Life on the Wicked Stage: Act 3
Musings on life, the theatre, technology, culture and the occasional emu sighting
I wrote a little something on the Medium publication Rome Magazine about poltics, my grandfather, and how nothing much has really changed when it comes to the political animals that we are. We just don’t hide behind the facades we like to show the world as much.
Hope you check out The Ties That Bind. Thanks to David Todd McCarty for letting me publish on Rome Magazine.Good stuff and good writers there.
It’s Sunday morning. So here’s some Sunday Morning Reading to share. There’s no theme. Just a collection of topics and writers that caught my eye and tugged a bit on the heartstrings.
Chris Welch on The Verge lets us know that Samsung and NYC’s Metropolitan Museum of Art are collaborating and expanding the collection of art that is available to view in your home on Samsung’s Frame TVs. I didn’t know this was a thing. I’m sure some art lovers are glad it is. Would be nice to see this picked up by other museums and Smart TV makers. Check out Samsung Is Bringing Artwork From The Met Museum To Its Frame TVs.
On the politics beat, Susan Glaser pens The Rage of The Toddler Caucus On Capitol Hill. If they title doesn’t tell you what it’s about, you’re not paying attention.
When and why does time matter? Check out Philip Ogley’s The Clock Watcher. Make the time.
What happens if turbulence in the brain’s waves can carve indentations and pathways over time in the same way that water does in stone? Check out Newly Discovered Spirals of Brain Activity May Help Explain Cognition by Shelly Fan.
David Todd McCarty penned an excellent and very personal piece this week about his family coping with drug addiction and its aftermath entitled Bear With Me, I Want To Tell You Something. Beautiful stuff. Tough. Coconuts and plungers.
These are tough times to wade through. Ana Marie Cox says We Are Not Just Polarized. We Are Traumatized. I think she’s correct. And remember, cynicism is a trauma response.
A devilishly good piece by Natasha MH, In Bed With the Devil.
Mark Jacob in Courier Newsroom let’s us in on The Republican Trick To Spin Straw Into Gold. There are no surprises. But we all need to recognize it when it’s happening.
Changing the channel, M.G. Siegler takes a look at the end of the Cable TV bundle in Cable Bites the Dust, and predicts that we’re going to be bundling again as we continue down the path into streaming entertainment consolidation.
And as we head into a week when new iPhones are arriving around the world, finally equipped for USB-C charging, Jay Peters on The Verge writes an almost mournful obituary for the Lightning Connector in Lightning was Great Actually.
If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here.
Celebrating the grandson’s second birthday this weekend but there’s still a bit of Sunday Morning Reading to share. As usual it’s a myriad collection of writing on different topics featuring some history, some politics, some Shakespeare, and some writers with some personal things to share.
First up are a couple of interesting pieces about Shakespeare. In August Drew Lichtenberg wrote a provoking piece in the New York Times about the latest attempts to cancel Shakespeare in the wake of all of the current nonsense going on in educational and political circles. The title, Cancel Shakespeare, might turn you off. Don’t let it. It’s worth a read for the turn.
In a follow up to that piece, Shakespeare’s ‘Sublimely, Disturbingly Smutty Effect’ Must Endure, Lichtenbeg lists some Shakespearean passages that readers say “got their blood flowing.”
And while I’m sharing pieces on how politicians think banning and banishing books, topics and history can change the future, this Politico piece by James Traub, Virginia Went to War Over History. And Students Actually Came Out on Top is worth considering. This in depth piece is worth hanging on to if we ever come to our senses and someone chronicles this period of insanity for future generations.
And speaking of history, you might not (or might) be sipping some whiskey with your Sunday Morning Reading, but this piece from Jason Willick on What a 1790’s Rebellion Shows About the Campaign to Disqualify Trump takes us back to the Whisky Rebellion. It’s worth considering in light of all the talk about the 14th Amendment disqualifying Trump from holding office again. FWIW I wrote a little something about that here.
And one thing follows another. Nate White, a British writer, delivers a terrific takedown of the orange guy in British Writer Pens The Best Description of Trump I’ve Read.
Jay Rosen is always worth following if you’re interested in what’s going on in journalism. This sketch of a lecture he was going to give in 2013 resurfaced in my feeds and I thought “Old Testatment and New Testatment Journalism” was worth sharing.
And on a somewhat personal note, I’ve contributed a few pieces to a Medium publiciation Ellemeno, thanks to the prodding of David Todd McCarty. The publication hosts some excellent writers with fantastic writing from a personal perspective.
I recommend two such pieces here if you want to get a taste. First up is McCarty’s All On My Own. As he describes it: “The art of being alone without being lonely, or one man’s semi-solitary adventure through time and space.”
Next up is Natasha MH with Why Are You Obssesed With Me? I’m thinking it has something to do with her writing.
If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here.
I wrote a little something somewhere else that I’m linking to here. You can find my thoughts on Oliver Anthony’s Rich Men North of Richmond on the Medium publication Ellemeno.
Go, check out Everywhere is North of Richmond.
I wrote a little something that I’ll share a link to here. It’s a little something about race in my hometown, growing up, and reunions in a mountain top restaurant sitting astride a country line.
You can find the piece called There You Go on Ellemeno, a publication on Medium. There’s an excellent collection of writers there.
Thanks to David Todd McCarty for letting me put my words down there.
That damn Constitution and those damn amendments. Always an obstacle. Especially depending on whether you use the paper it’s printed on as a shield, a weapon, a distraction, or a promotional tool.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is the hot topic these days. Here it is below:
Did I say hot topic? Tepid is probably more like it. Well, let’s put it this way. Legal scholars and TV talking heads are debating whether or not it’s self-enforcing and rules out a presidential run by you know who.
Let me say this about that:
If folks are fighting mad over whether or not the orange buffoon is either the saddest excuse of criminal humanity currently on the planet or some sort of divinely anointed martyr-to-be then I don’t think this debate is going to self-ennunicate a solution.
As long as Supreme Court Justices can wine and dine their vacations away on other folks’ dimes there’s no such thing as self-enforcing. Self-enriching for lawyers. But that’s about it.
Summer is heading towards Fall and we’re on lake time this weekend. So a shorter list of things to share. As usual it’s a potpourri of topics and great writing. Enjoy!
Mug shots were the talk of all the towns this week. David Todd McCarty takes a look at a bit of of mug shot shooting history in The Lost Art of Shooting Criminals.
Always fun to look back on the history of old school Chicago politics. Edward Robert McClelland takes just such a look back as he looks ahead in The Machine Has Given Way to Organizing.
This piece is a real pleasure from Natasha MH. Worth lingering over for more than two minutes. Check out A Two-Minute Pleasure.
In this world where the reliance on facts keeps diminishing Jonathan Taplin takes a look at How Musk, Thiel, Zuckerberg and Andresseen-Four Billionaire Techno-Oligarchs- Are Creating an Autocratic Reality.
And if Autumn is approaching so too is football. David. K. Li takes a look back at the Supreme Court case that changed the game (or rather the money behind the game), in Meet The Man Who Thinks He’s Screwed Up College Football With A Supreme Court Win.
An another harbinger of Fall is the build up and anticipation of new Apple gear. Jason Snell takes yet another look at the never ending debate surrounding the purpose of the iPad in Giving Up The iPad-only Travel Dream.
If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here.
Don’t make promises you can’t keep. I can’t imagine anyone who hasn’t heard that at some point in their life. I also can’t imagine anyone who hasn’t made one of those “can’t keep” promises only to have it come back to bite then. Also can’t imagine anyone having not broken one.
That’s apparently where we are. We make promises, take oaths, utter vows, and swear on bibles stacked with meaning and historical symbolism. We enter into contracts and agreements. We teach our children not to lie. But when push comes to shove does it really matter?
As far as the US legal system is concerned Special Counsel Jack Smith has essentially told us it doesn’t. The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gives anyone the right to lie. Lying is protected political speech. if you can avoid slandering or libeling someone, or your target doesn’t have the resources to defend themselves, our much cherished freedom of speech gives you the right to lie your ass off. Legally.
That being the case, here’s the question: Shouldn’t we then dispense with the ritual and the formality of swearing oaths? What’s the point? Why do we need the symbolism for something most know is a public pageant and a sham?
We all know the oath that elected leaders, members of the military and other government services swear. Our founding fathers didn’t want to see us swearing fealty to any king or church, so we take an oath to support and defend the US Constitution. Many who have never taken that oath can recite it by heart. I’m not suggesting some don’t take it to heart and live it. But if enough don’t, it makes a mockery of those who do.
I can remember a small right wing media dustup when Obama and the Chief Justice muffed a few words during the swearing in ceremony. That dustup caused enough of a ruckus they later re-created the swearing in. Just to be sure.
We also all know the oath that folks swear on a witness stand or legal proceeding. That one includes the “tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth” part. We all know how flimsy that is. Heck, the entire legal profession is built on finding ways to keep clients avoid and keep them from divulging the truth when confronted.
So why keep up the charade? What is it about us that when things get dicey we’ll forswear oaths and vows?
In my opinion we all want to believe in something larger, that bolsters and binds our position beyond question. It’s supposedly an enobling act that raises the oath-taker to another plain, above it all, embuing the moment with a deeper unquestioned signficance. Or at times it’s a desperate plea for shelter when caught in the act. We swear to God and heaven. We swear on the lives and souls of our mothers and fathers. We swear on our children’s lives. And some even swear on a stack of bibles.
Oh. About those bibles. In rituals when hands are placed on bibles, there’s often personal and historical symbolism attached to the actual bible used in the act to deepen the signficance. Paradoxically, it’s intriguing that many Christian religions believe that the bible tells us in Matthew 5:34 to essentially forswear swearing on anything in Heaven or on Earth.
If you continue reading the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew you’ll find Jesus saying simply, “But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.” Interpretations of this range from a biblical forbidding of all oaths to it being allowed for ceremonial oath taking. It’s a debatable theological question. Ask the Calvinists and the Quakers. Some hold it tighter than others, which has resulted in affirmations replacing oaths in some situations. Some have simply rationalized it into the ether of meaningless.
Debatable or not, it calls into question the familiar customs and rituals around swearing in, taking vows, and taking oaths. We bind ourselves to these rituals for their significance and some sense of continuity. But in reality most see through the pageantry even while recognizing the holes in the plot. It’s like agreeing to support a couple’s wedding vows when everyone knows they aren’t going to make it.
Dropping out of the theological realm, I prefer to keep my own tussles with the truth grounded in that old saying “my word is my bond.” I’ve stumbled on that ground at times. But while it’s easy to take some comfort in the fact that I’m not stumbling alone, it’s still troubling. I don’t have answers, but it does make me wonder if we shouldn’t bring an end to the pageantry of public oath taking. There’s enough paradox already built in to call the entire thing into question. Why stand on ceremony when we can’t and aren’t expected to stand by our word?
We might have already reached that point without recognizing it as we see large portions of the population living in a fantasy world exposed by an orange madman who never uttered a word he couldn’t break in the next breath.
The willing suspension of disbelief is enough to make one swear.
On the road spending time with the grandson this weekend. So I’ll be brief. But these writers and articles are worth spending some time with this Sunday morning. A few of them writing about, well, writing.
I’ll kick off with a controversial piece by Adam Thirlwell in The Guardian who takes a look back to the French Revolution to perhaps find clues into why we’re writing and expressing ourselves quite so much today. Too much writing? Too much self-examination? Depends on what you call writing if you ask me. Anyhow, check out ‘We’re Gripped by graphomania’: why writing beame an online contagion and how we can contain it. I’m not one for containing any of this. The terrific examples below I think illustrate why.
Baldur Bjarnson is one of the thinkers I’m following when it comes to the topic of AI. He’s written a terrific piece called Authorship, in which he explores what happens when creative work, in this instance he’s using film to illustrate, becomes less about the author and more about the aggregator.
One of my most recent discoveries NatashaMH has written two excellent pieces that I recommend. The first is The Need To Write And The Will to Heal From Our Traumatic Experiences.It’s quite a journey. The second is A Portrait of A Woman and is also more than worth your time. Great stuff.
Natasha tells us this piece by David Todd McCarty, I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For inspired her to sketch A Portrait of A Woman. I’ll take her word for it. It damn sure stands on it’s own and sorta makes me hope he never does find it.
Talking at The Texaco is another McCarty piece worth your time. As you read it and you think you know where it’s headed, hang on. You don’t.
So much, too much, of our energy is being taken up with all of the news surrounding the orange buffoon and the shit he’s dragged us all into. It’s worth remembering we’ve been here before. While I’m not a fan of Rich Lowry, this look back at Huey Long is a good reminder. We’ve been here before. Damn shame we’re so good at burying those memories.
And to close this out and look ahead, the Farmer’s Almanac is out with it’s predictions for the winter. If they’re correct, many of us might be bundling up this winter.
If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here.
Back home after a two-week road trip supporting my wife teaching her summer acting camp. Needless to say we’re pooped. The kids were amazing. Regardless, here’s some Sunday Morning Reading to share.
Movies are big news this summer because of a couple of big original ones (Barbie and Oppenheimer), but also because the unions for writers and actors are on strike. James Surowiecki in The Atlantic lands a take on the strike and says Netflix opened the door for this upheaval in A Strike Scripted by Netflix.
One of my favorite writers I’ve recentlly discovered, Natasha MH, pens an incredible review of Barbie entitled The One About Barbie.
And while I’m raving about Natasha MH, take a look at this incredible piece of hers, The Need to Write and The Will to Heal From Our Traumatic Experiences. Excellent.
And since it’s Sunday, I think this piece by Jake Meador called The Misunderstood Reason Millions of Americans Stopped Going to Church is a worthy read. I’m not so sure it’s so misunderstood.
George Dillard in Rome Magazine tackles the orange guy racking up indictments like bowling pins in Trump’s Defense: I’m a Stupid Liar.
I rarely link to pieces I find ridiculous in Sunday Morning Reading. But this one is rarely ridiculous in how the logic turns in on itself and defeats the entire point. David Brooks takes on the what’s happening in American politics and wonders What If We’re The Bad Guys Here? Think of it as comedy.
And to close out this week, here’s an excellent piece by Elizabeth Lopatto in The Verge, What Would The Internet Of People Look Like Now? Hits to how we got to where we are today in this crazy thing called “online.”
If you’re interested in just what the heck Sunday Morning Reading is all about you can read more about the origins of Sunday Morning Reading here.
