#over a decade's culmination of my art skills

[macabre-discotheque]

AM I A MAAAN OR AM I A MUPPET?? IF I'M A MUPPET THAT MAKES ME A MAN OF A MUPPET

I had another muppet fueled frenzy that was inadvertently started by people referencing that song in the welcome home fandom So in a daze I made these because i have no control over my impulses 💀also here's the original song if you wanna listen to that lmao

[ruddykite]

TLDR: I got a good grade on my diss and a good spot for my final exhibition.

I've had to work through so many feelings of frustration and grief for the person I was before I got sick. I can feel that my brain works slower now, that I don’t pick things up the way I used to. But today, I got my dissertation grade back—and getting a first is awesome*, but more than anything, though, knowing that I’m still capable of thinking deeply, complexly, and communicating effectively means everything to me. My dissertation was about how digital art platforms make art more accessible—something I care about so much, as you can probably tell.

My feedback wasn’t perfect, and I’m trying really hard to let myself be proud of this instead of fixating on the (constructive) criticism. I’m making a conscious effort to sit with the achievement, not just pick apart what I could have done better.

I also found out that I’ve been given the entire front half of the foyer for my final exhibition. I had asked for a corner, somewhere out of the way, where my intentionally messy, chaotic work could sit without drawing too much attention. Instead, they decided to place me at the entrance—right at the heart of the space where everyone will walk in for the final exhibition, the culmination of four years of work.

I know they want to give every project the best possible chance to stand out, and if they think my work belongs there, it makes sense, but to me, it didn’t. My work is chaotic, messy, even ugly at times—it doesn’t fit into a gallery space**. Among my peers creating deep, thoughtful and beautiful fine art, I create flyers and stickers about monsters and creatures and rabies and horrible little gay people. That is what they’ve decided belongs front and centre as the first thing people will see. 

I’ve never been naturally skilled in art. I used to be “gifted”—academics used to come easily, but now, nothing really does. And honestly, art never did. I was told that GCSE art wasn't a good fit for me, and even my mum tried to gently talk me out of it. Upon meeting me, my A Level graphics teacher told me that she categorically disliked each and every piece of work*** I’d ever made.

But despite all of it, I kept going. I worked relentlessly because I loved it. I drew until my hands seized. I did the studies and the theory and everything in-between. I poured every ounce of myself into making something, anything, out of all I felt. And now, after over a decade of pouring everything I have, everything I am into creation, I think people are finally starting to get it.

I think I’m finally starting to feel what all that effort was for.

*I got 75/100. This was my first real first.

**My work has, on more than one occasion, nearly been cleaned up because someone thought it was litter.

***Hell, I still feel like a fraud calling what I make art after my GCSE art teacher told me she wouldn’t call what I made art.

[thestylediary]

Building Beauty: Exploring Francis Libiran's Architectural Fashion Designs

Francis Libiran, a renowned Filipino architect and fashion designer, studied architecture at the University of Santo Tomas and later pursued fashion design at the Fashion Institute of the Philippines. His designs are heavily influenced by his passion for travel, nature, architecture, and patterns, featuring signature techniques such as Art Deco patterns, cutouts, custom laser-cut materials, intricate embellishments, and custom embroidery. With over two decades in the industry, Libiran is regarded as one of the Philippines' leading fashion designers, specializing in bespoke and ready-to-wear wedding gowns, evening gowns, dresses, menswear, corporate attire, and accessories.

Among his various collections, the recent collection is called "Sterling" to celebrate 25 years of unparalleled artistry in fashion. His innovative collection drew inspiration from the mythical phoenix. "The Francis Libiran Phoenix Collection is inspired by my 25-year journey in creating wearable art. It tells a story of rising from the ashes, transitioning from gold to gray to black, and culminating in a fiery red gown — The Phoenix," explained the architect-turned-designer.

The dress is elaborate, featuring intricate embellishments, feather-like extensions, and a flowing train with shades of red and beige. The design emphasizes movement, with the fabric and embellishments creating a dynamic, almost ethereal effect. The lighting is dark and dramatic, highlighting the vivid red of the dress and casting deep shadows that enhance the sense of depth and texture.

This next dress is highly detailed with intricate embellishments and a form-fitting silhouette that accentuates the model's figure. It features an elaborate, structured design with sweeping lines and patterns that give it a regal and sophisticated look. The gown is complemented by a dramatic, flowing cape made of sheer fabric that adds a sense of grandeur and movement to the ensemble.

This last dress is an exquisite, floor-length ball gown that exudes elegance and drama. The gown features a strapless, sweetheart neckline, and the bodice is intricately adorned with red embellishments that shimmer under the light. The embellishments are detailed and follow a pattern that extends from the bodice down through the voluminous skirt.

The skirt of the gown is particularly striking, with a full, flowing silhouette that fans out dramatically, creating a sense of grandeur. It is richly embellished with a pattern of red and possibly dark undertones, giving it depth and a sense of movement. The intricate designs on the skirt appear to be inspired by organic or art Deco motifs, with swirling lines and shapes that catch the light beautifully.

My insights for his collection is that he showcased his archetectural skills incorporated with his knowledge for fashion, I do think that he skillfully shows his craftsmanship at another level. As for his designs, the lines do show elegance but also very unique patterns. It's his brand’s objective to promote Filipino beauty, artistry, talent, and craftsmanship internationally and take on the global arena and I do see that in his collection not just this one but also in every single one.

[dismalrain]

F*ck The Tortured Artist Trope

I hate the tortured artist trope. I hate in my daily life and I hate it in art history.

TLDR: Being in pain, disabled, mentally ill, having an addiction doesn't inherently make you a better or more worthy artist. The more you suffer doesn't mean your art will become better and you don't need to suffer to be a great artist. Don't let the tortured artist trope make you fear getting help and putting your mental, physical, and all other well-being above all else.

I think that everyone in their life faces some sort of hardship, struggle, and that some people may have more of those that culminate than others. I do not believe that the more you suffer the better you are as an artist.

I think that philosophy puts young artists in the mindset that the more they suffer the better there art will be; also that if you're not suffering you don't have what it takes to be a good artist.

I was self-taught, then I started taking art classes when I started my undergrad, now I'm getting and MFA to be an art teacher (out of spite).

So I'm in my third year of university when I take the beginning/introductory art class. I have my OCD diagnosis and I'm over a decade into constant medication changed for my chronic illness (also like four step dads, being groomed online as a child, one step threatening to kill me and my partner, other nonsense). So we need to make a collage out of a sensation/feeling of our choice and then explain our decisions.

So I make a collage about my experience with debilitating paranoia that made me essentially agoraphobic and incapable of sleeping without someone in the house with me. This was all a symptom of my OCD, I'm medicated and I'm doing a lot better now.

So I'm talking about my piece, popping off, explaining all my shit and she's like 'well everyone experiences that, that's not hard to relate to' and I'm sitting there in my bed, at 7:30 pm on a Zoom meeting talking about my journey to getting medicated for a mental health condition that had me socially isolated to the point of being scared of my phone notifications. I thought it was out of touch but I ignored it and then my classmate was talking about her issues with disassociation and not being able to be in touch with her body and she said the exact the same thing.

I was thinking 'no, I don't think we experience that to the point of dropping out of society for weeks on end' I was not jiving with this teacher. It was one of the few times I didn't like a teacher because their personality just was an ick for me. But then we get to Van Gogh chat and she goes on, and on, and I mean a whole ass powerpoint about how his art is so inspirational because it was born out of mental illness and drug addiction. How if we wasn't suffering we wouldn't have been blessed with such divine works.

That's one of my hard stops. I do not think it's fair to say that Van Gogh's work is all mental illness and drugs. I do not think it's acceptable to say without mental illness he wouldn't have been great, wouldn't have been a painter, and anything else of that nature. I don't like it applied to me or anyone else either.

I'm scared that if we spread the idea of the tortured artist, artists will be scared to get help when they need. If we equate artistic genius and skill to the more we suffer, what protects young artists from the belief that they need to pursue suffering to improve. What protects mentally ill artists from the belief that they won't be good anymore if they seek help if they need it?

I have never really thought to myself that my art is what it is because I've had painful and bad experiences. I make art that helps me cope sometimes but I also make character designs. Of all the artists in the world I don't think work that is born out of suffering and turmoil makes it better inherently, it might just be that we at times seek out the tragic to make ourselves feel less alone. But I don't think that is what defines our success.

Take care of yourself. If someone tells you something about the importance of the tortured artist, I hope I can be a case study to show that my art is still good even though I'm medicated for my OCD and neuropathy now. I hope soon I'll have a pain protocol that makes living easier. I'll likely always be disabled but I don't want to always be tortured because of it.

If I'm off the mark as all hell let me know. I always want to know other people's thoughts and experiences and this is a topic that I think is particularly interesting.

[genesisrhapsodyoffire]

So, I'm gonna add onto this, as someone who started riding pre kindergarten (so under 6).

I started riding on my great uncle's farm as a 5 year old. Started with uncle holding the reins and me holding on for dear life on a mini horse/pony type situation.

Has a 1-5th grader aka elementary schooler, one of my only friends' parents owned a farm and I continued learning to ride there, eventually going from just riding in a circle in a pen with supervision to being able to ride at nearly a gallop.

Let me tell u. The skill required to stay on a horse, without jostling yourself so badly you bite your tongue off, as this nearly half a ton of muscle and power moves at nearly the speed of a car? Is a lot more than ppl think.

Between 13-15 I went to a summer camp every summer and did vaulting aka gymnastics on horseback. Competitively for my final year. I was at intermediate level. I had a scholarship/grant to go, as I couldn't have paid otherwise, but I had been riding for over 7 years at that point and was rather good.

By the time I quit the sport (due to falling off a horse going at full clip while I was attempting to do a flip and incurring a head injury and a stoved wrist) I could do both a front and back flip on a trotting horse, I could do a somersault, and do a bunch of other balancing acts and ribbon twirling things and baton shit . I even talked my instructor into letting me incorporate my martial arts bullshit into one of my freestyle type exhibitions (I had escrima and bo staff training under my belt in my final year so imagine the love child of gambit and Nightwing only Southeast Asian, but on a horse)

Doing all this looked effortless from the outside but was the culmination of almost a decade of work in multiple athletic disciplines and is neither a cheap or easy sport to get into.

I always thought it was like an exaggeration when horse people would talk about how silly it was for anyone to think that riding a horse does not require any particular level of skill or balance or anything, or even that they "drive themselves" (???) but just the tags on the reblogs of that "can you ride a bike and/or horse" post from me alone are demonstrating how overconfident some people are in their (often entirely theoretical!) ability to stay on an alive and moving animal with a will of its own.

[zedecksiew]

Kriegsmesser

When I received Kriegsmesser in the mail I finally googled "kriegsmesser", and found out it meant "war knife". Which makes sense; Gregor Vuga's ZineQuest 2021 project is a tribute to "roleplaying games named after medieval weapons".

I love Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay's piss-renaissance Old World setting. I tend to pick up WFRP-a-likes sight unseen:

Warlock (quality);

Small But Vicious Dog (yesss);

Zweihander (which I have come to hate); etc.

Anyway: I backed Kriegsmesser without really knowing anything about it. So Kriegsmesser surprised me.

+

Kriegsmesser grew out of a Troika! cutting. Its 36 backgrounds are compatible with that system: each come with a couple of lines of description; a list of skills and possessions; an a visual cameo cropped from actual 16th-Century woodcut art.

Cohesive and competently flavourful. My favourite is the Labourer, who always starts with "an empty pine box":

"You've spent your life breaking your back, working hard for other people's profit. You have nothing to show for it but a spectre of the future."

(The obligatory ratcatcher-analogue , called the Vermin Snatcher, is here -- check that box!)

+

Kriegsmesser also comes with its own ruleset. Hits all the notes it needs to, with lots of orientation and advice for how to run a game -- but ultimately super-simple, mechanically:

Roll d6s equal to the value in a relevant skill, look at the highest result. 6 means you get what you want; 5 or 4 means you get what you want, at a cost.

It's not quite a dice pool, since only the highest result matters. No opposed tests.

+

Kriegsmesser intends to have this base mechanic handle fights, too. The combat rules - with armour, toughness and weapon values -- are nested in an optional section.

For a WFRP-a-like, this feels like a purposeful departure.

Many of WFRP's most celebrated adventures are celebrated for bits that their underlying ruleset does little to support: the investigative structure of "Shadows Over Bogenhafen"; the complicated timetable of "Rough Night At Three Feathers".

Ludwig von Wittgenstein never needed a statblock to be memorable.

Not to say that lethal, hyper-detailed fights isn't super Warhammer-y. (Kriegsmesser includes an injury table, broken down by body-part -- check that box!)

But here it feels like Gregor is saying: "I'm not Games Workshop and Roleplay isn't an ancillary of Warhammer Fantasy Battle; we can evoke grim-and-perilous-ness even if we fork away from heavy combat rules."

+

It has become ritual for me to read my partner Sharon to sleep.

Sometimes I read her RPG things. The other night, after I read her Kriegsmesser's introduction --

" The Empire wages an eternal war against Chaos. Its priests preach of Chaos as an intrusion, something unnatural ... These men see Chaos in anything that does not buttress their rule. They call it disorder, anarchy, corruption. They say that to rebel against their order is to rebel against god and nature. That the current arrangement is natural, rather than artificial.

" Meanwhile, the common people look to the Empire to deliver the justice that they were promised and they find none. They look to the Empire and do not see themselves reflected in it. They look around at what they were taught was right and good and see only misery.

" Their world begins to unravel. Chaos comes to reside in every heart and mind sound enough to look at the world and conclude it is broken. "

-- Sharon remarked: "Nice one."

The RPG things I read her generally leave Sharon lukewarm. She has enjoyed a couple -- but, yeah: for many of these books, text isn't their strong point.

Kriegsmesser is the only time I can recall Sharon praising the writing of an RPG book without my prompting.

Nice one.

+

That introduction surprised me. It underlines Kriegsmesser's biggest departure from its WFRP-a-like pedigree: how it characterises Chaos.

Corruption, a mainstay of most grim-dark-y games, is made an optional rule, like combat. Explaining this, Gregor writes:

" Kriegsmesser partially subverts or deconstructs the traditional conceit of Warhammer where the characters are threatened by the forces of Chaos. In this game it is the player characters who are the agents of 'Chaos': they are likely to become the 'rats' under the streets, and the wild 'beast-men' in the woods bringing civilisation down. It's the Empire and its nobles and priests that are corrupt ... "

Describing the Empire, Gregor writes:

" The Empire encompasses the world yet is terrified of the without. It enforces itself with steel and fire yet considers itself benevolent. It consumes the labour of others with bottomless hunger yet calls its subalterns lazy, or wasteful, or greedy. "

Holy shit this is the first time I've seen the word "subaltern" in an RPG thing, I think?

I love this.

+

Rant incoming:

With every passing decade Warhammer abridges its Moorcockian roots more and more; nowadays it is "Order = Good" and "Chaos = Evulz", pretty much.

Gone are the days when chaos berserkers are implied to grant safe passage to the helpless (because Khorne is as much a god of martial honour as he is a god of bloodletting); Or that the succor of Papa Nurgle is a genuine comfort to the downtrodden; Or that Tzeentch could unironically embody the principle of hope, of change for the better.

As Chaos is distilled into unequivocal villainy, Order goons get painted as Good Guys by default --

Giving rise to Warhammer's contemporary problem, wherein fans are no longer able to recognise satire.

+

When I was introduced to 40K, it seemed pretty clear that the Imperium was a Brazil-esque absurdist-fascist bureaucratic state: planets are exterminatus-ed due to clerical error; the way it stamps out rebellions is the reason why rebellions begin in the first place.

Tragi-comic grimdarkness. That was the point.

Nowadays that tone has shifted -- and you're more likely than not going to encounter a 40K fan who argues that the Imperium's evils are a justified necessity, to prevent worse wrongs.

We went from:

"Space Nazis because insane dumbass fuckery, also chainswords vroom vroom rule of badass!"

To:

"Space Nazis because it makes sense actually, and also chainswords make sense because [insert convoluted rationalisation here]."

+

Even Fantasy Flight's Black Crusade line, which ostensibly offers a look at 40K from the perspective of Chaos, never truly commits to its conceit.

With prep you could play a heroic band of mutant freedom fighters, resisting the tyranny of the Evil Imperium --

But I don't remember Black Crusade giving that kind of campaign any actual support. Its supplements service the relatively more conventional "You can play villains!" angle; the Screaming Vortex is a squarely Daemons-vs-Daemons setting.

+

This tonal drift culminates, in my mind, with Age of Sigmar, Games Workshop's heroic-fantasy replacement of the old WFRP / WHFB setting.

Here's the framing narrative for AoS's recently-launched Third Edition. Let's see whether I've got things right:

A highly professionalised, technologically-superior tip-of-the-spear fighting force (the Stormcast Eternals);

Backed by an imperialist military-industrial complex (Azyrheim);

"Liberating" rich new territories (Ghur) for exploitation by a civilised settler culture (Settlers of Sig-- I mean, Free Cities);

Justified because the locals are irredeemable heathens (Chaos and Kruleboyz).

I mean, that's a sweet-ass Warhammer setting. It's contemporary, laser-guided lampoon. Except it is played totally straight.

In AoS, a literal crusade is justified as the moral good.

+

I think Kriegsmesser surprised me because its framing of Chaos -- as a promise, as the light of hope shining through cracks of a broken world --

It feels so fucking right.

Yes: its a subaltern deconstruction of the conventional moral universe of Warhammer -- but it is a take that is also already implied / all but supported in the various depictions of the setting: from WFRP to the modified title-crawl of Black Crusade.

I'm annoyed I didn't think of it, myself. Damn you, Gregor!

And I'm annoyed that more Warhammer fans aren't thinking it, also.

+

lmagine if Kriegsmesser's perspective stood on equal standing as the GW orthodoxy. Imagine if, instead of simplifying stuff into "Order = Good" and "Chaos = Evulz", GW did a Gregor Vuga.

You'd have a Rashomon-ed Warhammer, where villainy depends on perspective:

You are fearful villagers, huddled around your priest, muttering prayers against the wild braying coming from the trees beyond your gates.

You are Aqshyian tribeswomen, defying the thunder warrior towering over you, the foreigner demanding you bow to his foreign god.

You are a Tzeentchian revolutionary cell, desperately trying to disrupt a Inquisitor's transmissions so your home planet isn't destroyed by fascist orbital fire.

+

Get Kriegsmesser HERE.

+++

( Image sources: https://theenemywithinremixed.wordpress.com/2021/05/21/thoughts-on-the-4e-death-on-the-reik/ https://www.criterion.com/current/posts/59-brazil https://www.deviantart.com/faroldjo/art/Warhammer-40k-Black-Crusade-273596035 https://www.warhammer-community.com/2021/06/09/fancy-a-new-life-bringing-order-to-the-mortal-realms-join-a-dawnbringer-crusade-today/ https://www.nme.com/blogs/the-movies-blog/team-america-15-anniversary-south-park-2558750 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Palestinian_children_and_Israeli_wall.jpg )

[stewblog]

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings

Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings more or less immediately became one of my favorite movies in the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Some of this is due to it being one of the best American-made martial arts movies I’ve ever seen. Some of this is due to it delivering some incredibly cool moments and imagery, the likes of which we haven’t really seen much of in the MCU, much less in American filmmaking in general these days. But it’s due also in large part to the fact that the movie is consistently fun, funny, brimming with exhilarating action scenes and moves like a rocket. It’s just a genuinely great time at the movies and I found myself grinning from ear to ear for most of its (just over) two hour runtime. There are more than 20 MCU movies, and while I highly enjoy most of them, it definitely felt like it was time for Marvel to deliver something different than yet another costumed superhero outing. And that’s precisely what’s been done here with Shang-Chi giving audiences a straight-up kung fu adventure film.

In a way, the excellence of Shang-Chi as an action movie is bittersweet. The action scenes were designed and shot by Brad Allan, a brilliant martial artist who spent years as a member of Jackie Chan’s personal stunt team. He had truly come into his own as an action designer and choreographer but met an untimely death about a month before this film’s release. What he delivered here alongside director Destin Daniel Cretton is some of the most impressive hand-to-hand action I’ve seen in an American action film.

Marvel movies have had plenty of exciting and fun action scenes but, as is the case with so many Western films, the performers simply lack the training and capability to convincingly pull off what is shown off with aplomb in many Asian films. That is absolutely not the case here thanks to the exceptional skill shown off by the likes of Simu Liu, Tony Leung, Michelle Yeoh and nearly every other actor who throws hands (and feet). Allan may be gone, but he left a heck of a legacy on-screen here and it is absolutely exhilarating to watch. Capable, highly trained actors being filmed in wide shots without an excess of editing to cover up their inadequacies makes for exciting cinema. Who knew?!

Though it is brimming with excellent action, the heart of Shang-Chi is actually found in the familial drama driving the plot. Shaun (Liu) is a fairly typical 20-something in San Francisco. He’s mostly content to work his day job as a parking valet with his best friend, Katy (Awkwafina) before spending their nights carousing and doing karaoke. But after Shaun kicks the living tar out of a group of henchmen, including a guy with a literal sword for an arm, on a bus, Katy demands to know who her lifelong friend actually is. Turns out his real name is Shang-Chi and he’s actually the son of a history-defining warlord who’s been alive for thousands of years thanks to ten powerful, magical (possibly alien) rings who trained Shaun since childhood to be an assassin. Ya know, normal stuff.

Shang-Chi’s dad, Wenwu (Leung), thinks he’s found a way to enter the mystical, ancient city his wife hailed from. Though she died more than a decade ago, Wenwu is certain he’s heard her voice calling to him to set her free from captivity. Though he’s willing to fight and kill to do so, Wenwu mostly just wants to reunite his family, and he especially wants his son to take up the mantle of leading the Ten Rings, his millennia-old crime organization.

Shang-Chi is, as expected, not too hip to his abusive father’s plans, but there still clearly resides in him a desire to be loved and accepted by Wenwu. It’s that push and pull between the light and dark within him that drives Shang-Chi’s emotional journey as he slowly comes to realize he can’t ever fully run from or hide his lineage, try as he might.

Liu has been acting for the better part of a decade (I really need to check out Kim’s Convenience) but this is without question his breakout performance and he handles leading man duties well. He’s handsome and funny, and though his charisma is somewhat low-key, he’s able to project enough stoic gravitas that you can always get a sense of what he’s feeling. If nothing else, he’s primed for a string of action roles based on how superbly he pulls off each fight scene. It’s always thrilling to watch a performer pull off their own stunts and fight moves, but Liu brings a very visible energy to his combat.

The real treat here, though, is watching Tony Leung make his Big Hollywood Debut. Leung is one of China’s biggest movie stars and he’s given more than enough incredible performances in truly amazing films to cement his status as one of the all-time great actors. But there’s something uniquely fun seeing him not just let loose in a big budget blockbuster, but to do so and not water down his trademark intensity. Leung’s greatest skill has always been his ability to communicate so much with just his eyes, and that intensity and passion is on full display here. Whatever shortcomings the script might have barely matter because Leung tells you everything you need to know about Wenwu with just a look.

If there’s a major shortcoming here it’s that there are elements of the script that feel notably undercooked. In particular there’s a moment before the big finale where Shang-Chi is brooding over his father’s treatment of him as a child, questioning whether or not he’s still just the assassin he was raised to be. It feels like something from a different version of the script where that self-doubt played a much larger part than what made it to screen.

And, as seems contractually obligated in these movies, the climax culminates with a lot of Typical CGI Nonsense. Though at least here that Typical CGI Nonsense is delivering a look at some mythical beasties and imagery that we don’t often get in these sorts of movies.

None of those frustrating elements (not even the often horribly glaring use of green screen composite shots) detracts enough from the experience to make this anything less than a total blast to watch. I’ve come to accept that most Marvel movies are simply going to have frustrating or undercooked elements to them in one way or another. But even grading on that curve, Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings still manages to feel like a complete, thrilling package, one that I can’t wait to watch again.

Author’s Note: If you walk out of Shang-Chi jonesing for some more Tony Leung, check out The Grandmaster if you want more of him doing kung fu. Watch In the Mood for Love if you want one of his best, most internalized acting performances. And watch Hard Boiled if you want to see him co-star in one of the greatest, most over-the-top action movies ever made.

[introvertguide]

15 Badass Movies for a Fun Time at Home or with Friends

There is a buzz in the air as COVID-19 vaccines are rolling out and the hope of having a movie night with friends is again becoming a reality. Watching alone isn’t as fun because I want to talk to somebody about what I have just seen. A full theater does not agree with my introvert nature because somebody screaming or laughing or talking on their phone will ruin it for me. Watching with a fellow cinephile or two is perfect. But what to watch first? People have been stuck inside, so fantasy and alternative worlds have been overly popular. All I do is talk over zoom for a living. I think what I need most right now is a movie about realistic people with realistic skills that go into a situation and just wreck house. I need a badass movie. What is this “badass” movie you might say? Well, here are some basic criteria: 1) There must be a tough lead character who kicks butt while spouting one liners and doesn’t need superhuman powers (high levels of peak skill with speed, aim, or strength is OK if they are plausible in the real world), 2) most of the characters (good and bad) must be likable, admirable or at least memorable, 3) the lead must face and defeat overwhelming odds against them, and 4) extra points for memorable one liners. Also, I am only dealing with human protagonists (sorry Terminator), but slightly superhuman opposition is acceptable. This list is by no means exhaustive, it is just an example of some badass movies. So in no particular order:

1) Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)

To start off the list, I want to mention the most well known American badass. Indiana Jones is a smart guy with a gun and a whip. He is rugged and punches guys in the face. He has weaknesses but works through them to get the job done. Harrison Ford was in his early 40s for this role and had this tough-as-nails and seen the world kind of feel while still being young enough to fight hand to hand. Any of the first three films featuring Indiana Jones would work here, but this is the original and it started the fun. Easy to watch. Easy to cheer for. Great movie. You can’t really go wrong with any age or group with this one. 

2) 13 Assassins (2010)

This movie is extremely badass but not for everyone. This is one of the goriest films I have ever seen as 13 warriors kill off a couple of hundred soldiers and the evil leader that they guard. The movie was directed by Japanese extreme horror icon Takashi Miike if that means anything to you (hey made Audition and Ichi the Killer). The movie has gallons of blood, but also an amazing story of redemption and honor. There are tons of scenes of a single warrior taking on dozens of soldiers and managing to overcome. Not for everyone, but still very much a badass movie.

3) The Raid (2011)

This is an Indonesian action thriller with the word action in bold. The film is directed by Gareth Evans and stars Iko Uwais as part of a small police force that tries to take down an old building that houses a drug lord and his violent gang. It has a lot of what I like in badass movies: one-on-one fights between the lead and almost superhuman villains, long well-choreographed scenes, a banging soundtrack, ridiculous weapons, and ridiculous gore. The fight scenes in tight places and the use of the environment for weaponry is amazing and the sound design makes sure you can feel every punch. The lead character should have no chance, but he makes up for it with skill and being a pure badass. This movie is one of the few that I would describe as having non-stop action.

4) Jon Wick (2014)

When did Keanu Reeves become so cool? I grew up with him being part of the Bill and Ted duo. He decides to learn martial arts and play a god-like being in the Matrix movies and then becomes a one man wrecking crew? I guess he is a badass because he does it so well. Keanu plays a retired hitman who is wronged and decides to go back to work for vengeance. He just won’t stop coming and seems to constantly survive out of pure hatred alone. There are 3 films in the series and any one of them will impress. Pure fun too watch.

5) Casino Royale (2006)

When I was asking around, there were many people who thought that James Bond was the ultimate badass. I disagree in that many of the older films show Bond as overconfident with the assistance of many people. In fact, Q is more of a badass in many ways than James Bond. However, when the series was taken back to its roots with the last book that had not been made into a serious film and made darker, it reached badass levels. From the parkour chase to a poisoning to an extreme torture scene, this was not like any James Bond movie before it. Roger Craig plays a much colder lead who gives no quarter, much more like what the greatest secret agent would have to be. Heavy on violence but light on gore, this film is more for all audiences than other films on this list.

6) Desperado (1995)

What makes this movie is not all about Antonio Banderas and Selma Hayek. It is that every other character is memorable and badass as well. The street standoff with Bucho’s men versus El Mariachi, Quino, and Campo is iconic. El Mariachi murders everyone in a bar with precise skill. The rogue assassin Navajas with all the knives played by Danny Trejo. Nothing but extreme shoot outs and fight scenes with a ridiculous variety of guns and explosives. I think what makes this movie so amazing is that all these amazing assassins are incognito and, when they suddenly produce an arsenal out of nowhere, it is always a pleasant surprise. Quino and Campo are amazing when they bring their guitars. 

7) Pulp Fiction (1994)

Truly the role that made Samuel L. Jackson into the ultimate badass. He and his partner Vincent are hitman that keep running into the worst situations. The thing about the film is that everybody is so cool. The characters are cool, the music is cool, the dialogue is cool, hell even the diner featured in the movie is cool. The movie only spans a couple of days (in completely separate segments shown out of order) but packs in 7 distinct situations that are all berserk. From the mind of Quentin Tarantino, this movie is dripping with the best characters traveling through the best story. Highly recommend.

8) Leon: The Professional (1994)

Also known simply as The Professional in the U.S., this film features the debut of Natalie Portman. It is directed by Luc Besson at his best period, right between La Femme Nakita and The Fifth Element. The lead is actually a quiet hitman who reluctantly takes a little 12-year-old girl on as an apprentice to become a paid assassin. Her parents were killed by a corrupt cop and she wants Leon to help her exact revenge. He is an absolute badass and somewhat of a caring surrogate father to the girl. Unlike a lot of the films on this list, the premise is not simply kicking butt in a bad situation. There is serious character growth. Apparently you can be a caring parent and a cold-blooded murderer...and that is badass.

9) Kill Bill (2003)

Being a badass is not exclusive to men and The Bride is a prime example of this. She survives a shot to the head, kills deadly assassins, slaughters a gang, and takes on a crazy school girl bodyguard. She is tougher then any lead I can think of and she has the bad attitude and sense of vengeance that makes for a badass. Combine this with the soundtrack and beautiful cinematography associated with director Quentin Tarantino and you have a beautifully violent movie in which the hits keep coming. Even on this list, the fight scene between the bride and Gogo Yubari is insane. Also note the nod to Bruce Lee with the bright yellow motorcycle suit. Beautifully badass film.

10) Aliens (1986)

In nature, there are few things more dangerous than a mother protecting their young. A mother will fight you to the death and make sure that, at the very least, you won’t be able to go after her kids. Now imagine an alien planet covered with hostile beings created in the mind of James Cameron and Stan Winston and you have a setting made to create a real badass. In the beginning, Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) is just desperate to survive and barely knows how to use a weapon. She meets a little survivor named Newt and then has a real reason to become aggressive. She and a group of marines fight through a station filled with super destructive xenomorph aliens made straight from nightmares to save this kid. The transformation is truly amazing and culminates in a mech suit versus a giant queen alien and it is extremely badass.

11) Army of Darkness (1992)

Far and away the funniest movie on this list, this is the third film stemming from Evil Dead and again stars Bruce Campbell taking on the deadites that were raised by reading from the Necronomicon. The opposition is the undead evil that faces the world which makes the violence very unrealistic. This was early work from Sam Raimi and features a variety of different shots done to the extreme. What really makes this film stand out is how Bruce Campbell is amazing at delivering a one liner. His classic quips have been used as fun Easter eggs in video games like Duke Nukem and World of Warcraft for decades. The quintessential horror comedy and a perfect example of a badass.

12) Die Hard (1988)

Apparently, I am a big fan of single characters that need to work their way through a building of villains using mostly intelligence and the element of surprise. Throw in some one liners and I am all for it. That is exactly what this is with Bruce Willis crawling barefoot around a 40 story building and fighting off a gang of villains. The movie also has Alan Rickman as the main bad guy and he is chewing the scenery. This is a great example of being a badass, but it is too bad that the follow up sequels were so poor. Definitely stick to the original and let the rest pass by.

13) The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (1966)

An OG of the badass movie genre, this is some of the best of Sergio Leone and the spaghetti western. Instead of one badass, this movie has three different leads that are all amazing. You have the good, Clint Eastwood, who is an amazing shot and a heart of gold under a rough exterior. You have the bad, Lee Van Cleef, playing an conniving assassin that will kill anyone that he doesn’t have a use for. Finally, you have the ugly, Eli Wallach, as a desert rat that will do anything to survive. They all gain information about a gold stash and need to work together to get it, but this creates a vortex of cheating, undercutting, and straight up murder. Clint Eastwood is more of the classic badass with his cigar, hat, and poncho, It is an iconic look on an iconic character in an iconic movie. That is what I call badass.

14) Ong-Bak (2003)

This less of a badass movie and more houses some of the most amazingly badass fight scenes that can only be described as badass. This movie introduced the great Tony Jaa to the western world and showed the high flying nature of Thai boxing and Muay Thai in general. The main character is entered into a street fighting tournament and the moves include a flying double knee drop and a full splits kick. If the whole movie was the tournament, it would be the best movie that ever existed. The variety of opponents makes the fighting even better and the cinematography is top notch. Tony Jaa is truly badass in this film.

15) Dredd (2012)

Not the crappy version with Stallone, this movie is seriously badass. It features Karl Urban who is helmeted for the entire film (as Dredd would be) taking on a 200 story mega slum filled with residents that want to shoot him dead. There is a drug dealer high up in the building and she locks down the entire compound with instructions to kill Dredd, who only has his rookie partner to help. He takes on random resident mobs, groups of gang members, and even a trio of mini guns that have bullets that can rip through walls. He has a smart gun with a bunch of ammo that he uses judiciously to kill everybody. This movie was seriously underrated since it had not been that long since the garbage Judge Dredd came out in 1995. The 2012 is a far superior movie, being much more violent and dark instead of having Rob Schneider as the comedy relief (not badass).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I know there will be a lot of opinions about what makes a badass film and what movies i didn’t add. Feel free to add your own movies or critique my choices. I will stand by my choices, however, and recommend any of these films for a night of cheers and badass action.

[fuckyeahwarriorwomen]

Copy of article below thge cut, should the original ever go away

Leading up to the 20th anniversary of the March 10, 1997 premiere of Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Yahoo TV is celebrating “Why Genre Shows Matter” and the history of how these shows have tackled universal themes (e.g. how much high school sucks) and broader social issues.

Perhaps because they seek to imagine the world that’s possible rather than the world that is, genre shows have a long tradition of striving to expand the horizons of what’s possible for women on television. Within the realm of space operas alone, there’s a direct line that connects Lieutenant Uhura’s prominent perch amongst the Enterprise‘s largely male bridge crew on the original Star Trek to The Expanse‘s fiercely independent engineer, Naomi Nagata. And each point along this continuum helps inform the next: commanding officers like Babylon 5‘s Susan Ivanova and Voyager‘s Kathryn Janeway are linked by a devotion to duty, if not necessarily temperament, while Killjoys‘ scrappy bounty hunter, Yala, could have been a student of Firefly‘s highly-skilled soldier, Zoë Washburne. On this International Women’s Day, we celebrate the accomplishments of one such influential intergalactic heroine.

Her name is Aeryn. Officer Aeryn Sun if we’re being formal, one of the interstellar outlaws at the center of Farscape, the wildly ambitious Australian/American space serial that ran from 1999 to 2003 on the Sci-Fi Channel. Bred from birth to be a loyal Sebacean soldier in the Peacekeeper army that patrols her section of the galaxy, Officer Sun switches careers after inadvertently ending up aboard a living spaceship named Moya that’s occupied by a motley crew of jailbreakers. These convicts-turned-comrades include towering warrior Ka D’Argo, blue-hued priestess Zhaan, flatulent deposed despot Rygel XVI, and John Crichton, an Earth-born astronaut who is very, very far from home. Created by Rockne S. O’Bannon and produced by The Jim Henson Company, Farscape enjoyed a bumpy four-season stateside run that ended prematurely when the network declined to fund a fifth and final year. (Sci-Fi later aired, but didn’t finance, a wrap-up miniseries, Farscape: The Peacekeeper Wars, in 2004.)

The original cast of ‘Farscape’ (Credit: Everett Collection)

One of the joys of Farscape is that its defining house style is the lack of a defining house style. Episodes can range from standalone homages to body-switching comedies and vintage Loony Tunes cartoons to densely plotted multi-part stories that don’t conclude with conventionally happy endings. The primary constant amidst this narrative and tonal juggling is the turbulent love story between Aeryn Sun and John Crichton. Revisited today, Farscape stands as something of a bridge between eras of space opera, linking the last wave of episodic space adventures like Star Trek: Voyager and Stargate: SG-1 to the intensely emotional serialized narratives that later drove Battlestar Galactica and its ilk. Aeryn is both a traditional and transformational figure as well; raised to be an impersonal enforcer in the Imperial Stormtrooper mold, she comes to live out a promise that John makes to her in the very first episode: “You can be more.”

“Oh, I’ve got chills down my arm,” says Aeryn’s alter ego, Claudia Black, as she reflects on the character and those prophetic words nearly two decades later. “Her evolution as an individual takes off in an extraordinary way [after that].” Over the course of Yahoo TV’s hour-long conversation with the Australian actress, it’s clear that she does regard Aeryn as an individual unto herself, one who took on a life that sometimes superseded the actress’s own. “I was always happy to hand the character off,” Black says. “I would say [to the producers], ‘If I’m going in the wrong direction then please find someone to serve Aeryn, please. Because she deserves to have the full love of a person who can give you what you need.’ She was honestly such a privilege to play, and I never abused that privilege.”

And Black very nearly didn’t get that privilege. The role had already been cast when she first auditioned for Farscape, but the creative team encouraged her to read for Aeryn anyway. That reading later led to a screen test opposite Tennessee-born Ben Browder, who would be playing John Crichton. (Interestingly, Browder’s casting is, in part, what opened the door to Black inheriting the role from the English actress who had originally been chosen as Aeryn. “Because of the Australian co-production agreement, if they brought in a lead actor from America, the second lead had to be Australian,” Black explains. “So thank god for our union!”) Immediately recognizing the crackling onscreen chemistry between them, Browder pushed hard for her to land the role over network skepticism. “I was a controversial choice for sure,” Black says now. “I was just lucky in the end.”

Whatever the circumstances of how she got the role, Black climbed aboard Moya with strong ideas about how to play Aeryn. Superficially, the character is part of the wave of warrior women that swept through genre shows in the ’90s and early ’00s, whose ranks included Xena, Buffy, and even Cleo of Cleopatra 2525 fame. But as conceived by O’Bannon and carried forward by executive producer David Kemper, who became a driving creative force behind the show, Aeryn cuts against that archetype as well. Unlike Xena, she doesn’t necessarily relish battle; it’s something that’s been programmed into her. (Although, as Aeryn memorably remarks in The Peacekeeper Wars: “Shooting makes me feel better!“) She also reverses the arc traversed by Buffy and Cleo, which begins with them in places of perceived weakness — as a cheerleader and exotic dancer, respectively — and leads towards empowerment.

Because of her militaristic upbringing, Aeryn starts from a place of fierce strength. Her journey over the lifespan of the show, then, becomes about softening what Black describes as Aeryn’s “jagged edges” without surrendering her agency. “I’ve always loved science fiction because of the way it affords us an opportunity to look at humanity from an outsider’s perspective,” Black says. “And Aeryn really gets to experience it firsthand the best way that humans can, which is through love, in all of its forms. When I look at humanity, and my own life, we have to break before we can grow. That’s really what happened with Aeryn; she became stronger with softer edges.” (For the record, Aeryn may start out as a superior fighter to Buffy, but Black says that Sarah Michelle Gellar would easily mop the floor with her in real life. “Sarah has a black belt in karate, and I have two left feet! I always felt like a bit of an imposter [as Aeryn] just on the physical front. If I could push the reset button, I’d go back and get good at some form of martial art.”)

But that stronger-to-softer arc is also more treacherous to navigate than a traditional empowerment story, flirting, as it does, with the fanboy-friendly stereotype of the buttoned-up ice queen whose resolve (and inhibitions) melt when love, generally in the form of a strapping male hero, comes her way. The risk of falling headlong into that tired trope is something Farscape had to deal with throughout its run, especially as the core of the show was always the romance between John and Aeryn.

And while that romance takes a number of unexpected twists and turns — most boldly in a Season 3 storyline that saw Aeryn committing herself fully to a cloned version of Crichton, only to see him die and then have to re-learn how to love the original John — it ultimately culminates with two staples of a standard love story: a marriage proposal and a pregnancy. “It seemed pretty clear to me that Rockne’s intention in the pilot was that this was going to be a love story for the ages,” Black says. Not only that, but it was a love story penned by a largely male writing staff who had their own opinions about how to depict Aeryn’s gradual acceptance of Crichton’s love that sometimes ran counter to Black’s feelings. “I recall moments where they wanted me to be more vulnerable with Aeryn, and I didn’t want to be because I didn’t think it was time and I didn’t think she was ready,” she says. “But it wasn’t my place to say.”

Nevertheless, she persistently found ways to make her voice heard, whether it was by talking one-on-one with specific writers or her co-star, who was equally eager to avoid certain genre show clichés. Black recalls one instance early on in the show’s run when Browder actively pushed back against Sci-Fi’s directive that John Crichton demonstrate the same sex drive as James T. Kirk. “They wanted Crichton to have an alien girl of the week. Ben put his foot down and said, ‘No, he’s not that kind of guy. This isn’t the story I want to tell.’ And on my side I was saying, ‘Yeah, what does that say about Aeryn if she’s going to fall in love with a guy [like that]?’ We wanted to investigate and have them experience the more positive aspects of attraction, as well as what’s worth fighting for and what’s worth dying for,” she says. “Maybe the show would have continued longer if we’d been able to please the network! They know what they’re going to need in order to keep [viewers] interested and tuning in. But we’re very proud of what we managed to make regardless, because of those choices.”

The ongoing battle that Black personally waged throughout Farscape‘s run was ensuring that Aeryn maintained control over her own body. In the genre shows of her era, the female leads were stronger and savvier than ever, and that translated into fashion choices that expressed their own body confidence and sexuality. Xena rode into battle in a heaving breastplate, while Buffy fought vampires in halter tops and Relic Hunter‘s Sydney Fox always donned a tight tank top before exploring some ancient tomb. But flashing cleavage, leg, and midriff also made those characters desirable pin-ups for the male audience courted by networks and advertisers. (Farscape added its own version of a pin-up type midway through the first season in the form of Chiana, a grey-skinned con artist with a plunging neckline and a voracious sexual appetite.)

But those fashions didn’t make sense for a soldier fighting in an army where men and women’s bodies were interchangeable. In fact, Black remembers reading a very specific direction to the makeup department in the production notes for the pilot. “When I take my Peacekeeper helmet off [for the first time], the note read in big print, ‘She looks masculine.’ They thickened my eyebrows — which are already thick! — and shaded my face in very minimal makeup. All of the on-set gallery images of me in the first season are with that very masculine makeup.”

Aeryn in her ‘masculine’ Season 1 appearance (Credit: Everett Collection)

By Season 2, though, Aeryn’s appearance underwent a noticeable change; her hair got longer and straighter, and her Peacekeeper uniform gave way to outfits that walked a line between practical and revealing. Black, who describes herself as a feminist, agreed to these cosmetic changes as she felt they were part of a “natural progression” for Aeryn. “I was honoring where she had come from at the same time having to find a way to let her grow into whatever it is she was going to become,” she says. (This clip from Farscape‘s aforementioned Looney Tunes-inspired episode, “Revenging Angel,” neatly summarizes — and satirizes — the female body types commonly featured on genre shows that Aeryn deliberately defies.)

Already objectively beautiful, Aeryn’s sexuality continued to emerge as she grew into her new self. Even so, Black could sense it wasn’t emerging quickly enough to satisfy certain expectations. “I felt that I was being pushed to show more flesh than was necessary,” she admits, pointing to one incident in the show’s fourth season where it was written into the script that Aeryn would sit poolside in a bikini. “I just said, ‘I will get in a bikini for you if it makes sense, but this woman’s world is falling apart.’ It was the last thing I thought Aeryn would do [in that moment]. It felt really frivolous and superficial to me.” (Black had already donned a bikini to play pregnant Aeryn in a hallucinatory scene in the Season 4 premiere. “They not only had me in a bikini, but they gave me a pregnant belly as well, which is really hard to pull off and make it look naturalistic,” she says.)

Black remembers shooting down an even more egregious bit of flesh-flashing in an earlier episode. As an international production, Farscape frequently shot extra scenes for certain ad-free European markets that would fill the time normally allotted for commercials. The cast referred to these filler sequences as “Euro scenes,” and they rarely involved big story or character beats. According to Black, this particular episode dispatched D’Argo and Aeryn on a planetside mission, and the writers cobbled together a Euro scene that she describes as “absurd.” “They said, ‘Let’s have a scene where we cut to them by a lake, and Aeryn turns and sees a bunch of soldiers across the lake. Aeryn takes off her clothes, swims across the lake, and fights these soldiers completely naked, then comes back to D’Argo and off they go.'”

In later seasons, Aeryn naturally progressed towards more revealing fashion choices (Credit: Everett Collection)

“There were so many things about it that were so bizarre,” she continues. “I said, ‘You know what, please explain this to me, how this honestly can fit in.’ In the end, they just said, ‘All right, fine — we won’t do it.’ That’s what I felt I was having to haggle for a lot of the time: my right to keep my clothes on until it was appropriate. I’ve always felt as an actor — and I’m sure other females have felt like this as well — that when you sign on the dotted line and enter the business that somehow you’ve given your body away as a piece of property, and you spend the rest of your career haggling for pieces of it back.” And the actress credits Browder with backing her up in her fight for Aeryn to be in full control of her own femininity and, by extension, her destiny. “Aeryn is really as feminist as I am, but she’s nothing without Crichton, which is an interesting statement to make,” she says. “So as much as we praise Aeryn, we must give full credit to Crichton and to Ben for shaping him the way that he did. It’s the space that he gives her. He’s such an exquisite champion of her growth and development, that it becomes possible for her to grow to her full size.”

In the 13 years since the concluding Peacekeeper Wars miniseries, rumors have occasionally flown about Farscape‘s return. At one point, there was talk of a webisode series following John and Aeryn’s child, D’Ago Sun-Crichton, but funding never came to fruition. (The show did continue in comic book form for a time, but publication ceased circa 2011.) Black, whose recent credits include stints on The CW genre shows Containment and The Originals, has no updates on any future revivals, and jokes that if Aeryn and Crichton ever do return, they’ll be “tired, ornery, and not really wanting another battle.”

Claudia Black as Dahlia on ‘The Originals’ (Credit: Annette Brown/The CW)

In a way, though, Aeryn’s larger battle has already been won. One of the breakout characters on Battlestar Galactica — which premiered in December 2003, nine months after Farscape‘s series finale — was Kara “Starbuck” Thrace, who displays some of the same steely spine, and jagged edges, of Officer Sun. And today’s genre TV landscape is populated with women who, consciously or not, reflect Aeryn’s assertiveness, independence, and refusal to conform to societal (or genre) norms of appearance or attitude, whether it’s Orphan Black‘s Helena, Sense8‘s Nomi, or Jessica Jones.

For this Scaper, she lives on off-screen as well. When my wife and I learned that we’d be having a daughter, we thought about all the things we wanted for her life. To know that she, and she alone, is in control of her body. To be strong in the face of injustice. To be confident in her own power. And to know that when she chooses to give her heart to another person, that person will be her champion, and give her the space to grow to her full size. And so we picked a name that, for us, would embody all of our hopes and dreams for the individual she’s becoming with each passing year.

Her name is Aeryn.

[bobdylanrevisited]

Highway 61 Revisited

Released: 30 August 1965

Rating: 10/10

My favourite album of all time. Released just five months after BIABH, this is another unforgettable record which defines the 1960s. Unlike the previous album, this one is almost entirely electric, minus the closing song, and it was clear that Bob couldn’t be further from his folk roots. This is, for me, the pinnacle of music and song writing, and whilst I consider many of his albums to be masterpieces, this is the one that truly makes him a god in my eyes. He would tour following this release, with so-called fans hatefully booing at the sight of a drum kit or an amplifier. This only confirmed to Dylan that he had to continue revolutionising his sound, and if these people didn’t like it then he must be doing something right. 

1) Like A Rolling Stone - Judas! How dare he open with one of the greatest songs ever recorded. A needling, accusatory, schadenfreude attack of ‘Miss Lonely’, which relishes in a fall from grace. There’s been much speculation as to her identity, but it’s the refrain of ‘How does it feel?’ that will get under your skin and stay with you. The angry snarling of Dylan is both exhilarating and intense and it never gets old, the song sounds fresh every single time you hear it. Alongside the perfect lyrics, the crashing guitars and Al Kooper’s irregular organ chords give the track a uniquely jarring sound, and it’s breathtaking. It’s no wonder it’s often voted the greatest song ever made, and Dylan has enjoyed playing it live ever since, in many different styles. But nothing will ever top the Free Trade Hall 1966 performance, which is the greatest moment in musical history. If you haven’t heard it, go and listen to it immediately and prepare for your jaw to hit the floor. Oh, and don’t forget, play it fucking loud. 

2) Tombstone Blues - Dylan parades historical and pop culture figures in this fast paced song, which has been analysed as being about the Vietnam War or the absurdity of the zeitgeist. Another track that has remained popular in live sets for decades, it’s a brilliantly worded piece that is both amusing and confusing. The screeching guitar solos from Mike Bloomfield are pure rock ‘n’ roll and elevate the song to another level, although the whole band are phenomenal throughout the album. It’s just another brilliant track that couldn’t be further from his earlier work, but cements Dylan as a rock star. 

3) It Takes A Lot To Laugh, It Takes A Train To Cry - Although many quick tempo versions were rehearsed, this final recording was reworked by Dylan over a lunch break, because he’s a fucking genius. To create this beautiful song in under an hour is ridiculous, and it’s a lovely, bluesy tune which is less angry and cynical than many other songs on the album. The Newport Folk Festival 1965 version, which is hard to hear over the screams of those feeling betrayed, is great, but the Rolling Thunder Revue 1975 version is truly magnificent 

4) From A Buick 6 - Whilst this is the weakest song on the album, it’s still an incredible blues track with some brilliant singing from Bob. The lyrics aren’t as deep as the other songs, it’s basically about a woman who gives Bob life and potentially will cause his death, but the instrumentation is fun and it sounds like everyone is having a blast playing it. It’s a great tune that is a fun couple of minutes and there’s nothing wrong with that. 

5) Ballad Of A Thin Man - Poor Mr. Jones, probably Dylan’s most fully formed and completely repugnant character. This is my favourite track on the album and probably my favourite Dylan song (I know I say that about a lot of songs). It’s a brutal, depressing, bleak assassination of someone who has wronged Bob, with haunting piano that echos around the menacing words that send shivers down your spine. It’s most likely aimed at the reporters and the media who misunderstood Bob, or pretend to be cool and up to date with the culture, and here Bob unmasks them and publicly annihilates their fraudulent disguises. As with much of this album, it has remained in his live sets since release, but again no performance ever topped the Free Trade Hall 1966 one, the booing made Dylan’s words and delivery even more sinister and shocking. 

6) Queen Jane Approximately - Another needling song in the same vein as ‘Like A Rolling Stone’, though this one is more sympathetic to the subject. However, it is once again a classic track which sounds absolutely beautiful. Potentially about Joan Baez, though Dylan claims it actually about a man, it’s a fantastic piece that is both mellow and devastating at the same time. 

7) Highway 61 Revisited - The whistle on this song is iconic, as is the screamed refrain which is basically impossible to not shout at the top of your lungs with each listen. Biblical lyrics and dark imagery are contrasted by the upbeat tune, and it’s interesting that in reality, Highway 61 leads back to Dylan’s birth place, potentially making himself the true subject of the song. Another example of his advances in storytelling through references and metaphor, this is a deep and vivid song that Dylan still belts out on tour to this day. 

8) Just Like Tom Thumb’s Blues - Despite being a brilliant song, which creates an atmosphere of tiredness and surrender, the story Dylan tells here is both fascinating and, not surprisingly, fantastically written. Starting in Juarez and returning to New York City, the protagonist must fight off women, booze, drugs, and the police on his journey, and it’s a riveting tale. As there is no chorus or refrain, this could easily be a Kerouac short story, but it really works as a track you can lose yourself to. You’ll be wrapped up in your own imagination of the events, described in an incredibly personal way by Bob, as if he’s telling you this story directly. I know I’ve mentioned this a lot, but the Free Trade Hall 1966 version sounds like it’s not of this world and should be mandatory listening. 

9) Desolation Row - This is the true showcase of Bob’s skill with the english language, an 11 minute acoustic song, which is more like an epic poem of old. Again peppered with pop culture references, it was released during a period where 3 minute love songs were topping the charts, and shows how much Bob was challenging the notion of what music could be about, and really mastering it as a literary art form. It begins with infamous lynchings from Bob’s birthplace, before moving on to fairy tale characters, biblical figures, authors, poets, scientist, and the victims of the Titanic, to name but a few. The lyrics are so engrossing, and the delivery is almost hypnotic, that the 11 minutes feel like mere seconds, as he paints a tapestry in your mind that is exciting, vivid, and yet tinged with a bleakness as no one is happy in the song. It’s an incredible way to end the album, though you’d wish it went on forever. 

Verdict: Obviously, I consider this the definition of perfection. For an album that largely focuses on sadness, feeling lost, anger, and cynicism, no other record makes me feel as joyous as this one. It’s the culmination of everything that came before it, from the dense verses of ‘A Hard Rain’s A-Gonna Fall’, to the audience rejection of ‘My Back Pages’, to the new sound on ‘Subterranean Homesick Blues’, and it comes together to create this perfect album. It’s unfathomable that a human created this, it seems more like a gift from the universe made especially for me, and I implore you to listen to it on repeat. Each time you’ll discover something new and your favourite song will change numerous times. Bob’s next outing would be of a similarly astonishing quality, and whilst he was touring the world to a chorus of jeers, he was about to record another album that would continue to push the boundaries of popular music. 

[sciencespies]

Congress Approves Smithsonian Museums Honoring Women and Latino Americans

https://sciencespies.com/history/congress-approves-smithsonian-museums-honoring-women-and-latino-americans/

Congress Approves Smithsonian Museums Honoring Women and Latino Americans

Days after a single senator blocked legislation approving two long-awaited additions to the Smithsonian Institution—a National Museum of the American Latino and a museum dedicated to women’s history—Congress has officially authorized their creation.

As Sarah Bahr reports for the New York Times, lawmakers passed the measures Monday night as part of a $2.3 trillion omnibus bill that earmarked $900 billion for Covid-19 relief and $1.4 trillion for government spending. If President Donald Trump signs the bill into law (a prospect called into question by his characterization of the pandemic relief package as a “disgrace”), the Smithsonian will be able to begin the lengthy process of transforming the proposed museums into brick-and-mortar buildings.

“We are reviewing the legislation carefully,” a spokesperson says in a statement provided to Smithsonian magazine. “The Smithsonian has unparalleled experience building national museums, and is already doing significant work to tell the stories of American [w]omen and Latinos.”

The representative adds, “We look forward to building two world-class museums to further amplify these stories and help our country learn more about the impact that women and Latinos have had on the fabric of our nation.”

Expected to stand on or near the National Mall, the proposed museums will be the first to join the Smithsonian since the National Museum of African American History and Culture opened in September 2016. Like that museum, which first welcomed visitors 28 years after Representative John Lewis co-sponsored a bill proposing its creation and 13 years after it received congressional approval, the new venues will likely trace a protracted path from inception to opening. Both will rely on a combination of federal funds and private donations (50 percent each) to finance their eventual construction.

The new museums will be the first to join the Smithsonian Institution since the National Museum of African American History and Culture opened in 2016.

(Alan Karchmer)

Calls to establish a national museum honoring the more than 60 million Latino American residents in the United States date back to 1994, when an internal task force documented the Smithsonian’s “pattern of willful neglect” toward Latinos. In 1997, the museum and research complex responded to the findings by establishing the Smithsonian Latino Center, which works to highlight Latino American culture through public programs, exhibitions and collecting initiatives.

Congress authorized a commission to examine the possibility of a Latino American museum in 2008. The group formally recommended the museum’s creation in a 2011 report that placed the proposed 310,000-square-foot space’s estimated cost at $600 million; legislators have introduced bills on the subject in every congressional session since.

“We have overcome tremendous obstacles and unbelievable hurdles to get to this historic moment, but, as I’ve said before, Latinos are used to overcoming obstacles,” says Senator Bob Menendez, who sponsored the Senate’s version of the bill and has long advocated for the museum’s creation, in a statement. “Passage of the National Museum of the American Latino is the culmination of decades of hard work, advocacy, successes and set-backs in the movement to recognize Latino contributions to America’s history, economy and culture.”

Friends of the National Museum of the American Latino, an advocacy group that is not affiliated with the Smithsonian, also celebrated the legislation’s passage. (The Smithsonian Institution is prohibited from campaigning for new museums.) Speaking with NPR’s Elizabeth Blair, the organization’s president, Estuardo Rodriguez, deemed the bill’s inclusion in the Covid-19 relief package fitting, as “Latinos and Latinas have been disproportionately impacted by the pandemic, suffering high rates of infection and death.”

He added, “The legislation to create a museum serves to not only honor the past contributions of American Latinos for over 500 years, but recognize their sacrifices today.”

Los Quetzales dance ensemble in front of the Smithsonian Institution’s Arts and Industries Building in 2003

(Melissa Carrillo / Smithsonian Latino Center)

The national museum of women’s history, meanwhile, traces its origins to 1998, when Representative Carolyn B. Maloney first introduced legislation on the subject. In 2014, Congress established a commission tasked with studying the museum’s “necessity and feasibility,” per USA Today’s N’dea Yancey-Bragg and Nicholas Wu. Two years later, the bipartisan group “concluded unanimously that the American people need and deserve such a museum,” according to a statement from Maloney’s office.

“How fitting that we pass this bill as we mark the centennial of the 19th Amendment and in the year in which we elected our first woman vice president,” says Maloney in the statement.

Last year, the Congressional Budget Office estimated the proposed 350,000-square-foot museum’s cost at $375 million over a nine-year period. The space will build on the work of the Smithsonian American Women’s History Initiative, which was established in 2018 to research, collect, document, display and share women’s stories.

Decades of legislative efforts aimed at establishing the two museums culminated in a December 10 Senate vote that legislators on both sides of the aisle had expected to unfold without controversy. Because the measure required unanimous consent to move forward, the objections of a single senator—Mike Lee, a Republican from Utah—were enough to temporarily derail the long-awaited legislation.

“My objection to the creation of a new Smithsonian museum or series of museums based on group identity—what Theodore Roosevelt called hyphenated Americanism—is not a matter of budgetary or legislative technicalities,” said Lee, who was one of just six senators to vote against the omnibus spending bill, as quoted by the New York Times’ Nicholas Fandos. “It’s a matter of national unity and cultural inclusion.”

Once the bill is signed into law, the Smithsonian will have two years to select the museums’ locations. As Peggy McGlone writes for the Washington Post, options include the historic Arts and Industries Building and a site on the northwestern portion of the National Mall, near the U.S. Capitol.

“Creating new museums is challenging, but, with appropriate funding, the Smithsonian has the skill and expertise to do it right,” said Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III at a Senate Rules Committee hearing held ahead of the December 10 vote. “We can, and have, created museums that meet the needs of the nation and showcase the U.S. to the world.”

#History

[letterboxd]

Milking It.

Peerless American filmmaker Kelly Reichardt talks to Ella Kemp about her new film, First Cow, her favorite animal performers, and getting down to the nitty gritty of things.

We’re resharing this post to mark the arrival of ‘First Cow’ on VOD. The interview took place timed to the original release of the film in March, prior to the coronavirus pandemic.

With little fuss, Kelly Reichardt has been making some of the most tender and thoughtful films about American loneliness for decades. The quietly acclaimed director, writer and film lecturer began her feature career in 1994 with River of Grass, a runaway story of a couple caught in a tragedy, and now celebrates her ten-title milestone as a filmmaker by gifting the world the peaceful and moving portrait of another pair of nomads in First Cow.

Reichardt has earned her reputation as one of the most impressive and reliable American filmmakers with knockouts including the stripped-back heartbreaker, Wendy and Lucy and the stunning portrait of feminine isolation and frustration, Certain Women. There is always a common thread—and there is often Michelle Williams—but then, also, each film is a rich, vivid new tale that feels like it belongs to you and no one else.

Based on the 2004 novel The Half-Life, written by Reichardt’s frequent collaborator Jonathan Raymond, First Cow has been coming together for over a decade, and feels like the culmination of Reichardt’s finest skills and sensibilities. The story follows Cookie (John Magaro) a taciturn cook travelling alongside fur trappers in 19th-century Oregon, whose ambition comes into focus when he meets King Lu (Orion Lee), a Chinese immigrant. Together, they develop not only an essential friendship, but also a delicious business model, which involves slyly stealing milk from a cow owned by a wealthy landowner. It’s a film of subtle gestures, of deeply tender attentions, with a sharp eye across endless landscapes, and already has devoted fans on Letterboxd.

“I have never felt so well cared for by a movie,” writes Liz Shannon Miller in her Letterboxd review. Zachary Panozzo appreciates the way the film tackles American capitalism as a system, writing that “First Cow, in the most pleasant and honest way, calls bullshit on that.” And Phil Wiedenheft observes: “It feels—like all her work—so simple and elegant that it’s a wonder how [many] histrionics so many other filmmakers have to perform to end up saying less.” And, everyone wants those butter-honey biscuits.

First Cow premiered at the Telluride Film Festival last year and went on to the New York Film Festival shortly after, before impressing European audiences last month in competition at the 2020 Berlinale.

Sharing memories of the writers who shaped her movies, the first film that proved that cinema could show a different view of the world, and the greatest animal performers of all time, Reichardt chats with our London correspondent, Ella Kemp.

Orion Lee as King-Lu and John Magaro as Cookie in ‘First Cow’.

How did you choose where to strip The Half-Life back, to get to a film-sized story? Kelly Reichardt: The novel goes through four decades and they sail to China, so it was way outside the realm of what we could do. It also has a contemporary thread, and that just became a prologue and we settled into the 1820s. We found the main mechanism, the cow, which doesn’t exist in the novel—in the novel they’re selling the oil from beaver glands to China. So once we had the narrative element of the cow, we could work our own way into the script while still using a lot of the themes and stories from John’s novel. And the other thing John did, which was great, was to combine two characters from the novel. King Lu is actually a fusion of two people in the novel.

On paper, First Cow might seem like a straightforward Western but in practice it feels much softer. How do you see it in terms of genre? I didn’t feel any limits by a genre, and I wasn’t really thinking of it as a ‘big W’ Western. I actually see it as a heist film if anything. When I made Meek’s Cutoff, we were dealing with bonnets and wagons and the desert and people crossing West. That felt like having to deal with the whole history of the Western while we set up the camera, but I didn’t feel like that at all here. I just felt like we were telling an intimate story about two people. We were in the minutiae of trying to find out as much as we could about the Multnomah tribes that lived on the Columbia river, and we had fashioned Toby Jones’ character—the Chief Factor—after John McLoughlin in the [retail business group] Hudson’s Bay Company. It was more about researching the beaver trade and definitely taking artistic liberties, while also really trying to stay pretty true in the details to the period. It was such a little world we were building, I didn’t really have the feeling that I was confined in a genre at all.

Kelly Reichardt. / Photo by Jens Koch courtesy Berlinale

You work with outdoor landscapes a lot, particularly in Oregon. There are similarities with Meek’s Cutoff but also with Wendy and Lucy—the nomadic loners, the animal companion… What keeps you coming back to these places? I’ve actually worked outdoors much more than I’ve worked indoors. It’s really the indoors which was really fun to shoot here, because with Tony Gasparro, who was the production designer on First Cow, he and I were able to design these cottages and interiors and build around what [we] wanted to shoot, which is really great and a first for me. But outdoors is where I’m usually mostly shooting. It was recognizable to me at different points in the film that we were recalling Old Joy and Meek’s Cutoff and Wendy and Lucy. It was like the ‘Best Of’ of my movies.

There were some echoes of the other films for sure. It’s interesting to think how that’s happened. Because really, John’s novel The Half-Life is the first thing I ever read of his, and I wrote to him asking if he had any short stories—because I knew the novel was too big back in 2004—and he sent me Old Joy, the short story, which became the first thing we did together. But in between all that we’d been musing together for a decade, whenever there’s a lull in whatever we’re working on, we’d ask ourselves how we could do The Half-Life. It’s been cooking on the back burner for a long time, so maybe it’s bled into other films along the way.

Would you ever consider working in the city? I’m definitely ready to do something contemporary. It could be anything. I will just say on the practical side I do enjoy going away with a crew and feeling somewhat off the grid while making a film, separate from everyday life. When you say a city, I immediately think of New York. Never say never, but it’s just the practicalities of it… even if you can hire the crew you want, it doesn’t jump out at me as the most inviting thing.

In First Cow, your central characters are two men. Did you encounter different things in delving into male psychology after shaping so many rich female characters across your filmography? I don’t think of it in terms of gender, more in terms of personality. Maile Meloy’s short stories that I was working off for Certain Women focus on isolated women, a theme in some of her writing. But it’s really more about getting down to details on all levels of filmmaking for me. You have at some point the bigger picture, but I like to get down to the nitty gritty of things, in the story I’m telling and the people I’m making the story about and not worry about what gender anybody is. It’s more about who are these characters. A big draw to The Half-Life was that the Cookie character was so great. King Lu was totally fascinating as well. So it was more about keeping track of what they wanted, what they were to each other in the minute-by-minute, more even than in the big sense.

Lucy, the very good girl in Reichardt’s ‘Old Joy’.

Evie, the titular cow, is a terrific performer. What is your favorite animal performance on film? Oh god… Lucy! My own beautiful dog in Old Joy (2006), actually. No, of course there’s others. The animal that probably made the biggest impression on me as a kid was in Mike Nichols’ The Day of the Dolphin (1973). That dolphin was everything. You’re always afraid the animals are going to come to some demise. There’s [Vincente] Minnelli’s Home from the Hill (1960), which has the tragic hunting dog there. But it’s such a beautiful film. Whenever a film is named after the animal, you know it’s bad news for the animal.

Do you have a favorite film to teach your students? I’ve been teaching since 1998 so I wouldn’t call anything a favorite, but one film I’ve used in a sound class a lot is the opening scene of McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971), where we’re just listening to the sound, and we turn off the image and the students describe the space. And so by doing that over the years I have René Auberjonois’ voice so firmly planted in my head, as he’s the bartender in the opening scene. I had the great pleasure of working with him on Certain Women and we wrote a little part for him [in] First Cow where he’s the cranky guy in town with the raven.

What is the film that made you want to be a filmmaker? When I was a kid and I saw Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962) on TV, and there was a scene on a beach at night that happened in black and white. It was the first time I’d seen the ocean in black and white—I grew up in Miami. It was the first time I became aware that people could do something as far as film went. I think when I was in art school, Stranger Than Paradise (1984) came out, and it probably opened the door to a lot of people’s minds—like a lot of people who saw the first band who played their own music and not cover tunes, like, ‘maybe I could tell my own story on film’. It made something seem possible, for myself anyway.

‘First Cow’ is in US cinemas now. An international release is yet to be confirmed. Kelly Reichardt’s films ‘First Cow’ and ‘Wendy and Lucy’ feature in Letterboxd’s Official Top 100 Narrative Feature Films Directed by Women.

[dustedmagazine]

Listed: Lithics

Lithics, out of Portland, has been making minimalist post-punk for half a decade and three albums. Their latest, Tower of Age, fits into a well-established tradition of deadpan, off-kilter punk, borrowing the irregular rhythms of Kleenex/Liliput, the rough mechanical dance-i-ness of Fire Engines and the apocalyptic Android funk of Pere Ubu. In her review, Jennifer Kelly concluded, “Tower of Age isn’t radically different from Mating Surfaces, but it feels at once sharper and looser, as if the musicians in Lithics had gotten so precise and skilled at their razory art form that they could afford to take some risks. There’s a lot of post-punk out there, but very little as good as this.”

Kleenex/LiLiPUT – The Complete Recordings

I got the Kleenex/LiLiPUT 2xCD compilation from Kill Rock Stars when I was 16 and that album was one that truly impacted my life. I was really into the first disk of the more raucous and repetitive punk tunes for a long time and then as I got older, I got a lot more into the second disk of their more mature sounds. It’s something I’ve come back to again and again throughout my life. (Aubrey)

Grace Slick & The Great Society – Live at the Matrix

In the summer of 2018 I got extremely into this Grace Slick & The Great Society live at the Matrix album. I’ve been pretty obsessed with it ever since. It consists of two live performances from the mid-sixties. They were such a good band, it’s a shame she moved on to the much more boring Jefferson Airplane, taking along a couple of the Great Society’s good songs, but there are so many more! Darby Slick’s guitar solo on "Grimly Forming" is my favorite guitar solo of all time and Grace’s vocals are so incredibly strong throughout. (Aubrey)

Swell Maps – “Midget Submarines”

I’m picking just this song and not the album, it’s on Trip to Marineville, only because it was my introduction to the band. Everything about this song and recording is perfect. It encapsulates so many ideas, somehow successfully tying together a range of disparate musical threads: punk, psychedelic, dub, sound collage, motoric, noise... Pure joy for the ears. I still get goosebumps when I hear the opening drum beat. (Bob)

Half Japanese – “Live In Hell”

I don’t know much about the context of why or where this footage was shot, but it is 1985 Sing No Evil era Half Japanese (their peak lineup in my opinion) delivering a completely feral performance in front of a backdrop of flame while identical twins (?) in skeleton costumes jump all over them. Jad smirks while strumming an unplugged guitar, and David goes apeshit, dancing himself into a frenzy. The mix heavily favors John Dreyfuss’ Funhouse-esque sax, a unique perspective that I wish was represented more on their studio albums of the period. This is rock ‘n’ roll in its highest, wildest form. (Bob)

The Luv’d Ones – Truth Gotta Stand

The Luv’d Ones were an amazing band that I will take any opportunity to spread the word about. Char Vinnedge is one of my favorite guitarists, laying down hypnotic minor key riffs and piercing squalls of fuzz, often both in the same song. They were extremely ahead of their time, and it’s maddening to think they never got a chance to record a full album. I especially love the demo songs later in the album that manage to be wilder and more internal than the singles. (Mason)

Devo – The Mongoloid Years

As a 15 year old browsing the Devo section of my local CD shop, I found a new $17.99 copy of Freedom Of Choice, and a heavily used $8.99 copy of The Mongoloid Years. Luckily, I decided to save some money that day and bought the best recordings Devo ever released. I love how tight and blown out they sound, and the studio albums always sounded a little muted and mellow by comparison. The album ends with an early “hardcore” era performance, baiting the audience with comically inept nightmare music and getting kicked off stage. An inspiration. (Mason)

L.O.X. – L.O.X. Time

Who are they? I have no idea, but these strangers used to practice across the hall from us and it wasn’t long before they became one of my favorite bands. They reference bugs often, in lyrics and cover art, but it seems like a deeper theme within the album. “Ants” feels like it was written by ants. Like you’re in an ant hill, and somewhere down one of the tunnels, there’s an ant clawing at a piece of sheet metal in time. Nobody really knows who they are, but if you’ve heard this record you know that they rule. (Wiley)

Velvet Underground – White Light/White Heat

Few records make me want to burn all of my possessions, knock myself out with a frying pan and float down a river into the night, but this is one of them. Every once in while I’ll check back in with it and be astonished by its creation. While I love the majority of this bands catalog, I particularly like the recklessness of some of the recording performances in this era. The deluxe edition has some great alternate takes of VU classics, as well as some overlooked live gems such as “Guess I’m falling in love.” (Wiley)

Honey Bucket – Furniture Days

Furniture Days by Honey Bucket

Portland’s now sadly defunct Honey Bucket are a collective favorite of all of us in Lithics, and a band that I will always fondly identify with a particular time in this city. Their music was energetic, highbrow, and fun; perfectly reflecting the personalities of the three talented humans behind its creation. Not a day goes by that we don’t miss this band, Honey Bucket forever! (Bob)

Mope Grooves – Desire

Mope Grooves are, by this point, something of an institution in Portland. Primarily the brainchild of singer/lyricist/ multi-instrumentalist Stevie Pohlman, it still has the feel of a community effort. The sound has gradually evolved along with a shifting lineup of local musicians culminating in their latest LP Desire, their most fully realized work to date.

[recentanimenews]

Happy Birthday, Space Cowboy: A Shinichiro Watanabe Retrospective

  Today we wish a very happy birthday to the Cowboy Bebop director, the one and only Shinichiro Watanabe! Watanabe-san has been a powerhouse in the world of anime for well over two decades, working with acclaimed studios such as Sunrise Inc., Studio Nue, and BONES. His mastery at blending Western and Eastern elements has earned Watanabe a devoted fanbase in many different countries. One of the most consistent aspects of Watanabe's catalog is his skill at successfully amalgamating a variety of genres from sci-fi to Westerns to comedy and more.

In honor of Watanabe's birthday, I'll be exploring the artistic depth of three anime from his impressive oeuvre and celebrating the very special spark that can be found in all his works. Read on for more!

Terror in Resonance (2014)

Terror in Resonance seems critically underappreciated when compared to some of Watanabe's other directorial efforts. Though it lacks the robust character development and sense of immersion found in his other titles, the series still retains many of the qualities that make Watanabe such a globally respected anime auteur.

Terror in Resonance follows two high-school-aged terrorists named Twelve and Nine as they plot a series of bombings in order to reveal the injustices enacted against them — and many other children — during a secret government operation called the Athena Plan. Along the way, a lonely girl named Lisa finds herself enwrapped in the boys' mission, and experiences camaraderie for the first time due to their presence.

The show's basic premise alone reflects Watanabe's willingness to explore uncommon thematic spaces by featuring literal terrorists as two of the main characters. Common in his other works as well, Watanabe invites viewers to feel compassion for characters who inhabit the outermost margins of societal acceptability. The show doesn't endorse Twelve and Nine's actions, but it does position them as isolated characters with real human attributes, acting coherently in retaliation to the incorrigible exploitation they faced as children. Twelve and Nine also make extreme efforts to make sure no one is killed due to their bombings, which serves as an empathetic deviation from standard depictions of terrorists as one-sided, monstrous caricatures.

Ultimately, Terror in Resonance features many trademarks of Watanabe's unique touch: compassionate explorations of loneliness, a tragic narrative interspersed with brief moments of beauty, and yet another gorgeous soundtrack by Yoko Kanno (a frequent collaborator with Watanabe).

Macross Plus (1995)

Watanabe made his directorial debut as co-director for Macross Plus working alongside Shoji Kawamori (the creator of the original Macross). This four-part OVA is the best flying mech, artifcial-intelligence-pop-music-gone-horribly-wrong redo of Top Gun I've ever seen. I remember I first saw it on the Starz Channel back in 2002 or 2003. It was fun to revisit the US dub recently with the fresh realization that Bryan Cranston — aka Walter White, our favorite fictional suburban meth dealer — did the voice acting for the main character Isamu. Isamu is like a more womanizing Spike from Cowboy Bebop, mixed with the arrogance of Mugen from Samurai Champloo, and is an early example of a recurrent protagonist-archetype in Watanabe's titles. The playful comedic qualities Watanabe would become known for were already apparent in much of Macross Plus, such as the scene when Isamu and his rival Bowman bring up old adolescent/high-school gripes while they're both engaged in an airborne mech-duel to the death.

Once again, Yoko Kanno's absolutely incredible score must be mentioned. The soundtrack ranges from orchestral music perfect for dogfights to emotional ballads and '90s trance (there's also a really cool reference to the Aphex Twin album "Selected Ambient Works 85-92" on a bus sign in one scene). Watanabe's first directorial outing already grapples with a subject near and dear to his heart: music. The last episode features an intense sequence involving an AI popstar named Sharon Apple, who takes control of everyone viewing her concert via seductive musical mind control. This scene explores a what-if scenario: an imagined future where technology meshes with the power of music for nefarious — rather than healing — ends. Either way, since Watanabe is a self-proclaimed "music freak," it's fun to watch him implement a plot device about just how disruptively powerful music can be (his most recent anime Carole and Tuesday tackles AI and pop music with a more neutral lens, as an FYI). Macross Plus is not to be missed.

Cowboy Bebop (1998)

  I'll never forget what it was like to experience Cowboy Bebop for the very first time when it initially aired on Adult Swim in 2001. I must have been 12 or 13 at the time, and few pieces of media have made such a lasting impression on me. I was already extremely impressed even after seeing the first episode "Asteroid Blues," but it's the fifth episode entitled "Ballad of Fallen Angels" — where viewers are introduced for the first time to the central antagonist Vicious — that completely sold me on the series.

"Ballad of Fallen Angels" culminates in a climactic battle that takes place in a church, with the main character Spike duking it out against Vicious and his goons. The most memorable moment for me is the scene when Spike is thrown out of the top of the church by Vicious. Spike falls in slow-motion as viewers are treated to a montage of his tragic crime syndicate past and his relationship with his lost love Julia. It's such a stunning moment that perfectly echoes the old creative writing adage "show don't tell," since it subtly expresses so much about Spike's life without explicitly battering it over your head. The scene speaks volumes in just a few wordless seconds, with no sounds to be heard at all other than Yoko Kanno's gorgeous choir and piano-based track "Green Bird." I've drifted toward arthouse movies as I've grown older, and I truly think the aforementioned scene was my first time experiencing the ineffable artfulness that I find in the experimental films that move me most. It feels a little silly and overblown to say, but the sequence feels like it contains a large spectrum of life — love, hate, sadness, memories, dreams, etc.

Cowboy Bebop is a show that abounds with moments like this. There are so many moving scenes rich in an atmospheric tenderness that aches with longing, loneliness, and beauty. Intimate scenes where characters in interstellar ships stare quietly at a sea of stars. A view of someone smoking a cigarette alone in a dimly lit alleyway. Or something like the ending of "Waltz for Venus," when a music box-esque song plays while Spike gazes into the sky as spores that can blind drift downward like snow.

I could go on and on about the series — the masterful quality of Keiko Nobumoto's screenplay, the riveting action sequences and lovable characters, the expert blend of genres coupled with breathtaking animation and music, and how Spike's somewhat Buddhist philosophy (whatever happens, happens) influenced my own. Cowboy Bebop truly deserves all the praise and is undoubtedly one of the best animated works of all time.

So here's to you Shinichiro Watanabe. I hope you have a birthday as stunning and cool as the anime you've graced the world with.

What else do you love by Shinichiro Watanabe, and why? Sounds off in the comments below!

    Do you love anime? Do you love writing? If you have an idea for a features story, pitch it to Crunchyroll Features!

By: news+feed@crunchyroll.com

[davidcoopermoore]

Transcript from “Shape of Education to Come” podcast

I was recently a guest on the Shape of Education to Come podcast hosted by Devin King. I like to transcribe these, especially when I'm talking in a semi-professional (as opposed to formally professional) context. (It turns out that when I'm not transcribing audio for a living I find it relaxing in small doses.)

This is lightly edited for relevance (I snipped some Taylor Swift content that wasn’t related to teaching, but kept in the Taylor Swift content that was) and coherence. You can listen here.

SEC: 

David Cooper Moore, tell me what you do.

DCM: 

Hello, my name is David Cooper Moore. I am a media literacy educator in the United States -- I’m based in Philadelphia. 

The past four years I was the media and blended learning coordinator at an alternative high school for kids who had become disconnected with high school, dropped out, or were in danger of possibly dropping out or failing out of high school. Before that I worked in media literacy enrichment mostly with the Media Education Lab, which is now at the University of Rhode Island, but that I got connected with when it was in Philadelphia at Temple University. 

I’m a certified English teacher, so I teach English but I also teach media arts, and I just got a consulting gig to do a digital literacy curriculum with the Free Library of Philadelphia, so I’m taking a year off of teaching to do that, plus a lot of other life stuff going on with kids and houses and things. So that’s kind of my general log line.

SEC: 

What would a digital literacy curriculum look like?

DCM: 

That’s a great question. The classic framework that I go by is one that Renee Hobbs at the University of Rhode Island uses, which is: access, analyze, create, reflect, act. 

Media literacy is this really big tent movement and academic field of study that encompasses questions like how do we access information? How do we use things in both digital and non-digital media worlds? How do we make meaning out of it through analysis? How do we compose -- how do we make stuff? But also how do we reflect on its impact on our lives and how does it inform the way that we take action in the world? 

So any digital literacy curriculum to me goes back to that kind of a framework, especially those first three, access/analyze/create. I think reflection and action are imbued in media literacy practice but the access/analyze/create part is what a lot of educators and folks that are in education don’t always know how to do, so I’ve always been attracted to the media literacy field because of the way that it really is non-negotiable that those three pieces of accessing information, making meaning out of it, and creating with it are really fundamental. It’s such an expanded view of what counts as texts, how we make meaning, how we communicate in the world.

SEC: 

We’re definitely going to come back to that. What you’re talking about is really huge, there is a ton to that, which is why there’s a curriculum for it. So we’re gonna come back to that but first of all, I wanted to think back to when I think I first became familiar with your work. It would have been over a decade ago, when you were doing music writing. 

DCM: 

Oh yeah, that’s right! Those are my two non-education things, I’m a filmmaker and I’m a music writer, and those actually are the things that got me interested in the intersections between media and education, which led me to do this kind of work. The work I’ve been doing for the past ten years is just the synthesis of the media stew I’ve been bathing in my entire life since I was a little kid, culminating in my young adulthood with making movies and writing about music. But you know, for my professional life, it turns out they don’t really give you huge paychecks to make movies about your family or write about underrated pop albums. 

SEC: 

So I know that you started out as a critic. I don’t know if you’d say you’re a critic.

DCM: 

Yeah, I was a formal music critic for a couple of years. I actually wrote for real publications.

SEC: 

Do you think that good critics make for good teachers?

DCM: 

I think that there are overlapping skills. 

I taught in the classroom for four years. I took a position as a full time teacher because I really wanted to get my five years as a teacher under my belt. I really wanted to teach full time because one thing that I knew very clearly from doing enrichment work was that it’s just different. Classroom teachers do different types of work than a lot of other people who educate others do -- college professors, enrichment educators, people that do coaching, mentoring. 

There is something very different about full-time teaching, and so to that extent I think that the critical sensibility is a good one to have in the classroom, but it doesn’t tell you everything you need to know about whether someone is a good teacher, and I don’t know if it’s in the top five, in terms of the key traits you need to have to be a good classroom teacher. A critical mind might be part of it, but honestly if the kids don’t really care about your critical insights I don’t know how effective a teacher you’re going to be. I certainly found that when I tried to use my own criticism directly it was pretty hit or miss. It’s as likely as any other text to engage students. 

Teaching is really about the relationship you build with the students you are working with. I do find that a lot of folks that I know who are critics do make good teachers. I actually know some music critics who are high school teachers, that’s their day job. But I’m not sure there’s anything inherently better. It’s better to “be a music critic” about music than not to be, but there are probably other things that  are more important for teaching.

SEC: 

I guess what I was wondering was if the critic sensibility of looking closely at something and assessing its value and worth lent itself to the way we think about classes and systems and what’s valuable and ways to approach student learning? I wondered if being able to think critically about what we do could come from that critic sensibility.

DCM: 

One thing that I’ve noticed with music critics -- the people who are really good music critics tend to be really good other things, too. They tend to be good thinkers in a lot of fields, and they’ve chosen music but they could have just as easily chosen politics or film. 

And I also find that a lot of folks that are thinkers and writers in other spheres often show their worst instincts when they’re writing about music. So that’s always fascinated me about music as a medium, that it is so predicated on our viscerality, our feelings about it, how we feel about it, and we try so hard to put that into this kind of critical thinking language, but a lot of times we just use the critical thinking language to say the really biased or weird thing that true critical thinking wouldn’t have us saying. I read a lot of critics, who are very smart, who when put in an uncomfortable space will just use their critical faculties to say something that I don’t think is a very “critical thinking” thing. 

Good teachers are more likely to uncover the good music critic within themselves than the music critic who does that [uses critical thinking language for non-critical-thinking insights] is likely to access their inner teacher. 

I think classrooms do this kind of naturally. You have to be openly curious and humbled and not allow any of your preconceived ideas about what’s going to be the right thing to guide you too often, because the students will just knock you down. Students are really good at sussing out inauthenticity. So when you’re using those critical devices to prop up something that needs questioning, the people who are going to do that first are your students. 

One thing I found teaching is I would say something that I’d never thought twice about and my students would say, “why do you say that?” Maybe there’s a song they’re listening to I don’t like and I say “oh, I don’t like this song,” and there’s a student who really loves the song and they’re like, “I really love this song! It’s my favorite song!” And I have to think about the song differently now because I’m in a situation where I’ve been kind of put off-guard and I need to actually use my real self-reflective critical thinking. 

So I think there’s this great synergy between criticism and teaching but I actually think it kind of comes from the teaching side more than necessarily from the criticism side. Being a good teacher helps you be a better critic in a way that I’m not sure that being better critic helps you be a better teacher. 

SEC: 

One of the things you mentioned there was the idea that it comes from a feeling, bad music criticism or bad criticism just comes from that feeling rather than an analysis. And I wonder if we see that sort of thing in education because I don’t know what your experience with teachers are but there is a certain kind of teacher who has been around for a long time or even a short time and has a feeling of what things work, and doesn’t want to change their practice.

DCM: 

I think that the thing that interests me about feeling in music is the way that feelings can destabilize us. And I think what you’re describing are teachers who are doing almost the opposite, teachers who feel highly stabilized in their classrooms. That’s what I’m always skeptical of. It’s the teacher that feels like nothing could possibly happen to them to change anything about what they think or what they do. 

It’s not that I’m the most open-minded and amazing person, it’s just that I have a lot of experiences where I think I know something and the teaching experience really knocks me down a peg. It can be humiliating, in fact! When you realize that what you just expressed that you thought was teaching critical thinking, isn’t. 

For instance, when I’m talking to young, predominantly black, and predominantly low-income students who are 16 to 19 years old about the news, I could get up on my high horse -- I read the Washington Post every day and I do this and that and yada yada yada, and talk about the credibility of sources. And then they start telling me about things that are actually happening in their very own backyards and neighborhoods that I know nothing about. And who am I to say that the way that they found that information is better or worse than my way? I don’t mean that obviously means I’m not better or worse, I might be better at something, but I need to think about it more carefully, because the assumption I went in with that I had the knowledge and the students had the brains to absorb my knowledge, it didn’t work out that way. 

It’s not even that it can’t work out that way. I do have knowledge sometimes and they can absorb the knowledge. But the teacher who isn’t open to being humbled unexpectedly is not going to be able to improve their practice in the way that the teacher that is can. That isn’t to say you need to go cut yourself down at every opportunity and completely take out all your confidence, it’s just that it’s complicated and again, students are going to be able to push you in ways that other types of relationships don’t. 

So that’s what I’m looking for in teachers, and I think music does this to people. When you really hate a song and you just explode with anger about it, I mean, the kind of feeling that that can instill in you, I can’t think of a lot of other media that can really do that. But I can definitely tell you some experiences that people have had in classrooms, where the kid did that one thing and you just exploded, you didn’t even know that was your trigger. Like, “oh my gosh, that kid that wouldn’t sit down, that really bothered me for some reason, I have to analyze that!” I think music does that. I think there is something about the combination of feeling and analysis that is so tied together in music, I think there’s an echo of that in how we learn about ourselves in the classroom. 

SEC:

This was obviously a very big week because on Pitchfork this week they reviewed all the Taylor Swift albums. 

DCM: 

All the Taylor Swift albums! I know! Where were they when I was actually writing for them in 2006? They didn’t ask me to write up the self-titled album. I had it before anybody did. My friend actually burned me the self-titled Taylor Swift album and mailed it to me. In the mail. I was there, man! I was there! 

SEC: 

What did you think of her first album?

DCM:

I loved her first album. At the time I had taken a critical turn. I was really interested in teen pop music, so I was writing about it at an old website called Stylus Magazine, a really cool online space. And it’s funny because I think people can look back -- I’ve worked in elementary media literacy and all this stuff and it seems like maybe it’s all of a piece, of me being really curious about youth culture. I’m actually not that curious about youth culture. I just really liked the teen pop music at the time personally! So I got into it and I was writing about it and that got me into youth culture only because of the ways in which people were writing about young people. 

I thought it was just bizarre -- High School Musical had just come out. Taylor Swift had not quite broken yet. She was still trying to be a country star at that time. And people were just writing about it -- you saw this when One Direction got really big, too, these recycled teenybopper losing their minds takes. And so it forced me into understanding youth culture, and that got me connected with the Media Education Lab at Temple. I was a grad student there at the time. I thought I should actually try to understand what’s happening in youth culture, because I mostly just liked, like, listening to Ashlee Simpson for myself.

When Taylor Swift came out, I saw this as a really ingenious way to try to find a space outside of Disney which at the time was starting to build its music brand through Hannah Montana and High School Musical, and she was doing this thing where she was trying to capture the country audience with the same moves that they were doing in the teen pop music. And it was interesting to watch her really struggle in country music. She had a couple hits on country radio but there was always this talk about her inauthenticity and how she’s not really country and whatever else. And then when Fearless came out it seems like it was just this explosion, that young people just flocked to her and created almost a whole separate genre of Taylor Swift. She is her own genre now. I think she has been since 2008. She stopped being a country star about a year after she started. 

But what’s interesting to me about the Pitchfork thing is how uncontroversial that is now. Of course you’d cover Taylor Swift! She’s the biggest American pop music star probably in the world. I think she’s maybe bigger than Beyonce by a nose? They’re probably the top two, right? 

SEC: 

Probably! 

DCM: 

Why wouldn’t you be interested in writing about that? At the time you just couldn’t do it. 

SEC: 

It was part of the rockist sensibility that was still in the ether then. Poptimism was still kind of coming out. For me, I remember when I was in school I was teaching Grade 8 and we were doing a music video lesson, and a student wanted to watch “Teardrops on my Guitar.” And I remember being snooty about that then, and I think I probably looked down on that student and I almost  guarantee that student noticed that. So for me, that’s a lesson to check yourself. It’s so easy for us to look at student culture and say, that’s not my culture, that’s not good. And we saw that even in Pitchfork, which was the leading credible source of music.

DCM: 

Yeah, you know, it’s funny, because you have those experiences, and you have such a personal relationship with students whether you want to or not. I consider myself a progressive educator and I’m all about relationships, but there are some really healthy boundaries that teachers need to have from their students. And part of that can have to do with their popular culture. You also don’t have to be the hip teacher that insists on being really into all the music your kids are into. It’s more about your authenticity to yourself in your relationship to the students. 

But at the same time, if you don’t like Taylor Swift, there are a lot of ways to engage with the student who loves Taylor Swift honestly without making the student almost a representative of a social problem. You still have to teach that kid math! You still have to have engagements with that student who loves Taylor Swift. And that is such an important part of that person’s identity. But as the teacher, that’s the field that you have the least control over. You really have almost zero say in how that student is going to take their own popular culture and make meaning out of it. 

And so in a way it was actually kind of healthy for a place like Pitchfork to stay away from Taylor Swift, because the only thing that would have happened is that they would have gotten somebody who doesn’t listen to Taylor Swift to write some sneering thing about it. Or do the thing where it’s like, “well, begrudgingly I’ll admit there are a couple of songs here.” But something interesting was obviously happening with Taylor Swift from a social perspective. I happen to think it was pretty god as music, too -- your mileage may vary with that. 

SEC: 

If you were going to give yourself a Pitchfork rating as a teacher, what would you give yourself?

DCM: 

Well you have to understand about Pitchfork ratings, because there’s a science to it, right? It’s a little code between music nerds. Anything under a 7 and above a 5.8 means “I listened to it, it was fine, you shouldn’t really even bother to read this review, because I’m not really sure how I’m feeling about this one right now.”  Anything between a 7 and a 7.5 means this is a solid album that I don’t quite have the traction on, or I really like it but they won’t really let me rate it higher. I don’t think they do that any more. They made me change some of my ratings sometimes. 

SEC: 

Did you give a number? I thought it was the case that writers didn’t give the number.

[Ed note: Pitchfork editorial gives scores now, but when I wrote for Pitchfork in 2004-2006 writers gave the initial score and it was discussed editorially if necessary.]

DCM:

Yeah, I gave the numbers. Writers gave the numbers then and there was sometimes an editorial decision about it. I infamously tried to give the Arcade Fire’s first album a 10 and they wouldn’t let me. We negotiated it down to a 9.7, which I think is kind of funny. It’s too bad, because it turns out it’s really more of a 9.4, but that’s OK. I mean, I was really obsessed with it at the time. It settled into a 9.4. 

Nah, I’m just kidding, 9.7 is the perfect score for that album, I think. 

What was I talking about? Oh yeah -- Pitchfork ratings are very specific, so as a teacher, I actually don’t think--I only taught for four years in a classroom so I am ineligible for anything above a 7.6. That’s the cap of the album that was great and some people are going to love that album, but no one is going to talk about it in the critical conversation at the end of the year. So you’re going to see a lot of individual writers’ favorite albums that they don’t feel comfortable giving a bunch of Pitchfork hype to get between a 7.3 and a 7.7. After that, once you get into the 8’s, you’re getting into the critical conversation. 

So I would give myself over four years...a 7.4. 

SEC: 

One thing that jogged my memory and made me think you were someone I should talk to is that you were posting on Twitter a list of observations you were making as you were coming to the end of your year, and the end of your job. 

DCM: 

I had this manic spell in the first week after I left where I just had all these disconnected thoughts. So I started a big Twitter thread, and now I’m writing some of that stuff up. I don’t know if I’m going to do anything with it. It’s nice to just write, I’ve written like 30 pages of observations. 

I didn’t write anything while I was teaching for a couple of reasons. One, I felt really overwhelmed with the job of it -- I don’t know how many of your listeners are teachers and how many aren’t, but I feel like the lack of understanding that people have about the kind of job that teaching actually is from a minute-to-minute, hour-to-hour type of day-long standpoint is one of the fundamental things that keeps people from  truly understanding education problems in general. I don’t know if it’s true in Canada versus America but certainly in the U.S. -- anything that’s bad in Canada is probably just worse here.

So I started writing these observations because there were so many scattered thoughts, and I didn’t feel comfortable reflecting on it formally anywhere, because it was happening to me in the moment. I felt some protection of my students and not wanting to use them as examples of things, use pseudonyms or whatever. But now I’m kind of processing it and I really am reflecting a lot on it. 

A lot of what I learned makes me think of Annette Lareau, who wrote a great book called Unequal Childhoods, which tracks different social classes of folks raising kids in Philadelphia -- middle class, working class, and poor, more or less. I think she didn’t really hit that many super affluent families and she honestly didn’t seem to engage with that many really poor families. There were a couple. And her big sociological insight was around this idea of middle class versus working class parenting philosophies. 

The middle class parents, maybe unconsciously, maybe consciously, go through what she calls concerted cultivation, which is the idea that your children are investments and you cultivate them to become a certain type of person. A lot of this is based on the kinds of scheduling that you do and the activities you do and the way you teach kids to question authority, in ways that promote power. So middle class kids learn to ask the doctor questions, whereas working class kids don’t ask doctors questions because doctors are experts and you don’t ask experts questions--because that’s why you’re seeing them. Working class families tended toward something she called the “theory of natural growth,” something like that [ed note: her phrase is the “accomplishment of natural growth”], the idea being: let the kids be kids, set pretty firm distinctions between the adult world and the child world. So there are these authoritarian elements of the working class philosophy, but generally kids have a lot of space to themselves. They just kind of do what they need to do as kids. There are often many more siblings and other folks from the family that are of comparable age. 

And then she tried to deal with poor families. And really most of the book that I remember when she’s writing about children growing up in poverty is thinly-veiled horror at the daily existence of their lives. Having to take a bus for an hour to try to get food stamps so that you can go get some bread, but it’s not enough. She’s just detailing the horrors of American poverty. 

And I think I understood this all better in working in the environment I was working in for so long, and getting to know the students, and getting to know the distinctions between students. That’s another thing that I think happens, especially when people write about, quote, “urban education” -- by which they’re usually talking about high populations of students who are black or people of color -- you just homogenize the group benevolently. It’s like a benevolently homogenous group, so you’re all for the kids but you can’t see the distinctions between the kid who’s got the working class parents and the kid who’s really suffering from acute poverty and needs other kinds of assistance. So working so closely with so many with those kids helped me understand how poverty and working class families in our country are so intimately connected, and they’re part of what you could argue is the same socioeconomic bracket. What poverty is in America, to me, is just what happens when the bottom drops out of the working class and there’s nothing to protect anybody. 

So what I had to do in working with my students was to really develop an understanding of who they were as -- I sound like John Lennon in the ‘60s, but -- who are they as working class people? And that was a lot of my own learning as a teacher. I had things I could teach -- everybody needs to know how to Google and how to make movies and how to write. But what I had to learn was what this whole social arrangement was, and how students’ lives before they ever came into my classroom affected both their attitudes toward learning and where they were going with it. That was most of what I learned. 

So when I started reflecting it was like, “God, I don’t have a whole lot of cool pithy quotes about education because, like Annette Lareau, I’m just kind of struck by the horror of poverty, and I don’t have a lot to say about it!” How do you help this kid to learn...? “...But this kid is homeless! Oh my god, how could you let a child be homeless?” Those were the kinds of things I was dealing with. 

It’s the kind of work I want to do -- but it’s a lot to process. How to write about it is very complicated. 

SEC: 

Let’s talk a little bit about how you found out who your students were. That relationship aspect is really important and I think a lot teachers believe in that, but I also think they are uncomfortable about how to go about that or what they might uncover when they go about it. 

DCM: 

I always told my students “I keep it 85.” They keep it a hundred, I keep it 85. I’d say, I’m your teacher, so there’s 15 percent of things I’m not going to tell you anything about but of the 85% of things I will talk about, I will be 100% honest about 85% of things. And that was important for me to be able to share with my students within boundaries that I set for myself but know that every time I talked to them I was coming from a place of honesty for myself. Because it allowed them to be honest with me, and so our dialogue kind of worked when they had trust in me. 

The way they trusted me was to know that I was not putting on an act for them. I was who I was. And that meant some warts and all stuff -- we would talk a lot about how I’m a white male teacher and that’s a thing. We’d talk about school shootings and they’d say, “why do white guys do that stuff?” And we had to have conversations about that. I didn’t always have the answers, but we could have the dialogue because everything was kind of fair game in terms of what they could bring to me and how I would respond--as me. Even if that response was “I can’t say that, I can’t speak to that, I don’t know.” So that’s one of the ways I built trust. 

What’s funny is that I think a lot of the teachers at my school thought that because I had an interest in popular music, that was something that gave me some capital with my students. It appears that way from the outside because I would know all of the music that they listened to, including the music they made.  A lot of my kids made music, so I would always want to know who they were. But I don’t think that my fellow teachers understood that I didn’t actually like most of the music my students listened to and I wouldn’t have sought it out if they hadn’t been listening to it. But because they were listening to it, and because it was such a huge part of the classroom -- it was coming out of headphones and speakers and laptops all the time -- I wanted to know what this stuff was, because I was curious about it. 

Some of it I ended up really liking. But I think that’s irrelevant, whether I liked it or not. The point was I was curious about it and I took it really seriously, the music they liked. Understanding what it was and why they liked it was really important for me. That was an element of the trust, but it’s connected to the first thing I was talking about, which is the honesty piece. I honestly was interested. I think for teachers that honestly aren’t interested in their kids’ music, don’t force it. It’s not going to work. Whether it is better to take an interest in your students music or popular culture or whatever or not, I don’t know. I read something the other day, some educator Twitter who talked about how they pretended to be interested in sports every year. They were so glad the basketball season was over so they didn’t have to pretend to be interested anymore for their students. And I was like, that’s terrible! If you’re not interested in basketball, just say that! I mean, be honest. And if you feel you should be interested in basketball because your students are interested in it, then come to it from a place of honest exploration of it and -- you know, if you still feel like it doesn’t matter, just be real with people about that. 

It goes a longer way being honest with students about yourself and your shortcomings and everything, along with your strengths. That’s the other piece -- when I knew stuff, I told my kids, look, I’m sorry but I know a lot about this so I know you’re telling me this way you found this thing on the internet, and I’m telling you I know more about finding this thing on the internet than you do. I feel very comfortable saying that, this is the better way. But I limited the number of domains in which I would claim that kind of expertise. I tried to limit it to being on-topic in the classroom. I wouldn’t try to know everything about everything. When I don’t know stuff or don’t like stuff or don’t feel a certain way and feel comfortable enough to say it, I’m honest with them. In that way, you build a certain level of trust. 

The other thing is -- and I hate to say it -- I was also the permissive uncle in terms of classroom discipline at my school. I’m the guy who you go to and he gives you the ice cream and mom and dad get upset: “We don’t give him ice cream and now he’s gonna ask us for ice cream every day for two weeks!” I was also that. But I don’t think that that was as big of a factor as my sense of wanting to know my students, within limits, and wanting them to feel that they can know me as well as I want to know them, that it’s two-way. Whatever I want to get from them, they should be able to get from me. And that’s why I was the permissive uncle. I don’t actually care that this kid did this in my class, so why would I go through the work of writing it up and making it a thing, when I don’t actually care about this? Now, from an organizational standpoint that’s not a great approach to take. I get that. Things break down when there’s not consistency among classrooms. 

I guess it’s just to say, I wanted to know who these people in my room were, and that’s how I saw them. One thing I started writing when I got off of Twitter was that I think we have it backwards, especially for the age group I worked with, which was 16-21. Most of them were disconnected from formal school, although not entirely (it’s very complicated, especially in Philly). I feel like we tend to call kids “kids” in situations where we should think about them as adults, and we tend to call them adults in situations where we should be thinking about them as kids. To give you an example, we say that because this young woman has a baby even though she’s only 17, well, that makes her an adult. But because you are throwing pencils in my classroom, you’re a kid. Right? 

And I would kind of flip that in my mind -- I didn’t realize I was doing this until I was reflecting on it. I’d say, look, if you’re 16 and you have a baby, this is a kid that just had a baby. Let’s think about the impact of the baby on this young person’s life. But if you threw a pencil at me in my room -- why did this adult in my room just throw a pencil at me? I’m not saying you should think about things this way or it’s better this way, I just realized that that is the approach that I took philosophically to who my students were. I was working with adults and they were adults in all the times when I most wanted to call them kids, and they were kids in the times that I think, maybe not me, but society wants them to be adults. Incarceration, teen pregnancy, all these big scary social problems, you have to think about what kind of things a person is going through-- and what is a person going through when they’re going through it at sixteen? 

I think my students would judge me higher than a 7.4 as a teacher. But I also think that there were certain jobs I had as a teacher that I wasn’t as good at as other people are, and I’m pretty open about that. Organization of time. Having the plan set. Having the boundaries set. Making the space safe for learning. Making learning happen even when it’s hard. Those are the things that, because I was so interested in how people are feeling, “are we there today,” sometimes I could lower my standards, I could let the discipline slip and it affects other people’s learning. There are some teacherly things that I think I have a lot of work to do in my own professional development. 

One way I started thinking about it early on was, in my first year, I was reading the John Lennon biography. (It’s weird I’ve mentioned John Lennon twice so far. I do love the Beatles.) And they’re describing Hamburg, their first big tour in Germany, how they got there with their songs and they realized after the first night that they’d played all their songs and they didn’t know anything else. 

So they were in this crucible -- but not of creativity. They didn’t go to Hamburg and write their best stuff. They wrote their best stuff after Hamburg, after they’d gone through this crucible of performance. Performance, performance, performance. Play it again. When you run out of something, pick an old showtune that someone half-remembered. Steal songs from other people. Play the thing you just heard the other band play and see if you can do your own take on it. Not because it’s creative but because you have so much time to fill and you don’t have enough material. That’s how I felt after my first year teaching. There was so much time and I’d gone through everything, I felt I’d left it all on the floor in my first year and I had nothing left. I was already resorting to Googling lessons and trying to figure out what the hell I’m gonna do tomorrow. 

And so I realized in my disposition, I’m thinking about the difference between being a composer or a songwriter versus being a performer. And how those things are often connected but they’re not the same. So maybe I’m a Carole King--a really good songwriter but it’s often better if other people sing my stuff. Even though there’s a couple things only I can sing. Other stuff, other people should probably do. 

My relationship between curriculum and teaching is like that. I’m like a singer-songwriter more than I am a performer. That was a good realization to have, because it means there are some things I’m just never going to be the best at, and if I’m teaching full time again I need to work with those limitations. But that hadn’t hit home before. I could have abstractly said something like that before I was a full-time teacher, but you gotta feel it. You gotta understand what it feels like to run out of material and be empty and have nowhere to go. Every teacher goes through that. It usually happens in the first year if not the first month.

SEC:

That idea of teacher as performer--there’s a lot to unpack in that. When you’re a performer, what is the thing you’re trying to be? I don’t know that a lot of teachers think about who they’re trying to be. There’s a lot of thought about what they are trying to do. Not who they’re trying to be. Who you are informs a lot of what you do. 

DCM:

Yeah -- it’s an imperfect metaphor. I mean, I think teaching as performance is only one, maybe even small element of teaching. There are a lot of non-performative teachers who are just really good at the nuts and bolts of getting people in a room to do something. That is a good teacher, too. It was more about the difference between imagining lessons and putting them into reality. Maybe because I’m a music guy that’s where my head went with it. But it is interesting to wonder, if teachers were performers, are there rock stars versus second-chair violins? Different ways to perform? I dunno, I don’t want to go too far with the metaphor, it’s tenuous enough as it is. 

SEC:

I wanted to go back to one of the things you talked about in your observations. You were working at an alternative high school and a lot of the students who you were working with had so many gaps, or there were things in their background that had made them not love learning or not feel confident in learning. I’m curious about how in the high school situation, it’s hard to catch up with that background. I mean, maybe this is a Philly question. Where I am, we were the poverty capital of Canada for a long time, we may still be. There may be some overlap here. So what do you do in those cases? Because you talk about scaling up form elementary and how that might not work. 

DCM:

It’s hard, because the tendency is to scale up from young. So where did you lose it with math? I have to be careful about my language here, because I don’t want to play into deficit thinking. I also don’t want to do the thing where I say there’s no such thing as a deficit, because if you talk to a student about their math abilities, they’ll be like, “I have a deficit! Please help me!” 

If you find the point where the student disconnected -- to give an example I like to think about from my work, because it controls for a lot of other stuff -- take a student who is more or less engaged in the project of school and has not decided that school in and of itself is a bankrupt institution, but who also has real challenges with math. If there is some kind of specific learning disorder, it hasn’t been diagnosed, and it’s probably too late to be diagnosed, and it’s specific to math. What do you do?

I think the way that people tend to go about it, that I’ve seen, is to figure out what should have happened in fourth grade and figure out a way to do that fourth grade piece in high school. And I think that’s a problem, because I don’t think that it works very well, and it especially doesn’t work for kids who are not motivated. If it could work for anybody, it would be the student who is already motivated but happens to have this missing piece from fourth grade. 

In this student’s case, it was literally that they had a bad math teacher in fourth grade and they struggled and failed math and they were kept back. So the kid gets to high school about a year or two late because of this math issue that he’s had that’s been unsupported, and now he’s at our school. And the question is, how do we work with the student who has a math issue? For me, the answer is one on one instructional time. And I hate to say that, because what it means is that the classroom itself is not the space to deal with this. 

And that’s a very uncomfortable realization that I started to have as I was working through this with my students -- that I can differentiate, differentiate, differentiate, but when the gaps are so large...I don’t know. I feel like this student needs an hour of an expert’s time that is a reading specialist or a math specialist. Then there needs to be something else happening in the classroom environment. 

I think a lot of the issues are a little like that. From the reading perspective it’s even more complicated, because these practices of literacy are so intertwined with content knowledge, background knowledge, cultural context, how you were taught phonics from a very early age, basic decoding that may have happened in weird ways. 

What you can do at the high school level is you just set the bar really high for everybody, but you don’t assume that anybody actually knows how to read. You set the bar for everything else really high, and you don’t do the basal reader with the sixteen year old. If they’re interested in mass incarceration, you read about mass incarceration. But they may not be able to read what you’re using --so you use the exact same resource and you use every trick in the book to get them reading as much as they can -- chunking it out, working on smaller passages, connecting it together. I don’t know what all the best practices here are. I’m probably going to go back to school at some point to learn some of this stuff, in terms of literacy coaching. 

I do think that we tend to level kids in ways that are really counter-productive to their ability to see the point in education in a big picture sense. When you’re going into school and you’re sixteen years old and you’re reading the “adapted reading” that is really not very good--these adapted readings tend to be very poor quality. I had a person that I worked with who used a website that would replace words with easier words with an algorithm. I would read the results and think, this is garbage! You took a really cool article and you changed all the words in it! You can’t just do that! “I’m gonna take this song that I love but I’m going to change every other note in the melody and I’m sure it’ll be just as good.” That’s not gonna work. 

So I think you treat the group that you’re with as capable of taking whatever they can talk to you about. And then you think of literacy as a very specific set of practices, and that different pieces of it need to be emphasized in different ways. For my students, maybe everybody has to do some pretty high level vocabulary and then there are a lot of strategies for how do we chunk out this reading, which is really difficult for some kids, only a little difficult for other kids, and pretty much in the comfort zone for the others. You kind of have to sit down with the kids and go through it sentence by sentence, talk about it, re-read it--OK, so what is this saying? Why does it say it like this? And for the students who struggle with print literacy, it’s just going to take longer. I don’t know if there’s any way around that. 

I don’t know what it looks like in the long-term, because I also don’t know what the proper amount of time is. I also feel like students weirdly have too much time in school and not enough time with some fairly uncomfortable, hardcore learning. They spend a lot of time in this building but the times at which they’re really doing cognitively challenging work is not nearly as concentrated as it needs to be. 

I played piano as a kid, and practice is awful. I had to practice every day, and as soon as I stopped practicing every day I got worse. I could practice for one hour and then I was just done. If I could practice for an hour every day for a week, I got better, and when I didn’t do that I got worse. 

But I feel like the problem is that in school, you don’t have one hour, you have six hours, each of which is a one-hour block. But you can’t practice for six hours. You can’t do cognitively challenging work for six hours. So it seems like the better thing to do would be to really target the time when you are doing the most cognitively challenging stuff, do it for an hour, and then take a break and do cool stuff that’s not that. 

But I don’t know how you square that, because every teacher kind of feels like they’re in their own little island of content and they don’t realize that by the time you have the kids for fifth period they’ve been doing this all day. They’re not even doing cognitively challenging hour-long work. What ends up happening is that everybody kind of blands out. So you’re doing 20% cognitively challenging here, and 50% here, and maybe 0% there because you were asleep that period. It’s just not organized very well for what I think the challenge really is, which is that learning is really hard, the more you miss early on the harder it is to make up later, and the ways that you make it up later require more investment and more resources, not less. We want to do the opposite. We want to say, what’s the fastest way we can get this kid to learn all the crap they didn’t learn in the last twelve years? Well, I don’t think you can. Maybe the answer to that is that it’s not possible. I don’t know.

JEC:

We’re coming up on an hour now and I didn’t talk about any of the media stuff -- we’ll set up another call. I’ve enjoyed all of this time and want to put it all up. 

DCM

Sure! You basically got everything I’ve done except the media literacy work, which is fine because actually media literacy is a whole separate thing we could talk about. 

JEC:

That’s good. The work of Julie Coiro and Renee Hobbs, their work and your involvement in that, has been really interesting to me as I’ve been doing the same thing as you have in a lesser scale for the last few years. I really want to talk about that. So I’ll start wrapping it up and ask, what would be a resource you might recommend to someone?

DCM

The one book that I recommend to people is Inside Teaching by Mary Kennedy, whose big project as a scholar is understanding why reform tends not to work in schools. The reason it doesn’t work is that most reforms don’t fully grasp the day to day practices that teachers have to accomplish to do their job. And if you don't understand the very intimate details of on-the-ground work in schools, there is no reform that's going to change anything, because you don't actually understand what you’re doing. You have an idea, but you don’t know how to implement it at all.

Inside Teaching is a series of observations about how teachers manage in the classroom. They manage their time, they manage their resources, they manage their sanity, their tranquility. And that, to me, was one of the single biggest insights I ever had about teaching, and I reflected on it a ton when I was doing my full-time teaching, which is that teachers really value tranquility in the classroom, and soundness, this feeling of safety and quiet. And the reason is because they're teaching for so long that if you don’t have that, you burn out immediately. 

It’s one thing to be a cool engaging college professor and teach people three days a week and you have a little seminar room or whatever -- I’ve done that kind of teaching, it’s a blast. And I can be on all of the time! As you can probably tell already from this conversation I can be very on. But if you teach full time, you get there at like 8 a.m. and you leave at 5 p.m., you can’t be on for that whole time. You will physically blow a circuit. So her observation about what teachers do to manage that was so interesting. 

She has this really big picture critique of reform movements in education that are not ground-up from teachers. What I like about it is that she doesn’t have any clear ideas about what teachers should be doing, just that if you don’t have their buy-in, nothing that you do is actually going to matter very much. And the other insight there is that there are really good reasons why schools operate the way they do, even in the most dysfunctional school systems and spaces, and you should really put some effort into understanding exactly why things are the way they are. Because if you change one thing about it, you don’t realize you’ve also changed five other things that are connected to this one fix. There’s no way for ideas to fix organizational issues if you don’t really understand how the organization works. 

I return to that book a lot because it just it’s really a nice perspective on what teaching is, and why a lot of our best ideas about education don’t actually seem to work when you put it into effect. And the answer is it works for something, but not for teaching. This cool idea you had is a good idea for something, just not for this. It’s because there’s no way to sustain it. So that’s the book I would recommend. 

If you’re a science teacher, I just read a cool science book. I’m the type of person that thinks the last book they read is the best book ever written, and then promptly forgets it existed after I read the next book. 

The book I just read was Life Ascending by Nick Lane. It’s a science book and it goes through, from this microbiology perspective, everything from the origins of life through the development of most of the major processes of life, and it was a very cool, cosmic look at everything. I kept reading it thinking, “God, I wish I was helping teach a science class again, because I could talk about this stuff and kids would be interested in cells because they would know why it’s like this.”  I never knew! There’s so much stuff I actually never knew even though I, quote, “learned it in school.” I learn it again later and I’m like, “oh, I didn’t know this at all! I don’t know anything about this!” I could have told you what mitochondria were but now I actually understand mitochondria--it’s profound. I love that book because every chapter is like that for something science-related and I have a really hard time finding accessible math and science literature that makes accessible not only what happens, but why it matters and what the context is, so that was cool.

[lifepro-tips]

If you're thinking about turning your hobby into a profession, be aware that it will no longer feel like a hobby in short order, and may not have anywhere close to the same enjoyment.

I'm sure this doesn't apply to every skilled hobbyist out there, but speaking for myself, and a lot of artists I've seen try to build successful businesses from their art, I can say that there is a good chance that you will hate what you do as much, if not more than whatever you're doing now for employment. Especially if you have no experience in self-employment or know how to manage yourself with discipline and dedication.

I've been building gaming terrain for a living for close to a decade now, most of that time it's been my primary income source, and while I build everything with passion and perfection that I take pride in, it also suuuuuuuuuuucks. I often hate working on this stuff and only feel enjoyment when I'm done and don't have to look at it on the worktable any longer. Before it was a profession I had great enjoyment for the process, but now I just can't help but count the minutes that I'm wasting, the cost-to-time-pay ratios, and so on. The business aspect of it has taken over my life completely and contributed to a real degradation in my mental health, culminating in a major breakdown last year.

If you're going to turn your hobby into a business:

Start it as a side job, don't get ahead of yourself. Start slow and small.

Manage your time, learn to put only a certain amount of time into your work per day, per week.

Never start getting in the habit of taking on more work than you can handle in those hours. Be strict about this.

Avoid "Commission Hell" where you get backed up working on custom projects for people and at the same time have to do other work to keep the lights on.

Charge appropriately. Don't sell too cheap because you're desperate to be seen. Don't charge more than your quality is worth. See what comparable work is being sold for and judge yourself critically.

Cramming will destroy your soul. If you get in the habit of working past your scheduled hours into the wee hours of the morning to meet a deadline, you WILL burn out very quickly. If you're doing this, you don't have a good work ethic, you've made a mistake in your judgement of what you can accomplish.

Motivation is a lie, a passing mood, if you wait for motivation to get work done, it will never get done. You need discipline. If you have a hard time with this regularly, you need to learn how to push yourself before you go into business for yourself.

Enjoy your hobbies as hobbies and only think of changing this dynamic if you are absolutely sure and driven to take it to another level. Keep your working life and your resting/recreation time separate, or you may end up regretting it.

Source: reddit.com/r/LifeProTips