “Maybe this is my greatest calling in life.” I think he’s right.
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line41
|
__label__cc
| 0.658584
| 0.341416
|
25 Jan The sky’s the limit
Posted at 11:00h in For children and families, News in youth services, Our stories, Youth services, Youth services careers by Angela Virtue 1 Comment
Walking from Dubbo airport to where Adam spends much of his time in the air, the young caseworker with the Uniting Doorways program talks about his work.
We arrive at a gate and on the other side is the fantastic yellow plane he flies. Adam has a pilot’s licence as well as his Flying Instructor rating. He has a number of students under his instruction, and dreams of starting his own flying school in the Dubbo area. He has been flying for 15 years – since he was 15 years old.
Adam is an exceptional practitioner and young Aboriginal leader in the Orana Far West community. He is also part of Jaanimili, the Aboriginal Services and Development unit in Uniting. The unit was born out of the 2007 ‘Dreaming as One’ internal review of Aboriginal staff recruitment, retention and service delivery, which highlighted the importance of Aboriginal leadership and participation in all layers of the organisation.
“I’ve also worked in a Uniting family restoration program,” he says. Family restoration helps children at risk of entering the foster care system to stay with their parents through early intervention and counselling. Adam has helped within the tight network that is the Aboriginal community.
He sometimes sees families he has worked with previously and they seem grateful. “But it’s not about me. It’s about doing something good for the community.”
Now Adam helps people by finding short term accommodation for homeless youth and those at risk of becoming homeless.
“There’s not a lot of accommodation in Dubbo. Lots of people are homeless and so many are couch surfing. The government departments can’t keep up with the need for housing.”
Adam’s dedication to the community is evident. On weekends he works full time with Wings Out West as a flying instructor and mentor.
“I really want to start my own flying school for Aboriginal students. It’s something positive for young people,” he says. “The commitment to youth work and flying goes hand in hand – they’re both about mentoring young people, and trying to inspire them and show them that everything is possible.”
“I wanted to get into the air force as a young fella, but then ended up having kids. So I didn’t pursue that path, but I fly as often as I can. I’m in the process of working towards my commercial flying license.”
Adam has two children, and hopes to one day pass on the love of flying to them as well.
Adam’s instructor and mentor, is Dan Compton, founder of Wings out West, who has 30 years flying experience. “Dan was in the air force for 12 years and then was a flying doctor. He motivates me and has helped me along the way and I want to do that for others. Even at work, the managers have been very supportive of me, especially with the flying hours. They’re flexible – and they call me the Uniting pilot!”
Adam’s passion and dedication are so strong, not to mention his emphasis on unity, especially the importance of the community and family connections. It’s not surprising he was nominated for Youth Worker of the Year in the 2015 NSW Youth Work Awards.
If you would like to find out more about our services you can get in touch by calling 1800 864 846 or emailing ask@uniting.org
Careers, News, volunteering
sunita glykidis
Posted at 21:21h, 11 March Reply
You are great ambassado Adam, bless you
Post A Reply to sunita glykidis Cancel Reply
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line43
|
__label__wiki
| 0.573182
| 0.573182
|
Hypocrite of the Year
I have just watched The Prime-Minister-Elect make his acceptance speech to Labour Party conference. Gordon Brown’s certainly wasn’t making a chancellor’s speech – there was precious little there about the economy.
Neither was it the speech of a contender in a contested election for the party leadership – he made no attempt whatever to placate those within the Labour party who had hoped that a Brown premiership would mean the end of New Labour. He obviously considers that he has the succession in the bag and was setting out his stall to the country for the next general election. And judging by the sour looks on the faces of some left-wing delegates even as they forced themselves to give Mr Brown a standing ovation, most of the Labour party has reached the same conclusion.
From a technical perspective, ignoring my own opinions about the validity or otherwise of what was said, it was a better speech than any other I have heard him make. But was really stood out about the speech was the truly astonishing hypocrisy. Not since O.J. Simpson promised to bring to justice his wife’s killer have I seen such an amazing display of bare-faced humbug.
Gordon Brown said he learned from his parents ‘to respect others, to tell the truth, to take responsibility’. A pity he wasn’t listening more carefully.
He said that Labour should be proud to have taken one million pensioners out of poverty. This from the man who, with his £5 billion a year raid on pension funds and his over-complicated tax credits which destroyed incentives to save, has done more than any other individual to wreck pension provision in Britain. His Pension Credit is so complicated and unpopular that 1.6 million eligible pensioners fail to receive the money to which they are entitled, because they don’t or cannot complete the forms. And typical pensioners have seen more than a third of the increase in the basic state pension snatched back in higher council tax. As Labour’s own Frank Field pointed out Gordon Brown inherited one of the strongest pensions provisions in Europe, but we now have one of the weakest.
The same Gordon Brown who waxed lyrical today about the need to develop human potential by providing more access to education, was the man who intervened to defeat the rebellion against top-up tuition fees. Usually when Tony Blair has been taking flack for unpopular policies Gordon Brown goes into hiding, but just before the key vote on University fees, Gordon let it be known that he was backing Tony on this one. With that support, top up fees, a policy which is likely to deter many students from poor backgrounds from Higher Education, scraped through by five votes. Without Gordon Brown’s support the policy probably would not have been passed. And he talked about how Conservatives did not want people to go to University – the truth is that the number of University places was expanded far more under the last Conservative government than it has been under this one.
And what a nerve to accuse Conservatives of having believed it was impossible to ban child labour when it was not a socialist but a Tory - Lord Shaftesbury – who introduced the legislation which did exactly that.
Similarly, what a nerve to say that Conservatives believed it was impossible to ban slavery. This country banned slavery first here and in other places within our reach, and then hunted down and destroyed the slave trade on every ocean on earth, many years before the Labour party existed, and there were plenty of Tories and Liberals alike who took part in that campaign. William Wilberforce, the independent MP who campaigned long and hard to ban the slave trade was a close friend of Tory Prime minister William Pitt and was supported by him - Pitt even moved an anti-slavery motion for an investigation on Wilberforce's behalf at one stage when Wilberforce was ill.
But the worst of the lot was that he actually dared to say
“No more ‘The man in Whitehall knows best.’”
That really is in the same league of duplicity as if Tony Blair were to claim to have opposed the war in Iraq. Gordon Brown is one of the biggest exponents of Whitehall meddling in the entire history of British government. He is responsible for a massive increase in the number of inspectors and regulators. There have been 15 new regulations every working day under Labour. The British Chambers of Commerce now estimate that the cost of new regulations on business under Labour has reached nearly £40 billion (BCC, Burden’s Barometer).
Brown has doubled the total spending on auditing local government, expanding certain types of regulation by six thousand percent. Today’s papers report that the number of consultants taken on by this government has added 1p in the pound to income tax. Councils, police, head teachers, doctors and nurses, have all faced dozens of government targets, forms to complete, and controls, and most of these bureaucratic implements have the Treasury’s fingerprints all over them.
For claiming to oppose the idea that “The man in Whitehall knows best”, a philosophy which his entire term of office as chancellor completely exemplifies, I nominate Gordon Brown as Hypocrite of the Year.
Reflections after a trip to Newcastle
A couple of days ago I had occasion to drive to Newcastle and back to visit a work colleague. I was already well aware at an intellectual level that getting from West Cumbria to the North East was quite a slog, but intellectually understanding this is not the same as doing the journey. I went by the A66 to Penrith and M6 to Carlisle: it took well over three hours to get from Gosforth to Carlisle and my colleague, who used to live in Whitehaven, tells me this was par for the course. I came back via Scotch Corner: this also took more than three hours and took me through the most dangerous stretch of road in Britain, where there are signs warning that nearly 200 people have been killed or injured in the last few years. And the train journey is no easier.
Overall the round trip from West Cumbria to Newcastle took longer, and was more tiring, than a one-way trip between West Cumbria and London.
I’m sure this isn’t news to any native Cumbrian and that everyone born here or who has lived here longer than me is thinking something along the lines of “finally worked that out, have you?” But please bear with me. What really bothers me is that decisions about transport networks and the organisation of public services as they affect Cumbria are being made by people in London who have absolutely no idea what that journey is like.
It was obvious at the public inquiry into the daft proposal to de-trunk the A595 that this had been dreamed up on the basis of national criteria and looks totally logical from a desk in London – and it was equally obvious that anyone with first hand knowledge of the roads and communities affected realises that downgrading the road is a really terrible idea.
Similar arguments apply to the future of local health services. There are real difficulties about providing every possible medical service locally in an area like Cumbria. Obviously we want the best possible health care: unfortunately for some specialist services that is going to mean a visit to a regional centre. However, we must never lose sight of the fact that every time a service moves to Carlisle that imposes suffering on people in West Cumbria and when a service is moved to Newcastle it is even worse. And where there is absolutely no alternative but to provide some NHS services at a regional level, perhaps we need to re-think where that should be – many of Cumbria’s North-South transport links, while far from good, are not as difficult as some of the East-West links.
The same issue applies to proposals to regionalise the Fire service and the latest scheme to regionalise the police.
I am deeply unhappy both with the idea of abolishing local fire control rooms and merging Cumbria constabulary into some giant regional force. The government’s argument for larger police forces is that the small ones are supposedly inefficient. Perhaps if they didn’t have such a huge burden of form-filling and could spend more time catching criminals both small and large police forces could be more effective. I heard from a recently retired copper that when he started work thirty years ago they had to fill in forms equivalent to an average of about two pages of A4 when they arrested someone, but that now it would be closer to fifty pages.
It has not been my experience that large operating units are always more capable. There are certainly some efficiency savings with bigger units – economists like me call them economies of scale – but big organisations are usually more bureaucratic, less flexible, and often less able to adapt to local and human needs. Even if we can save on administrative overheads by having larger police forces, it will remain important to take as many policing decisions as possible at a local level. But I remain to be convinced, and any proposals to merge local police forces, especially into huge regions, should be examined with a fine tooth comb.
Double book review: "Incompetence" and "Jennifer Government"
“Incompetence” by Rob Grant
“Jennifer Government” by Max Barry
The two funniest books I have read this year have both been satirical black comedies set in extreme near-future worlds. In each book the author has taken some trends he perceives in modern society, extrapolated them ad absurdum, and had fun seeing how ludicrous he can make the consequences. In this the two books are very similar, but in the targets they take aim at they are diametrically opposed. “Incompetence” takes the mickey out of big government, the nanny state, and the European Union. By contrast “Jennifer Government” satirises America, and that version of free market libertarianism which is so extreme that it is sometimes called anarcho-capitalism.
The preface to “Incompetence” reads as follows:
“Article 13199 of the Pan European constitution: ‘No person shall be prejudiced from employment in any capacity at any level by reason of age, race, creed, or incompitence’” (Yes, the spelling mistake is deliberate – I wonder if Rob Grant had the same problem I did in preventing the software he was writing in from automatically correcting it !)
“Incompetence” is described as “A novel of the far too near future” and is set in a united Europe in which “Non Specific Stupidity” is a registered disability which cannot be used to hold back promotion prospects, waiters have Tourette’s syndrome, airline pilots have vertigo, etc. The story is told through the eyes of an undercover agent who is not what he appears to be, on the tail of a mass-murderer who is all too competent.
Where Rob Grant satirises an over-mighty European Federal government, the Australian Max Barry depicts a future in which his eponymous heroine Jennifer Government is one of the few remaining employees of a state which has been almost entirely privatised. For the two thirds of the world dominated by the USA, government, welfare, tax, and the welfare state have been abolished and the major companies run things to such an extent that most people change their surname to that of their employer.
Back when I was at University I met a number of people who actually wanted to live in a world like the one described in “Jennifer Government” – they thought that taxation is theft, money should be privatised, heroin and all other drugs legalised, etc. One of them, now an MP (though he has since grown up and is no longer an extremist – in fact he’s now arguably to the left of Tony Blair) once criticised me for believing in the National Health Service. Another told me that Libertarians had a lot in common with anarchists as they were “both anti-state.” All the major political parties have had problems with hardliners taking over their student wings, and these people were so over-the-top that when they took over the Federation of Conservative Students it eventually had to be shut down by Norman Tebbit for being too right wing.
Both books bear just enough resemblance to real world events to be very funny indeed, but if you take either of them too seriously you may be a trifle paranoid. If you’re into black comedy or satirical humour, I would recommend that you read both and gain additional amusement by reflecting on what a complex world we live in that two such completely opposite satirical visions both have sufficient truth in them to make the books work.
WHERE HAVE ALL THE DENTISTS GONE ?
One of the issues which regularly came up in Copeland during the recent election was the impossibility of finding a dentist. This is becoming an increasingly acute problem in many parts of Britain, and Cumbria is one of three or four rural counties where the lack of access to dental services has become totally unacceptable.
During the run-up to the election WHICH asked candidates to support a pledge to work for improved dental services: I was happy to endorse this and would have made it a priority had I been elected.
Over the past few months the number of dental practices in Cumbria which are taking on new NHS patients has varied between three and nil. As of yesterday I was advised that there is not a single practice taking on new NHS patients in the county. And even if you are prepared to pay, many practices are not taking on new private patients either. If you are not fortunate enough to find one of the exceptions, the only way to get dental treatment short of an emergency is to travel anything up to a hundred miles.
Tony Blair promised five years ago that by now everyone in Britain would have access to an NHS dentist. As usual, he broke that promise.
Britain is not spending enough on training new dentists, and we do not have an adequate reward framework to ensure that it is worth the while of existing dentists to provide a basic service. And that isn’t only about money. One of my contemporaries at University who became a dentist on graduation recently switched to private practice, after a successful career as an NHS dentist, and subsequently wrote to tell me that she wished she had done so years ago – not just because of the money, but because of the freedom from all the bureaucratic rules and regulations.
Years of neglect will not be put right overnight but we need to make a start. This should involve a proper contract between NHS dentists and their patients so that everyone knows where they stand. We also need a sensible payment system based on the number of patients on roll rather than the number of procedures carried out, which should include a limit on how much patients will have to pay but a guaranteed adequate income for dentists which gives a reward for their skills and checks the steady loss of good dentists to cosmetic work.
Copeland’s MP, Jedi Jamie, has suggested in parliament that “golden handcuffs” for dentists might be part of the solution. Apparently the curriculum at the Jedi academy doesn’t include the law of unintended consequences. If you put conditions like that on any profession, one of the first side-effects is that fewer people are attracted to it.
Cumbria, and Britain, deserve better.
Don't tell me what to believe
One of the most irritating things in political discussion is people who tell you what your own views are. Usually this is a variant of a debating trick – the people who are taking one side in a debate want to be up against the most extreme form of the opposing position and claim the middle ground, so they try to paint the other side into the corner of adopting the strongest possible position.
Tony Blair is a past master at this. For example, until very recently – to be precise, until French and Dutch voters killed both the European constitution and any realistic chance of British entry to the Euro - he was always playing this game on Europe. Mr Blair and his acolytes would suggest that we had two choices with regard to the European Union – sign up to the constitution, or leave altogether. (Before that, they suggested that the two choices were to scrap the pound and replace it with the Euro, or leave altogether.)
Like the majority of British voters, who are neither federalist eurofanatics nor hardline anti-europeans, I became extremely tired of Mr Blair telling me that if I didn’t support his own European projects I had to support British withdrawal instead.
Funnily enough when the French voted down the constitution I don’t recall anyone suggesting that France might have to leave the European Union. And suddenly Mr Blair adopted our position, the existence of which he had previously denied, and now presents himself as the arch champion of a more democratic and decentralised Europe of co-operating nations.
On other issues, however, both the Blairites and often their opponents are still playing the same trick. Let’s look at a few examples
Fallacy number one – If you don’t support the war in Iraq, you must want Saddam Hussein back.
Oh come off it. It is perfectly natural to view both the thousands of deaths caused by the war and the anarchy and unrest which has followed it, and the vast numbers murdered by Saddam Hussein, as terrible disasters. It is legitimate for people on either side of the debate about the Iraq war to point to considerable loss of life which resulted or would have resulted from the opposing side’s policy. But the decision of whether or not to invade was a choice between evils, and the fact that someone has come down on one side does not mean they are happy about all the consequences unless they have actually been foolish enough to say that they support Saddam or that everything in Iraq today is wonderful.
Fallacy number two – If you want to maintain British liberties you must be undermining the war against terrorism
The need to strike a balance between security and freedom has existed as long as there has been civilisation. The human rights to freedom from arbitrary arrest and protection from being blown up by terrorists – or shot by policemen who have mistaken you for a terrorist – are all important and part of what makes this country what it is. We found out in Northern Ireland that arbitrary detention without trial does not necessarily help us defeat terrorists. Sometimes it creates injustice which leads to more terrorism. There will be circumstances where we have to give up some liberty to ensure our own protection. But this should never be done without the most careful consideration of the consequences.
Fallacy number three – if you suggest that the war in Iraq (or any other government policy) has made terrorist attacks more likely, you’re justifying those attacks.
There was no justification for 9/11 - period. There was no justification for the tube bombs - period. There is no justification for trying to change the policy of any democratic state by blowing up men, women and children - period. Those who carry out such atrocities are not soldiers or martyrs but murderers - period. (That view is shared by the vast majority of British Muslims.)
It is quite possible to combine the belief that terrorism is wrong with a wish to ask ourselves what policies will most effectively help us to combat terrorism and recognise where we got it wrong. As it happens, I think that the removal of the Taleban regime in Afghanistan probably reduced the terrorist threat to the rest of the world but that the overall effect of the war in Iraq has been to increase it.
Fallacy number four –if you want to fight racism, islamophobia, or any other evil, the best way is to pass more laws against it.
In the past few years we have seen a positive torrent of new laws, often badly thought out, often criminalising things which are already illegal, as a substitute for effectively enforcing the laws we already have. Unfortunately these laws are often badly drafted, and can end up criminalising things which should not be illegal.
I would dearly like to see a rule adopted by parliament for at least the next ten years that for every new law they pass, another one should be repealed. Sadly the flood of ill considered and useless or downright harmful legislation shows no sign of abating.
A week is a long time in Northern Ireland ...
I keep two versions of this blog - one on the News and Star website and one at www.blogger.com. Usually I post the same items on both in the same day. Owing to a slight misunderstanding between myself and my long-suffering staff, there was a delay in posting some of this month's entries on the blogspot site.
So when I came to post here a piece which I had written immediately after the World Cup qualifier between England and Northern Ireland, the senseless violence of the last few days made the optimistic tone of that entry seem wholly inappropriate. I am convinced that my basic point was right, but I have rewritten the piece to reflect more recent events.
Last week when the final whistle blew, with the score at one goal for Northern Ireland to none for England, the cameras zoomed in on the scene where two types of flag were being waved in close proximity by jubilant supporters. Some were green flags belong to ecstatic Irish supporters, from Ireland's Catholic community – the others were the flag of St George modified by loyalist symbols, and these flags were being waved by equally ecstatic football supporters from the Ulster protestant community.
I never thought I would see such flags from those two communities being waved in jubilation, side by side, as both sides celebrated the same event. I know some people can never regard an English sporting defeat as anything other than a national disaster. But to me – a British Anglican married to an Irish catholic – the sight of protestants and catholics celebrating together said something positive about the ability of people to come together, compared to which the loss of the match paled into insignificance.
But Northern Ireland has seen many false dawns and this was yet another. In the past few days of rioting both policemen and innocent women and children have been injured by thugs who wrongly describe themselves as "loyalists".
Guys, nobody who throws things at, let along fires automatic weapons at, Her Majesty's police officers for trying to do their job, is in a position to describe himself as a loyalist. And nobody who takes part in such behaviour or refuses to condemn it, whatever community they come from, has any business claiming that they are operating on the principles of any form of Christianity, Protestant or Catholic.
Jesus Christ told his followers to "love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you." And when they came to arrest him, Jesus told two of his disciples who tried to defend him with force to put their swords away, saying "those who live by the sword shall die by the sword." The first century Aramaic language didn't have words for "machine gun" or "petrol bomb" but I think it's fairly clear that the sense of the instruction covers them.
If we want peace in Northern Ireland we have to make sure that those who follow democratic paths are rewarded and those who use or threaten violence are not. That message has not always been sent as clearly as it should have been. We owe it to the children of Northern Ireland to make it clear to everyone. Last week's scenes of celebration as protestants and catholics waved their flags side by side represent the future. The rioting of the past few days does not.
KEEP HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL DAY
I drafted this blog entry on my laptop yesterday while sitting in front of the TV and unable to tear myself away from the final afternoon of the Ashes.
I had been at the Oval 20 years ago when England last won the Ashes at home. This has been the most fantastic test series – one of the Australian commentators described it as one of the best of all time. And after some stunning close finishes and fiercely fought matches a magnificent century from Pietersen was bringing England within sight of regaining the trophy. It has been an emotionally charged occasion: as Richie Benaud was saying farewell in the commentary box on his last afternoon at the end of many years as a test cricket commentator, Kevin Pietersen’s innings was finally concluded by an unplayable delivery from McGrath. As Pietersen left the field, Shane Warne shook his hand, and we saw one of the greatest bowlers of all time - finishing his test career with yet another ten-wicket haul and as the leading wicket taker of the series - shake hands with the new batsman who in his debut test series has been the leading run scorer and almost certainly helped delivered a historic victory. This was the past shaking hands with the future.
Which brings me to a point about the past and the future – for as the saying goes, those who forget the past are condemned to repeat it.
When Holocaust Memorial Day was introduced, I was responsible for organising the first commemoration in St Albans as chairman of the relevant committee. It was not practical to put together a local commemorative service which would have done the event justice, so instead we organised an exhibition using material provided from the lead government department, DCMS. That material was thoroughly inclusive. Although it justifiably gave particular attention to the murder by the Nazis of six million Jews and a similar number of other victims including Gypsies and mental patients, Holocaust memorial day also commemorated many other acts of genocide including some against Muslims such as the massacre of Bosnians at Srebrenica.
There were a few people who expressed to me privately a minority view that Britain is already obsessed by the history of the World War Two era, and this was yet another repetition of a story which is very well known. However the majority, and especially all my Jewish friends, were very strongly in favour of setting aside a day to remember the terrible crimes which humans have committed against one another and giving it a name which commemorates what they rightly regard as the single most ghastly episode of mass murder in history.
I agree, and was deeply disappointed when certain Muslim leaders who ought to have known better boycotted Holocaust Memorial Day earlier this year on the inaccurate grounds that the event is supposedly not inclusive.
Anyone who read the material which DCMS put out knows that this is simply not true – Muslims in Bosnia and elsewhere were mentioned along with Armenians, Rwandans, Latin and Native Americans – you name a group of victims of racial mass murder or ethnic cleansing in the past few centuries, and they were included. This also appears to have escaped several committees of Muslims set up to advise the government who have advised that the event should be renamed Genocide Memorial Day and suggested that the present name gives the impression that “Western lives have more value than non-western lives.”
Apart from the fact that the Jewish race originated in the Middle East, and it is therefore odd to describe them as Westerners, there is nothing in the way the event has been organised which would give a reasonable person that impression. All the Holocaust Memorial Day material which I have seen bent over backwards to avoid creating the impression that some lives are more valuable than others.
We need to improve relations with the Muslim community, and that imposes a responsibility on both sides. Non-Muslims must do their best to respect the faith and reasonable concerns of those who follow Islam, but Muslims must also respect the beliefs of others, and both sides must work to dispel damaging stereotypes and prejudices. Both sides must also pay the other the challenging compliment of not being afraid to criticise those who they think are in the wrong, which is what I am doing now.
Any Muslim leader who appears to downplay the significance of the Holocaust is failing to rise to that challenge. I do not believe that most modern British Muslims are anti-semitic. I suspect that those who boycotted Holocaust Memorial Day or suggested that the name be changed are guilty of foolishness and insensitivity rather than racism. But one of the most damaging stereotypes against Muslims is that they are particularly prone to prejudice against Jewish people. Every time a Muslim leader reinforces that image, he (I use the male gender deliberately because it is always a man) damages the reputation of Islam and lets down his own community.
Posted by Chris Whiteside at 6:08 pm 1 comment: Links to this post
Double book review: "Incompetence" and "Jennifer G...
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line48
|
__label__wiki
| 0.514487
| 0.514487
|
Home > Commentaries > Coffman Commentaries > Numbers > Chapter 26
Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament
CD-ROM $39.95
Here is the text of this entire chapter:
And it came to pass after the plague, that Jehovah spake unto Moses and unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, saying, Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers' houses, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel. And Moses and Eleazar the priest spake with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying, Take the sum of the people, from twenty years old and upward; as Jehovah commanded Moses and the children of Israel, that came forth out of the land of Egypt.
"Reuben, the first-born of Israel; the sons of Reuben: of Hanoch, the family of the Hanochites; of Pallu, the family of the Palluites; of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites: of Carmi, the family of the Carmites. These are the families of the Reubenites; and they that were numbered of them were forty and three thousand and seven hundred and thirty. And the sons of Pallu: Eliab. And the sons of Eliah: Nemuel, and Dathan, and Abiram. These are that Dathan and Abiram, who were called of the congregation, who strove against Moses and against Aaron in the company of Korah, when they strove against Jehovah, and the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up together with Korah, when that company died; what time the fire devoured two hundred and fifty men, and they became a sign. Notwithstanding, the sons of Korah died not.
"The sons of Simeon after their families: of Nemuel, the family of the Nemuelites; of Jamin, the family of the Jaminites; of Jachin, the family of the Jachinites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites; of Shaul, the family of the Shaulites. These are the families of the Simeonites, twenty and two thousand and two hundred.
"The sons of Gad after their families: of Zephon, the family of the Zephonites; of Haggi, the family of the Haggites, of Shuni, the family of the Shunites; of Ozni, the family of the Oznites; of Eri, the family of the Erites; of Arod, the family of the Arodites; of Areli, the family of the Arelites. These are the families of the sons of Gad according to those that were numbered of them, forty thousand and five hundred.
"The sons of Judah, Er and Onan; and Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Judah after their families were: of Shelab, the family of the Shelanites; of Perez, the family of the Perezites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites. And the sons of Perez were: of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Hamul, the family of the Hamulites. These are the families of Judah according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and sixteen thousand and five hundred.
"The sons of Issachar after their families: of Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Puvah, the family of the Punites; of Jashub, the family of the Jashubites; of Shimron, the family of the Shimronites. These are the families of Issachar according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and four thousand and three hundred.
"The sons of Zebulun after their families: of Sered, the family of the Seredites; of Elon, the family of the Elonites; of Jahleel, the family of the Jahleelites. These are the families of the Zebulunites according to those that were numbered of them, threescore thousand and five hundred.
"The sons of Joseph after their families: Manasseh and Ephraim. The sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites; and Machir begat Gilead: of Gilead, the family of the Gileadites. These are the sons of Gilead: of Iezer, the family of the Iezerites; of Helek, the family of the Helekites; and of Asriel, the family of the Asrielites; and of Shechem, the family of the Shechemites; and Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites; and of Hepher, the family of the Hepherites. And Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters: and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. These are the families of Manasseh; and they that were numbered of them were fifty and two thousand and seven hundred.
"These are the sons of Ephraim after their families: of Shutheleah, the family of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the family of the Becherites; of Tahan, the family of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the family of the Eranites. These are the families of the sons of Ephraim according to those that were numbered of them, thirty and two thousand and five hundred. These are the sons of Joseph after their families.
"The sons of Benjamin after their families: of Bela, the family of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family of the Ahiramites; of Shephupham, the family of the Shephuphamites; of Hupham, the family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: of Ard, the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites. These are the sons of Benjamin after their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and six hundred.
"These are the sons of Dan after their families: of Shuham, the family of the Shuhamites. These are the families of Dan after their families. All the families of the Shuhamites, according to those that were numbered of them, were threescore and four thousand and four hundred.
"The sons of Asher after their families: of Imnah, the family of the Imnites; of Ishvi, the family of the Ishvites; of Beriah, the family of the Beriites. Of the sons of Beirah: of Heber, the family of the Heberites; of Malchiel, the family of the Malchielites. And the name of the daughter of Asher was Serah. These are the families of the sons of Asher according to those that were numbered of them, fifty and three thousand and four hundred.
"The sons of Naphtali after their families: of Jahzeel, the family of the Jahzeelites; of Guni, the family of the Gunires; of Jezer, the family of the Jezerites; of Shillem, the family of the Shillemites. These are the sons of Naphtali according to their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and four hundred.
"These are they that were numbered of the children of Israel, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty.
"And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance: to every one according to those that were numbered of him shall his inheritance be given. Not-withstanding, the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit. According to the lot shall their inheritance be divided between the more and the fewer.
"And these are they that were numbered of the Levites after their families: of Gershon, the family of the Gershonites; of Kohath, the family of the Kohathites; of Merari, the family of the Merarites. These are the families of Levi: the family of the Libnites, the family of the Hebronites, the family of the Mahlites, the family of the Mushites, the family of the Korahites. And Kohath begat Amram. And the name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister. And unto Aaron, were born Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. And Nadab and Abihu died, when they offered strange fire before Jehovah. And they that were numbered of them were twenty and three thousand, every male from a month old and upward: for they were not numbered among the children of Israel, because there was no inheritance given them among the children of Israel.
"These are they that were numbered by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho. But among those there was not a man of them that were numbered by Moses and Aaron the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai. For Jehovah had said to them, They shall surely die in the wilderness. And there was not left a man of them, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun."
Here is a graphic summary of this census and that of the first chapter, showing the changes during the intervening 38 years.
GRAPHIC SUMMARY
First Second Net % %
Tribe Families Census Census Change Gain Loss
REUBEN 4 46,500 43,730 2,270 6%
SIMEON 5 59,300 22,200 37,100 63%
GAD 7 45,650 40,500 5,150 11%
JUDAH 5 74,600 76,500 1,900 2 1/2%
ISSACHAR 4 54,400 64,300 9,900 18%
ZEBULUN 3 57,400 60,500 3,100 5 1/2%
EPHRAIM 4 40,500 32,500 8,000 20%
MANASSEH 8 32,200 52,700 20,500 63%
BENJAMIN 7 35,400 45,600 10,200 29%
DAN 1 62,700 64,400 1,700 2 1/2%
ASHER 5 41,500 53,400 11,900 28%
NAPHTALI 4 53,400 45,400 8,000 15%
Totals 603,550 601,730
Evidently, these figures were all rounded off at the nearest one hundred, but the reason for the exception for Gad in the first census, and for Reuben in the second census is not known. In those cases, we have a stray fifty and a stray thirty.
It is foolish indeed to question the authenticity of these figures. As Noth said:
"The suggestion that these numbers are a pure invention or that they are reckoned on the basis of some numerical speculation is just as improbable in the case of Num. 26 as it was in the case of Num. 1."F1
More and more scholars are receiving such conclusions as this one; but some are still following the pattern of blatant denials so characteristic of the first half of this century. Marsh, for example, declared, "The numbers are artificial."F2 His denial is typical in that he offered no proof and gave no intelligent reason whatever why his flat denial of God's Word should be taken seriously.
That some scholars do not believe these figures is of no consequence at all. Satan has always denied God's Word.
"From here to the end of Numbers we have preparations for entering the land of Canaan."F3 There were several reasons for this census.
(1) It was a necessary prelude to a fair division of the Promised Land among the Israelites.
(2) In the light of certain warfare upon their entering Canaan, it was most important for the leaders to know the relative strength of the tribes as well as the total strength of the nation.
(3) It was needed to demonstrate the truth of God's promise that the Sinai rebels should not enter Canaan.
There are many similarities in the two censuses, but there are also many differences. Some of the tribes lost very heavily, and others gained, and, surprisingly, the grand totals are in a practical sense almost identical! One difference is the emphasis on families in the second census. Smick thought this came about because the census was taken with the tribes' "inheritance in view."F4
The final clause of Num. 26:4 does not indicate that the people in this census came out of Egypt. It indicates that this census is to be taken in the manner of the first.
The shocking decline of the size of the tribe of Simeon is easily understood in the light of the Simeon rebellion under Zimri in Num. 25. A major share of those slain by the plague were evidently Simeonites.
The mention of Serah "the daughter of Asher" in Num. 26:46 is not easily explained. Of course, the critical scholars cut the Gordian knot by making the clause "dittographic."F5 However, in our view such allegations are not a legitimate way of explaining our ignorance! We simply do not know why the name of Asher's daughter is found here, and, although it looks out of place, it is possible that there were very good reasons for its presence here, if we only knew them. Certainly, there are excellent reasons why the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 26:33) are included in the family of Joseph, and, likewise, there might very well have been some excellent reason for the appearance of the name of Serah in this passage, a reason now lost, of course.
And it came to pass after the plague, that Jehovah spake unto Moses and unto Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, saying, Take the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, from twenty years old and upward, by their fathers' houses, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel. And Moses and Eleazar the priest spake with them in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho, saying, [Take the sum of the people], from twenty years old and upward; as Jehovah commanded Moses and the children of Israel, that came forth out of the land of Egypt. Reuben, the first-born of Israel; the sons of Reuben: [of] Hanoch, the family of the Hanochites; of Pallu, the family of the Palluites; of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Carmi, the family of the Carmites. These are the families of the Reubenites; and they that were numbered of them were forty and three thousand and seven hundred and thirty. And the sons of Pallu: Eliab. And the sons of Eliab: Nemuel, and Dathan, and Abiram. These are that Dathan and Abiram, who were called of the congregation, who strove against Moses and against Aaron in the company of Korah, when they strove against Jehovah, and the earth opened its mouth, and swallowed them up together with Korah, when that company died; what time the fire devoured two hundred and fifty men, and they became a sign. Notwithstanding, the sons of Korah died not. The sons of Simeon after their families: of Nemuel, the family of the Nemuelites; of Jamin, the family of the Jaminites; of Jachin, the family of the Jachinites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites; of Shaul, the family of the Shaulites. These are the families of the Simeonites, twenty and two thousand and two hundred. The sons of Gad after their families: of Zephon, the family of the Zephonites; of Haggi, the family of the Haggites; of Shuni, the family of the Shunites; of Ozni, the family of the Oznites; of Eri, the family of the Erites; of Arod, the family of the Arodites; of Areli, the family of the Arelites. These are the families of the sons of Gad according to those that were numbered of them, forty thousand and five hundred. The sons of Judah: Er and Onan; and Er and Onan died in the land of Canaan. And the sons of Judah after their families were: of Shelah, the family of the Shelanites; of Perez, the family of the Perezites; of Zerah, the family of the Zerahites. And the sons of Perez were: of Hezron, the family of the Hezronites; of Hamul, the family of the Hamulites. These are the families of Judah according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and sixteen thousand and five hundred. The sons of Issachar after their families: [of] Tola, the family of the Tolaites; of Puvah, the family of the Punites; of Jashub, the family of the Jashubites; of Shimron, the family of the Shimronites. These are the families of Issachar according to those that were numbered of them, threescore and four thousand and three hundred. The sons of Zebulun after their families: of Sered, the family of the Seredites; of Elon, the family of the Elonites; of Jahleel, the family of the Jahleelites. These are the families of the Zebulunites according to those that were numbered of them, threescore thousand and five hundred. The sons of Joseph after their families: Manasseh and Ephraim. The sons of Manasseh: of Machir, the family of the Machirites; and Machir begat Gilead; of Gilead, the family of the Gileadites. These are the sons of Gilead: [of] Iezer, the family of the Iezerites; of Helek, the family of the Helekites; and [of] Asriel, the family of the Asrielites; and [of] Shechem, the family of the Shechemites; and [of] Shemida, the family of the Shemidaites; and [of] Hepher, the family of the Hepherites. And Zelophehad the son of Hepher had no sons, but daughters: and the names of the daughters of Zelophehad were Mahlah, and Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah. These are the families of Manasseh; and they that were numbered of them were fifty and two thousand and seven hundred. These are the sons of Ephraim after their families: of Shuthelah, the family of the Shuthelahites; of Becher, the family of the Becherites; of Tahan, the family of the Tahanites. And these are the sons of Shuthelah: of Eran, the family of the Eranites. These are the families of the sons of Ephraim according to those that were numbered of them, thirty and two thousand and five hundred. These are the sons of Joseph after their families. The sons of Benjamin after their families: of Bela, the family of the Belaites; of Ashbel, the family of the Ashbelites; of Ahiram, the family of the Ahiramites; of Shephupham, the family of the Shuphamites; of Hupham, the family of the Huphamites. And the sons of Bela were Ard and Naaman: [of Ard], the family of the Ardites; of Naaman, the family of the Naamites. These are the sons of Benjamin after their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and six hundred. These are the sons of Dan after their families: of Shuham, the family of the Shuhamites. These are the families of Dan after their families. All the families of the Shuhamites, according to those that were numbered of them, were threescore and four thousand and four hundred. The sons of Asher after their families: of Imnah, the family of the Imnites; of Ishvi, the family of the Ishvites; of Beriah, the family of the Berites. Of the sons of Beriah: of Heber, the family of the Heberites; of Malchiel, the family of the Malchielites. And the name of the daughter of Asher was Serah. These are the families of the sons of Asher according to those that were numbered of them, fifty and three thousand and four hundred. The sons of Naphtali after their families: of Jahzeel, the family of the Jahzeelites; of Guni, the family of the Gunites; of Jezer, the family of the Jezerites; of Shillem, the family of the Shillemites. These are the families of Naphtali according to their families; and they that were numbered of them were forty and five thousand and four hundred. These are they that were numbered of the children of Israel, six hundred thousand and a thousand seven hundred and thirty. And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying, Unto these the land shall be divided for an inheritance according to the number of names. To the more thou shalt give the more inheritance, and to the fewer thou shalt give the less inheritance: to every one according to those that were numbered of him shall his inheritance be given. Notwithstanding, the land shall be divided by lot: according to the names of the tribes of their fathers they shall inherit. According to the lot shall their inheritance be divided between the more and the fewer. And these are they that were numbered of the Levites after their families: of Gershon, the family of the Gershonites; of Kohath, the family of the Kohathites; of Merari, the family of the Merarites. These are the families of Levi: the family of the Libnites, the family of the Hebronites, the family of the Mahlites, the family of the Mushites, the family of the Korahites. And Kohath begat Amram. And the name of Amram's wife was Jochebed, the daughter of Levi, who was born to Levi in Egypt: and she bare unto Amram Aaron and Moses, and Miriam their sister. And unto Aaron were born Nadab and Abihu, Eleazar and Ithamar. And Nadab and Abihu died, when they offered strange fire before Jehovah. And they that were numbered of them were twenty and three thousand, every male from a month old and upward: for they were not numbered among the children of Israel, because there was no inheritance given them among the children of Israel. These are they that were numbered by Moses and Eleazar the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the plains of Moab by the Jordan at Jericho. But among these there was not a man of them that were numbered by Moses and Aaron the priest, who numbered the children of Israel in the wilderness of Sinai. For Jehovah had said of them, They shall surely die in the wilderness. And there was not left a man of them, save Caleb the son of Jephunneh, and Joshua the son of Nun.
(Numbers 26:11). As should have been expected, this declaration is greeted with screams of contradiction. See Plaut and others.F6 In such instances, it is usually most helpful to read the comments of great scholars who lived prior to the current times of unbelief, and it is no surprise to find the perfect answer to such charges as follows:
"It is difficult to reconcile this place with Num. 16:27,31-33, where it seems to be intimated that not only the men, but the wives, and the sons, and the little ones of Korah, Dathan and Abiram, were swallowed up in the earthquake. See especially Num. 26:27, collated with Num. 26:31-22, but the text here expressly says, "The children of Korah died not"; and on a close inspection of Num. 16:27, we find that the sons and little ones of Dathan and Abiram alone are mentioned:
"So they went up from the tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, on every side: And Dathan and Abiram came out -- and their wives and their sons, and their little ones."
Here is no mention of the children of Korah; they therefore escaped."F7
Notice once more the phenomenon that continually appears in the Bible. Mistaken and false interpretations usually result, not from ignorance of Greek or Hebrew, but from a simple failure to respect the grammar. If the critics had only paused to consider that the antecedent of the pronoun "their" in Num. 16:27 was Dathan and Abiram and did NOT include Korah (necessarily), they would not have been betrayed into the error of alleging a contradiction in the Bible.
In Num. 26:52-56, we have instructions for dividing the land of Canaan among the Israelites. It was to be done by "lot," that is, by casting lots; and yet it was also to be carried out in a manner proportionately to the numerical size of the various tribes, the larger ones getting more, and the smaller ones getting less. Noth declared that these divine commands were "incompatible,"F8 and contradictory, but the Israelites found no difficulty in carrying out God's instructions. They evidently cast lots for the general sectors of the Promised land in which the tribes would be settled, and then, the actual amount of land that went to each was apportioned on the basis of the numbers of the people.F9
The real wonder of the dividing of the land lies not in how it was done, but in the fact that God divided it to Israel BEFORE they ever entered it! What God promises is already AS GOOD AS DONE!
Footnotes for Numbers 26
1: Martin Noth, Numbers, a Commentary, (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1968), p. 204.
2: John Marsh, Interpreter's Bible, Vol. 2, Numbers (New York: Abingdon Press, 1955), p. 265.
3: T. Carson, New Layman's Bible Commentary, Numbers (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1979), p. 274.
4: Elmer Smick, Wycliffe Bible Commentary, Old Testament, Vol. 1 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1962), p. 146.
5: George Buchanan Gray, International Critical Commentary, Numbers (Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1903), p. 394.
6: w. Gunther Plaut, Torah, a Modern Commentary, Vol. 4 (Philadelphia: The Union of American Hebrew Congregations, 1979), p. 261.
7: Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Vol. 1 (London: T. Mason and G. Lane, 1837), p. 702.
8: Martin Noth, op. cit., p. 208.
9: J. A. Thompson, New Bible Commentary, Revised, Numbers (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970), p. 193.
James Burton Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Numbers 26". "Coffman Commentaries on the Old and New Testament". <http://classic.studylight.org/com/bcc/view.cgi?book=nu&chapter=026>. Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line49
|
__label__wiki
| 0.873857
| 0.873857
|
Everything that Happens Will Happen Today
About Lyrics and Credits Press Related
Lyrics and Credits
Music Review: David Byrne and Brian Eno, Everything That Happens Will Happen Today
David Byrne & Brian Eno: Everything That Happens Will Happen Today
Eno, Byrne ‘Happen’ with bright sounds about dark times
By Greg Kot
The new album Everything That Happens Will Happen Today marks the first collaboration between David Byrne and Brian Eno in nearly three decades, and once again it brings out the best in both artists.
With Eno producing, Byrne's Talking Heads evolved from an edgy, somewhat brittle-sounding new wave band into a riotous funk-punk beast on three albums from 1978 to 1980, climaxing with the landmark "Remain in Light." During that time, Eno and Byrne also teamed up to create a futuristic collage, My Life in the Bush of Ghosts which anticipated the sample-based recordings of hip-hop.
Everything That Happens Will Happen Today is unlike any of those earlier projects. For one thing, it's distributed without the aid of a major record company. The album is available to be streamed for free or downloaded (320 kbps MP3s with no copying restrictions) for $8.99 from a Web site, everythingthathappens.com. A physical CD can also be ordered for $11.99 (or as a $69.99 "deluxe package") but won't be available for at least a few more weeks.
Musically, it departs from the more turbulent work Eno and Byrne have done previously. On the surface, it's an inviting, song-based collection of major-key melodies. But as usual with these two artists, there's more to it. This is a bright sounding album about dark times.
The two artists collaborated via e-mail, with Eno creating most of the music and Byrne supplying lyrics and vocals. A handful of musicians add instruments here and there, but the sound is unmistakably Eno-esque in the way it blends tones into an evocative wash of blurred aural colors. These atmospheric arrangements spur one of the strongest vocal performances of Byrne's career.
He and Eno have described the music as "electronic gospel." Byrne will never be mistaken for a gospel singer, but his adenoidal yelp has never sounded fuller, warmer, more confiding. He appropriates gospel's attitude as much as its technique, its unyielding optimism in the face of hard times, whether the environmental disaster of burning lakes and falling stars that consumes "My Big Nurse" or the soul-crushing oppression of "Poor Boy."
Eno's burbling soundscapes suggest the impending turmoil even as they fight against it; the brass section in "Life Is Long" sounds like a freedom-march fanfare from the civil rights era. And Byrne's vocals refuse to knuckle under, name-checking Sam Cooke's "A Change Is Gonna Come" for inspiration in "The River."
"Tigers walk behind me, they are to remind me that/I'm lost but I'm not afraid," Byrne sings.
In the end, music is a last refuge.
In the lovely, closing hymn "The Lighthouse," darkness is about to envelop everything. But a gentle chorus sings "the whole night through" until, finally, the moon appears.
|
cc/2020-05/en_head_0019.json.gz/line57
|
End of preview.