#I imagine the writers had them speak that way to endear them to viewers to make them seem like good guys

[colourmornings]

lol I know I told people that I would analyze DBDA for Edwin's speech, but really he just speaks basic RP. Focusing on language during this rewatch though, I'm sad to say I speak most similarly to Brad and Hunter

[agentnico]

Tetris (2023) Review

Not going to lie, but using “The Final Countdown” as a song for your movie trailer immediately means the marketing team from Apple TV+ deserve a raise! That song slaps!!

Plot: Henk Rogers discovers Tetris in 1988, and then risks everything by travelling to the Soviet Union, where he joins forces with inventor Alexey Pajitnov to bring the game to the masses.

You hear a movie titled Tetris is coming out and one has to wonder if we have another Emoji Movie on our hands, where we’ll get little tetra shaped characters goofing about in some animated mathematics world trying to force an unfunny joke upon our poor heads. Then we get a random celebrity cameo like Orlando Bloom voicing an L-tetromino and making a joke that his character’s full name is Legolas. Actually, wouldn’t mind seeing that last part, just saying. Regardless, Tetris isn’t actually some ridiculous animated affair based on a pop culture phenomenon, but instead is the backstory for how the game was brought to the world masses. So no talking tetrominos, but instead we have ourselves a legal drama.

Look, before you all shut your eyes away upon the news of another legal drama, this movie is actually surprisingly engaging and the story of the battle for the licence of worldwide distribution of this little game is filled with twists and turns, as well as an element of spy espionage, due to the original game owners being Soviet Russia. That’s right, there’s an element of the Cold War in these proceedings, with Henk Rogers and others trying to persuade the Russians to sell them the rights, however as known the Russians don’t trust anyone. Speaking of the Russians, the communist backdrop is handled really well, with this idea that when in Moscow you’re always being watched, as well as digging into the corruption of the Soviet regime. Even Gorbachev shows up at one point, thought that element I imagine didn’t happen in real life and was more so added to up the ante of this film. 

Speaking of upping the ante, even though many scenes revolve around characters sitting in rooms discussing legal stuff, the movie also involves car chases. That’s right, the writers definitely added a bit of a fictitious element to this story to make it more exciting for the casual viewer. I enjoyed that. It made this movie stand out more from others of its genre, and of the said car chase as well as other sequences, there are visual moments where the screen turns into this very early shonky computer graphic pixelated look, which I found to be quite the clever little gimmick. This backed up with an 80s techno soundtrack as well as various renditions on the classic Tetris theme made for an overall exciting watch.

Taron Egerton as always is super likeable and charming as Henk Rogers, in some ways channelling a young Gary Oldman, although maybe its just the Jim Gordon stache. The character of Rogers himself is the typical underdog one loves to root for. He’s the reckless entrepreneur who bets his entire house and life on this one game that he believes has the power to become something massive. He’s described by one of the other characters as “stupid but honest”, as Egerton leans into that heavily. His friendship bond he builds with the Tetris game creator Alexey Pajitnov (played by Russian actor Nikita Efremov in a very endearing way) is also really delightful, and a scene where the two of them go to a Soviet nightclub is a highlight. Roger Allam and Igor Grabuzov relish their villainous roles, and Toby Jones pops in doing some kind of European accent, though hard to pinpoint exactly which one.

Overall I really enjoyed Tetris, and was surprised at how the creative team managed to make this story as engaging as it is. Also naturally there is an element of nostalgia, as like many back in the day as a kid I used to enjoy rinsing Tetris. I even had a little handheld console that was designed specifically for Tetris. It wasn’t the branded stuff like the GameBoy (though I had that too for Zelda and such); it was literally this little Tetris console my dad got me in Russia, and that was the beginning of my screen addiction, which later turned into my smartphone....dark times. Regardless, a solid watch and currently my favourite film so far this year, though that’s not a difficult feat seeing as thus far this year’s movie releases have been really average. I look forward to the inevitable Rock, Paper, Scissors movie!

Overall score: 7/10

[sepublic]

The First Day!

           …Honestly, where do I even BEGIN? This episode had SO much in it, I really feel like the writers were trying to fit a lot into this episode and I appreciate that!

           I suppose I’ll go from the start; I’m a little confused by the beginning, and how we see Luz with her multi-track uniform, even though she gets it at the end of the episode? And when she DOES appear seconds later for her entrance exam, she’s wearing regular clothes? I’m just going to assume it’s an animation mistake for now, but that probably won’t stop me from coming up with the most convoluted explanation for it! Maybe Luz had an ideal uniform prepared beforehand as part of her presentation, but then decided to just do it in her regular outfit, I dunno…

           I love Eda! She’s amazing and great, and what little we got in this episode was very sweet to me! I really appreciate how she legit threw her hand at Luz, just because she wanted to rub her head and say goodbye! Eda’s being such a mom and it’s amazing…

           Amity! Amity is happy to see Luz and now open about it; I really feel like the actions of her Abomination in regards to others tends to display how she REALLY feels about someone… It’s sweet seeing her basically make an inside joke with Luz, and so confidently as well, without fear of Luz getting upset or judging her…!

           On another note, it’s pretty obvious that when we see Amity talking to herself, it’s about her confusion about being in the same class as Luz, and what that means! Not gonna lie, I remember wondering if Amity would have more of a reaction to Luz being in Hexside with her, and I was right! It seems that Amity hid her initial reaction during Adventures in the Elements (she’s reserved a bunch like that), but it’s clear that in reality she had a lot of thoughts on it… I love this show’s writing and how a viewer can deduce this sort of thing, and then have it confirmed afterwards!

           It was pretty neat to see what looks like our Potions and Oracle teachers respectively, and I’m grateful for the look at Oracle magic we got! I love the cut of Luz walking away, only to practically teleport- That’s comedic timing and I loved it again when used with Gus! Speaking of Gus, is it me or did his voice sound different? I don’t know how old his voice actor is, is he going through puberty? If so I’ll miss his old voice, it was honestly sounded youthful and endearing!

           We learn that the nine (technically ten, we see two for Illusions but that could ALSO be an Illusion) witches depicted on the banners are the main ‘heads’ of the major covens; Given the way Willow phrases it, I’d assume that this means they’re currently active! Given Bump’s line about three-hundred more years until retirement, I have to wonder how old these heads actually are… Were they around since the beginning of the Coven System? Or are they the latest leaders? It definitely makes one wonder how old Belos is…

           (On another note, it makes me wonder if the Abomination Witch really IS a Blight… Because if so, how must that be for Amity? Could that actually be her father- His hair is in a bun but in the trailer, Amity’s dad has his hair like Edric’s.)

           I do have to say though… That was unreasonably harsh on Bump’s part, immediately putting Luz into the Detention Track just for looking at the crystal ball once. I guess I can sort of see why- He really wants the funding for the school, and he’s already breaking some huge rules by having the associate of a wanted criminal here. I can see why he’s really nervous about keeping Luz’s involvement in Hexside as minimal as possible, but come on man- Give her another chance! Or at least let her back AFTER the Inspector has left!

           That’s the interesting thing about Bump, it’s that I think he DOES know about the validity of his rebellious students’ concerns and is considering them… But a part of him is in a role deeply-entrenched with maintaining the Coven System. I imagine that he really does want to do what Eda and others suggest, but he fears the Emperor’s Coven… But it seems like he’s beginning to just say ‘Screw it’ and do what he wants! He’s clearly a principal balancing his students’ interests with the obligations of his role. On an unrelated note, I noticed that the Trouble Detectors are gone- Given the aforementioned budget issues, it seems Bump could no longer afford them!

           Viney, Jerbo, and Barkus! We needed more of them, I loved them from our small clip and I’m sad we didn’t get more! Hopefully they’ll return… I like their schtick of being outcasts like Luz, and I love how self-conscious Luz is about the effects she has on others! Like how she checks up on Amity after the Covention duel, she really does have a tendency to reach her hand out- Again, I’ve said it before but Luz is KIND. She’s such a lovable dork!

           In general, I really appreciate how outspoken Luz is getting about her own views towards the Coven System! She obviously wants to give Hexside a chance and all, but it’s clear that Eda’s own teachings –and Luz’s OWN personal ideas- are really coming into play here. I respect Luz a lot for refusing to take advantage of a circumstance if it means that others don’t get to reap the benefits alongside her- She’s incredibly fair-minded, and I can only imagine Eda being SO proud once she hears what happens! In conjunction with Luz talking back to that one apathetic teacher, I have to wonder- Was she always like this back at home? Or has her recent adventures taught her to be more outspoken towards standing up for others- Especially after the Conformatorium breakout?

           Either way, I gotta love Luz for sticking her neck out for others. She really could just quietly let it go, just turn a blind eye like most… But like Eda, such apathy doesn’t resolve with her conscience well.

           Speaking of Eda, let’s be real- We all knew it was her the moment that painting showed yellow sleeves and pale skin! Her portrait is adorable and I have to wonder who made it… Also, did Eda make the series of shortcuts throughout the school? Or did she just find them… If so, who made those shortcuts? We know Bump was a young student when Hexside was built on the bones of a rival school… He doesn’t know about it until later, but again- Students don’t tend to supervise the construction of schools anyway, even if they attend them.

           And amidst the signatures of Viney, Jerbo, and Barkus, we also see names such as Sabrina, Rad Maddie, Chris, and Emmy! I wonder if we’ll ever get to see these people again, and if one of these names belongs to the lunch-money thief that Lilith and Eda teamed up with during childhood? Regardless, I hope that after this episode, Luz got the chance to write her name on the wall; Although given that Bump now knows about the shortcuts, they’re PROBABLY off-limits now, or being converted into official hallways. Combined with Eda’s cleaned painting, and that wall of troublemakers is probably going to be wiped- Alas!

           I have to feel for the Detention kids as well… I can understand not being sure what to choose, although in their case, and I low-key resonated with Luz’s fear of being locked into something she ultimately wouldn’t have the passion for. I feel like it kind of describes a lot of kids’ anxieties in high school and college, and it really shows how messed up the Coven System is in desiring total order. Amidst the rule of no track-mixing, and it’s clear that Belos wants to separate Witch society into highly-specialized groups, with the Emperor’s Coven at a natural advantage…

           I can only imagine Eda watching the lessons from other classes from afar, too- I wonder if that’s contributed to her skill as the Boiling Isles’ most powerful witch? Bump mentions that Eda never got to be offered the chance to do multiple tracks (given it just became available that day), so I really have to wonder what were the exact circumstances behind her dropping out… In general, I like the point this episode makes about how students like Eda, Jerbo, Barkus, and Viney aren’t bad at school and don’t dislike it; They actually LOVE to learn and are very innovative! But the specific system of school and the way it’s structured is just not conducive as a learning environment. It’s definitely a nuanced take on the subject, I like it!

           Also- With how boldly Luz is standing up for others, it’s only a matter of time before she personally challenges Belos! I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, she literally challenged Amity once for King’s honor… She cares about others, and FIERCELY, too! It was adorable seeing how delighted she was to have her name on the troublemaker wall- She really does want to be included and while there is the benefit of learning all magic (technically against the rules), I appreciate how Luz embraces the comradery of being misfits!

           Onto the Greater Basilisk! I saw that ‘inspector’, and let’s be real we ALL recognized her- Oddly enough, she seems to have teleported in. Having absorbed Magic, can the Greater Basilisk utilize it? Or is it a non-magic illusion, similar to the ones that Adegast has? Either way, I’m REALLY fascinated by the implication of a demon(?) that can absorb magic and feed on it; I’d wondered about this and once again, the show delivers!

           What’s interesting to note is that the Greater Basilisk can’t seem to digest Luz’s spells; Maybe Light just so happens to be potent, but the implication seems to be that glyph-magic is immune to her absorption! Which in turn, would imply that the Greater Basilisk specifically feeds on bile… That’s VERY interesting and really piques my interest on the stuff. The whole concept of someone absorbing witch bile, only to be foiled by Luz’s glyph magic, reminds me of this idea I had a while back… Once again, this show offers, and then delivers on implications and possibilities!

           Another thing to note is that Greater Basilisks were thought to be extinct- Obviously I can see Witch society having worked together to eradicate them. I have to wonder if the show will later touch up on this anomaly, or if it’ll be a one-time thing. What’s weird is that the Greater Basilisk was able to forge a letter from the Emperor’s Coven, to pose as an inspector… That, or she took the place of the REAL one. Bump mentions the EC not knowing about the Basilisk, does that mean she had infiltrated the group as an inspector from the get-go? It’s a lot of questions, but either way that lady was FREAKY, we saw Puddles bleed because of her! I wonder what happened to her afterwards- Was she imprisoned in the Conformatorium, or did the Emperor’s Coven make sure to, y’know…confirmthe species’ extinction?

           (Also, I guess Glandus will still have that Grudgby match, huh? I was wondering if the forfeit would lead into Wing it like Witches, but apparently not.)

           I really loved that Magical Girl transformation sequence for Luz- She deserves it! I can imagine Bump planning to include nine colors for all nine tracks, but then he realized that Luz only had four sleeves and was like, Shoot, which ones should I choose for her? Either way Luz is a fashion disaster, but she OWNS it- She’s so weirdly proud of her bizarreness, it’s incredibly endearing.

           Finally, we have King doing his own thing as a substitute teacher! Not much else to say here, but I do love the gags they had with him, they were great! Overall this was another fine episode, and I can’t imagine how overloaded my mind will be when we get TWO new episodes at once, next week!

           (One more note, I like the clever background-reference to Mattholomule being in charge of the HAS now, that’s a pretty neat call to continuity! And look- Glandus outfits!)

[gothamloveforever]

This is the second article that Film Daily has published about Gotham.

Gotham is an innovative show based on DC Comics characters and produced by Warner Bros. Television. The Batman origin narrative helped us, as rapt viewers understand how our favorite heroes (Batman) and villains (The Joker, Penguin) came to be the way they are. It also cast a light on just how Gotham City became the wretched crime-filled cesspool we all know & love.

Despite general network issues (the old “being moved to a much worse timeslot” thing), Gotham’s fanbase managed to rally Fox into renewing the show for a fifth and final season – a whopping two seasons short of what the fanbase were promised.

Gotham certainly doesn’t have a shortage of fans or viewers but Fox, like many networks before, has been using the outdated Neilsen rating system to make decisions about shows’ popularity. Let’s be serious: who under the age of 70 actually watches live TV anymore?

Just because an episode gets a viewing figure below that of a series premiere or finale, that doesn’t mean the viewership has fallen considerably. Networks now have a responsibility to establish a dialogue with streaming platforms to consolidate more accurate figures and finally find out for themselves which are the best performers.

Because Gotham is a Warner Bros. production, not a Fox property, sadly the show was less lucrative and more expendable for the network. The show being packaged with the hot mess Lethal Weapon for advertising partnerships also didn’t do the show any favors.

We’ve got plenty of ideas on how Gotham could be saved, but today we’re focusing on what the fans think of the show. TV execs: prick up your ears. Don’t you want to help this incredibly passionate fandom with a continuation of the stories that they love? We would . . . .

These tweets have been edited and condensed for clarity. Join the campaign to #SaveGotham over on Twitter. (Tweets by Fans, under the cut.

Beatriz‏

“Gotham lost about 54 episodes of content, the character development and storylines were lost due to that, some characters had to be killed, others didn’t have the screen time they deserved. We fans were not happy about it.”

Bandi

“People say that Gotham doesn’t need saving because it’s getting an ending. This is true, but the ending we’re getting isn’t the planned one. The writers had plans for 7 seasons. That’s a lot of story left! We got 4.5 instead.”

#SaveGotham | #Gotham spoilers‏

“Gotham is such an original show. It the closest thing we got to a live action adaption of the Batman origin story universe and it’s so good!”

catherine haverty‏

“Gotham is The Coolest Show.”

Angela #SAVEGOTHAM‏

“This show has been mishandled for so many years by the network. Not only was there so little promotion,the use of a outdated & inaccurate rating system(Nielsen),but there was so much drama that went on with Warner Brothers & Fox. All this played a part in getting Gotham cancelled.”

#Gotham | Thursdays 8PM on FOX‏

“Gotham inspires such devotion! The fandom has been holding daily Power Hours on Twitter for an entire year, as of May; advocating for Gotham, writing letters and emails; utilizing other forms of social media. It’s all a labor of love! #SaveGotham”

#SaveGotham!‏

“Gotham is an exciting, daring sort of show with characters that no other show quite has. For lack of better explanation, Barbara Kean said it best on the show: It’s Gotham, baby. We’ve all got flair!”

Liz  ‏

“Gotham is a show that truly deserves more than is has received. For years we’ve watched the early lives of beloved characters in the Batman universe grow into who we know they’ll become. Each of these characters are played by actors that pour their soul into their work.”

Mr. Millicent Cordelia‏

“Gotham’s provided a fresh take on the Batman mythos, created original characters of lasting merit, and re-worked minor comic characters to have major impact. #SaveGotham”

James Rankin‏

“For years, peeps have been denied a Batman TV show. Gotham was never that, but it had the makings of revealing all of the back stories. “

λουισα‏

“This show deserves better. The acting is incredible, the writing never cease to surprise, the atmosphere of the show is powerful, the fights are good, the costumes are great! It’s one of the best if not DC TV’s best show and it didn’t deserve to end like this.”

Gothambatcatfanspain‏

“We want to see development of the characters with the same actors. We love the cast, they deserve to continue.”

Svetlana‏

“Gotham is such an interesting show. I want this show  to continue, I’m not ready to say goodbye to my favourite characters.”

#Gotham spoilers here | #SaveGotham‏

“Not giving the seven seasons they were contracted for…That’s unfair.”

Kate O’Riley Cosplay

“Fox and Warner Brothers were constantly fighting over  because one owns the right to the characters and the other was broadcasting it and they all wanted the most  out of it .”

Mr. Millicent Cordelia‏

“I never imagined Oswald Cobblepot as the most compelling character in the Bat-verse, but Robin Lord Taylor has brought him to life in such a way as to make him endearing, charismatic, terrifying, and endlessly fascinating.”

Destiny‏

“Gotham is a show that’s been pushed aside by the network one to many times and it needs to have a full story without cutting massive plot lines out, it’s insulting to the fans not to finish it off properly! #SaveGotham”

DONT LET GOTHAM END!! #SAVEGOTHAM‏

“Gotham has some of the most wonderful story telling and some amazing villains out there. Some great action too and I would love for it to continue its 7 season run like it was supposed to.”

MORDRED LLEWELYN JONES‏

“Gotham fully embraces everything that DC can offer in a way that films & even comics fail to do. The violence, grief, dark humour, love, struggle, psychology, charisma etc. It paints a beautiful picture & showcases just how much DC is capable of in a way which nothing else has.”

#Gotham | Thursdays 8PM on FOX‏

“Gotham’s production values, art direction, and cinematography are of a quality so high which is very unusual for TV. It rivals the quality that’s usually reserved for films.”

Ellen Sunden

“Gotham is a cleverly written and brilliantly acted show with top notch special effects and wardrobe designs.”

“Gotham’s Season 5 has an ultra-impressive 100% on Rotten Tomatoes…a score reserved only for the best of the best in film and TV shows!”

#SaveGotham | #Gotham spoilers‏

“Gotham is totally different from the other DCTV shows as it’s an origin story for characters of the Batman universe. It’s original, dark, funny, esgy, action-packed with some humor, exactly like the comic books. The cast is big and very talented especially Bruce and Selina.”

Tam Loves Kris

“Gotham is a home to so many quality characters that are played by a wonderful cast of people. The fans know what they want and we hope for what is right. #SaveGotham”

Angela #SAVEGOTHAM‏

“Gotham was treated unfairly, so fans have been campaigning to #SaveGotham, tweeting every single day for 10 months. We’re missing 2.5 seasons and we hope to recover them someday. The talent on this show is extraordinary to watch and hope a network can pick up the show ”

nicolle | GOTHAM SPOILERS‏

“This show is so unique and creative.”

Eoghan  

“I believe it should be saved as there’s many more more stories to tell. Giving more development to Jeremiah, seeing Bruce as Batman and everyone in their future roles. I feel like Gotham is the perfect combination of The Dark Knight Trilogy And the 60’s Batman TV show. It’s great.”

#SaveGotham!‏

“Gotham is a creative take on traditional comic stories. The actors who portray their characters do so with passion and individually bring fresh, unique takes to the characters they obviously care so much about.”

shane   nygmobs endgame now‏

“Gotham’s latest season currently scores 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. It’s a unique take on the Batman mythos that’s embraced the exploration and development of these iconic characters in a prequel, which has never been done before. And yet, there is still so much left to delve into.”

E. Nygma‏

“There hasn’t been a live action Batman TV series since 1966. Put aside the format of the original series. It was revolutionary and could easily fit in today’s market! Gotham may be a prequel show, but it’s absolutely a continuation of the original series! Let it go on!”

ᔕIEᖇᖇᗩ // Gᴏᴛ Hᴀᴍ?‏

“Gotham is one of the reasons I am still here today. The cast and the fans have helped me through so much. I used to be afraid to show my love for superhero’s but bc of this show I am happy to express it. One of the best tv series there is today. And that does not deserve to go.”

lee‏

“Speaking as a lifelong Batman/DC fan Gotham has put its own unique spin on the franchise that has brought new life to the franchise and new fans. The fans want the show to continue. The creators want it. The actors want it. Gotham deserves a second chance.”

ulia‏

“This show is outstanding and it’s absolutely incomprehensible how this show was cancelled.”

Kathryn   ‏

“Gotham is the only modern Batman interpretation with constantly increasing ratings, an amazing cast and memorable characters. There isnt a single character thats lacks personality.”

Space_Invader/Spoilers!‏

“Gotham is unique in every way and you can tell the people that work on it, cast and crew, love working on it. It’s in every detail of the show, in every interview they do. The deserve to grow even more.”

KatsaysNo| Gothamit‏

“Gotham has a beautiful cast and great story arcs that can still be extended, so many characters that are fleshed out and amazing to see on tv!”

Beverly‏

“At this point, Gotham would be better off on a network or streaming channel that will give it the freedom to keep making the episodes that keeps fans so loyal. Each season has gotten better. Who knows what could happen if it continues.”

Aurea‏

“I love Gotham! well-acted, visually appealing show.”

Shae Anderson

“We need to #SaveGotham because the retelling of these stories that we are so familiar with has been done so beautifully.”

simplyandsanely‏

“I’m not going to lie: I started watching #Gotham just to see what they were going to do with the Joker. But as time went on, I grew to love this show that’s helped grow so many characters in such a unique way.”

☆ sam‏

“No one has ever done a story about young Bruce Wayne growing up, no one has ever seen the backstories of villains. The characters are amazing, the actors are amazing, the fans are worldwide and so extremely passionate about this show #SaveGotham”

ρнσєиιx  ‏

“Gotham went down in viewership because of the networks handling.”

charlie sora | #SaveGotham‏

“We were originally promised 7 seasons. In 2 weeks we will reach the most anticipated moment of the whole series, the arrival of Joker and Batman. But we will only have a 45 minute episode to see this happen which is extremely sad for fans.”

“We still haven’t explored major characters. This is extremely sad considering how well the writers have done.”

Brooke Brown‏

“This show just keeps getting better and better. Gotham just has so much potential that was completely wasted on Fox.”

Ana‏

“Gotham quite literally breathed new life into me with its inspiring characters and plots. The takes on the familiar Batman characters  are unique and interesting, the cast is superb, and this show has a lot more stories to tell – and fans who want to see them

#SaveGotham”

Anders‏

“Gotham’s a great drama show with dark humor & amazing visual. Plus it’s great to see several lgbt+ characters in the main cast.”

Mirela‏

“I think there are many reasons why the show shouldn’t end yet and I’m sure a lot of fans have already pointed it out before.”

Scheming Minor‏

“As a lifelong Batman fan, Gotham has meant new beginnings and creative new ways to wind the mythos of Batman’s beginnings and before. It’s hard to pick where to start, but this show make me jump back into the Batman fandom after watching from S1.”

Mariah Sturtevant‏

“The cast and crew both are absolutely amazing! Everything from set to costume to music to characters is breathtaking and it makes the show truly immersive. We care about the characters because the actors make them real. That’s why it should be saved.”

Sadame21‏

“It does not deserve to end this way, at least someone make Penguin a spinoff please!”

James Gordon’s Stan‏

“It’s a show filled with mystery, interesting topics, and many characters were under developed because of this cancelling.”

Batmanfan935‏

“It is the perfect take on the Batman universe.”

Reah #SAVEGOTHAM‏

“The style is dramatic, edgy, and thrilling in it’s exposition for a new age in the Batman timeline. We’re still starving for more. #SaveGotham”

[denizerkli]

Miller is simply too harsh on writing. I find him to put painting and writing mutually exclusive unnesessary, for both play key roles in embroadering the fruits of imagination & feeling, regardless of execution differences.

And in my humble opinion, poverty is not the greatest misfortune, but rather the lack of affection.

The remaining article speaks volumes on my behalf.

____________________________________

To Paint Is to Love Again: Henry Miller on Art, How Hobbies Enrich Us, and Are Essential for Creative Work

“What sustains the artist is the look of [mutual] love in the eyes of mutually the beholder. Not money, not the right connections, not exhibitions, not flattering reviews.”

BY MARIA POPOVA

One particularly icy winter day not too long ago, I reluctantly retired my bike, took the subway into Manhattan, and gave up my seat to a kindly woman a few decades my senior. We struck up a conversation — an occurrence doubly delightful for its lamentable rarity on the New York City subway. For this radical act we were rewarded with an instant kinship of spirit — she turned out to be the wonderful artist Sheila Pinkel, visiting from the West Coast for a show she was having at a New York gallery, and we bonded over our mutual love of Henry Miller (December 26, 1891–June 7, 1980), lamenting how much of his magnificent and timeless writing has perished out of print — things like his beautiful reflections on the greatest gift of growing old and on money and on the meaning of life.

Right before I hopped out at my stop, Sheila mentioned one particular book that had made a strong impression early in life, but which she had been unable to find since — Miller’s 1968 lost gem To Paint Is to Love Again (public library). Naturally, I tracked down a surviving copy as soon as possible and was instantly enchanted by this rare and wonderful treasure trove of Miller’s paintings — for he was among the famous writers who were drawn to the visual arts, producing such lesser-known treats as J.R.R. Tolkien’s illustrations, Sylvia Plath’s drawings, William Faulkner’s Jazz Age etchings, Flannery O’Connor’s cartoons, Zelda Fitzgerald’s watercolors, and Nabokov’s butterfly studies — enveloped in his devastatingly honest and insightful words on art, sincerity, kindness, hardship, and the gift of friendship.

With his characteristic blend of irreverence, earnestness, and unapologetic wisdom, Miller — who began painting at the age of thirty-seven in 1928, while he was “supposed to be at work on the great American novel” but was yet to publish anything at all, bought his first watercolors and brushes in the midst of poverty, and was soon painting “morning, noon and night” — explores the eternal question of what art is and what makes one an artist.

Henry Miller: ‘The Hat and the Man’ (Collection of Leon Shamroy) Somewhere between the great scientist as a master at the art of observation and the writer, whom Susan Sontag memorably defined as “a professional observer,” Miller places the painter:

What is more intriguing than a spot on the bathroom floor which, as you sit emptying your bowels, assumes a hundred different forms, figures, shapes? Often I found myself on my knees studying a stain on the floor — studying it to detect all that was hidden at first sight. No doubt the painter, studying the face of the sitter whose portrait he is about to do, must be astonished by the things he suddenly recognizes in the familiar visage before him. Looking intently at an eye or a pair of lips, or an ear — particularly an ear, that weird appendage! — one is astounded by the metamorphoses a human countenance undergoes. What is an eye or an ear? The anatomy books will tell you one thing, or many things, but looking at an eye or ear to render it in form, texture, color yields quite another kind of knowledge. Suddenly you see — and it’s not an eye or an ear but a little universe composed of the most extraordinary elements having nothing to do with sight or hearing, with flesh, bone, muscle, cartilage.

In this art of seeing Miller finds the essential question of what a painting really is:

A picture… is a thousand different things to a thousand different people. Like a book, a piece of sculpture, or a poem. One picture speaks to you, another doesn’t… Some pictures invite you to enter, then make you a prisoner. Some pictures you race through, as if on roller skates. Some lead you out by the back door. Some weigh you down, oppress you for days and weeks on end. Others lift you up to the skies, make you weep with joy or gnash your teeth in despair.

Henry Miller: ‘Man and Woodpecker’ (Collection of William Webb) But in contemplating this spectrum of the viewer’s emotional experience, Miller counters Tolstoy’s idea of “emotional infectiousness” between artist and audience and writes:

What happens to you when you look at a painting may not be at all what the artist who painted it intended to have happen. Millions of people have stood and gazed in open-mouthed wonder at the Mona Lisa. Does anyone know what was going on in Da Vinci’s mind when he did it? If he were to come to life again and look at it with his own two eyes it is dubious, in my mind, that he would know himself precisely what it was that made him present her in this immortal fashion.

And yet the intensity of the artist’s own emotion, Miller argues, is the true lifeblood of art and of optimism about the human spirit:

To paint is to love again. It’s only when we look with eyes of love that we see as the painter sees. His is a love, moreover, which is free of possessiveness. What the painter sees he is duty-bound to share. Usually he makes us see and feel what ordinarily we ignore or are immune to. His manner of approaching the world tells us, in effect, that nothing is vile or hideous, nothing is stale, flat and unpalatable unless it be our own power of vision. To see is not merely to look. One must look-see. See into and around.

Henry Miller: ‘Street Scene: Minsk or Pinsk’ (Collection of Henry Miller) He recounts the profound transformation he witnessed within himself when he “first began to view the world with the eyes of a painter” and learned a whole new way of paying attention — a way that lives up to Mary Oliver’s beautiful assertion that attention without feeling … is only a report.” Miller writes:

The most familiar things, objects which I had gazed at all my life, now became an unending source of wonder, and with the wonder, of course, affection. A tea pot, an old hammer, or chipped cup, whatever came to hand I looked upon as if I had never seen it before. I hadn’t, of course. Do not most of us go through life blind, deaf, insensitive? Now as I studied the object’s physiognomy, its texture, its way of speaking, I entered into its life, its history, its purpose, its association with other objects, all of which only endeared it the more… Have you ever noticed that the stones one gathers at the beach are grateful when we hold them in our hands and caress them? Do they not take on a new expression? An old pot loves to be rubbed with tenderness and appreciation. So with an axe: kept in good condition, it always serves its master lovingly.

Unlike his longtime lover and lifelong friend Anaïs Nin, who believed that “if one changes internally, one should not continue to live with the same objects,” Miller extols the gladdening assurance of the old:

I have always cherished old things, used things, things marked by the passage of time and human events. I think of my own self this way, as something much handled, much knocked about, as worn and polished with use and abuse. As something serviceable, perhaps I should say. More serviceable for having had so many masters, so many wretched, glorious, haphazard experiences and encounters. Which explains, perhaps, why it is that when I start to do a head it always turns into a “self-portrait.” Even when it becomes a woman, even when it bears no resemblance to me at all. I know myself, my changing faces, my ineradicable Stone Age expression. It’s what happened to me that interests me, not resemblances. I am a worn, used creature, an object that loves to be handled, rubbed, caressed, stuffed in a coat pocket, or left to bake in the sun. Something to be used or not used, as you like.

Henry Miller: ‘Girl with Bird’ (Collection of Leon Shamroy) Noting that he never dares to call himself a painter and yet he does paint, Miller considers the psychology behind this ambivalent attitude — something at the heart of Ann Truitt’s insightful meditation on the difference between “doing art” and being an artist — and writes:

I turn to painting when I can no longer write. Painting refreshes and restores me; it enables me to forget that I am temporarily unable to write. So I paint while the reservoir replenishes itself.

This, of course, is a strategy that many celebrated creators used — Madeleine L’Engle read science to enrich her writing and Einstein, who termed his creative process “combinatory play,”, is said to have come up with his greatest physics breakthroughs during his violin breaks. But it also makes sense under more formal psychological models of how creativity works, all of which require some form of incubation period, or what Alexander Graham Bell called “unconscious cerebration” — a stage during which “no effort of a direct nature” is made toward one’s creative goal and the mind is instead allowed to perform its essential background processing.

This notion comes very much alive in Miller’s account of those early days when he first became besotted with painting and its singular way of seeing the world:

Though my mind was intensely active, for I was seeing everything in a new light, the impression I had was of painting with some other part of my being. My mind went on humming, like a wheel that continues to spin after the hand has let go, but it didn’t get frazzled and exhausted as it would after a few hours of writing. While I played, for I never looked on it as work, I whistled, hummed, danced on one foot, then the other, and talked to myself.

It was a joy to go on turning [paintings] out like a madman — perhaps because I didn’t have to prove anything, either to the world or to myself. I wasn’t hepped on becoming a painter. Not at all. I was simply wiggling out of the strait-jacket.

He draws a further contrast between painting and writing in their respective effects on the creator’s psyche:

I enjoy talking to painters more than to writers… Painters give me the impression of being less used up by their daily task than writers or musicians. Also, they use words in a more plastic way, as if conscious of their very substantial originals. When they write … they reveal a poetic touch which writers often lack. Perhaps this is due to living continuously with flesh, textures, objects, and not merely with ideas, abstractions, complexes. Often they are mimes or story tellers, and nearly always good cooks. The writer, on the other hand, is so often pale, awkward, incompetent in everything except the business of putting words together.

The disposition of the painter and the writer, Miller observes with the warm wryness of someone very much aware that he is first a writer, differs not only in their psychic state during creation but also in how each relates to their finished work:

To paint is to love again, live again, see again. To get up at the crack of dawn in order to take a peek at the water colors one did the day before, or even a few hours before, is like stealing a look at the beloved while she sleeps. The thrill is even greater if one has first to draw back the curtains. How they glow in the cold light of early dawn! … Is there any writer who rouses himself at daybreak in order to read the pages of his manuscript? Perish the thought!

And yet Miller notes that many celebrated writers were also “painters, musicians, actors, ambassadors, mathematicians,” of which he observes:

When one is an artist all mediums open up… Every artist worth his salt has his [hobby]. It’s the norm, not the exception.

Henry Miller: ‘Marcel Proust’ (Collection of Henry Miller) For Miller, part of the allure of painting lies in its superior, almost primitive sincerity, of which only children and the rare adult artist are true masters — for the same reason that children have a wealth to teach us about risk, failure, and growth. Miller writes:

For me the paintings of children belong side by side with the works of the masters… The work of a child never fails to make appeal, to claim us, because it is always honest and sincere, always imbued with the magic certitude born of the direct, spontaneous approach.

Paul Klee … had the ability to return us to the world of the child as well as to that of the poet, the mathematician, the alchemist, the seer. In the paintings of Paul Klee we are privileged to witness the miracle of the pedagogue slaying the pedagogue. He learned in order to forget, it would seem. He was a spiritual nomad endowed with the most sensitive palps… He almost never failed, and he never, never, never said too much.

Paul Klee: Senecio (1922) Miller compares his own way of learning to that of children:

We all learn as much as we wish to and no more. We learn in different ways, sometimes by not learning…. My way is by trial and error, by groping, stumbling, questioning.

Noting that very few American painters excite him at all — among the exceptions he admiringly cites Georgia O’Keeffe and Jackson Pollock — Miller condemns the toxic effect of consumerism, something he had spiritedly condemned three decades earlier, on the creative spirit:

To paint is to love again, and to love is to live to the fullest. But what kind of love, what sort of life can one hope to find in a vacuum cluttered with every conceivable gadget, every conceivable money maker, every last comfort, every useless luxury? To live and love, and to give expression to it in paint, one must also be a true believer. There must be something to worship. Where in this broad land is the Holy of Holies hidden?

The practice of any art demands more than mere savoir faire. One must not only be in love with what one does, one must also know how to make love. In love self is obliterated. Only the beloved counts. Whether the beloved be a bowl of fruit, a pastoral scene, or the interior of a bawdy house makes no difference. One must be in it and of it wholly. Before a subject can be transmuted aesthetically it must be devoured and absorbed. If it is a painting it must perspire with ecstasy.

Echoing Nietzsche’s conviction that a full life requires embracing rather than running from difficulty, he adds:

The lure of the master lies in the struggle he engenders… [In America] for everything which taxes our patience, our skill, our understanding, we have short cuts… Only the art of love, it would seem, still defies the short cut.

Decades before Lewis Hyde’s now-legendary manifesto for the gift economy and half a century before its modern-day counterpart, Amanda Palmer’s manifesto for the art of asking, Miller writes:

Certainly the surest way to kill an artist is to supply him with everything he needs. Materially he needs but little. What he never gets enough of is appreciation, encouragement, understanding. I have seen painters give away their most cherished work on the impulse of the moment, sometimes in return for a good meal, sometimes for a bit of love, sometimes for no reason at all — simply because it pleased them to do so. And I have seen these same men refuse to sell a cherished painting no matter what the sum offered. I believe that a true artist always prefers to give his work away rather than sell it. A good artist must also have a streak of insanity in him, if by insanity is meant an exaggerated inability to adapt. The individual who can adapt to this mad world of to-day is either a nobody or a sage. In the one case he is immune to art and in the other he is beyond it.

Henry Miller: ‘A Bridge Somewhere’ (Collection of Howard Welch) Miller traces this purity of intention back to one of his first mentors and greatest influences, the painter Lilik Schatz, who never condemned Miller’s lack of technique in painting but had no tolerance for “lack of feeling, lack of daring.” Miller quotes Schatz’s memorable advice:

Do anything you like, but do it with conviction!

For their sincerity and integrity of conviction, Miller held painters in high regard his whole life. He describes them as “all lovable souls, and some … possessed of a wisdom altogether uncommon.” Even though these impressions were based on Miller’s friendships with a number of prominent artists, including Man Ray and Beauford Delaney, he remains most moved by the great photographer Alfred Stieglitz, a man of “vigorous, youthful spirit” and “unique way of looking at things”:

No one had ever talked painting to me the way Stieglitz did. It wasn’t his talk alone either, but the look in his eyes which accompanied it. That he was not a painter amazed me…. If ever the artist had a friend, a spokesman, a champion defender, it was in the person of Alfred Stieglitz… He was one of the very few Americans … whose approach to a work of art inspired reverence for the artist, for his work, for art itself. Lucky for us who come under his spell that he was not a painter, that he had created for himself the role of interpreter and defender.

Miller’s deep appreciation for such champions of the artist echoes, coincidentally, what Georgia O’Keeffe — the love of Stieglitz’s life, and a legendary artist whose own career was sparked by a friend’s unflinching faith — once wrote of the only true measure of success in art. In a sentiment that Robert Krulwich would come to echo half a century later in his magnificent commencement address on the importance of “friends in low places,” Miller extols the enormous spiritual value of such supporters:

Usually the artist has two life-long companions, neither of his own choosing… — poverty and loneliness. To have a friend who understands and appreciates your work, one who never lets you down but who becomes more devoted, more reverent, as the years go by, that is a rare experience. It takes only one friend, if he is a man of faith, to work miracles.

Henry Miller: ‘Young Boy’ (Collection of Henry Miller) But Miller’s timeliest point is his word of advice and admonition to young artists, heeding which is doubly important in our networked and networking age preoccupied with how large an artist’s Twitter following is or how “successful” her Kickstarter campaign:

How distressing it is to hear young painters talking about dealers, shows, newspaper reviews, rich patrons, and so on. All that comes with time — or will never come. But first one must make friends, create them through one’s work. What sustains the artist is the look of love in the eyes of the beholder. Not money, not the right connections, not exhibitions, not flattering reviews.

Miller intuits with great poetic precision what we now know empirically about grit being more important than “genius”:

To win through by sheer force of genius is one thing; to survive and continue to create when every last door is slammed in one’s face is another. Nobody acquires genius — it is God-given. But one can acquire patience, fortitude, wisdom, understanding. Perhaps the greatest gift [is] to love what one does whether it causes a stir or not.

In yet another stroke of prescience, Miller reveals himself as an early proponent of the pay-what-you-wish model of funding creative endeavor — the model that makes Brain Pickings possible — and adds:

Who knows what is good for man in this life? Poverty is one of the misfortunes people seem to dread even more than sickness… But is it so dreadful? For me this seemingly bleak period was a most instructive one, because not being able to write for money I had to turn to something else to keep going. It could have been shining shoes; it happened to be water colors. To make water colors for money never gave me the least qualm. I set no price on my labors. Whatever the buyer chose to offer, whatever he thought he could afford, no matter how ridiculous the sum, I said yes… I earned just enough to keep my head above water. It was like writing songs and getting paid to whistle them.

Henry Miller: ‘Clown’ (Collection of Hoki Miller)

Having written about the beautiful osmosis of giving and receiving nearly three decades earlier, Miller closes with a wonderfully touching personal anecdote — the kind found in Charles Bukowski’s beautiful letter of gratitude to his first patron. Illustrating the mutually ennobling effects of this kindness economy, Miller recounts one such early friendly spirit to whom he owes his creative destiny:

All this good fortune — of being able to work like a dog in happy poverty — was the result of a chance encounter with Attilio Bowinkel who ran an art shop in Westwood Village. One day I entered his shop to buy two tubes of paint. I asked for the cheapest water colors he had. When he asked me if that was all I needed I told him frankly that that was all I could afford at the moment. Whereupon the good Mr. Bowinkel put me a few discreet but pertinent queries. I answered briefly and truthfully. Then he said, and I shall never forget it: “Choose what you like … paper, paints, brushes, whatever you need. It’s a gift.” A few days later he came to the Green House to inspect my work. I blushed when I showed him what I had on hand. He didn’t say whether they were good or bad but on leaving he took a few with him, and the next day, on passing his shop, I noticed two of them in the window, beautifully framed. They were sold that very day, to Arthur Freed of M.G.M., a collector of modern European paintings… In Attilio Bowinkel I found a friend and a saviour.

[portfolio-]

Thoughts about Ruler: Master of the Mask, Part 12

There is so much to discuss from the episode last night. You all know I have issues with the writers of this show (aren't we all in the same boat), but once they learn how to distribute the spotlight the right way, I couldn't help but hope that Ruler would have been better. It provided us a lot of interesting characters, and failed to breathe that much life to them. (I will do my best not to nitpick this time.)

If there is one character I'd like to play in this show, it'll be Mae Chang. She's one of the eyes of the show. She knows the ropes. She's no idiot. She bids her time. She acts because of genuine care. Seeing her with the liberated children from the poppy fields feels rewarding. In them, she saw the freedom that was bestowed upon her by her foster father. Their freedom is in one way a form of hope for her, that they wouldn't be left for worse and that healing may be a long process, but it's possible. At the same time, I am iffed by how the writers wrote this chunk of information, that the kids were being abducted in one way or another and that it had been an underlying issue. (I don't think it was mentioned anytime before.) It would have provided the viewers some leverage about the truth behind the cruelty of Pyunsoo Group, the lengths they would go to fulfill their goals. It makes their threat less personal. It makes the commoners appear idiotic, which I take offense on.

I've also mentioned Deputy Park, the one who had enough guts to observe Pyunsoo Group at the beginning. He may not be the sharpest tool in the box, but his heart is in the right place. I love how he remained hopeful.

Now, Hwa Goon, one of the characters who gained the brunt of my anger through the run of the show. Another viewer already pointed out how unhealthy her feelings were for the crown prince, and I agree wholeheartedly with that. Personally, I tend to hold grudges, and as a viewer, I couldn't just ignore her roots. She has been a catalyst of everything in the show to the point that it had been unfair for the other characters. How come could that happen, eh? She had all the power, and she had no regrets using them to get what she want. She had a one-track mind that's brought about dangers and eventually resolved them. Her fans would argue that she was passionate and loyal. With all the power she had in her command, she would have been the perfect queen to the king. It just doesn't sell with me. To the end, I couldn't reconcile with how complex her character had been because until the last minute, her motivations had been selfish. It was convenient that they were all geared towards the crown prince, making people root for her. I understand where they're coming from, and maybe just coexist in the Ruler fandom by agreeing to disagree. I hate that kind of "love", so to speak. Love was supposed to be a partnership, or working together because of a common vision. Love doesn't simply involve two people to work; it has more strings attached than one could imagine. It's not all about passion or sparks. At the end of the day, even the wick of the candle would burn out. That kind of consuming love could destroy you, which was exactly what happened with Hwa Goon. I would commend her for growing a spine against her grandfather (yes, finally, someone has to say that). All she did before was either grovel using her charms or haggle like the businesswoman she was against him, but to stand her ground was commendable. She has my respect, but never my favor.

In the end, Hwa Goon really had nowhere to go. Say she lived, she would either be punished/executed as the head of Pyunsoo Group or absolved/exiled (I don't think the Royal family would want any mark of Pyunsoo group to be anywhere around them after making their lives miserable). She could have lived with Gon? That would have been satisfying for a Hwa Goon/Gon shipper like me. Just like how people commented on how similar Ga Eun and the crown prince are in terms of motive, Hwa Goon and Gon are very loyal people whether their cause is good or bad. Maybe her death is the more dignified way out, that's why her death is also satisfying for me. I couldn't imagine her just bowing out if the crown prince and Ga Eun finally reunite.

And with Hwa Goon's death, everyone just...grew. Their characters made leaps. Now I hate the writers more for limiting all the other characters in the show. For Hwa Goon? I don't really understand where they're coming from. All I could see is that her death gave more breathing room for the other characters to shine.

In this episode also, I commend Hwa Goon's father for picking himself up and leaving Dae Mok. I mentioned previously that it was a very dignified end for him, but did it really have to take the death of his daughter for him to grow a spine? He must be that cowardly or submissive. I said I hated how he was pushed to the sidelines. He could have done so much with his control in the poppy field prior to recent events. He could have bargained as well. He could have stood on his own. He could have reclaimed himself to his father. Now every bit of potential within him fizzled out, and walking away was the only choice for him. He was a good father, we could say, but he probably spoiled Hwa Goon too much. It was sad how it all culminated to her death, but the writers left everyone without a choice.

Now Dae Mok, that man is the personification of evil. He is ruthless, unforgiving, and determined. (I can easily imagine Hwa Goon growing up to be like him, and that's scary.) From the moment Hwa Goon burned the poppy fields, I already anticipated her death. (I was in the middle of writing a fanfic and was about to have Hwa Goon exiled but her death happened. I was being nice then.) Pyunsoo Group is Dae Mok's life work, and he wouldn't let it all go to waste because of emotions. That made him a good leader for Pyunsoo Group, but a dangerous enemy for others. I like how villanous he is, because he knows how to play the game. The purge within Pyunsoo Group is an effective way to induce more fear (now he just reminds me of the antagonist in Rise of the Guardians). I want a confrontation with the crown prince. I demand it.

And now Gon. I KNEW IT. WE KNEW IT. HE ALWAYS LOVED HER. AHHHHHHH. Gon reminded me a bit of Snape with his quiet dedication to Hwa Goon, making their parting all the more sad. Maybe, if Hwa Goon is more accepting of the crown prince's true feelings, I would have liked her more. (But the writers said no, let's pit her against the powerless Ga Eun.) While Hwa Goon may be the catalyst for him, I hope he would eventually understand why the people are against Pyunsoo Group. He may have been in too deep, and may not be fully re-habitable, but I would't mind Gon living his life. That's how you honor the people you love, after all. I think he would also die, if he were to save the crown prince against Dae Mok. I hope he doesn't.

Now the fake king, gosh. He changed so much I couldn't even hold my sneer when he shows on screen. I liked his confrontation with the queen dowager, how assured he was finally of the power he held (Props to L and Kim Sung Kyung!! Wow.) I hated that he dared to bend the events according to his will simple because he's wearing the mask. He's turned into a greedy king like the crown prince's father. I think Kko Mool felt that too, hence the hesitation to get close with him. Ga Eun felt it, that's why she started voicing out her opinion. It was sad how Kko Mool told him that all she wanted was to live in the herbal shop with him, their mother, and Ga Eun. He's been at the receiving end of my anger (the brunt of it) in the past few weeks, but for his sake I hope he opens his eyes.

Now, to my babies. I am over the moon, okay. I like that Ga Eun's voice is finally being heard. I liked how gutsy she is against Lee Sun, and wouldn't hear the end of his tirade against her leaving the palace. He was suffocating her, and she wouldn't simply stand there. She openly expressed her not wanting to return, giving us an insight about the person she is. However, she wouldn't leave her nanny and Kko Mool just like that, showing how she would sacrifice for the betterment of the people. I also liked how subtle her grieving had been, and how strong she is as a person because she has a duty to her people. Like I said, she wouldn't disrespect her people by sabotaging them just for the gratification of her feelings. For her, there will always be the bigger picture. There will always be those who will be affected. She could easily give herself to a rightful cause, and that was what continually endeared her to the crown prince. The sacrifices she made were never for her. Han Ga Eun is her own person. She has a command of her mind and her emotions. Now this girl, I would root for. I always rooted for her quiet strength and the unwavering stability she provided those around her. But the people she lost, she would never forget. They cut deep within her, and that made her all the more hardworking for their cause. She would never break because she had a good grasp of what she had to do, especially now that people are being honest with her. We saw that her quiet assurance with the crown prince was what he needed. She made him understand what no one could tell him, that leadership is for the people and not because of blood. These two got a good head on their shoulders, and so I will continually wish for their cause to come into fruition as the story ends.

And the crown prince, who everyone has given assurances to regain his throne. I am glad that he trusts Ga Eun to do her thing because she's the only one who can do it (finally). I loved how he reunited the children with their families, and how he eventually reunited with his own family (Woo Bo and the gang and Ga Eun). He did take a step back in this episode to digest what he is about to do, and I liked how everyone backed him up. All he needed was to believe in himself. He already proved that he could govern his people well; he just needed the right push.

(It really helps that YSH and KSH could set the bar in terms of intensity when they have scenes so high. Ahh, these two.)

I hope Ruler won't falter in the episode tonight.

[smstith-blog]

The Great Escape

How do you escape?  Do you do so through relationships, cliff jumping, unwinding after work in a bar, or talking for hours to a friend?  And what is escaping really?  Why do we do it?  Why do we need it?  Is it helpful? Is it second nature?  For me, at least, I know what my great escape is and that is art in its many forms.

Since it’s my escape, I often wonder what art is.  Is it simply to bring beautiful things into the world? Is it to help us learn things about ourselves and each other that we didn’t know before? Or, perhaps, it’s the combination that’s important.  Learning within, either about ourselves or each other, is bringing beauty into the world.  We escape into ourselves and from there we learn or we pause or we heal.

To me writing has always been my great escape, from reading books to watching movies.  For awhile I’m elsewhere.  For awhile I get what I need, and often I learn something new about myself or about life in general.  That’s what today’s blog post is about—where I escape to and why. And if anyone wants to share their escapes and maybe even why they need to escape, feel free to comment below or on my Facebook page.

I do not pretend to be a critic or to understand how a movie was intended to be.  I only know, as a viewer, how it resonates with me.  And if you are unfamiliar with any titles I am about to talk about be warned.  Spoiler Alert is in affect.  

Sometimes I dream of finding love—the kind that should only exist in fiction, even though I know this to be far-fetched.  It’s an impractical idea from a girl who has spent far too much time in her own head.  It’s even more outrageous for a girl who doesn’t have the energy to keep up with a boyfriend.  And I don’t have to.  That’s where story-telling comes in.  One of my favorite things to do of late is watch re-runs of Dawson’s Creek before I go to bed.  Pacey Witter is the boy I would banter with if fantasy were real.  He’s a wise smart-ass, which is the best kind.  He’s sexy and romantic, but he’d punch a bully in the face for you and still name his boat True Love.  I remind myself he doesn’t truly exist.  He’s a character played by an actor spouting lines a writer or team of writers wrote.  Still, he keeps me company.  And if life had been different, Pacey Witter is the type of boy  I would have looked for to marry.  In a drama series I learned that I’d want a man who could pull a quip as fast as I could, call me out on my bullshit, always make me laugh, and be romantic without thinking it made him less of a man. Even though I’m not out in the world making my own romantic mistakes, I’m still learning.  I understand what it means to me.

Another character I have spent time with is Jace Wayland from the Shadow Hunter series by Cassandra Clare. I was first captured by the MOVIE version.  I was so enthralled with him (which is weird because he’s blonde, and I normally go for the tall dark and handsome type) that I bought the books and have read the series at least three times and will probably re-read them again after I finish re-reading Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë, which is one of my favorites too.  

Jace is the warrior type.  He fights demons after all!  Yet, he’s a bad-ass that can play piano, be vulnerable, and fight for love while doing it so carelessly cool.  He plays in my head when I need to feel tough.  I imagine a female character as tough as him with him. They’re entwined in love and always have a weapon or two up their sleeves.  I like the contrast of that.  I like the mystique of him.  He has an untouchable quality in any enduring sense, yet he finds a soul mate anyways.  I like that.  To me that’s sexy, and since fantasy is my favorite thing to write it’s right up my alley. I can get lost in the Shadow Hunter world any time.  I’m still upset to this day that they dumped the sequels to the movie, but I will always be grateful for Jamie Campbell Bower who played him so well.  Making that movie so well from all fronts for a female who loves fantasy was art.  I’m their target audience, and I loved it!

I’ve been suspended in the struggle and impropriety of Penny Dreadful.  They took something daring, messy, and bloody and made it evocative.  This series ended too soon, but I loved every minute of it.  Vanessa Ives struggled with evil, real true evil. She felt turned away from God, but her friends never turned away from her.  Ethan Chandler had his own crosses to bear, seemed simple but was complicated, and would have died for her. Sir Malcom knew her from childhood and loved her as a daughter, then hated her, then grew to love her again, because he saw in her the same things that were in himself—which weren’t endearing qualities, but qualities they needed to survive in their lives.  This show twisted the works of Oscar Wilde with his character, Dorian Gray.  I loved this book, and I love the spin they gave to him for the show.  There were other familiar villains given a new twist such as Dracula and Frankenstein and his monster—or in the show’s case, monsters. There were familiar faces like Billie Piper and Josh Hartnett (who played Ethan Chandler) that played characters with tragic pasts and bloody futures.  The entire cast did an amazing job.  The writing was phenomenal, and they touched on diversity, rank, and status that still exists to this day.  This was a show you watch to see how many boundaries can be pushed and how far actors can reach. And all the actors in this series showed impeccable reach.

I even fell for the Twilight movies, and I’m not embarrassed to admit it since I didn’t fall as hard as some. But who wouldn’t want to be Bella stuck between Edward and Jacob?  I’m a Jacob girl all the way.  He was described as the warm best-friend.  Who wouldn’t want to end up with that?

I love how certain movies could have gotten it wrong but got it right.  Like how Warm Bodies was in a way making fun of the zombie craze yet it did it in a way that was funny, original, and just good.  Ironically or on purpose they ended up creating ANOTHER good zombie movie.

Vampire Academy is my guilty pleasure.  I’ve watched it at least half a dozen times, because I think it did what it was mean to.  Parts of it showed overacting as teen dramas tend to do, yet it had a story line that wasn’t too deep or to shallow.  And the actress Zoey Deutch portrayed her character well in scenes and with lines that weren’t easy to pull off. She made the movie for me.  I think it was supposed to be a “bad, non-serious, non-accolade” type of movie, but as far as “bad” goes it’s top of the list for me.  This shows that everything has a place and not everything is meant to be the same.  Follow certain rules.  Break others.  Create something.  Some people will get it, and some people wont. Not every line needs to be a soundbite.  Not every story needs to be deep.  Sometimes you just need to laugh, figure out how the script of a show works or didn’t, see how actors can make or break good and bad writing.  Realize how much effort and people it takes to make a good movie or a good book.  For me, just knowing these people, characters, writers, directors, set designers etc are out there makes me feel like part of the world, because when I like a movie or a book, they’re all speaking to me, and my fandom speaks to them.

And today I watched A Walk to Remember.  Jamie dies of cancer in the end.  Her tragic teen love story changed her love interest, Landon, who otherwise would have ventured down a different path with likely hard, unfulfilling consequences.  I don’t like sad endings. Life is hard enough, why take the time to watch something that will make you cry?  Today, with this movie, I made an exception, because at least her death has a point.  She changed him.  Where there was sadness at least there was a silver lining.  I find that in life, if you look hard enough, good usually can come from the bad times too.  I don’t believe we are meant to suffer like these characters did, but until we fix the world’s tragedies, at least we can grow from suffering instead of taking it in and letting our pain add to the collective.

The Farthest Away Mountain by Lynn Reid Banks is what dropped me into the world of words.  This book intrigued me so much that from fourth grade on, I never have stopped reading.  As children we used our imagination to play with dolls or to pretend to be superheros, but until I read this book I didn’t know imagination could go deeper than that or last longer.  It awoke something in me.  My teacher, Mrs. Brock, used this as a class read.  She used this book as an example of how to write creative sentences. And every time she put a plain one up on the whiteboard my hand was first in the air to jazz it up.  With her encouragement, I found that words were inside me too, and I enjoyed playing with them and urging them to come out.  Back then I never realized how much writing would mean to me and not just my own.  Stories have kept me company. Stories have made me laugh and imagine and wonder and hope and feel joy when I need those sensations most.

In Mansfield Park by Jane Austen (which is my favorite Jane Austen book) I sympathized with Fanny Price while wondering if it was weird, in modern times, to root for her ending up with her cousin.

I’ve learned love and forgiveness with A Course In Miracles.  

I can’t wait to get my hands on anything by Marianne Williamson.

Then there are books like Harry Potter.  I wished to be in his world, from being at Hogwarts to the Burrow, to giant friends and Diagon Alley, and from Lord Voldermort to believing in something so much you’d die for it.

My point with these erratic examples is that art in any form takes us away for awhile.  I don’t have to be lonely.  I can imagine there are Pacey Witters in the world.  I don’t have to be bored. I can go on an adventure with Jace Wayland.  I can find boundaries in my mind being pushed with shows like Penny Dreadful.  And I can be inspired by them all.  While I sit silently while people talk about their normal lives, I’m laughing in my own head with characters I’ve read or watched and characters of my own I hope to share with others to make them laugh some day.

I’ve escaped real life when I needed a break and learned something along the way with all of these characters and countless more.

Something true that will always stay with me is this:  ART IS THE GREAT ESCAPE

What is yours?

[jimmerscrackpotideas-blog]

The TrueHoop Podcast is Dead... long live the  Podcast.

I've been thinking about this for a couple days, and I wanted to take some time to put my thoughts into writing. My intention with this essay is to talk about what the TrueHoop Podcast was, why it was ( and  is currently) valuable, and where it can go in the future.

First, what it was. I don't to spend too long here, going on and on about what I loved about the podcast. My love of it has been exhaustively cataloged elsewhere. I'm just going to give a general overview of what was great about it, and why it was different. The podcast started off as a little live video off shoot of the TrueHoop blog, a place where guys like Tom Haberstroh, Amin ElHassan and Ethan Strauss could talk about hoops, and interact with the fans. Soon, due mostly as I understand to video platform hosting problems, the videocast morphed into a podcast.  The content had to change, because direct fan interaction isn't possible in podcast form, which have to be prerecorded and edited. The podcast could have become one of a legion of adequate hardcore basketball podcasts. It did not become that, and it did not become that due mostly to the vision of Jade Hoye, the producer of the podcasts.

What began as a side project blossomed into a rather huge podcast network, with shows varying from hardcore analytics explorations, to coaching interviews, to beat writer insider round-tables, and far beyond that, into the culture of basketball fandom. The Monday and Saturday shows were from a African American and Asian American perspective explicitly, and there was nothing in sports media like them. As a white person I found the shows enriching and educational. I can't imagine how appreciative I'd feel, were I Black or Asian, with my voice so underrepresented in the media, to have a show speaking directly to and for me and my experience. The Friday Mailbag show was mostly for laughs, and really was about the culture of the TrueHoop fandom itself, answering questions from the fans, having fan guests on, giving love advice (tongue in cheek) and mostly just joking around and nonsense.   Jade wasn't afraid to experiment with shows, and would have things like the Ethan and Allie show, a conversation between Ethan Strauss and his basketball novice wife, and it was remarkable and endearing. Allie had  fresh perspective, of highly intelligent person really examining basketball for the first time, bringing into question many assumptions about the game we, as hoop heads take for granted.  

Jade drew on a diverse talent pool. I don't want to turn this into a long listing of names involved in the pod, but Jade has a remarkable ability to recognize talent, and how that talent could fit together. He drew from all over ESPN, and beyond. Some involved in the sports industry, some were just starting out in it and Jade recognized their talent, some not even involved in sports professionally at all and were just funny and intelligent fans. Jade was able to make it work, mixing and matching all of the talent and that's a huge credit to him. I also want to mention Andrew Han here. It's impossible for me, as an outsider, to really judge how much of the network could be attributed to Han, but I do know the NBA Sidecast was his brainchild, and the NBA Sidecast was brilliant and is the future of the broadcast sports. I wish Andrew had spoken more during the podcasts, as I loved almost everything he had to say.

The point is, Jade took this afterthought, little corner of ESPN, and created a community, a real one. Go to /r/TrueHoopPod on reddit and see for yourself. Go look at Jade's twitter timeline, and see the fan interaction. See what the pod meant, to us fans. I don't have any idea how big the numbers on the podcast were, but I know the level to which the fans of the pod were engaged in it. The TrueHoop Pod has a cult following, and that cult was getting bigger and more passionate by the day.

This passionate fanbase has been shell shocked due to the ESPN layoffs this week, laying off many of our podcast favorites, like Ethan Strauss, Justin Verrier, Coach Thorpe and the founder of the TrueHoop brand itself, Henry Abbott. We have been informed that the TrueHoop Podcast is no more, and many of us are angry. I am not one of them. I am not angry, exactly, because I understand the corporate reality that Disney and ESPN are undergoing. I just think, to pull the plug on this sort of content, is really short sighted, and I'll explain why. But first, let me give an overview of the problem I see that ESPN is facing.

ESPN was founded as, and has been, above all else, operated as, a cable broadcasting company. ESPN makes money not just from advertisers, but also from cable and satellite subscriber fees. ESPN charges cable companies I believe 9 dollars per cable subscriber, per month, to have ESPN as part of their cable package. Because ESPN is part of every basic cable package, anyone who has cable or satellite has to pay this fee, even if they never watch ESPN. There are around 100 million cable subscribers right now. ESPN has around 2 million viewers a day. Their peak rating was 28 million, for a college football championship game a few years back. So, even at it's peak, 3/4ths of the cable subscribers pay 9 dollars a month, for a channel they do not watch. That's ~900 million dollars, each and every month, the vast majority of that money coming from people who do not use the service.  ESPN has been able to charge this, because they have the rights to many major sports, and the people who love sports HAVE to have ESPN, so ESPN has been able to strong arm cable providers, because the demand for their product is so high. This has of course been a cash cow for ESPN, and allowed ESPN, as a brand, to explode.

They money ESPN has gotten from Subscriber fees, allows them big outrageous amounts for NFL, NBA, MLB rights. It allows them to spend money on things like EPSN the Magazine, which might not be profitable on it's own, but is good for the brand. It allows it to have a vast online presence. It allowed to try to get into sports blogging, when that was still fresh and new, and caused ESPN to buy the TrueHoop Blog in the first place. ESPN didn't really need to make money off of any of these, money was coming in hard and fast. ESPN did these things, for prestige. To make ESPN have cultural value and expand the brand. To help raise generations of sports fans, to be loyal to ESPN. It has largely been successful. However, there's a huge problem, and the problem is, the entire media paradigm is shifting.

ESPN may have started out as a cable broadcasting company, but it is not anymore, though it may not fully realize it. What it is, is a multi-platform content company. One with a particularly strong brand, but one with an out of date business model. As people increasingly cancel cable, refusing to pay for channels and subsidize networks they don't watch, those subscriber fees are gone forever. That cash cow produces less and less milk, every month, and will continue to produce less for years and years to come. ESPN has paid billions in rights fees to major sports networks, in order to be able to charge those high subscriber fees, but when those fees stop coming in, ESPN is going to have a huge economic crisis. They will be paying out so much many and have no way (as of yet) to recoup those costs. I think ESPN and Disney are going to need to do something drastic and quick. Figure out a way to merge with Netflix or Amazon, or launch their own subscription online platform. ESPN needs to fully embrace that the future of media is online subscription streaming.

Because of that coming economic crisis, ESPN has attempted to become leaner. Parts of the company that weren't profitable that existed just for prestige and brand building, are being cut. These are band aids, compared to the giant gaping wound that is the real issue, but apparently every bit helps. So it is under that crisis, that Henry Abbott and the TrueHoop brand got let go. Blogging in 2017 isn't really the hot new thing that it was when TrueHoop was acquired. ESPN wasn't really didn't need  the TrueHoop blog profitable, they just wanted to jump into the basketball blog game, and recognized the best talent in the business doing it. It was a prestige hire. The time for that sort of prestige has passed, it seems, and now the TrueHoop Podcast is defunct, as a casualty of ESPN's belt tightening. It might seem, to the suits at ESPN, that the podcast just an odd little thing, that they haven't been able to figure out how to monetize, and it needs to go because it's just a money sink. I think this is incredibly short sighted. I don't just mean because the TrueHoop Podcast is good, I mean content like TrueHoop is the future.

The old model of broadcast television was to appeal to the broadest possible audience.  This was because television makes money based on advertising, and the more people viewing, the more they can charge advertisers. The content of shows, particularly on network television, would largely be safe, and non-offensive. It was almost never experimental, never controversial, rarely taking chances. The goal was to appeal to as many people as possible, and when you do that art and quality often suffer. This is not the model of streaming services. The goal of content on Netflix, Amazon, and premium cable like HBO, is not to make a product that many people like a little, it's to make products that a core amount of people love a lot. So shows like Orange is the New Black, Game of Thrones, Stranger Things, that could never be on commercial television, are the corner stones of these streaming services. The idea is that people will love the content so much, they are willing to subscribe to Netflix, or HBOgo, in order to get it. Netflix would like big numbers on the shows they put out, but what is more important is loyal and passionate numbers. To cultivate fanbases fiercely loyal to high quality shows. This requires companies to put out legitimately great programming, not safe or unoffensive programming. Products that appeal to niches. Products that people are invested in, not just turn on at 9 PM out of force of habit, waiting for the news.

ESPN, if knows it or not, must become like these streaming sites. It has products, like major sports, that people LOVE and would be willing to pay directly for.  However, they also have content, like the TrueHoop podcast, that a hard core of people LOVE. That a community is built around. That people would be willing to pay for and stay loyal to ESPN for. It's that kind of media loyalty, that these streaming sites are looking for. It's that kind of engagement, that can make something like the NBA Sidecast work, where fans are watching a blowout basketball game, long after the outcome is in doubt, because they love the talent talking on the screen. I don't know the ins and outs of monetizing podcasts. This is an issue for business experts to try to crack. What I do know, is content. I consume a lot of it, sports, television, radio and podcasts.  The TrueHoop Podcast is great content, truly unique content. I think ESPN has a wonderful problem, of having something great, that people are passionate about, and they need to figure out what to do with it. But what you don't do, is throw up your hands and cast it aside, because you can't figure out how to make money off it yet.

I don't know this for fact, but I based on what I've seen online, the TrueHoop brand itself is gone. It's leaving ESPN with Henry Abbott, and I think that's a shame, because I think Henry was a great talent. However, ESPN still has almost all of the talent from the podcast left. It still has the minds behind the podcast and the nba sidecast. It still has almost all the participants in the Podcast, most of whom weren't even on the ESPN payroll to begin with, and were working for free, out of love of the community and product that had been built, and out love for Jade himself.  ESPN might do away with the TrueHoop brand, but it should NOT do away with the podcast.

What I propose, is the podcast be reborn under another name. The name to me, is obvious and a natural fit, The Jump Podcasting Network. Rachel Nichols has been a regular host of various TrueHoop Pods, I know she listens to them (at an infernal 3x speed), I know she's worked with and values Jade's talent. This seems like a natural fit to me, to expand the Jump's brand, from just broadcast, into a multi-media platform. Many podcast regulars, like Tom Haberstroh and Brian Windhorst already appear on the Jump. Amin Elhassan, perhaps the most important TrueHoop Podcast host, is basically a co-host of The Jump. Jade does animated videos for The Jump. There is already a relationship there, it seems like a natural transition. Rachel could have a regular podcast, talking about what ever she wanted, hoops and beyond. Ex-pros like Tracy McGrady, Scottie Pippen, Stephen Jackson, and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar could be regular guests on various pods. The old pods, like #BOMM, #FOB and the Friday mailbag could be reborn and brought back onto the network. I think it works, from both a professional and branding perspective.

However, if Rachel for what ever reason doesn't want to become the Henry Abbott of this new, expanded brand, then ESPN should figure something else out. Find a new name for the podcast, hand the reigns over to Jade completely, do something. Because, The Truehoop Pod has a following. A really, dedicated, passionate, loyal following. Cultivating that sort of loyalty, is what media companies should be dreaming of. Figuring out ways to monetize them, should be the priority. It's that kind of quality and loyalty that is the future of media. ESPN needs to figure that out, and fast, because the days of them being able to skate by, on the strength of their subscriber fees, are over. ESPN is a content production company now, not a cable broadcaster, and you when you're in the content creation business, you simply cannot toss away high quality content and expect to survive.