A Good Take on the Bush disaster

Sorry, I forgot my camera today when I went skiing, so you'll have to wait for those photos. It was, however, an epic day of skiing.

I know there are dozens of articles and columns about what a disaster the last eight years have been, but this one by Bob Herbert, does the job without requiring pages of reading. Amen, Bob.

~ Tom

Still here...

I haven't had time to blog lately -- holidays, relatives in town, and all that jazz.

Now I am up at our place at Tahoe Donner through Sunday. Had a lovely day of skiing today at Squaw Valley. I'll try to remember to take my camera tomorrow and give you some breathtaking shots.

Happy New Year to you all.

Tom

Genre vs. "predictability"

A couple of days ago, we watched the DVD version of "Chaos Theory," a great little film that is basically a romantic comedy, with a dash of "Heathers" dark comedy thrown in. I actually enjoyed Chaos Theory even more than "Definitely, Maybe," which I blogged about recently, or "Love & Sex," which Michael Lally praised.

In this frame of mind, I went to Metacritic to read the reviews, after-the-fact, and was surprised and a little disappointed at a lot of the criticism leveled at Chaos Theory. The synthesis of the criticism was that it was too predictable, and that we all knew what was coming next, etc. I disagree, because there are some great plot twists in the movie, including a HUGE one, but even assuming the criticism is all true, so what! Romantic comedies, like most other movies in a so-called genre, ARE predictable to a large extent. That's why we watch them when we are "in the mood" for a certain type of movie. If this weren't the case, it would be like going to a sushi restaurant and finding only Yankee Pot Roast on the menu. Or going to a Springsteen concert where Bruce played only Country & Western songs of the most treacle sort. Or, buying a book by your favorite mystery writer and finding out that it was a dry, historical novel about the Mormons settling in Utah.

Anyway, don't believe all the reviews. If you want a nice entertaining evening, rent Chaos Theory and sit back with a big bowl of popcorn. I predict that you will thoroughly enjoy the predictable.

~ Tom

Metheny on Kenny G.

When you have been a jazz fan as long as I have (from about age 14 and still going strong at 64), you run into some perplexing moments when you interface with people who are quite decent, but don't know much about jazz. In their attempt to mesh with me they often mention Kenny G as one of their favorites. Early on in this process (but not for long), I would mount my high-horse and dump all over Kenny G., who deserves it [see below]. But the result would be that the well-meaning person would be visibly hurt or want to get in an argument. This problem would also arise when I would be in a group of unfamiliar people and tell my favorite Kenny G. joke:

What's the difference between Kenny G. and and Uzi? Kenny G. repeats more.

After telling the joke, someone would either come to G's defense or I would be told later by a third party that Kenny was so-and-so's favorite "jazz" musician, and that he/she had really been offended by my joke.

So, now days, if someone mentions Kenny G., my response is always something like, "That's interesting. If you enjoy that, you might also enjoy John Coltrane's version of 'My Favorite Things.' "

Well, much to my amazement, I ran across this incredibly cogent, wise and fearless rant by Pat Metheny on Kenny G. I've seen Pat in live performances many, many times with all kinds of fabulous and differing jazz musicians, and if anyone has the "street cred" to blast Kenny, it's him. If you are a jazz fan and not at all fond of Kenny G. and what he represents viz a viz the world of true jazz, please read this article. (Seriously, you need to read this article, if only to stand in amazement at how far out on the limb of righteousness Pat goes. Take the time to read it all).

~tom

Thoughts on identity

I am blessed to live in our home here in Alameda, which is about 500 feet from the San Francisco Bay, and which has a long greenbelt with many beautiful trees, just out our front door. As part of our home owners dues they maintain the trees and the greenbelts. I was out walking my dog the other day in the greenbelt when I noticed that a tree had a metal tag nailed to it with a number. Then I started checking all of the trees and sure enough, they've all got a number now.

This got me thinking of just how cool that is. Someone cares about each and every one of these trees on an individual basis. Just think about that. If there is a problem with a specific tree, the arborists don't have to say, "yeah, it's the 4th one from the left, 50 feet past the intersection of Cheshire and Sheffield." Now they can simply say, "it's number 377." Or if I want to meet someone at a certain tree, I can just say, "see you at #244." The numbers run consecutively so it's pretty easy to find specific tree. Or I might say, #45 is one of the most beautiful oaks in Alameda.

I realized that what we are dealing with here is the concept of individual identity. That dog you see on the street has no individual identity to you, but your own dog has massive identity -- your children, spouse, and friends have even more. I believe that the definition of true loneliness is literally having no identity, other than your own self-perception. Imagine having no identity -- it would be almost as if you were walking around invisible, or in another dimension. Or more apropos to my initial thoughts, just another tree in the forest.

~ Tom

Campbell gets her undies in a bunch...

I watched Obama introducing his new appointees on Monday, and was just gassed about how great he and all of them were. Then the questioning began. Soon, a reporter launched into a litany of negative quotes that Obama had made about Hillary during the heated primary campaign and then in essence asked how he could have appointed her, etc. I, and friends I've talked to, thought it was just a "gotcha" type of question, and would be a waste of time for Obama to explain the obvious: that was then, this is now. Instead, Barack pulled a beautiful JFK-type move, chuckling and smiling and saying: "Well, I mean, I think -- this is fun for the press to try to stir up whatever quotes were generated during the course of the campaign. No, I understand. And you're having fun." I understood where he was coming from: "If you want to ask me a question about the serious state of the nation and how Hillary and I are going to move forward to solve the problems, please ask. But if you are just going to have fun stirring up old quotes, then I'm not going to buy into it."

Well, I guess I should have known that the press would be outraged at being called out for doing exactly what they do. Here is Campbell Brown going berzerk. I was gratified to see that most of the comments are in support of Barack, not her.

P.S. I also love the fact that Obama has not called on a Fox News reporter yet in any of his press conferences.