Poetic justice without regret

In the midsts of reports on suicide bombings in Moscow subway stations, the University of Wyoming announced on Tuesday that it decided to cancel a public lecture by William Ayers, a former 1970s radical antiwar protester and an alleged "terrorist," according to Palin.


The viewpoints on whether Ayers is a terrorist are split, but it is undisputed that he was a founding member of the Weather Underground, a radical group opposed to the Vietnam War.  As Ayers disclosed in his 2001 memoir “Fugitive Days”, he helped bomb official sites, including the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon. After charges against Ayers were dropped, he became a professor of education and currently holds the title of  Distinguished Professor at the University of Chicago.  


In his defense, Ayers claims "I'm not that radical" and writes in his blog:


"The Weather Underground carried out a series of illegal and symbolic attacks on property then, some 20 acts over its entire existence, and no one was killed or harmed; the goal was not to terrorize people, but to scream out the message that the US government and its military were committing acts of terrorism."  


However, the Weathermen's actions were not  without victims, including  the death of Ayer's girlfriend.  Moreover, according to the 2001  York Times article, Ayers found ''a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance'' and stated that the Weathermen "didn't do enough."  


University of Wyoming does not subscribe to Ayer's appreciation of poetic violence.  According to the news reports, University President Tom Buchanan supported the decision to cancel Ayers, stating: "The University of Wyoming is one of the few institutions remaining in today's environment that garner the confidence of the public. The visit by Professor Ayers would have adversely impacted that reputation." 

Despite this setback, it is reported that Ayers will continue traveling around the country to lecture as an authority on social justice and education. 

PHOTOGRAPH: JEFF SCIORTINO, courtesy of www.chicagomag.com

The fashion of the future

I enjoy looking through fashion magazines and save images of unique designs and unusual photographs.  Here are my selections for 2010 thus far:

Tatyana Usova by Elias Wessel// Futureclaw January 2010 

Sasha Pivovarova for Interview Magazine, February 2010 issue

Vogue Italy Supplement, March 2010 - The Great Illusion
Photographer: Paolo Roversi; Model: Lara Stone  

Spacetaker goes Armageddon

Spacetaker annual gala, Apocalypto, wrecked havoc and widespread destruction upon the Winter Street studios with its mad parade of leather costumes, armor, and explosive hair. 


Photographer Anthony Rathburn documented the festivities and adopted less is more fashion policy:

 Artist Barrett Brown and metal artist Geoff Mann posed in front of their wicked Mad Max creation:

The award for the best headpieces should go to Titanica DeBarge and Chavo Beans:  

Associate director of Wade Wilson Art Susanna Kise was all hair and smiles :) 

Spacetaker director Jenni Rebecca Stephenson tried to rein in rebellious Eric Osteen.

Dance Houston founder and director Andrea Cody and the master of costumes, Sam Cole, collaborated with the Apocalypto gala committee member Jim Peterson in ragged theatrics.

Gorgeous and fierce publicist and yoga guru Nicole Haagenson joined her buff boyfriend Arthur Langham in carrying accessories appropriate for the end of the world  aesthetes. 

Artistic director of 002 magazine Alex Rosa did not have to go further than his fashionable closet for this creative look that matched the holy wall art of Christina Seely.

(c) Pictures by Vika!

Five books everyone should read

"Me Talk Pretty One Day" is a collection of autobiographical essays written by David Sedaris, which is even funnier than his earlier undomesticated make belief "Naked". Unless you don't find frenzied bouts of laughter embarrassing, I would not recommend reading this book in public. I read it on the plane and laughed so hard that the stewardess asked me if I was alright. I waved her away, suffering from uncontrollable fits of hysteria. 

 Voltaire's "Candide" is  easily the best satirical novel ever published.  It is a story of a gentle man who, though thrown around and slapped by fate, continues to believe that  "all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds."  Wonderfully entertaining, this novel is suitable for anyone, especially the idealists among us.

Aravand Adiga's "The White Tiger" is a  remarkable novel.  Full of wit, suspense, and provocative originality - a tale of a poor Indian servant, turned entrepreneur.  Although a work of fiction, this book portrays poverty, hardship, injustice and fatality of the Indian caste system in an authentic and unprecedented way.

"The Power of Now" is a rare book with the power to enable readers to see the light and live the way they always wanted to live. Written in a simple and clear language, this book contains cure against  negativity and suffering and teaches how to stay in the NOW, where pain and problems do not exist. 

Gladwell's "Outliers" is a fascinating analysis of what makes the really successful people succeed. Gladwell takes examples of  Bill Gates, Joe Flom, the Beatles and other legends and dispels the crude myths of their success. He presents an alternative and realistic set of explanations for why some people excel  while others don’t. I could not put this book down. I rank it at the top of my library list. 

Ritchie's Holmes is elementary

I am a fan of Guy Ritchie and thoroughly enjoyed watching his new Sherlock Holmes film.  Ritchie is surprisingly talented in capturing the outlandish nature of reality in which his characters dwell. 

Of course, his portrayal of Sherlock Holmes is different from the iconic image painted by Conan Doyle, which we have all grown to associate with our beloved private detective.

The new Homes

Sherlock Holmes as we knew him is replaced with an action hero, whose lack of fear is infectious.  Richie’s Holmes is different from the slow, calculating Sherlock we are used to. He is faster, coarser, better looking and more likeable that the traditional Sherlock. Don’t get me wrong, I love reading Conan Doyle, but I prefer watching Robert Downey, Jr. 

Ritchie’s Holmes is detached from the world and is kind of like Batman, who comes to the rescue when summoned, but otherwise lives in his own world of chemical experiments and heavy drug use.

The new Watson

Ritchie’s Watson is not a naïve timid doctor, but somewhat of a super hero, who is quick at combat. I am not crazy about the choice of Jude Law as this Watson.  He makes a clumsy hybrid of a doctor/war hero and he is not rugged enough for this role. I think Daniel Craig would have made a better fit. Jude Law is a pretty boy. I prefer watching him in films like AI, Alfie and Closer.

Other characters

All other characters are unimportant, although Rachel McAdams makes nice splashes of color with her scarlet dress and gorgeous face. 

 The plot

This is an action film made by Ritchie, which means that the plot is  not important. Basically, you are just going to see Holmes and Watson, dressed in warm sepia and grey, running around dirty streets of London, bickering like lovers, and fighting an underground war of corruption.  Trust me, the film is filled with enough energy, imagery, and grungy lingo to make you forget that its plot is floating Up in the Air (sorry had to stick that in.)  

Setting

Not unlike the Batman films, Ritchie’s creation is set against the backdrops of soiled, grimy, post apocalyptically gritty city.  The streets of London do not seem Victorian, but rather look like random alleys behind old abandoned warehouses.  With the exception of a few colorful scenes involving Rachel McAdams, the film appears almost monotone brown and blue. 

Costumes

Costumes in this film are the only clue to the Victorian time period.  They are very well chosen and kept simple, elegant and functional. No fluff, no adornment, pure comfort and practicality in the event of combat, which takes place every couple of minutes.

Action

Boxing, explosions, and fist fights are only interrupted by a slow motion display of a fight that is about to take place.  The final fight, on the Tower Bridge was well choreographed. After running all over London, Holmes finally comes face to face with the main antagonist and reacts to the danger with calculated dignity. Filmed on a partially built Tower Bridge, 200 feet up in the air, this fight makes for a spectacular ending. (It was actuality filmed 30 feet up, in front of a green screen.)

Soundtrack

The soundtrack of this film is also rugged and extremely noisy, but not in a bad way. I enjoyed the random medley of fiddle, explosions and metal grinding sounds. The main score sounds a little off key, like a tango on acid, with a mix of polka. Its gypsy, pirate like sounds are fitting for the new Holmes, who is a bit weird himself. 

Conclusion

This film took me into another dimension, a parallel reality of sorts, where Holmes is deducing the mystery under the influence of unknown substances. It reminded me of the Blade Runner with its industrial apocalyptic looking scenes.  It is appealing in a sullen way an Irish pub brawl would appeal to an unsuspecting spectator.

Overall, the film is well worth watching for anyone who likes action films without a well woven plot and does not expect to hear phrases  like “It’s elementary, Watson.”

Up in the Air

After a short flight to Dallas, and a fairly light day at work, I am reclining on a made up bed at the Crown Plaza hotel in Downtown, watching George Clooney play Ryan Bingham in "Up in the Air".  What an appropriate movie to watch as a business traveler.

The film starts off lightly, the way most relationships do.  We are meeting Clooney's character for the first time.  He is easy going and explains with delight in his voice how he managed to boil traveling down to a science. 

(Bingham's packing demonsration reminds me that I forgot to pack my toothbrush. Fortunately, they have plenty of extra toothbrushes at the front desk. I know this being a freaquent traveler myself.) 

Bingham is a professional terminator, who fires people in a comforting manner.  He is also an inspirational speaker, who encorages others to follow his example of relinquishing their possessions, and commitments to lighten up their life load.  Bingham's inspiration speech is worth quoting:

"How much does your life weigh?  Imagine for a second that you're carrying a backpack. I want you to pack it with all the stuff that you have in your life...  Fill it with all the people in your life. Feel the straps cutting into your shoulders.  Feel the weight of that bag. Make no mistake, your relationships are the heaviest compenents in your life.  All those negotiations and arguments, secrets and compromises.  You don't need to carry all that weight.  Why don't you set the bag down?  Some animals were meant to carry each other to live symbiotically over a lifetime. Star crossed lovers, monogamous swans.  We are not those animals. The slower we move, the faster we die.  We are not swans.  We are sharks."

Powerful words.  Moving.  I could not help but agree with Bingham that some people are worth loosing - the arguing is just not worth it.  I would not don't mind stuffing these people in a bag and leaving it outside my door.

But let's stop and think about what he is saying: is it really better to be detached from everything, like Bingham?

Bingham is free.  He seems happy on his own.  He claims that he never wants go get married; never wants to have kids.  He sees no value in kids or marriage.  He does not care about love. He is completely removed from everyone, even his sister. Traveling perpetually, earning miles, staying in hotels, eating alone, hooking up with random attractive women.  Bingham dreads being grounded and coming home for the 70 days out of the year when he is not flying around like a bird. 

Make no mistaske, Bingham is not a careless emotionless guy.  He is a compasionate, friendly, thoughtful man.  He just does not want to feel the weight of life on his shoulders and chooses to stay on the move.  He calls this the mature life choice and explains it to 24 year old Emily, who cannot accept it.

It is funny to watch a young girl take Bigham apart. Pure in her idealistic exectations of life, she calls him out when he explains that he is not interested in a serious realtionship with a woman he is seeing:

"Don't you think it's worth giving her a chance... at something real?"

Bingham responds with "your definition of something real will evolve as you get older"

Emily does not give up: "Can yo ustop condescending? ...Or is that one of the principles of your bullshit phylosophy?... The isolation, the traveling, is that supposed to be charming?"

"No," Bingham explains: "It is simply a life choice."

"A life choice? It's a cucoon of slef banishment! ... You lead a cycle of life that makes it impossible for you to have any kind of huma connection. And now this woman comes along and somehow runs through the gauntlet of your ridiculous life choice and comes out on the other end smiling, just so that you can call her casual!? I need to grow up? You are a 12 year old!"

With time, Bingham realizes that "life is better with company"... it is lonely out there ... "everybody needs a co pilot". Unfortunately for him, the woman he falls for turns out to be  married with children. Poor Bingham falls victim to reality - he was an escape, a break from one's normal life, a casual relationship, a "parenthesis".  At this point, when the irony of life hurts the most, he earns 10 million miles, which are meaningless to him now.

On a lighter note, the film has a few comedic breaks.  I really enjoyed the difference in femaile perception and expectations between the ages of 24 and past 34.

Its refreshing to hear a young girl go thrhough her long list of requirements and compare it to a very short list of requirements of an older woman. The only thing on which they both agree is that a man must have a nice smile.

Up in the air is about choices we make in life: to float in the air or to come down and plant our feet firmly into the ground.    Family is hard work.  Those, who choose to get married and have children, do so because they don't want to spend their entire life floating around.

Clooney is a charismatic genious.  His Oscar nomination for this role is well deserved.  He is equally charming when he is firing people or being played.  I liked this film.  It made me happy to be alive.

Favorite places

Today was an absolutely gorgeous day, which I spent in the company of good friends. I went to brunch at one of my favorite Houston restaurants, Backstreet Cafe:

followed by a walk around lower Montrose area. It is a neighborhood like no other, where visitors come seeking refuge from the hustle and bustle of the big city, to meditate within the dark walls of the Rothko Chapel, to contemplate on the significance of the Broken Obelisk:

to marvel at the architectural beauty of the Chapel of St. Basil:

to hang out at theChampanile Public Library:

To eat at the Black Labrador:

Google Voice review

Google Voice is a great free service provided by Google that enables voice transcription of voicemail.

It transcripts incoming voice messages into text messages and also sends an email of same to user's gmail account.

To most busy people on the go, this means that they no longer have to listen to their voice messages and can treat them as text messages and/or email.  They  can also search, sort, save, forward, copy and paste all of their voice messages.

The only issue I've experienced with Google voice-to-text transcription comes from variety of human accents, pronunciation and intonation. Sometimes things get lost in translation, causing me to sratch my head until I look up the phone number of the caller who left the voice mail.

Here is one such example that kept me guessing for a few seconds.

"Hi, jealousies. I guess I just wanted you. If you do not need packing. See if he'll stay off tomorrow thing. So please give me a call. Thank you. Bye bye."

Turns out, a foreigner left this message, trying to reschedule an appointment.

Most of the time, the errors in trascription are funny and not troublesome. Despite a few rough edges, Google Voice is a valuable time saving service. I highly recommend Google Voice to any busy professional who does not have it.

For more information about this service, visit: http://www.google.com/googlevoice/about.html

If you need an invite, email me. I have a few left.

Relating to Smiles

I watched a wonderful film by Ingmar Bergman, called "Smiles of a Summer Night". 

It's a humorous retrospection of human emotions, mainly revolving around love. It reminded me of Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" in much the same way "Wild Strawberries" reminded me of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol".

One scene in Smiles touched me.  During a visit of the actress with her mother, the old woman said:  "One can never protect a single human being from any kind of suffering. That is what makes one so extremely weary." 


She then added: “I am tired of people, but it does not stop me from loving them”. 

Defamation

Most people value their reputation because it is easily tarnished.  Defamation laws are designed to protect it.   Why is it then that defamation suits are so hard to bring?

These are the topics I hear people talking about. To clear up  misconceptions about these issues, I decided to explain what defamation really means:


Definition

Defamation is an act of communication, which causes someone to suffer a damaged reputation. Defamation can be written (libel) or spoken (slander).

Elements

In order to bring an action for defamation in court, there must be: 

(1) A communication to one other than the person defamed; 

(2) A false statement of fact concerning the person defamed; and 

(3) Harm to one's reputation.

Other elements of defamation sometimes include intent. However, defamatory statement does not have to be made intentionally.  A careless (negligent) act of making a false statement that is harmful to another sometimes may be enough.  The key is there must be damage to reputation, respect, goodwill or confidence in which the victim is held in the eyes of others.

Defenses

There are a number of defenses to defamation. The most important and absolute defense to an action for defamation is the "truth”. 

Another defense recognized against defamation is "opinion".  For example, if the person making a negative statement is expressing an opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation. Opinions on matters of public concern that do not contain or imply a provable factual assertion are protected by the First Amendment freedom of speech. New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254, 264 (1964). 

Costs of lawsuit

Filing an action for defamation is not always a good idea. While someone whose name is disparaged by lies has every right to feel angry, the act of filing a lawsuit for defamation is likely to create a greater audience for the false statement. For a public person, a loss in a defamation lawsuit is likely to be public and will only make people conclude that the allegations were true. 

Furthermore, there are always monetary and emotional costs associated with filing any lawsuit. In connection with a defamation suit, the emotional cost involved may be even higher because this suit is associated with the loss of social standing. There may also be hidden costs, such as business interruption.  

In practice

A suit for defamation may last years and cost thousands of dollars in legal fees. These costs deter most people from filing suits for defamation.  In practice, defamation law is a luxury of the rich, but rarely helps ordinary people whose reputation is attacked.

That said, ordinary people can easily fall victims to defamation suits if they get into the habit of making disparaging opinions about the rich and powerful.

How to avoid suits for defamation

In order to avoid suits for defamation, be sure that you stay away from stating opinions and stick with facts.  For instance, instead of saying that a product is defective, state that it failed to perform according to specifications. Instead of saying that someone is corrupt, state facts behind this opinion and let your audience make their own conclusions.  If you absolutely must use opinions, back them up with facts and references.

Conclusion

Although the law of defamation is supposed to protect people, in practice, it may hinder their freedom of speech. Thus, saying less may be more.