"Creating some blue pigment out of the blue should have required inventing new chemistry and there was no way to just add that recipe to their genes. It was much easier for evolution to change the shape of their bodies ever so slightly at the microscopic level and create blue using physics instead. They solved a biology problem with engineering. "
Didn't they solve a biology problem with biology? Was it even a problem? Engineering is the application of knowledge to the design of something. Engineering isn't the best word to describe a mutation that continues due to natural selection by the collective result of the unorganized actions of multitudes of the birds in questions and predators of those birds.
One of my pet peeves is people ascribing agency to evolution as if evolution has a master plan (while sitting on a cloud with a lightning bolt in hand).
Pictured : Evolution sitting on his throne in the clouds with lightning bolts in one hand considering how to engineer blue for the bird's feathers.
"Historically, tyrants have tried to control the press using 4 techniques that, worryingly, Donald Trump is already using."
1. Berate the media and turn the public against it. Trump refers to journalists as “dishonest,” “disgusting” and “scum.” When Trump lies—claiming, for example, “massive voter fraud” in the election, and that he “won in a landslide”—and the media call him on those lies, Trump claims the media is lying. Even televised satires he labels “unfunny, one-sided, and pathetic.”
2. Limit media access. Trump hasn’t had a news conference since July. (His two predecessors had news conferences within days of being declared president.) He’s blocked the media from traveling with him, and even from knowing with whom he’s meeting. His phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, which occurred shortly after the election, was first reported by the Kremlin.
3. Threaten the media. During the campaign, Trump threatened to sue the New York Times for libel in response to an article about two women who accused him of touching them inappropriately years ago, and then another that revealed part of his 1995 tax returns. He says he plans to “open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money.”
4. Bypass the media and communicate with the public directly. Trump tweets incessantly, issues videos, and holds large rallies—all of which further enable him to lie directly to the public with impunity. The word “media” comes from “intermediate” between the powerful and the public. The media hold the powerful accountable by correcting their misstatements, asking them hard questions, and reporting on what they do. Apparently Trump wants to eliminate such intermediaries.
Historically, these 4 techniques have been used by demagogues to erode the freedom and independence of the press. Donald Trump seems intent on doing exactly this.
Let's look at his 4 criteria and see of Robert Reich thinks Obama is a tyrant:
1)berate the media - The Obama admin called Fox News illegitimate. I recall Obama on the Daily Show bashing the media for being focused on shiny objects. (as an aside, why should the media be free from criticism? They often truly deserve it.) I'm not sure if he ever committed the unforgivable sin (and the hallmark of all the worst tyrants) of calling a televised satire "unfunny."
2)Limit media access - Obama kicked some reporters from less fawning newspapers off his plane during the campaign while claiming a lack of room. There wasn't room on the plane for a NY Post reporter but Glamour magazine? Sure. The Obama admin tried to exclude Fox from pool interviews and when the other news orgs balked everyone's interview time was reduced (see link above). Obama's EPA head Lisa Jackson used the nom-de-plume "Richard Windsor" to evade FOIA requests.
3) Threaten the media. The Obama admin referred to reporter James Rosen as a co-conspirator to get a warrant to monitor his email over time because he had written an article based on a source in the State Dept. and then they tried to keep the warrant a secret. Note the selective prosecution of leaks. Obama's appointment Ann Ravel of the FEC wants posting of a video to youtube with a political point of view to be subject to FEC regulations. Obama has said the Citizen's United case was wrongly decided. Keep in mind that when asked "It's a 500-page book, and at the end it says, so vote for X, the government could ban that?" the response from the Obama administration was "Yes"
4) Bypass the media and communicate directly with the public. Yeah Obama has held rallys, TV speeches, radio addresses, TV infomercials * and posted to twitter.
Following is my attempt at being a tyrant in a single sentence :
Because some reporters are awful, lying incompetent hacks(#1 berate the media) I think the law should be changed by Congress so there should be one standard for libel for everyone instead of a separate standard for a "public figure" (#3Threaten the media) and I'm going to exercise my free speech rights to post this on my blog (#4 Bypass the media and communicate directly with the public) but I will refuse to do a press conference (#2 Limit media access).
(I'd like to point out that while I support having a single standard for libel I am opposed to changing the standard to where the defendant has to prove something is true instead of the complainant having to prove the truth is on their side. I think the value of free speech tends to outweigh the burden of having to present the truth. Also there is the very real idea that something can be true without having proof right at hand. Technically, this puts me at odds with the UK and France where the defendant has to offer proof that what the published is true. Does this mean they are as big a tyrant as me?
* at the TV infomercial link above to the NY Times is headlined "Infomercial for Obama Is Big Success in Ratings" and, while I could have sworn the NYT was interested in the corrosive effect of money in politics, there is absolutely zero mention of it – not even a mention of how much was spent.
------------------------ Update Feb 10, 2017 : I forgot this important evidence as to why Reich thinks Obama is a tyrant. Back in 2008, during the campaign, a reporter was asking him a question and he responded with "Why Can't I Just Eat My Waffle?" (#2 limiting media access)
------------------------ Update Oct 11, 2017 : It could be that Robert Reich doesn't like people of color; after all Obama is black and Trump is orange.
Clip from Criminal Minds season 10 episode 18 "Rock Creek Park" :
(What's going on : The wife of an increasingly prominent Congressman is kidnapped and so the FBI team tries to figure out who would take her.)
(transcript of the episode clip) FBI Agent Aaron Hotchner : Is there anyone who would want to hurt her? Congressman Troy : No, no-no. Sophie's a wonderful, sweet woman. I, on the other hand, I'm not very well-liked in this town. FBI Agent Aaron Hotchner : and who are your enemies? Congressman Troy : Well, where do we begin? We have the oil lobbies. Uh, we have the NRA and PETA. You have an equal opportunity offender.
(later)
FBI Agent Derek Morgan : So the gun lobbyists were dismissive of the congressman saying they don't waste their time with one-termers like Troy. But anyway, even if they were involved I highly doubt they would outsource the job to the Russian mob. FBI Agent Aaron Hotchner : What about the oil companies FBI Agent Kate Callahan : Pretty slimey, pun intended. But none of our sources say they were involved. FBI Agent Derek Morgan : Well, considering how much oil comes out of Russia, they are the most likely candidates to have ties to the mob. (later it is suggested that the Congressman supported fracking ban would drive Russian oil prices up so the oil companies aren't suspect.)
1) The congressman describes himself as "not very well-liked" and an "equal opportunity offender" but they only investigate groups he specifically named.
2) they forgot to look into PETA even though he mentioned them! They didn't even a "pretty slimey" or "pretty stinky", as the case may be, comment.
3) With the NRA they don't ask "sources" they just asked one of their lobbyists if they did it. On the bright side, the writers consider NRA lobbyists to be upright and honest citizens who the FBI can take at their word without needing to offer one whit of evidence. On the other hand, the writers really think that a NRA lobbyist would imply that kidnapping the wife of a 2 or more term congressman wouldn't be wasting their time.
4) There is the suggestion that, sure, the NRA might kidnap the wife of a longer serving politician but that they wouldn't outsource the work to the Russian mob. It's unclear if the writers feel the NRA would do it themselves with Wayne LaPierre in a ninja suit or if they would just employ Americans to do it.
-----------------
Bonus : (transcript of the clip) Penelope Garcia : I found the smoking gun or at least the stuff that goes in to the gun to make it smoke. Credit card receipts from the congressman show he purchased ammo for a handgun and then more smoke he sent that ammo to a PO Box registered in his name in Virginia. FBI Agent Kate Callahan : And why would he do that? FBI Agent Aaron Hotchner : Did you have your wife kidnapped? Congressman Troy : What? No! What? Why are you saying this? FBI Agent Jennifer Jareau : You purchased ammunition for a handgun last month and you had shipped to a mailbox in Virginia, which means you likely own a handgun although there isn't one registered to your name Congressman Troy : Yes, I have a handgun. FBI Agent Jennifer Jareau : That you bought illegally? Congressman Troy : Uh, well I had to after having been so staunchly pro gun control.
"If–" by Rudyard Kipling (1895) "IF you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you, If you can trust yourself when all men doubt you, But make allowance for their doubting too; If you can wait and not be tired by waiting, Or being lied about, don't deal in lies, Or being hated, don't give way to hating, And yet don't look too good, nor talk too wise: If you can dream - and not make dreams your master; If you can think - and not make thoughts your aim; If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster And treat those two impostors just the same; If you can bear to hear the truth you've spoken Twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools, Or watch the things you gave your life to, broken, And stoop and build 'em up with worn-out tools:
If you can make one heap of all your winnings And risk it on one turn of pitch-and-toss, And lose, and start again at your beginnings And never breathe a word about your loss; If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew To serve your turn long after they are gone, And so hold on when there is nothing in you Except the Will which says to them: 'Hold on!'
If you can talk with crowds and keep your virtue, 'Or walk with Kings - nor lose the common touch, if neither foes nor loving friends can hurt you, If all men count with you, but none too much; If you can fill the unforgiving minute With sixty seconds' worth of distance run, Yours is the Earth and everything that's in it, And - which is more - you'll be a Man, my son!"
From the Futurama episode A Taste of Freedom (season 5 episode4) :
Did the Decapodians have a secret anti-perspective weapon or maybe a shrink ray is involved?
In this cross-section, the DOOP's (Democratic Order of Planets) Nimbus appears to have 14 levels.
Here, the same section of the Nimbus as seen just before it crashes to Earth with cloud of smoke after having apparently shrunk to the size of a Central Park tree (well, the size of the canopy of a Central Park tree). All the while, buildings with fewer than 14 stories loom in the background.
Clip from Secrets of Althorp - The Spencers (2013) :
Narrator : What you see now is an illusion designed to look like grey brick. The exterior is made up of 106,000 thin clay tiles, called mathematical tiles. But centuries of wet English weather wreaked havoc with this outer shell
… Jan Bialek (Althorp Building Manager) : Originally, the mathematical tiles were fixed on a quite think lime mortar bed. And then iron nails would be fixed through the holes that are in there and the nails went through the lime mortar and into the red brick. The problem with the nails is that they are iron nails and they rust. And there's no secure fixing to the tiles. So the tiles are gradually coming loose and moving away Narrator : The Earl embarked on a massive renovation project . A new lead roof and secure fixings for every tile on the walls. Jan Bialek (Althorp Building Manager) : one or two people have asked "well, why didn't you restore it back to its original red brick?" Physically, it couldn't be done because the red brick was damaged behind. Narrator : And there was another problem. Althorp's historical importance means that the house is protected by England's strict national heritage rules and regulations. The Earl would not have been allowed to strip the unique façade away from the building. …
"We must preserve history! But no, not that history." I suspect it is less about an interest in history and more about a dislike of change or a need for someone to boss people around.
(to whoever might be interested , the clip continues and explains how they fixed the mathematical tiles in place)
The original music of Richard Wagner's Götterdämmerung bound into book form.
Wagner and Me (2010) is a little movie about Stephen Fry's mixed feelings about the music of Richard Wagner and his distaste for things associated with the music (including the composer). Fry is a professional raconteur so despite the movie at times being centered more on Fry and what he might be thinking at that particular moment than Wagnerian history (to be fair, the title is Wagner & Me as opposed to All About Wagner) it is interesting and entertaining throughout.
Stephen Fry says :
Wagner's Russian adventure was a triumph. He was even sounded out about taking over as artistic director of the Mariinsky. Had he accepted there might never have been a Bayreuth Festival House[The theater designed to Wagner's vision of his ideal theater]. He might never have completed the Ring Cycle.
His story would have had a different and probably less controversial ending.
Hmmm, if his music had become more influential in Russia than Germany… I guess Russian Czars and Russian Communists must have ruled in a boring and completely uncontroversial way. Interesting isn't it that some mass murdering political leaders are controversial and some aren't. Note that the controversy is not due to Richard Wagner's antisemitism which was known before his trip to Russia but because several decades after Wagner's death (Feb 13, 1883) someone bad liked his music.
I confess that despite the movie's attempt at explaining why some people balk at Wagner because Hitler (born 6 years after Wagner's death) liked his music and the Nazi's played it, I do not understand it. I think I'll watch the movie again later to try to determine if it is a lack of understanding on my part or if I don't understand because it isn't rational.
I've heard the dislike of Wagner and of "his relationship with the Nazis" before and for a while I was under the impression that he was, if not a Nazi, then a Nazi sympathizer which must have meant that he lived to be well over 100. What is really meant is the Nazi's relationship to Wagner not Wagner's
relationship with the Nazis as he was long, long dead. (I can't help but wonder if some people confuse Richard Wagner with another German composer, Richard Strauss, who was alive during the Nazi regime and did deal with the Nazis.)
There is a transgenerational corruption of blood mentioned in the movie, but with a twist. Normally the corruption of blood stains the descendants but Fry has the stain run from descendants' spouses to taint the ancestor and his musical compositions. The movie informs that Wagner's son-in-law Houston Stewart Chamberlain was a racist and early supporter of Hitler and his daughter-in-law Winifred is said "to revere Hitler." The beliefs of the spouse of Wagner's third child is left unmentioned.
Other than Wagner, would Fry accept someone else claiming music or a bloodline or a family is tainted by the words and actions of ancestors or descendants?
Hypothetically, if Johann Sebastian Bach's great-great-great-great granddaughter is a inveterate shoplifter will some people chose not to listen to a Bach piece or perhaps with the distance of time they'll simply refuse to listen to it in stereo.
At one interesting point Fry is discussing Wagner with a musician who survived the Auschwitz as to whether his music is tainted and she starts asking him questions : "What happens to you when you sit there for five hours?" "Why do you have to listen to Wagner in Bayreuth?"
Oversized bust of Richard Wagner by Arno Breker at Bayreuth Festspielhaus (note the monumental scale)
Stephen Fry says :
"even this memorial bust was created by Hitler's favorite sculptor"
Considering that the bust was done by Arno Breker in 1939 (Breker was born 27 years after Wagner's death and the work done 56 years after) is it really surprising that it was done by a Nazi approved artist at a time when so-called degenerate art was being discouraged (as in censored).
I'm not sure what to call this. Instead of sins of the father perhaps call it Sins of the Muse. The implication is that Hitler liked a sculptor and decades after the composer's death that sculptor used Wagner as a subject and therefore through no action by Wagner his music is tainted.
Additionally, I'll note that Stephen Fry wore pants throughout the entire movie! Just like Hitler!
notice at 3:50 the blue shirted French horn player who, unlike his fellow French horners, is not playing his instrument. It is very possible he had a reason but it seems like instruments are played in unison so I think he might have gotten caught on camera loafing.
one of these things is not like the others
notice at 5:21 I obsessively watched this looking for the cameramen once I realized that there were multiple views but I hadn't noticed the cameramen. There are a couple cameramen. One in dark clothing in the upper left and another in a white shirt going across the front of the crowd. I think a third one is in a white shirt next to the building Editing away the cameramen makes the people's reactions seem more authentic despite the reality that there were guys with big camera pointing them at people's faces.
I'm not sure if this was edited in a linear way. the white shirt cameraman running in front of the crowd at 5:21 can also be seen running in front of the same crowd at 5:16. Did he do it twice or did they use the footage of the same event twice?
Also notice the little girl at 1:01 who sits next to a boy and she seems to be trying to mimic his way of sitting. And there is the little conductor at 3:35.
Update June, 6, 2014
Hmmmm, at the woman with dangling earrings is watching and then at the next scene at 2:14 she teleports so she is talking to a guy with a newspaper.
Likewise, at 2:30 the sunglasses guy is seen in the crowd behind the bassist and at 2:33 (the next scene) he teleports to the cafe area.
There is a reason why people shouldn't get their understanding of the world from comedians.
Clip from George Carlin : What Am I Doing In New Jersey? (1988)
Appropriately, this bit was after a long list of things he doesn't like.
Transcript :
Keep in mind, these Reagan people are the ones that were going to get the government off our back. Remember that? That was the rhetoric of the 1980 campaign : "We'll get government off your backs and out of your lives". Yeah but they still want to tell you what magazines you can read and they still want to tell you what rock lyrics you can listen to and they still want to force your kids to pray in school and they still want to tell you what you can say on the radio. The FCC, the Federal Communications Commission, decided all by itself that radio and television are the only two parts of American life not protected by the free speech provisions of First Amendment to the Constitution. I'd like to repeat that because it sounds vaguely important.
The FCC, an appointed body, not elected, answerable only to the president decided on its own that radio and television were the only two parts of American life not protected by the free speech provisions of First Amendment to the Constitution. Why did they decide that? Because they got a letter from a minister in Mississippi. A Reverend Donald Wildmon heard something on the radio that he didn't like. Well Reverend, did anyone ever tell you there are two knobs on the radio? … Of course, I'm sure the Reverend isn't that comfortable with anything that has two knobs on it. But hey Reverend, there are 2 knobs on the radio. One of them turns the radio off and the other one changes the station. Imagine that Reverend, you can actually change the station. It's called freedom of choice and it's one of the principals this country was founded upon. Look it up in the library if you have any left when you finish burning all the books.
The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) began 1934 and it's predecessor organization the Federal Radio Commission was formed in 1926. The Supreme Court had dealt with the FCC as early as 1943.
Interestingly, the 1943 Supreme Court case was specifically about the FCC overreaching and claiming powers not specifically granted by the legislation. The Supreme Court decided 5-2 (with 2 Justices not taking part) that FCC regulations were not limited to just the technical aspects of broadcasting but they could also regulate other aspects including content. The 5 Justices in the majority were all appointed by FDR. One of the dissents was appointed by FDR and the other dissent was the sole Justice on the Court appointed by Herbert Hoover. The Rev. Donald Wildmon mentioned by Carlin was born in 1938 and was 5 years old at the time (and he may not have been a reverend yet). It is possible he may have been a precocious letter writing at 5 year old but I have my doubts.
True enough, the Act does not explicitly say that the Commission shall have power to deal with network practices found inimical to the public interest. But Congress was acting in a field of regulation which was both new and dynamic. 'Congress moved under the spur of a widespread fear that in the absence of governmental control the public interest might be subordinated to monopolistic domination in the broadcasting field.' Federal Communications Comm. v. Pottsville Broadcasting Co., 309 U.S. 134, 137, 60 S.Ct. 437, 439, 84 L.Ed. 656. In the context of the developing problems to which it was directed, the Act gave the Commission not niggardly but expansive powers.
In other words, "screw what the law actually says we'll just pretend it says what we want it to say."
In a 1953 case the Supreme Court described the bounds of FCC regulation as "the vaguish, penumbral bounds expressed by the standard of 'public interest.' "
Again, from the majority opinion in 1943 :
We come, finally, to an appeal to the First Amendment. The Regulations, even if valid in all other respects, must fall because they abridge, say the appellants, their right of free speech. If that be so, it would follow that every person whose application for a license to operate a station is denied by the Commission is thereby denied his constitutional right of free speech. Freedom of utterance is abridged to many who wish to use the limited facilities of radio.
So, because radio is a limited medium that not everyone can participate in at once that justifies even more restrictions on those few who are allowed to participate. It wasn't exactly that the FCC "decided all by itself."
George Carlin was probably referring something a little more contemporaneous. The 1978 case before the Supreme Court, the FCC vs Pacifica Foundation had its origins in a broadcast of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" skit in 1973. Contrary to what Carlin said, Rev. Donald Wildmon did not write the letter of complaint that prompted the case. It turns out a guy named John Douglas complained to the FCC. He wasn't in Mississippi, he was driving back to Long Island, New York from New Haven, Connecticut and complained about WBAI-FM out of New York City. John Douglas belonged to Morality in Media while Donald Wildmon founded the National Federation for Decency.
I suppose "a minister in Mississippi" carries a different set of stereotypes than "a CBS executive in New York" or depending on what part of Long Island he lived and where he worked "a CBS executive in New York City"
"if you have any left when you finish burning all the books" The complaint by John Douglas was specifically complaining that the bit was inappropriate to be broadcast on a Tuesday afternoon.
Considering the case was decided in 1978 it might be a bit careless to blame the FCC "answerable only to" Jimmy Carter on "these Reagan people." Besides, I'm not sure exactly how much influence a sitting president has on the FCC ("answerable only to the president") considering they are appointed to staggered 5 year terms and a maximum of 3 members can be of the same party. But I wondered who was on the FCC Commission at the time :
FCC Commissioners when the broadcast occurred
(Tuesday afternoon, Oct 30, 1973.
The complaint was sent in November 1973)
Nicholas Johnson
Democrat
Jul 1 1966 to Dec 5, 1973
H. Rex Lee
Democrat
Oct 28, 1968 to Dec 31, 1973
Charlotte T. Reid
Republican
Oct 8, 1971 to Jul 1, 1976
Richard E. Wiley
Republican
Jan 5, 1972 to Oct 13, 1977
Benjamin L. Hooks
Democrat
Jul 5, 1972 to Jul 25, 1977
FCC Commissioners in 1978
(when the case was heard by the Supreme Court April 18 & 19, 1978
and when it was decided July 3, 1978)
James H. Quello
Democrat
Apr 30, 1974 to Nov 1, 1997
Abbott M. Washburn
Republican
Jul 10, 1974 to Oct 1, 1982
Joseph R. Fogarty
Democrat
Sept 17, 1976 to Jun 30, 1983
Margita E. White
Republican
Sept 23, 1976 to Feb 28, 1979
Charles D. Ferris
Democrat
Oct 17, 1977 to Apr 10, 1981
(the FCC site listing FCC commissioners shows the name, party affiliation, state and their term of service. Margita E. White's state is listed as Sweden. I assume she was born there and not that she represented Sweden.)
Carlin also refers to "these Reagan people" as those who"still want to tell you what rock lyrics you can listen to" but the PMRC, to name the most prominent group, was a bipartisan hysteria. (I thought it was hysterical hysteria because I was listening to some of the music highlighted and hadn't realized its perversity until Tipper Gore and the PMRC pointed it out. Some of the music I sought out just so I could hear it for myself.) The "they still want to tell you what magazines you can read" I assume refers to Attorney General Meese and the Meese Report which I understand was focused less on what people read and more on the graphical elements.
While I like people who defend freedom of speech, it seems dangerous to treat it like a team sport and only boo the other team while staying silent about the censorious tendencies of your own team. The concern is that when your team does overstep the habit of staying quiet will continue.
Harvey Weinstein is PRO-gun he just hasn't realized it yet (audio)
Harvey Weinstein : [referencing the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising] This has been a project I've searched for ever since my aunt gave me the book when I was a boy. It's an important story to tell. Howard Stern : …holocaust story Harvey Weinstein : It's not a holocaust story as much as it's jews with guns. It's my whole philosophy, or anybody, it's the idea that when injustice is that great then you can't just march into the camps. This is the story that's the opposite. Howard Stern : Do you own a gun? Harvey Weinstein : No Howard Stern : You don't have any guns? Harvey Weinstein : I don't ever wanna have a gun Howard Stern : Well, why, if that story resonates with you, why not own a gun? Harvey Weinstein : No, this is, this is when you're marching a half a million people into Auschwitz.
Howard Stern : Right Harvey Weinstein : I mean , whatever, I'd find a gun if that was happening to my people. I don't think we need guns in this country. …
And he'll get a fire extinguisher after the house is nearly burnt down. I don't think he's really given gun control much thought or he'd have realized that if those in the Warsaw Ghetto could have found 50,000+ guns to arm themselves then they probably would have. He needs to ask why they couldn't.
Update
confronted with the fact that he has produced a number of violent films, Harvey responds
"They have a point. You have to look in the mirror, too. I have to choose movies that aren’t violent or as violent as they used to be. I know for me personally, you know, I can’t continue to do that. The change starts here. It has already. For me, I can’t do it. I can’t make one movie and say this is what I want for my kids and then just go out and be a hypocrite."
Will his new Warsaw Ghetto Uprising movie eschew violence and have jews try to overcome Nazi genocide through coexist bumperstickers?
This would have been a much better movie if it had been about the travails of Jerry Seinfeld, etc making a B-movie while wearing fluffy bee suits rather than what was finally made.
An excellent Lou Reed performance on Saturday Night Live Nov 15, 1986.
Note at the end when it almost sounds like booing but is actually people yelling "Louuuuuuu!"
Lou Reed is dead, Sam Kinison is dead, who knows who else in the video is dead. Someday there will probably be an app that will mark everyone in a video who has died with a little tombstone and the date of death.
Lou Reed was one of my all time favorite musicians. His singing style is close to spoken word but it is a style of singing. My theory is that he sang that way on purpose to focus the audience's attention on the lyrics. There is an honesty in his way of singing that can be subtle.
I think in the 90s, Lou was interviewed by a very earnest Charlie Rose and was asked why the Velvet Underground reunion didn't stay together (specifically John Cale) and tour the US. Lou responded with something like "Uh, that's because we hate each other." Refreshing honesty and straightforwardness.
His volume of work is extensive and between the Velvet Underground and his solo career there are a huge number of songs I like. I don't think I'd recommend Metal Machine Music to anyone who likes his lyrics.
There is a difference between Lou solo and Lou with the Velvets performing the same song.
The Pruitt-Igoe Housing Project being given up on as a failure and imploded after only 18 years after taking over $300 million (in 2013 dollars) to build.
The Pruitt-Igoe Myth (2011) was imperfect but still an interesting documentary about rise and fall of the Pruitt-Igoe public housing project. One thing that stuck with me is that the introduction and conclusion assert that blaming modernist architecture, the welfare state and residents as causes of the decline of Pruitt-Igoe were mythical and that there were other external reasons for the decline. Interestingly, while watching it, it seemed that a fair amount of the material presented does point some blame in the direction of the so called myths.
I've strung together a few clips that I found interesting. Below is a partial transcript of those clips and some commentary.
The Myth of the Pruitt-Igoe Myth
clip one - introduction
The Pruitt-Igoe public housing development in St Louis, Missouri was opened in 1954 and demolished in 1972.
"What caused the failure? The Pruitt-Igoe myth begins here. … Some blame the architect, Modernist high rises like Pruitt-Igoe the say created a breeding ground for isolation, vandalism and crime … Others attacked the welfare state. Big government, the problem and Pruitt-Igoe the result. … Many stated flatly that the residents were too poor, uneducated or rural. That they caused their own problems and had taken Pruitt-Igoe with them. … Long after the dust settled and the site was cleared this was the Pruitt-Igoe that remained. The mythical Pruitt-Igoe with a fatal flaw, doomed to failure from the start."
here is your myth checklist :
modernist architecture
the welfare state
the residents caused their own problems
clip two - conclusion (starts at 3:25)
"The implosion footage was so shocking just because there was still in people's minds the idea that this had been the solution. It was a very painful moment of truth to see that failure. That's why in many ways that Pruitt-Igoe is not just the national and even the world symbol for the failure of American public housing it's also been a symbol for the perceived failure of well intentioned government policies in general. Andthat's why I think its so important to look beyond the famous pictures of the towers being destroyed and really try to understand what failed and why. In some ways Pruitt-Igoe failed because housing alone couldn't deal with the most basic issues that were troubling the American city. There was just no way to build your way out of that tragedy. I think we have a responsibility to understand those failures and to learn from them and to do better." – Robert Fishman (urban historian)
…
"We don't want people to think of Pruitt-Igoe as a failure if they're going to then to translate that failure into all public housing or all government programs or all social welfare or all modernism. That is what Pruitt-Igoe has been freighted with. If we want to say that this one project, in this one place, for this one set of reasons declined to the point where people thought it was necessary to tear it down that's one thing. But that's simply not how we've told the story."
What a bizarre standard for judging failure! If someone suggests a systemic problem then people should pretend Pruitt-Igoe was a roaring success? That attitude makes me doubt how much some people want to learn from the failure if they refuse to consider some potential causes.
The bigger story is in fact the decline of the city overall. What happened to St Louis was tragic. It's kind of a slow motion Katrina in a way. St Louis lost half its population and had a devastated tax base and a drained economy over the course of 50 years from World War II even to the present. It's no wonder Pruitt-Igoe declined in those circumstances. I mean, it would be hard to imagine a public housing project surviving under those conditions" – Joseph Heathcott
Did other housing survive? Did other neighborhoods in St Louis survive? If so then it suggests that there might have been something unique to Pruitt-Igoe being a government project and in being a political project.
clip three - planning and control (starts at 6:11)
"Before we moved into Pruitt-Igoe, the Welfare Department came to our home, they talked with my mother about moving into the housing project but the stipulation was that my father could not be with us. They would put us into the housing projects only if he left the state. My mother and father discussed it and they decided it was best for the 12 children for the father to leave the home. And that's how we got into the projects" – Jacquelyn Williams (former resident)
Gee, what could go wrong. Surely, the Welfare Dept. didn't see itself as splitting a family apart and positioning the government and/or modernist architecture to be a replacement parent. I bet the Department was mostly concerned not with any consequences but if it could recruit enough residents to meet the bureaucracy's expectations. Unfortunately, the filmmakers didn't let us know if her parents came to regret that decision.
"The Welfare Department had a rule that no able bodied man could be in the house if a woman received aid for dependent children. If a man lost his job and was looking for work he still had to leave the home. There was even a night staff of men who worked for the welfare department whose job was to go to the homes of the welfare recipients and they searched to find if there was a man in the home." – Joyce Ladner (sociologist)
"There were so many restrictions. We couldn't have a telephone. We couldn't have a television." – Jacquelyn Williams (former resident)
The rules of the housing project concerning TVs were changed a few years later. I'm not sure about the phone rule. Sometimes control is about control.
clip four - "unbreakable" (starts at 9:45)
"I think it created a mindset for the inhabitants that they weren't cared about and I think that manifested itself in a way that caused more harm to the tenants than an other entity. The vandalism that existed at Pruitt-Igoe came from that environment. Things allowed to just deteriorate and people not really caring. And so management decided, well instead of trying to enhance their existence we'll just make things so they can't be destroyed. Everything had to be protected. Light fixtures; no light exposed and shields around them with mesh metal protecting the bulb. Y'know, the fact that it was indestructible made you want to try to destroy things." – Brian King (former resident)
This does seem inherent to public housing as when most people destroy their own property they find that they have to spend their own money to replace it. The modernist dream of regimenting people into designated communal areas led to a tragedy of the commons.
"There was a screen around the lightbulb that kept you from breaking them. Y'know, kids'll be kids, find a way to break 'em. … they took all the lights off the elevator, put 'em, recessed them up into the ceiling and then they tried to cover that up with plexiglass but sometimes people would try to set that plexiglass on fire. Sometimes instead of taking the trash and putting it inside the incinerator, they just set it on fire right out there in the middle of the floor… After I moved away from Pruitt-Igoe, I went on to become a police officer with St Louis City… I do remember people calling the police and trying to come into the buildings and the would drop just anything they could find. Trash; throw trash out the window. I remember that. I remember them throwing firebombs out onto the police cars. I remember they did that. So there is enough blame to go around." – Valerie Sills (former resident)
"I don't think that people rationalized that somebody's house burned down or people could be killed. I think they just saw that firetruck or that police car or that ambulance as the enemy. It was just bitter people, angry people and that was a way of making a statement. We're not happy here and we want you to know it. And the way you gonna know it is these bricks and bottles will rain down on you no matter who it's saving , no matter how relevant or important it is. We want you to understand you're not welcome here." – Brian King (former resident)
Contrary to Le Corbusier and the Modernists, communities are built through human interaction and individual decisions and do not spring into existence as soon as an architect declares something to be communal property. I don't think it would be too harsh to suggest that some of the residents "caused their own problems" as I think most would consider their home being on fire to be a problem.
The movie suggests that the problems with Pruitt-Igoe were caused not by modernist architecture, the welfare state or some of the residents but by was racism, housing discrimination, segregation and the rise of suburbanism. This seems less convincing when one realizes that blacks lived in places other than Pruitt-Igoe and lived there successfully without lighting the place on fire or shattering their own light bulbs. It is true that a person can die if they have no food for a month but that does not mean that it isn't also true that a person can die from a lack of oxygen.
From the Housing & Urban Development publication Creating Defensible Space by Oscar Newman (April 1996) p11 (PDF)
"Across the street from Pruitt-Igoe was an older, smaller, rowhouse complex, Carr Square Village, occupied by an identical population. It had remained fully occupied and trouble-free throughout the construction, occupancy, and decline of Pruitt-Igoe."
Apropos of Tom Hanks being claimed to be the most trusted man in America I present this :
Tom Hanks and Dan Aykroyd rapping during the end credits of the movie Dragnet (1987). A quick search and I find its own music video including extensive choreographed and synchronized dancing.
Note Tom Hanks going for the 1980s style of shouting out the lyrics.
Performed by Dan Aykroyd and Tom Hanks
Featuring Glenn Hughes and Pat Thrall
Written by Peter Aykroyd, Dan Aykroyd and Pat Thrall
produced by J.B. Moore and Robert Ford
The lyrics to City of Crime :
Dan Aykroyd : This is the city. It's a city of crime. My name is Friday. I carry a badge.
Dan Aykroyd : 3:15 a.m., Thursday, January 15. It was chilly that morning in the City of Angels.
On this particular occasion we happened to witness a pagan* ritual in progress.
Dan Aykroyd : See that, Streebek? We’re just in time
We have stumbled into a major crime
Tom Hanks : They've got the girl all fright
Now that’s not nice
I think she is the subject of a sacrifice
Dan Aykroyd : Buddy, we’re putting this party on ice
Tom Hanks : But first you know we really ought to read 'em their rights
Dan Aykroyd : Read ‘em their rights
Read ‘em their rights
Tom Hanks :
Well, I’m here tonight to rap about your rights
Cause right now you’re in trouble
Don’t have to say nothing at all, you all got two calls
And you’d better make ‘em on the double
Pagans :
This is a city of crime
Don’t step out of line
This is a city of crime
You’d better be praying your judge is kind
Dan Aykroyd :
You’re a dangerous mob and it is our job
To bust you all for being violent
While we are here let’s state it clear
Tom Hanks : You have the right to remain silent!
Pagan :
Well, excuse me copper, Mr. Crimestopper,
What is wrong with what we’re doing?
We just like to dance in our goatskin pants
Around this ancient ruin
Tom Hanks : Now it's not so funny,
That it costs big money
If you ever have to hire a lawyer
Dan Aykroyd : It’s my duty to inform you
And my pleasure to warn you
Tom Hanks : We’ll provide one for ya! Huh!
Pagans :
This is a city of crime
Don’t step out of line
This is a city of crime
You're looking at seven to nine
Dan Aykroyd : Now you know what you’ve been doing is a serious crime
Tom Hanks : And you'll probably be doing some serious time
Dan Aykroyd : In case you might be worried about the friends you lose
Tom Hanks : At least they get to see you on the evening news
Dan Aykroyd : It’s a new sensation
Tom Hanks : We go down to the station
Dan Aykroyd : You’re going to answer some questions
Tom Hanks : And have some refreshments
Dan Aykroyd : What is your full name? What were you doing on January 15th of this year? All we want is the truth, mister. What were you doing in the location in question? What is the purpose of your pagan organization?
Pagan : Whoa! You can't pin nothing on me copper!
Well, excuse me
Excuse me
Don’t use or abuse or refuse me
It’s no joke, I’m broke
My rights I can and will invoke
I’m homely, and I’m lonely
But the state cannot disown me
It’s ain't funny
I might want money
To take home to my honey
Pagans :
This is a city of crime
Don’t step out of line
This is a city of crime
Where an [something indistinct] is hard to find
[the movie end credits version ends here with the sound of a jail cell slammed closed]
Dan Aykroyd :
In case you don't agree
With my methodology
I like to do things my way
Tom Hanks : Don't get memory loss
About who's the boss
Dan Aykroyd : Don't forget my name is
Everyone : Friday!
Dan Aykroyd : I'm the man of the hour
Tom Hanks : The tower of power
Dan Aykroyd : I'm the arm of the law
Tom Hanks : The very last straw
Dan Aykroyd : I'm on the side of the right
Tom Hanks : A Trojan white knight
Dan Aykroyd : If you get me uptight I am
Tom Hanks : A frightening sight
Dan Aykroyd : I'm as strong as the army
Tom Hanks : Nothing can't harm me
Dan Aykroyd : Coming down like a hammer
Everyone : Get ready for the slammer
[sound of a jail cell slammed closed] *"pagan" the video informs stands for People Against Goodness And Normalcy
Robyn Thomas of the Legal Community Against Violence (aka LCAV) a group funded by the Joyce Foundation (which has given millions to gun control groups over the years) complains about Oleg Volk's posters in this video.
Robyn Thomas of the Legal Community Against Violence : What I'm noticing more and more is this really scary marketing techniques which implies that women have some sort of moral obligation to own guns to protect their families. So, someone sent me this website which shows some of this marketing, some of this propaganda type ads about this and the actual ad says "Around midnight, she called 911 but by 12:06 the fighting was done. No time to wait for help to arrive, so she used her rifle to stay alive."
Robyn Thomas of the Legal Community Against Violence : Obviously what they are telling us here is as a woman you can't rely on law enforcement to help you if an "intruder" (makes air quotes) comes to your house you have to have a gun available and ready to defend yourself.
Narrator : Based in San Francisco, Robyn Thomas heads a group of lawyers called the Legal Community Against Violence. She's angry about advertising campaigns that urge parents to buy guns for their children
Robyn Thomas of the Legal Community Against Violence : Here's one that says "Once mature enough to be home alone she's ready to have a gun of her own." To me this looks like a pretty young child (Oleg says the model was 16 at the time). The message is clear, parents should be buying a gun for their young child so they can defend themselves. How sort of ridiculous is it to think that a child is going to get this loaded weapon, is going to use it, be effective with it and what are you saying about the experience of that child in both instances.
Of course, Oleg isn't selling guns so it is dishonest to describe his work as marketing or ads. Few advertisements have no logos, no copyright notices, no mention of the product or no mention of the manufacturer. A gun controller lying to advance their position? I'm sure everyone is suitably flabbergasted. Oleg is a citizen using his First Amendment rights to promote his Second Amendment rights. They don't even show Oleg's web sites like a-human-right.com or olegvolk.net instead the show his images at a Canadian website in French that is critical of his work.
If she had been honest and had said the posters were not some expensive advertising campaign but images produced by some guy on the internet would the TV producers have included it in the program?
Did you notice at 11:25 she used both hands to make air quotes/scare quotes when she says intruder? One wonders if the Legal Community Against Violence is opposed to shooting intruders while being less concerned about any violence an intruder might commit.
"Hi-diddly-ho, neighborino!"
– Ned Flanders' catch phrase (this one from The Simpsons season 7, episode #5 "Lisa the Vegetarian")
It just goes to show that if you do it with a friendly attitude and in a chipper tone of voice then you can call someone a ho. Calling someone a ho who is high is basically the same as calling them a crack whore.
In my garden of love Now there’s a rose for the way my spirits rose when we met A forget-me-not to remind me to remember not to forget A pine tree for the way I pined over you And an ash for the day I ashed you to be true And the sun and the rain fell from up above And landed on the earth below In my garden of love Now there’s a beetroot for the day you said that you’d beetroot to me A sweet pea for the sweet way you always used to smiled at me But you had friends who needed you There was Ferdy, there was Liza So, just for them, I put down a load of ferdy-liza And the sun and the rain fell from up above And landed on the earth below In my garden of love Oh, Gus the gardener’s left now and you went with him, too The fungus here reminds me of the fun Gus is having with you The rockery’s a mockery, with weeds it’s overgrown The fuchsia’s gone, I couldn’t face the fuchsia all alone And my tears fell like raindrops from the sky above And poisoned all the flowers in my garden of love
Col. Milquetoast was one of the thousands of monkeys banging on typewriters since the mid-seventies trying to recreate Macbeth. Having become disaffected by the intense pressure involved, his complete lack of talent and his superior's refusal to make use of his prehensile tail he quit to lead a simple but mostly contented life in the midwest. Occasionally he writes in third person when there was no good reason not to write in first person.
