NO Canada!!

I'm disappointed with my fellow Canadians today: Conservative Party member Stephen Harper is the new Prime Minister elect. I'm saddened to see that Canadians would elect Bush's bedfellow. And given that Harper was once a Reformer party member, a party that makes Pat Robertson look liberal and left-wing (ok. that's a slight exaggeration), I'm feeling rather disgusted with the outcome of the election. He has been a vocal opponent of gay marriage, and acted as the driving force behind a series of anti-gay marriage advertisements in January 2005. And considering his roots in the Canadian Alliance/Reform Party, we can expect increasingly conservative, pro-war, pro-GWBush, behaviors from Canada's capital. Sigh. So much for the idea that I can always escape the Bush administration by returning to more-liberal Canada.

Jackson's King Kong: a colossal disappointment

Because I'm both too annoyed by the film to bother and because Aviva has already written a very intelligent send-up of Jackson's latest film, I'm not going to bother composing my own lengthy invective against the remake. Let's just say that two hours into the film--just as Jack Black and his peons were being tramped upon by Brontosauruses--I exclaimed to Aviva: "My God! They haven't even returned to New York yet. Shoot me now." When we returned home, we spent about an hour raving about Jack Black's horrendous acting, the overdone and tiresome special effects, particularly the tedious dinosaur chase scenes, and, above all, the offensive representation of the "primitives" of Skull Island. So, why have only a handful of critics called Jackson on this? Nothing like the kerfufle caused by a certain Star Wars character a few years ago. I realize that the original film makes a fantasy out of the colonizing instinct; essentially, it glorifies the white man's desire to bring back the black "beast" in chains and make him do his bidding; it encourages a hysterical response to the beast's desire for a beautiful, blonde, white woman; it insists that the beast brought about his own downfall, that "it was beauty killed the beast." And yet, I would agree with The Washington Post's Stephen Hunter who observed that Jackson's remake only exacerbates the racist limitations in the original: "[The story of King Kong] remains a parable of exploitation, cultural self-importance, the arrogance of the West, all issues that were obvious in the original but unexamined; they remain unexamined here, if more vivid." For me, the original also exposes the problems of this colonial quest, even if the filmmakers of 1933 failed to recognize the double-edged message of their seemingly innocent fantasy narrative. I would argue that Jackson's depiction of the "natives" robs the narrative of any subversive potential. Why show the inhabitants of Skull Island as raving lunatics incapable of communicating even among themselves, showing only the "whites of their eyes" as they convulse and twist in epileptic fever-attacks. He takes the Melanesians, who he cast to play the natives, and makes them up to look and act like zombies, more monstrous and less capable of human feeling than the great ape. The only redeeming qualities of the film? Naomi Watts and the titular ape. Anyway, check out Aviva's review because, even though we often have very different reactions to films, we are on the exact same page where the new King Kong is concerned.

Where do you fit in the political spectrum?

I like that this test resists strict binaries. Here are my results:

You are a Social Liberal (80% permissive) and an... Economic Liberal (5% permissive) You are best described as a: Socialist Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Governor, Impaler, Vampyre, Hecate Witch, and Dark Priest???

Ok. I like vampires more than most people. And I tend to be more skeptical of orthodox religions than many people. Even so, I'm not sure I could ever bring myself to vote for someone with a resume like this guy's: Jonathon "The Impaler" Sharkey. He's running for governor of Minnesota in 2006. And his ambition doesn't stop there. He's running for the presidency in 2009. And I thought voting for the Terminator was ridiculous and, might I add, stupid?

What kind of assassin are you?

Though I'm not sure I want to be an assassin of any kind, if I had to be one, Vinvent would be good. Actually, I'd rather be Jean Reno in The Professional but I don't know if that's even an option. And I suspect I gave responses that were too cut-throat and unemotional to be the type of assassin who risks it all for the love of a sweet little girl and a potted plant.

Vincent You scored 58% Ruthless

You are Vincent from Collateral. You are a no-nonsense, get the job done, stone cold hardass, and you have no problem shooting somebody in the face at point blank range. You are very dedicated at completing your objective, and show no mercy or compassion to get what you want. If that weren't enough, you have a pretty suave way of slipping your way in and out of cities unnoticed, and can blend in with the common man. You keep your comments short and to the point, but have a unique way of looking at death: it pays the big bucks. Why should you get to know a guy before you kill him? You shouldn't, and that's what makes you bad to the bone.

My test tracked 1 variable How you compared to other people your age and gender: You scored higher than 53% on Ruthless

Link: The Secret Agent/Assassin Test written by UAMaverick

The Intrepid Travelers Return

Aviva and I returned from Charlottesville last night after a rather seamless eight-hour drive. The car was packed to the rafters and we even had to resort to strapping a container to the roof rack, which we affectionately called "The Snail." Fred and Aviva worked some magic on the thing, securing it with rope, tape, bungee cords, and paper clips. Though it looked a little piecemeal and, I must admit, I had visions of the thing flying open somewhere along the highway, spreading our belonging into the ditch or onto the windshield of a car behind us, it held fast. Shame on me for doubting their abilities! In fact, it took considerable effort to detach the thing the next morning. I won't take any of the credit for detaching it either; Aviva started and finished that process while I spent an hour talking to my mother on the telephone.

Here we are driving away from the house yesterday morning.

Obviously, Santa was way too good to us, which explains why the standard storage space in a mid-sized SUV wasn't sufficient to haul everything back to Rochester. Mind you, Fargo was occupying the entire back cargo space and Jezebel, Aviva's parakeet, was taking up quite a bit of room in the back seat. Car packed full of presents aside, the entire break was wonderful. Fred and Rita were as welcoming as ever, setting up a cozy little corner of the house for the three of us to occupy throughout our stay. As you can see from the picture, Fargo only needed the occasional reprimand to keep him in line.

Sit ubu, sit. Good dog.

On Christmas day, we started opening presents around noon and the process continued until dinner time. Given that there were only four of us, we all ended up with more than our fair share of goodies!

A lovely vase that will hold one or two lovely flowers.

The tree had already been decked by the time we arrived, although they saved the final decorating task for Aviva--the hanging of the Christmas pickle.

Even the Baga is dressed for the holidays.

Once again, Rita turned gift wrapping into an artform, constructing castles and over-sided books out of intricate bows, paper, and gift boxes. At times, we had to stop and admire the packages for several minutes before we could bring ourselves to rip them open!

Within the pages of this intriguing fairytale were two pairs of wrap-around pants, hand-made by Rita!

A few days after Christmas, we headed to Charleston, South Carolina for Renaissance Weekend, which turned out to be a very hectic but intellectually engaging event. I participated in three panels, one on "channel Markers" that considered television and American society, one "Critic's Corner" that considered how one's critical knowledge changes one's position as a spectator, and one that asked each panelist to speak about the best and worst of this year's films. Aviva participated in a panel about the future of books and movies in light of evolving technology and an "Art Attack" panel where artists, curators, board members, and academics discussed important issues in today's art world. We also attended a variety of interesting panels, "academies," and lectures. The weekend's highlights included Stephen Colbert interviewing Howard Dean and Linda Lader interviewing the Clintons. After getting up at the crack of dawn every day, shuffling quickly between four different hotels to attend various panels, making small talk and explained our lives to countless strangers over lunch and dinner, and doing just a bit of wandering in the streets of Charleston, it was good to get back to the tranquility of Charlottesville. Before returning to Rochester, Aviva decided to tackle something that's been on her to-do list for a few months--wisdom teeth extraction. The poor thing is still recovering, though the pain seems to be subsiding and she's now eating semi-solid food.

With classes starting on January 18th, it's now time to put the nose to the grindstone. I'll spend the remainder of the break making small changes to my syllabus and working on my next dissertation chapter.