(Enlarge.)
It's exiled on East Washington Avenue. Meanwhile, at the Capitol Square... the protesting is enigmatic and infiltrated with Halloween — Freakfest — spirit....
(Enlarge.)
Would you eat that carrot?
২৯ অক্টোবর, ২০১১
What the "Occupy Madison" encampment looked like today...
(Enlarge.)
It's exiled on East Washington Avenue. Meanwhile, at the Capitol Square... the protesting is enigmatic and infiltrated with Halloween — Freakfest — spirit....
(Enlarge.)
Would you eat that carrot?
"Why were we born?"
"What were we born for?"
The link goes to a commercial — in Japanese, with subtitles — for an insurance company. I am presenting it neutrally for you to comment on.
ADDED: After I watched that, YouTube suggested that I watch this ad, which I will comment on and say I liked:
The link goes to a commercial — in Japanese, with subtitles — for an insurance company. I am presenting it neutrally for you to comment on.
ADDED: After I watched that, YouTube suggested that I watch this ad, which I will comment on and say I liked:
"Are you just occupying space?"
The Occupy Wall Street — or Occupy [Your City] — movement made me remember an old expression: "Are you just occupying space?" It was normally preceded by another question. For example: "Are you getting any work done or are you just occupying space?" In the expression, to "occupy" is to be irritatingly passive and ineffectual. In my experience, it was a relatively mild insult, usually deployed by mothers and schoolteachers.
Should protesters want to convey an aura of inaction? Perhaps! Think of the old protest slogan: "We're here/We're queer/Get used to it." The message is: look, we exist. The onlooker is challenged to stop denying the existence of the people who are making their existence apparent by just occupying space. That's all.
What's perplexing about Occupy [Your City] is that the onlookers already know that people affected by the economy exist. Everyone is affected. The onlookers don't feel that they are at any sort of distanced relationship to the problem the protesters are attempting to highlight. The protesters are simply the people who have taken up urban camping as a manifestation of concern about the problem.
The onlookers might admire the protesters for their stamina and hardiness, but they might also be annoyed by the filth and chaos, especially if it undermines their ability to pursue their own livelihood. Why do these people who are just occupying space think they are heroic when I work all day and go home at night to take care of my family?
The protesters should be able to connect with the nonprotesters, since the economic problems are shared and there's little emphasis on solutions. (Did you see this Onion piece: "Nation Finally Breaks Down And Begs Its Smart People To Just Fix Everything"?) There shouldn't be an us/them relationship between the protesters and onlookers. It's a shared predicament, and the protesters don't have superior knowledge about the problems or what to do about them. But they are there, out on the street. Then what?
They could turn inward and resist communication, like the Occupy Oakland protesters who wore masks and then turned their backs on a reporter who wanted to interview them about what they were doing. But it would be better for them to turn outward, adopting a demeanor that would allow onlookers to talk with them and have real conversations about shared problems. Of course, a conversation goes both ways. You can't just harangue people. There must be back and forth, and since the protesters don't really know what to do about the problems, they can demonstrate their good faith by really engaging.
An outsider to the protest should be able to move into the crowd and get a dialogue going, the way investment guru Peter Schiff did the other day:
Last March, during the height of the occupation of the Wisconsin Capitol, we were impressed by a man — we call him "The Man in the Middle" — who was not one of protesters, who took a seat in the center of the rotunda and invited people to sit down and talk to him one on one. That was one of the best moments in the protests.
Why don't people talk to each other? There was a popular chant last winter — now taken up by the Occupy crowds — "This is what democracy looks like." But democracy should look like people talking to each other. Not staring each other down from a secure distance.
Should protesters want to convey an aura of inaction? Perhaps! Think of the old protest slogan: "We're here/We're queer/Get used to it." The message is: look, we exist. The onlooker is challenged to stop denying the existence of the people who are making their existence apparent by just occupying space. That's all.
What's perplexing about Occupy [Your City] is that the onlookers already know that people affected by the economy exist. Everyone is affected. The onlookers don't feel that they are at any sort of distanced relationship to the problem the protesters are attempting to highlight. The protesters are simply the people who have taken up urban camping as a manifestation of concern about the problem.
The onlookers might admire the protesters for their stamina and hardiness, but they might also be annoyed by the filth and chaos, especially if it undermines their ability to pursue their own livelihood. Why do these people who are just occupying space think they are heroic when I work all day and go home at night to take care of my family?
The protesters should be able to connect with the nonprotesters, since the economic problems are shared and there's little emphasis on solutions. (Did you see this Onion piece: "Nation Finally Breaks Down And Begs Its Smart People To Just Fix Everything"?) There shouldn't be an us/them relationship between the protesters and onlookers. It's a shared predicament, and the protesters don't have superior knowledge about the problems or what to do about them. But they are there, out on the street. Then what?
They could turn inward and resist communication, like the Occupy Oakland protesters who wore masks and then turned their backs on a reporter who wanted to interview them about what they were doing. But it would be better for them to turn outward, adopting a demeanor that would allow onlookers to talk with them and have real conversations about shared problems. Of course, a conversation goes both ways. You can't just harangue people. There must be back and forth, and since the protesters don't really know what to do about the problems, they can demonstrate their good faith by really engaging.
An outsider to the protest should be able to move into the crowd and get a dialogue going, the way investment guru Peter Schiff did the other day:
Last March, during the height of the occupation of the Wisconsin Capitol, we were impressed by a man — we call him "The Man in the Middle" — who was not one of protesters, who took a seat in the center of the rotunda and invited people to sit down and talk to him one on one. That was one of the best moments in the protests.
Why don't people talk to each other? There was a popular chant last winter — now taken up by the Occupy crowds — "This is what democracy looks like." But democracy should look like people talking to each other. Not staring each other down from a secure distance.
২৮ অক্টোবর, ২০১১
At the Prairie Café...
... you can hang out with us all night. (We're watching Game 7. Are you?)
UPDATE: Nice work by the St. Louis Cardinals.
Critiquing mainstream media and praising Occupy Wall Street, Dahlia Lithwick accidentally slams Barack Obama.
This essay rambles along, excusing OWS for its vague message on the theory that cable TV newsfolk just don't understand:
Occupy Wall Street is... a movement that has wisely shunned the one-note, pre-chewed, simple-minded messaging required for cable television as it now exists....Okay. The media doesn't get it. Check. Now, look at the final paragraph.
The mainstream media... has no idea whatsoever of how to report on a story that isn’t about easy fixes so much as it is about anguished human frustration and fear....
While the mainstream media expresses puzzlement and fear at these incomprehensible “protesters” with their oddly well-worded “signs,” the rest of us see our own concerns reflected back at us and understand perfectly....
By refusing to take a ragtag, complicated, and leaderless movement seriously, the mainstream media has succeeded only in ensuring its own irrelevance. The rest of America has little trouble understanding that these are ragtag, complicated, and leaderless times. This may not make for great television, but any movement that acknowledges that fact deserves enormous credit.These are leaderless times?! Whatever happened to The One?
Why do people have so much trouble understanding Herman Cain's smoking guy ad?
Back in 2007, we were able to get Mike Gravel's throwing-a-rock-in-the-water ad:
Maybe some day Mark Block — the smoking guy — will explain his ad the way Mike Gravel explained his ad here:
All right, now... try again. Here's the smoking guy ad:
Do you understand now? It is a little different, but there are similarities, and I don't just mean that both ads are weird and went viral as a result. Both have an old white guy, who seems pretty boring and rather surly, with his face right up in the camera. In both ads, you endure that face. How long must I look at this old guy?
Finally, something happens. In the Gravel ad, the old guy throws a rock in the water. Ah! In the Herman Cain ad, what happens is... the music comes on — "I am America!" — and the old guy starts smoking. It's absurd and still about oldness. This old man is doing that old thing from the past — smoking! What the hell? Then suddenly... Cain! He looks so fresh-faced, and he's not surly at all. He's got this slow-breaking smile. It takes 5 seconds for the smile to broaden to the point where the teeth begin to show. And those are not smoker's teeth. They are sparkling white teeth. We see that smile for 10 whole seconds.
And then you go on to talk about — not the 10-second long smile — but the smoker guy. Why was that man smoking?! You watch it again and get other people to watch it as your conscious mind dithers over the puzzle of the smoking man. And all along, you're falling — unwittingly — in love with the man with the beautiful smile.
Watch it again. See the smile. Sly!
Maybe some day Mark Block — the smoking guy — will explain his ad the way Mike Gravel explained his ad here:
All right, now... try again. Here's the smoking guy ad:
Do you understand now? It is a little different, but there are similarities, and I don't just mean that both ads are weird and went viral as a result. Both have an old white guy, who seems pretty boring and rather surly, with his face right up in the camera. In both ads, you endure that face. How long must I look at this old guy?
Finally, something happens. In the Gravel ad, the old guy throws a rock in the water. Ah! In the Herman Cain ad, what happens is... the music comes on — "I am America!" — and the old guy starts smoking. It's absurd and still about oldness. This old man is doing that old thing from the past — smoking! What the hell? Then suddenly... Cain! He looks so fresh-faced, and he's not surly at all. He's got this slow-breaking smile. It takes 5 seconds for the smile to broaden to the point where the teeth begin to show. And those are not smoker's teeth. They are sparkling white teeth. We see that smile for 10 whole seconds.
And then you go on to talk about — not the 10-second long smile — but the smoker guy. Why was that man smoking?! You watch it again and get other people to watch it as your conscious mind dithers over the puzzle of the smoking man. And all along, you're falling — unwittingly — in love with the man with the beautiful smile.
Watch it again. See the smile. Sly!
Paul Ryan at the Heritage Foundation: "Saving the American Idea."
Here's 52 whole minutes if you've got the time for a full serving of Paul Ryanosity:
Posters, with window reflections.
Some interesting sayings, especially for Madison:
(Enlarge.)
(Enlarge.)
Inside the Overture Center, it was a demonstration of poster printing.
ADDED: I enlarged a photograph enough to see the printer's name "Kennedy Prints," and Googling, I got here and found this trailer for a documentary about Amos Paul Kennedy Jr.:
Wow! Click on the last link in the post for a picture of Kennedy. Click through to the enlargements. The aphorisms on the posters are really terrific.
(Enlarge.)
(Enlarge.)
Inside the Overture Center, it was a demonstration of poster printing.
ADDED: I enlarged a photograph enough to see the printer's name "Kennedy Prints," and Googling, I got here and found this trailer for a documentary about Amos Paul Kennedy Jr.:
Wow! Click on the last link in the post for a picture of Kennedy. Click through to the enlargements. The aphorisms on the posters are really terrific.
A quote from Bill Daley, the White House Chief of Staff. Guess what he's talking about?
"That was a freakin’ drag out, knockout, every day sort of bing-bang-bong. There isn’t that now. There isn’t a sort of 'woe is us,' kind of dragging around, tail between the legs. Maybe there ought to be, but there sure isn’t."
What is he comparing to what?
What is he comparing to what?
"Juggalos are traditionally fans of the musical group the Insane Clown Posse."
Says the FBI in its 2011 National Gang Threat Assessment. Jesse Walker at Hit & Run comments: "I'd love to learn more about those non-traditional Juggalos who are not fans of Insane Clown Posse."
"The continuing economic downturn has drastically altered the internal migration habits of Americans..."
"... turning the flood of migrants into the Sun Belt and out of states like New York, Massachusetts and California into a relative trickle..."
West nowhere, young man.
Essentially, millions of Americans have become frozen in place, researchers say, unable to sell their homes and unsure they would find jobs elsewhere anyway.Go
Person-based praise and process-based praise — are you praising your kids the best way?
"The parents who gave more process-praise had children who believe their intelligence and social qualities could be developed and they were more eager for challenges" — according to Stanford researcher Carol Dweck, quoted in this essay by Jenny Anderson.
I haven't delved through Dweck's study, but I wonder whether correlation is causation here. Maybe less intelligent parents are the ones who make "person-based" comments like "You're so smart!" and more intelligent parents figure out that it is better not to tell the child what he is but to talk about the specifics of the thing that he is attempting to do. If so, the difference in intelligence may be simply inborn.
I haven't delved through Dweck's study, but I wonder whether correlation is causation here. Maybe less intelligent parents are the ones who make "person-based" comments like "You're so smart!" and more intelligent parents figure out that it is better not to tell the child what he is but to talk about the specifics of the thing that he is attempting to do. If so, the difference in intelligence may be simply inborn.
"In the history of baseball, there have been a small collection of World Series games identified solely by the moniker 'Game 6.'"
So begins David Waldstein in his write-up of last night's World Series game. It's an exciting read. But there are 2 more new essays on the game in the NYT alone.
Tyler Kpner begins:
Tyler Kpner begins:
The two men, both in their 70’s, with decades in baseball and a fortune to their names, huddled together in the runway outside the home clubhouse at Busch Stadium early Friday morning. They could have been caffeinated Little Leaguers at a pizza parlor, celebrating the most thrilling game of their lives.Pat Borzi begins:
He guessed right on a changeup, and once the ball left David Freese’s bat, he saw everything. The soaring drive deep to center field. Josh Hamilton chasing it for a few steps, then giving up. And a solitary usher in the bleachers trying to stop joyous St. Louis Cardinals fans from jumping onto the grassy batter’s eye in pursuit of Freese’s game-winning home run.It's a sportswriters' contest. Fabulous raw material. As the teams compete to determine who's the best in the land, so do the sportswriters.
এতে সদস্যতা:
পোস্টগুলি (Atom)
পোস্টগুলি
