Three snouts up for The Shaggy Dog (colorized version) made in 1959. I watched this movie the other day with my kids and I was surprised how well it held up. I kind of expected that it would be so silly and predictable that I would have to answer my email through the whole thing. Not that I was riveted, but it held my attention throughout.
Actually it made me realize (for the umpteenth time) how much worse most kid movies are today. Most of them rely on action, gadgets, visual tricks, and constantly changing images to hold a kid's attention. This relies on the old-fashioned idea of character development and story to hook you.
Fred MacMurray is at his finest as the grouchy (mailman Wilson Daniels) dad who hates dogs with such a passion that he reaches for his shotgun when one is nearby. The whole rest of the cast is wonderful. His sons are cast beautifully, especially Tommy Kirk as Wilby Daniels, the son who accidentally turns into a dog.
The movie takes pains to create a credible thread for its ridiculous premise. It's a joy to watch these kids in their 1950s vehicles and tuxedos driving around town (with Annette Funicello no less)--so cute!
This movie is well made, well-acted and directed. It's a predictable plot, but with some fun twists and a lot of genuinely funny physical comedy. I like that there's a cold war twist and cop and robber action but the only gun that ever comes out is Fred MacMurray's shotgun. There are no gadgets. There is no loud music. This is sweet fare for the whole family.
Sara S. Nichols Follow me on Twitter at @snicholsblog Sara S. Nichols is a former progressive lawyer/lobbyist turned new thought minister/spiritual scientist-- she is moved to share her thoughts on politics spirit movies, plays & books My best rating is (:)(:)(:)(:)(:) out of a total of 5 Snouts Up -- I almost never give 5 Snouts--that's just for the best ever.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Dead Heat in Iowa?
I don't know how much I have to add to the media buzz on polling out of Iowa this week, but I am interested in this. It seems that there is no front-runner in either party 6 weeks out in the Iowa caucuses, with Obama holding a (probably statistically insignificant) lead over Clinton followed closely by Edwards.
In the Republican caucus race, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has pulled into a statistical dead heat with Mitt Romney (read New York Times blog on that for more).
The main thing I wish to point out is something I try never to say (but other columnists revel in): I told you so. I predicted that things were going to tighten in both races considerably, and they have. I'm also not surprised to see Huckabee moving up. For a long time it has seemed likely that a former Arkansas governor with strong conservative credentials would have massive appeal with Republican voters.
However it's certainly too early to make any predictions about outcome. John Kerry was polling at 4% this far out in the last Iowa caucus with Howard Dean in a massive lead. This ABC News clip (click on the headline) indicates that most Iowans (probably in an ABC News poll) find Hillary Clinton the "most electable" which mystifies and terrifies me in turn. They also point out that Edwards is still very much in it.
In the Republican caucus race, former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee has pulled into a statistical dead heat with Mitt Romney (read New York Times blog on that for more).
The main thing I wish to point out is something I try never to say (but other columnists revel in): I told you so. I predicted that things were going to tighten in both races considerably, and they have. I'm also not surprised to see Huckabee moving up. For a long time it has seemed likely that a former Arkansas governor with strong conservative credentials would have massive appeal with Republican voters.
However it's certainly too early to make any predictions about outcome. John Kerry was polling at 4% this far out in the last Iowa caucus with Howard Dean in a massive lead. This ABC News clip (click on the headline) indicates that most Iowans (probably in an ABC News poll) find Hillary Clinton the "most electable" which mystifies and terrifies me in turn. They also point out that Edwards is still very much in it.
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
I Heart Hillary
I feel defensive after receiving comments on yesterday's blog Prediction: Hillary Clinton will not Win the California Presidential Primary. I wish to clarify: I love Hillary Clinton.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is a smart, successful, funny woman. She is a good mother and a steadfast wife (to say the least!). She is powerful and interesting. As compelling as these reasons are, they do not explain my love for Hillary Clinton.
I love Hillary because she is a fellow human being. She lives and breathes and walks this planet with me. She and I are separated only by illusion. I pray for her highest good daily, especially because she has such a strong effect on the world.
I love Hillary the same way I love George Bush.
Hillary Rodham Clinton is a smart, successful, funny woman. She is a good mother and a steadfast wife (to say the least!). She is powerful and interesting. As compelling as these reasons are, they do not explain my love for Hillary Clinton.
I love Hillary because she is a fellow human being. She lives and breathes and walks this planet with me. She and I are separated only by illusion. I pray for her highest good daily, especially because she has such a strong effect on the world.
I love Hillary the same way I love George Bush.
Monday, November 19, 2007
Prediction: Hillary Clinton will not Win the California Presidential Primary
I'll let you in on an important political secret: my mother is the unit California Democrat. As she votes, so vote the Democrats of California. As long as I have been tracking it, this has been proven to be true.* And my mother doesn't like (putting it mildly) Hillary Clinton.
Here are the facts: she is a retired schoolteacher, born and raised in the deep south east, she has lived in California 55 years (40 of them in San Diego). Although widowed by a radical leftist (yes, my father) who registered Peace and Freedom Party and often voted for losing third party candidates against mainstream Democrats, my mother is a yellow dog Democrat. There isn't an ounce of swing voter in her. She is relatively socially liberal, tends to be comfortable with and support the mainstream Democratic choices.
She supported Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis (she loves Greeks), Walter Mondale, Al Gore and John Kerry in their respective primaries (and she supported them long before the historically late California primaries rolled around). She still holds bitterness and resentment against some of her children for "throwing the election to that man (W)" by supporting Ralph Nader in 2000. "That man" was also what she called Ronald Reagan.
Closer to home, she supported Gray Davis until the San Diegans started to experience blackouts and electricity rate hikes. Then she started to hate him and voted for Cruz Bustamante in the recall--I think she voted against the recall because she was worried about Schwarzenegger winning, but I'm not sure, I should check.
She always votes in every single election. She calls my husband and goes over any questions she has on her ballot with him, taking his advice if she doesn't know more about it herself from locals. She is also very interested in how the local teachers' union tells her to vote. If the teachers' union's opinion differs from ours, she'll usually go with the union.
So last night, I gingerly broached the subject of who she was favoring in the California Presidential primary. I had been avoiding the subject for months afraid that it would be Hillary, given her affection for her husband.
Her response? "I'll tell you who I don't favor, Hillary Clinton. How anybody could vote for that woman is beyond me. I don't think she can win. The Republicans are all united against her. And I don't want her to be President. I don't trust her. I'm afraid I'm going to have to support that Obama, Barat (sic) whatever is name is, whom I've never even heard speak."
Music to my ears. A white woman brought up in the cradle of the confederacy, with all that that implies, would rather support a black man whose name she doesn't even remember over Hillary Clinton.
There's hope!
*Exception, my mother did not vote for stunning upset Assembly primary winner, Lori Saldana in 2004. Perhaps she is only the prognosticator of statewide outcomes, not local races.
Here are the facts: she is a retired schoolteacher, born and raised in the deep south east, she has lived in California 55 years (40 of them in San Diego). Although widowed by a radical leftist (yes, my father) who registered Peace and Freedom Party and often voted for losing third party candidates against mainstream Democrats, my mother is a yellow dog Democrat. There isn't an ounce of swing voter in her. She is relatively socially liberal, tends to be comfortable with and support the mainstream Democratic choices.
She supported Bill Clinton, Michael Dukakis (she loves Greeks), Walter Mondale, Al Gore and John Kerry in their respective primaries (and she supported them long before the historically late California primaries rolled around). She still holds bitterness and resentment against some of her children for "throwing the election to that man (W)" by supporting Ralph Nader in 2000. "That man" was also what she called Ronald Reagan.
Closer to home, she supported Gray Davis until the San Diegans started to experience blackouts and electricity rate hikes. Then she started to hate him and voted for Cruz Bustamante in the recall--I think she voted against the recall because she was worried about Schwarzenegger winning, but I'm not sure, I should check.
She always votes in every single election. She calls my husband and goes over any questions she has on her ballot with him, taking his advice if she doesn't know more about it herself from locals. She is also very interested in how the local teachers' union tells her to vote. If the teachers' union's opinion differs from ours, she'll usually go with the union.
So last night, I gingerly broached the subject of who she was favoring in the California Presidential primary. I had been avoiding the subject for months afraid that it would be Hillary, given her affection for her husband.
Her response? "I'll tell you who I don't favor, Hillary Clinton. How anybody could vote for that woman is beyond me. I don't think she can win. The Republicans are all united against her. And I don't want her to be President. I don't trust her. I'm afraid I'm going to have to support that Obama, Barat (sic) whatever is name is, whom I've never even heard speak."
Music to my ears. A white woman brought up in the cradle of the confederacy, with all that that implies, would rather support a black man whose name she doesn't even remember over Hillary Clinton.
There's hope!
*Exception, my mother did not vote for stunning upset Assembly primary winner, Lori Saldana in 2004. Perhaps she is only the prognosticator of statewide outcomes, not local races.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Revising the Snout-based rating system
It has come to my attention that my snout-based rating system, as wonderful as it is, needs revision. Many people have emailed and commented about this (btw, have you seen that I have now made it easy to comment? You don't have to register or anything, you can do it anonymously, so please do comment--many of you email me wonderful comments but only I read them).
The problem with the current system is that it jumps from 3 snouts being "flawed but worth seeing" to two snouts "just atrocious" and then there's nowhere to go but down. The reason there are 5 snouts instead of 4 is simply to differentiate between good movies and best movies of all time.
So here is the revised system:
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) One of the best movies ever made (American Beauty)
(:)(:)(:)(:) Wonderful (The Big Easy)
(:)(:)(:) Worth seeing (Hair)
(:)(:) Flawed (Syriana
(:) Irredeemably bad (Terror of Tiny Town--all midget western)
I don't have time to revise my page template to reflect it right now, but that's coming. Thanks for your interest.
The problem with the current system is that it jumps from 3 snouts being "flawed but worth seeing" to two snouts "just atrocious" and then there's nowhere to go but down. The reason there are 5 snouts instead of 4 is simply to differentiate between good movies and best movies of all time.
So here is the revised system:
(:)(:)(:)(:)(:) One of the best movies ever made (American Beauty)
(:)(:)(:)(:) Wonderful (The Big Easy)
(:)(:)(:) Worth seeing (Hair)
(:)(:) Flawed (Syriana
(:) Irredeemably bad (Terror of Tiny Town--all midget western)
I don't have time to revise my page template to reflect it right now, but that's coming. Thanks for your interest.
Thursday, November 15, 2007
(;)(:)(:)(:)(:) for Deepak Chopra, M.D.
Five snouts up for Deepak Chopra. This is the first time I've ever used my snout-based rating system to rate a person, rather than one of their books, movies or plays. But I make an exception for Chopra. I love Chopra. I devour Chopra books and speeches (although I've never seen him in person). If I had TiVo I would TiVo him. If they made Chopra t-shirts and bracelets, I would buy them and wear them.
And I'm not the least physically attracted to him! This may be my first all out obsession with a public figure that wasn't based at least in part on physical attraction. If I had been using my snout-based rating system as a teenager, I'm ashamed to say that I would have issued 5 snouts to such luminaries as Bobby Sherman, John Travolta, and (shudder) Sly Stallone (I haven't given up the habit of celebrity crushes, but I no longer have posters of them in my room--now they would be of George Clooney and, well, Bill Clinton, but not Hillary).
No, I love Chopra because he is able to explain in scientific terms such concepts as thoughts, dreams, intentions, coincidences, past, present and future, and, ultimately, God.
In a speech the kids and I listen to called "The Cosmic Mind and the Submanifest Order of Being" he really walks us through the quantum physics of consciousness. It's all very well and good for people to stand up in church and say we are all one. To me, it's another thing entirely to be shown that at the subatomic (quantum) level, the boundaries between our bodies absolutely do not exist.
We are light and energy and intention. We are not even specific masses of light, energy and intention. There is nothing to indicate where one person (or for that matter, one chair, table, mountain or river) starts or ends--we are all literally one.
By the way, my kids have trouble interpreting his South Asian accent. They insist that he is northern European, rather than Indian. They call him "that Swedish guy."
And I'm not the least physically attracted to him! This may be my first all out obsession with a public figure that wasn't based at least in part on physical attraction. If I had been using my snout-based rating system as a teenager, I'm ashamed to say that I would have issued 5 snouts to such luminaries as Bobby Sherman, John Travolta, and (shudder) Sly Stallone (I haven't given up the habit of celebrity crushes, but I no longer have posters of them in my room--now they would be of George Clooney and, well, Bill Clinton, but not Hillary).
No, I love Chopra because he is able to explain in scientific terms such concepts as thoughts, dreams, intentions, coincidences, past, present and future, and, ultimately, God.
In a speech the kids and I listen to called "The Cosmic Mind and the Submanifest Order of Being" he really walks us through the quantum physics of consciousness. It's all very well and good for people to stand up in church and say we are all one. To me, it's another thing entirely to be shown that at the subatomic (quantum) level, the boundaries between our bodies absolutely do not exist.
We are light and energy and intention. We are not even specific masses of light, energy and intention. There is nothing to indicate where one person (or for that matter, one chair, table, mountain or river) starts or ends--we are all literally one.
By the way, my kids have trouble interpreting his South Asian accent. They insist that he is northern European, rather than Indian. They call him "that Swedish guy."
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
PELOSI CALLS FOR HANDWRITTEN IMPEACHMENT LETTERS?
This may be an internet hoax, but what do we have to lose--this was forwarded to me from Cindy Asner, Ed Asner's wife, a Hollywood activist:
Pelosi purportedly asks for 10,000 handwritten impeachment letters. Will you send one before Friday?
Speaker Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
Pelosi purportedly asks for 10,000 handwritten impeachment letters. Will you send one before Friday?
Speaker Nancy Pelosi
235 Cannon HOB
Washington, DC 20515
IT'S WORTH A SHOT!
House Resolution 333 for the impeachment of Vice President Dick Cheney
is off the House floor, and has instead been sent to the Judiciary
Committee for "further study." This maneuver, organized by Pelosi and
the Democratic leadership, is consistent with their mantra that
impeachment is "off the table." But, we are told Nancy Pelosi is
reported to have replied to the question of impeachment that if she
received 10,000 hand written letters she would proceed with it. What
are we waiting for?
Bay Spill, Crises and Public Policy
Listening to an extensive series of interviews yesterday on the Forum show on KQED (Northern California public radio) about the big oil spill in San Francisco bay, I was struck by how strongly crises affect public policy in California, and elsewhere. Crises seem to have become a necessary ingredient for social change to occur.
From this vantage point, using only anecdote and my limited memory, it seems that clear, obvious, well-documented systemic problems are not sufficient to capture the attention of the public or their legislators. Well, I overstate the case. Problems such as millions of uninsured people, indisputable global warming, and widely weakened bridges do reach the attention of the public and their legislators, but for the most part, those systemic problems are not sufficient to result in policy changes.
Instead, we need Hurricane Katrina, dramatic bridge collapses, and killing sprees in highschools to force legislators to pass legislation and appropriate money to address such matters.
The container ship spilling oil into the bay recalls the dramatic massive oil spill of the Exxon Valdez many years back--that crisis resulted in legislation, which according to experts on the Forum show, produced a 90% decrease in the number of oil spills since then.
Crises are clearly the only way we get ethics or campaign finance reform too.
Perhaps this is the problem with health care reform--despite the many horror stories suffered by people without insurance or with inadequate health care access, it is all still at the level of individuals, documented systemically.
Maybe what we need is for a container ship to crash into the bay bridge and spill into the bay hundreds of uninsured middle class Americans on their way to Europe for medical procedures, then we could leverage the passage of universal health care.
From this vantage point, using only anecdote and my limited memory, it seems that clear, obvious, well-documented systemic problems are not sufficient to capture the attention of the public or their legislators. Well, I overstate the case. Problems such as millions of uninsured people, indisputable global warming, and widely weakened bridges do reach the attention of the public and their legislators, but for the most part, those systemic problems are not sufficient to result in policy changes.
Instead, we need Hurricane Katrina, dramatic bridge collapses, and killing sprees in highschools to force legislators to pass legislation and appropriate money to address such matters.
The container ship spilling oil into the bay recalls the dramatic massive oil spill of the Exxon Valdez many years back--that crisis resulted in legislation, which according to experts on the Forum show, produced a 90% decrease in the number of oil spills since then.
Crises are clearly the only way we get ethics or campaign finance reform too.
Perhaps this is the problem with health care reform--despite the many horror stories suffered by people without insurance or with inadequate health care access, it is all still at the level of individuals, documented systemically.
Maybe what we need is for a container ship to crash into the bay bridge and spill into the bay hundreds of uninsured middle class Americans on their way to Europe for medical procedures, then we could leverage the passage of universal health care.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
(:)(:)(: for Love in the Time of the Cholera
Two and a half snouts up for Love in the Time of the Cholera soon to be playing in a theater near you. Beautifully filmed and costumed, with an able performance by Javier Bordem in the lead role, nevertheless the film cannot transcend a stagnant screenplay and some atrocious performances (not mention casting choices).
I was looking forward to the first adaptation for the screen that I have seen of a Gabriel Garcia Marquez book. This was a beautiful book, which I urge you to read. Fortunately or not, I remember little of it. I was able to simply experience this as a film, unfettered by the book.
Nonetheless, it doesn't work. The single worst problem being Italian actress Giovanna Mezzogiorno in the lead female role of Fermina Daza. Her cold withholding performance and tired screen presence leave every doubt as to how Florentino Ariza (Javier Bordem) could possibly pine away for her for 51 years. There is no chemistry or energy between the two of the them. Her side of the story is not believable.
Having said this, somehow within the constraints of a weak script and a terrible leading "actress," Bordem's character comes to life. I absolutely believed that he was a mild-mannered clerk bedding over 600 women while he waits "with fidelity" for Fermina's husband to die.
One problem is that Fermina's husband Juvenal Urbino is played so well by Benjamin Bratt, that you can't believe Fermina could have lacked for anything--he comes across as handsome, loving and wonderful, the ideal husband, save for a brief affair later in the marriage.
Finally, in 2007 I consider it an unforgiveable choice to create the movie, set in turn of the (previous) century Columbia, in heavily-accented English instead of Spanish with subtitles or unaccented English. This stupid choice was made all the odder by random bursts of Spanish song or calls of "ayudame!" from the many cholera victims. Do people switch from heavily accented English to Spanish as they grow sicker?
Skip the movie and read the book, in Spanish if possible.
I was looking forward to the first adaptation for the screen that I have seen of a Gabriel Garcia Marquez book. This was a beautiful book, which I urge you to read. Fortunately or not, I remember little of it. I was able to simply experience this as a film, unfettered by the book.
Nonetheless, it doesn't work. The single worst problem being Italian actress Giovanna Mezzogiorno in the lead female role of Fermina Daza. Her cold withholding performance and tired screen presence leave every doubt as to how Florentino Ariza (Javier Bordem) could possibly pine away for her for 51 years. There is no chemistry or energy between the two of the them. Her side of the story is not believable.
Having said this, somehow within the constraints of a weak script and a terrible leading "actress," Bordem's character comes to life. I absolutely believed that he was a mild-mannered clerk bedding over 600 women while he waits "with fidelity" for Fermina's husband to die.
One problem is that Fermina's husband Juvenal Urbino is played so well by Benjamin Bratt, that you can't believe Fermina could have lacked for anything--he comes across as handsome, loving and wonderful, the ideal husband, save for a brief affair later in the marriage.
Finally, in 2007 I consider it an unforgiveable choice to create the movie, set in turn of the (previous) century Columbia, in heavily-accented English instead of Spanish with subtitles or unaccented English. This stupid choice was made all the odder by random bursts of Spanish song or calls of "ayudame!" from the many cholera victims. Do people switch from heavily accented English to Spanish as they grow sicker?
Skip the movie and read the book, in Spanish if possible.
Thursday, November 08, 2007
The Ring Cycle--Part III
Spiritual Lessons Learned by Losing (and Finding) my Wedding Rings
You would think, having lost one of my gorgeous antique unique diamond platinum wedding rings out at our spot on the Cosumnes River, I would have learned my lesson but no. On another occasion, I go out to the river with a group of women (see previous column for observations about nudity, still true).
We swim, we talk, we eat a great feast. We clean up. We return home.
As I'm getting out of the car, I remember that I took off my wedding rings before swimming (while it was still vaguely light), I begin looking through every bag I have as I walk to my house, reassuring my concerned women friends with call over my shoulder that "all will be well."
I get to my house and finish inspecting every bag in the light--nothing. Now I'm starting to panic. I call one of the women whom I drove home with, she's still up, where is the table cloth from the table? It's plastic, she tells me, she through it way with all its detritus.
Where is the trash bag? She has already taken it back to the dumpster in our cohousing community.
I look at the clock, it's late, my husband and kids are long asleep. I grab a flashlight (this is before my obsession with headlamps, a piece for another post) and walk back to the dumpster.
Good news bad news when I get to it. The good news? it is completely obvious which bag is the one Amy has just dumped in. The bad news? it's the only bag, alone and the bottom of a full size dumpster.
I pull over a milk crate and reach down low attempting to fish out the bag. Can't get it. I use tools. Still no luck. So, no choice, It's a warm night, with some moon and the alcohol from the evening hasn't completely worn off my bravado. I hoist myself INTO the dumpster.
I look through the bag painstakingly, hopefully. I find nothing. Disappointed, I move to get out of the dumpster. I discover that there's nothing to stand on except a small bag of garbage.
It isn't enough. I discover that I have virtually no upper body strength and cannot hoist myself out of the dumpster, gravity is no help here.
It's 2am and I'm trapped in a dumpster.
I consider yelling for help but I don't want to wake anyone up, but I sure as hell don't want to spend the rest of the night in the dumpster. When I'm under stress of any kind, I eat. I briefly consider the pie pan with remnants that I found when looking through the bag. I discard that thought--I might need the pie more at about 6am.
The floor is gross so I can't sit on it. I have to stand while I think. Periodically, I try to get a toehold on some side of the dumpster or to pull myself up. No luck.
I look at my watch again, it's 2:30am. I've been in the dumpster for half an hour. Time is passing very slowly. I want a shower, bed and clean pie.
The thought of a shower and clean pie somehow gives me a creative impulse and I realize that I have not been fully utilizing the garbage bag. My memory is foggy but there was a breakthrough of some kind and before you know it, I've found a way out of the dumpster.
Hallelujah! I am free. I come home, take my shower and get in bed. I thank god for getting me out of the dumpster, even if the rings could not be found. In the morning, as I open my eyes, I see my wedding rings on the bedside table next to my head.
Spiritual lessons learned: Before I go to drastic lengths to find something, make darn sure it's lost.
You would think, having lost one of my gorgeous antique unique diamond platinum wedding rings out at our spot on the Cosumnes River, I would have learned my lesson but no. On another occasion, I go out to the river with a group of women (see previous column for observations about nudity, still true).
We swim, we talk, we eat a great feast. We clean up. We return home.
As I'm getting out of the car, I remember that I took off my wedding rings before swimming (while it was still vaguely light), I begin looking through every bag I have as I walk to my house, reassuring my concerned women friends with call over my shoulder that "all will be well."
I get to my house and finish inspecting every bag in the light--nothing. Now I'm starting to panic. I call one of the women whom I drove home with, she's still up, where is the table cloth from the table? It's plastic, she tells me, she through it way with all its detritus.
Where is the trash bag? She has already taken it back to the dumpster in our cohousing community.
I look at the clock, it's late, my husband and kids are long asleep. I grab a flashlight (this is before my obsession with headlamps, a piece for another post) and walk back to the dumpster.
Good news bad news when I get to it. The good news? it is completely obvious which bag is the one Amy has just dumped in. The bad news? it's the only bag, alone and the bottom of a full size dumpster.
I pull over a milk crate and reach down low attempting to fish out the bag. Can't get it. I use tools. Still no luck. So, no choice, It's a warm night, with some moon and the alcohol from the evening hasn't completely worn off my bravado. I hoist myself INTO the dumpster.
I look through the bag painstakingly, hopefully. I find nothing. Disappointed, I move to get out of the dumpster. I discover that there's nothing to stand on except a small bag of garbage.
It isn't enough. I discover that I have virtually no upper body strength and cannot hoist myself out of the dumpster, gravity is no help here.
It's 2am and I'm trapped in a dumpster.
I consider yelling for help but I don't want to wake anyone up, but I sure as hell don't want to spend the rest of the night in the dumpster. When I'm under stress of any kind, I eat. I briefly consider the pie pan with remnants that I found when looking through the bag. I discard that thought--I might need the pie more at about 6am.
The floor is gross so I can't sit on it. I have to stand while I think. Periodically, I try to get a toehold on some side of the dumpster or to pull myself up. No luck.
I look at my watch again, it's 2:30am. I've been in the dumpster for half an hour. Time is passing very slowly. I want a shower, bed and clean pie.
The thought of a shower and clean pie somehow gives me a creative impulse and I realize that I have not been fully utilizing the garbage bag. My memory is foggy but there was a breakthrough of some kind and before you know it, I've found a way out of the dumpster.
Hallelujah! I am free. I come home, take my shower and get in bed. I thank god for getting me out of the dumpster, even if the rings could not be found. In the morning, as I open my eyes, I see my wedding rings on the bedside table next to my head.
Spiritual lessons learned: Before I go to drastic lengths to find something, make darn sure it's lost.
Wednesday, November 07, 2007
Take the Light Rail To Folsom and Ride the American River Parkway
Monday I took my bike on Sacramento's Regional Transit light rail train to the last stop in historic Folsom and then road it all the way back home, some 30 miles along the American River bike path.
If biking holds any appeal for you whatsoever, I highly recommend replicating some or all of this adventure. Some of my readers will be the sorts that can ride 60 miles in a day, in which case, enjoy riding both ways (uphill and down). But up until Monday I had never ridden more than 20 miles in one day, so this was a stretch for me.
It took me an hour and $2.00 to get from Sacramento to Folsom on the train. It took me 4 hours (even on my killer (borrowed) custom-made road bike I bike really slow) to bike back. A fit fast pedaling individual would probably do it in half the time.
There were some challenges presented in planning the trip. Nowhere online could I find an address or description of where the light rail station is in Folsom. The RT website confirms that it goes to "historic Folsom" but declines further information. Various friends of mine speculated as to where I would get out, most visualizing that I would be on the south (wrong) side of Highway 50, needing to cross it to get to the river parkway.
The reality is that it couldn't be easier to get on (I almost said "access" but I really think that's an obnoxious verb) the bike trail from the train stop. The Historic Folsom light rail station is located at Sutter and Reading in old Folsom. When you exit the train, you turn left, go to the end of the parking lot and there, to the left of the American River Bridge, is a little path that dumps you directly onto the parkway. It's maybe a total of 150 yards from the train to the river!
The ride from Folsom to the Nimbus Fish Hatchery is breathtaking. You're on the south side of the river, right down by the river seeing and hearing no traffic. On a gorgeous fall day, with my ipod blaring (hmmm, traffic?), I was completely blissed out. If riding all the way from Folsom to Sacramento intimidates you, consider doing just this stretch and then peeling off and crossing over the fairly obvious pedestrian bridge at the Fish Hatchery to return to Sacto from the Hazel ave.
Once you circumnavigate that part and the recreation places at the base of Lake Natoma (all easy and obvious on bike path that takes you slightly away from the river), there's another great stretch down to Goethe (inexplicably pronounced by the locals "Gay-tea") Park where you are forced to cross the river on a nice bridge. The whole rest of the way is very nice but less compelling than the initial stretch since you are often separated from views of the river by bushes or trees. If you're like me, you may spend the last hour thinking mostly about how sore your butt is.
Living right downtown, 5 blocks from the Sacramento River, I, of course, road to Discovery Park at the junction of the two rivers, crossed back over the American and headed down the Sacramento through Old Sacramento to get home.
Most importantly, I remembered along the way and at the end to be grateful for my health, the bike, the time on a weekday, healthy kids at school, the great weather, the river itself and the years, money and imagination it took to build the parkway and the light rail.
All in all, a day well spent.
If biking holds any appeal for you whatsoever, I highly recommend replicating some or all of this adventure. Some of my readers will be the sorts that can ride 60 miles in a day, in which case, enjoy riding both ways (uphill and down). But up until Monday I had never ridden more than 20 miles in one day, so this was a stretch for me.
It took me an hour and $2.00 to get from Sacramento to Folsom on the train. It took me 4 hours (even on my killer (borrowed) custom-made road bike I bike really slow) to bike back. A fit fast pedaling individual would probably do it in half the time.
There were some challenges presented in planning the trip. Nowhere online could I find an address or description of where the light rail station is in Folsom. The RT website confirms that it goes to "historic Folsom" but declines further information. Various friends of mine speculated as to where I would get out, most visualizing that I would be on the south (wrong) side of Highway 50, needing to cross it to get to the river parkway.
The reality is that it couldn't be easier to get on (I almost said "access" but I really think that's an obnoxious verb) the bike trail from the train stop. The Historic Folsom light rail station is located at Sutter and Reading in old Folsom. When you exit the train, you turn left, go to the end of the parking lot and there, to the left of the American River Bridge, is a little path that dumps you directly onto the parkway. It's maybe a total of 150 yards from the train to the river!
The ride from Folsom to the Nimbus Fish Hatchery is breathtaking. You're on the south side of the river, right down by the river seeing and hearing no traffic. On a gorgeous fall day, with my ipod blaring (hmmm, traffic?), I was completely blissed out. If riding all the way from Folsom to Sacramento intimidates you, consider doing just this stretch and then peeling off and crossing over the fairly obvious pedestrian bridge at the Fish Hatchery to return to Sacto from the Hazel ave.
Once you circumnavigate that part and the recreation places at the base of Lake Natoma (all easy and obvious on bike path that takes you slightly away from the river), there's another great stretch down to Goethe (inexplicably pronounced by the locals "Gay-tea") Park where you are forced to cross the river on a nice bridge. The whole rest of the way is very nice but less compelling than the initial stretch since you are often separated from views of the river by bushes or trees. If you're like me, you may spend the last hour thinking mostly about how sore your butt is.
Living right downtown, 5 blocks from the Sacramento River, I, of course, road to Discovery Park at the junction of the two rivers, crossed back over the American and headed down the Sacramento through Old Sacramento to get home.
Most importantly, I remembered along the way and at the end to be grateful for my health, the bike, the time on a weekday, healthy kids at school, the great weather, the river itself and the years, money and imagination it took to build the parkway and the light rail.
All in all, a day well spent.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Anti-Hillary Sentiment Tests Spiritual Principles
In the past few months, I have moved from generally worried that Hillary Clinton will be the nominee to full-on panicked that she will be. In this same period, I have moved from concerned that she might not win the White House if she were the nominee, to terrified that she will be President. [Note: Unlike most of the media, I do not assume that she will win the primaries. Stratified random samples of likely voters are not the same as real voters. I am still hopeful that the contrarian people of Iowa and New Hampshire will come to their senses.]
My spiritual and practical principles have kept me from ranting about this much in this blog. Why? Because I believe that wherever I put my attention and energy will bear fruit. So I should put my attention on what I want (peace, prosperity, sustainable development) not what I don't want (war, poverty, global climate change--aka Hillary for President--hey, I wonder if her handlers considered that as a slogan "Hillary for President--war, poverty, global climate change!").
I truly believe that one of the reasons that George Bush got (re-)elected President is the amount of energy that was focussed anti-Bush instead of pro-Kerry. The whole country was thinking Bush Bush Bush and so it happened.
Now I keep thinking Hillary Hillary Hillary. Here's why I don't want her to be the nominee:
My spiritual and practical principles have kept me from ranting about this much in this blog. Why? Because I believe that wherever I put my attention and energy will bear fruit. So I should put my attention on what I want (peace, prosperity, sustainable development) not what I don't want (war, poverty, global climate change--aka Hillary for President--hey, I wonder if her handlers considered that as a slogan "Hillary for President--war, poverty, global climate change!").
I truly believe that one of the reasons that George Bush got (re-)elected President is the amount of energy that was focussed anti-Bush instead of pro-Kerry. The whole country was thinking Bush Bush Bush and so it happened.
Now I keep thinking Hillary Hillary Hillary. Here's why I don't want her to be the nominee:
- She's for the war. She's never stopped being for the war in Iraq and now she's helping move along the war in Iran.
- She's got no articulated position on how to address global climate change quickly and effectively as president. There's no evidence that it is even in her top 10 issues.
- Her health care proposal could have been written by Republicans, it is a joke.
- There is no evidence that she has any closely held beliefs about anything--what does she care about except gaining power?
- She's a "centrist" without having any appeal in the center--the worst possible combination. She really is Republican light but the Republicans and center hate her viscerally. So we're forced to run a pro-Hillary (or anti Bush--no matter who the nominee is Democrats will run against Bush) campaign without being excited about anything she does.
- Nobody could galvanize and organize the Republicans like Hillary.
- Now I am aware of the inherent contradictions in this piece and in the list above.
- I'm equally afraid of Hillary winning and not winning in a general election--that I think makes some sense. Basically, she can't be the nominee because both outcomes are bad either we get a Republican as President, or we get Republican-lite as President.
- If being anti-something is such a powerful force, than that might be what gets her elected in the general election. And that's true.
- I can't get the numbering to turn off in this blog so I'll end it on this thought: if anything in this column resonates with you, go out right now and work really hard for John Edwards or Barack Obama and then when the first primary results are in, coalesce around the candidate that shows the most chance of beating Hillary. But please, concentrate on being pro-them instead of anti-her.
Monday, November 05, 2007
Was Dr. Jekyll a drug addict?
My guess is that this is a trite or tired observation, but it struck me hard as it hasn't before that the story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde could really have been Robert Louis Stevenson's way of exploring the issue of drug addiction in the 19th century.
The good doctor drinks a concoction of his own making and becomes a different person with base instincts. He finds that he soon has to go to the apothecary for more and more of the ingredients. He must have the potion or he will go out of his mind.
At first, he denies that his drugged self is doing anything terrible. But slowly the evidence grows. Soon he is face to face with the horrible things he has done. Yet still he cannot stop. He must have the potion, he must become Hyde. He must pretend he is only Jekyll. In the end, he is driven into madness by his obsession and his inability to return to his former self.
The good doctor drinks a concoction of his own making and becomes a different person with base instincts. He finds that he soon has to go to the apothecary for more and more of the ingredients. He must have the potion or he will go out of his mind.
At first, he denies that his drugged self is doing anything terrible. But slowly the evidence grows. Soon he is face to face with the horrible things he has done. Yet still he cannot stop. He must have the potion, he must become Hyde. He must pretend he is only Jekyll. In the end, he is driven into madness by his obsession and his inability to return to his former self.
(:)(:)(:)(:) for Jekyll and Hyde at Runaway Stage
Four snouts up for Jekyll and Hyde at Runaway Stage, now playing at Sierra 2 in Curtis Park through November 25th.
I struggled with the number of snouts on this one, so here's the caveat, I am giving this four snouts out of a possible five judging it by the standards of community musical theater not Broadway (or better yet, off Broadway) productions. Second caveat, I hate community musical theater (even though I like Broadway musicals). Interesting for me, since I grew up absolutely obsessed with performing in children's community musical theater.
But this is a quality production. I've never seen this musical staged before. The show itself is well-written, well-scored, very dark, with the music echoing the themes. The script takes liberties with the plot of the original Robert Louis Stevenson book (as recently recounted to me by my 12 year old, and vaguely remembered by me)--in this version, there's sort of a trumped up love story focus rather than a detective story focus. Also, Hyde's rapacious sexual appetite is developed here.
The cast was really excellent for this sort of show--the vocal leads of Tevye Ditter (Jekyll/Hyde) and his fiancee Norma-Jean Russell (Emma) made up for their wooden acting skills and (in Russell's case) dubious physical charms) with extraordinary voices. Russell's is out of this world Broadway recording quality--you can see why she was cast. The ensemble is filled with voices you can tell could play leading roles in other such productions.
But the standout performance in the show clearly comes from Amber Jean Moore (Lucy) who is the only performer who has it all: voice, acting, physicality and perfect casting. You absolutely believe her as the hooker with a heart of gold who is simultaneously repelled and in Hyde's sexual thrall.
So if you like this sort of thing, see the show. Warning: I thought the themes and simulated (clothes on) sex on stage/dancing were too mature for my 10 and 12 year olds. I'd recommend limiting this to a mature 15 year old or up.
I struggled with the number of snouts on this one, so here's the caveat, I am giving this four snouts out of a possible five judging it by the standards of community musical theater not Broadway (or better yet, off Broadway) productions. Second caveat, I hate community musical theater (even though I like Broadway musicals). Interesting for me, since I grew up absolutely obsessed with performing in children's community musical theater.
But this is a quality production. I've never seen this musical staged before. The show itself is well-written, well-scored, very dark, with the music echoing the themes. The script takes liberties with the plot of the original Robert Louis Stevenson book (as recently recounted to me by my 12 year old, and vaguely remembered by me)--in this version, there's sort of a trumped up love story focus rather than a detective story focus. Also, Hyde's rapacious sexual appetite is developed here.
The cast was really excellent for this sort of show--the vocal leads of Tevye Ditter (Jekyll/Hyde) and his fiancee Norma-Jean Russell (Emma) made up for their wooden acting skills and (in Russell's case) dubious physical charms) with extraordinary voices. Russell's is out of this world Broadway recording quality--you can see why she was cast. The ensemble is filled with voices you can tell could play leading roles in other such productions.
But the standout performance in the show clearly comes from Amber Jean Moore (Lucy) who is the only performer who has it all: voice, acting, physicality and perfect casting. You absolutely believe her as the hooker with a heart of gold who is simultaneously repelled and in Hyde's sexual thrall.
So if you like this sort of thing, see the show. Warning: I thought the themes and simulated (clothes on) sex on stage/dancing were too mature for my 10 and 12 year olds. I'd recommend limiting this to a mature 15 year old or up.
Friday, November 02, 2007
Pay Attention to Coincidence
As the grandchild of a Jungian, I was raised on "synchronicity"--the Jungian term for paying attention to coincidence. My grandmother, Sally Stevens Nichols, author of Jung and Tarot: an archetypal journey lived by it, and my mother definitely tracked it as well.
As a teenager and young adult, I came to view the notion of synchronicity sceptically. So you kept seeing the same symbol or animal or person over and over again? So what? Unless you believe in an unseen hand that is arranging all things for you, it makes no sense to ascribe any meaning to it. It is merely a coincidence (which popularly means that two things coincide for no particular reason).
In the past couple years I have learned that (and why) there are no meaningless coincidences. Deepak Chopra, M.D., in his marvelous mandatory book The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire: Harnessing The Infinite Power of Coincidence, explains it best:
There are no meaningless coincidences. It is not that the universe, or some unseen hand that is ascribing meaning to these coinciding events, it is us. At any given time in our field of experience, there are hundreds if not thousands of things that we could pay attention to. Some of them we do, and most of them we don't. Right now, I'm moving my attention from my computer screen to the clutter of my office, the Halloween detritus, the random lipstick that may be smooshed, the ipod I need to charge up. No wonder I mostly look at the screen!
Have you ever had that phenomenon where you hear about something new, a word, a car, a movie, a concept, and "suddenly" you hear it, see it, everywhere? Of course you have. Is that because suddenly events are arranging themselves to display more of that item? No. It's because now your mind is interested in it and is paying attention to it.
What's interesting about coincidences is not the fact of the coinciding people, places or things. What's interesting about coincidence is that I notice them. Coincidences are a clue as to what is most important to me. Of all the things I could pay attention to, I pay attention to this.
Chopra calls them clues to one's heart's desire, one's life destiny--the best that our subconscious (or "non local intelligence") wants to bring into the world. He tells a compelling story of how he followed coincidences to leave a hard-won prestigious medical research fellowship to go work in the ER of a county hospital only to discover his life's work, the connection between mind and body and to becoming an incredibly successful writer, speaker, runner of institutes.
Another book I like on the subject is Synchronicity: the Inner Path of Leadership by Joseph Jaworski (Leon's son). This book tells Joe's story of how he followed synchronicities to go from being a Type A Republican Texas wheeler dealer lawyer to founding an international institute for connecting people and public policy.
I have been experimenting for the past year with this. I try to write down coincidences every night in my journal putting a star next to the big ones. I believe they are shortcuts. Example, if a bunny keeps showing up in my life, everywhere I turn I see a bunny, and then I am faced with a choice between two things, one of which involves a bunny, one of which does not, I choose the bunny option. That most likely will result in my getting quicker along my path. Going where I want to go faster, more smoothly, with more clarity, focus, ease and grace.
Coincidences or synchronicities are signposts on what otherwise would be my largely unmarked path.
As a teenager and young adult, I came to view the notion of synchronicity sceptically. So you kept seeing the same symbol or animal or person over and over again? So what? Unless you believe in an unseen hand that is arranging all things for you, it makes no sense to ascribe any meaning to it. It is merely a coincidence (which popularly means that two things coincide for no particular reason).
In the past couple years I have learned that (and why) there are no meaningless coincidences. Deepak Chopra, M.D., in his marvelous mandatory book The Spontaneous Fulfillment of Desire: Harnessing The Infinite Power of Coincidence, explains it best:
There are no meaningless coincidences. It is not that the universe, or some unseen hand that is ascribing meaning to these coinciding events, it is us. At any given time in our field of experience, there are hundreds if not thousands of things that we could pay attention to. Some of them we do, and most of them we don't. Right now, I'm moving my attention from my computer screen to the clutter of my office, the Halloween detritus, the random lipstick that may be smooshed, the ipod I need to charge up. No wonder I mostly look at the screen!
Have you ever had that phenomenon where you hear about something new, a word, a car, a movie, a concept, and "suddenly" you hear it, see it, everywhere? Of course you have. Is that because suddenly events are arranging themselves to display more of that item? No. It's because now your mind is interested in it and is paying attention to it.
What's interesting about coincidences is not the fact of the coinciding people, places or things. What's interesting about coincidence is that I notice them. Coincidences are a clue as to what is most important to me. Of all the things I could pay attention to, I pay attention to this.
Chopra calls them clues to one's heart's desire, one's life destiny--the best that our subconscious (or "non local intelligence") wants to bring into the world. He tells a compelling story of how he followed coincidences to leave a hard-won prestigious medical research fellowship to go work in the ER of a county hospital only to discover his life's work, the connection between mind and body and to becoming an incredibly successful writer, speaker, runner of institutes.
Another book I like on the subject is Synchronicity: the Inner Path of Leadership by Joseph Jaworski (Leon's son). This book tells Joe's story of how he followed synchronicities to go from being a Type A Republican Texas wheeler dealer lawyer to founding an international institute for connecting people and public policy.
I have been experimenting for the past year with this. I try to write down coincidences every night in my journal putting a star next to the big ones. I believe they are shortcuts. Example, if a bunny keeps showing up in my life, everywhere I turn I see a bunny, and then I am faced with a choice between two things, one of which involves a bunny, one of which does not, I choose the bunny option. That most likely will result in my getting quicker along my path. Going where I want to go faster, more smoothly, with more clarity, focus, ease and grace.
Coincidences or synchronicities are signposts on what otherwise would be my largely unmarked path.
Thursday, November 01, 2007
Halloween theme overplayed in politics this year
Is it just me or did all involved overplay the halloween theme this year in political/policy circles? Every year there's at least one or two press hits at Halloween about what's "really scary." But this week I felt like it was a constant barrage of increasingly desperate and hateful emails from campaigns or organizations all with almost identical language:
This year for Halloween, dress up as someone really scary, "a right winger," "a Republican," "a prison guard," or "a supporter of compromise health care plans."
Strangely, I expected to see the corollary on the right--about how scary liberals are. Maybe it's because I'm not on any of their listserves, but I couldn't find it. I thought if People for the American Way is helping me dress up as the terrifying specter of Ann Coulter, surely someone has put together an Al Frankenstein costume?
Okay, I was able to find the Minnesota College Republicans Youtube posting on Al Frankenstein, but is that all?
Frankly, the whole theme needs to be put back in its grave for a couple of more years. These tired undead advertisements are mostly very boring and predictable.
Exception (and yes, I'm an Edwards supporter). I did find this alternate reality front page from the Edwards campaign both truly scary and funny. So if you're going to do it, be really really clever.
This year for Halloween, dress up as someone really scary, "a right winger," "a Republican," "a prison guard," or "a supporter of compromise health care plans."
Strangely, I expected to see the corollary on the right--about how scary liberals are. Maybe it's because I'm not on any of their listserves, but I couldn't find it. I thought if People for the American Way is helping me dress up as the terrifying specter of Ann Coulter, surely someone has put together an Al Frankenstein costume?
Okay, I was able to find the Minnesota College Republicans Youtube posting on Al Frankenstein, but is that all?
Frankly, the whole theme needs to be put back in its grave for a couple of more years. These tired undead advertisements are mostly very boring and predictable.
Exception (and yes, I'm an Edwards supporter). I did find this alternate reality front page from the Edwards campaign both truly scary and funny. So if you're going to do it, be really really clever.