I love lists, so I’m making one tonight:
1. “Moneyball” was a fine movie (saw it twice, and glad about it) – if you doubt that Brad Pitt and Robert Redford are somehow related (are they or aren’t they?), please go see it, and then watch “Legal Eagles,” an ’80s movie with Redford and Debra Winger (one of my favorites, and a great movie to compare with “Moneyball”). Better yet, some empirical evidence for you now until you complete this assignment:
Seriously, it’s even eerier watching Brad Pitt in “Moneyball” than seeing him here. I think the whole father/son idea is too easy – Pitt channels Redford in a way that I believe is a result of a phenomenon that I call “non-familal DNA transferrence.” (Totally made up, but you knew that, didn’t you, you smarties?) See Redford’s hand on his shoulder? That’s how it’s done; they’ve been transferring DNA since “A River Runs Through It,” and I think Brad Pitt has been concentrating on character roles in movies like “Fight Club” and “Snatch” so that the blatantly obvious would be less so – science should look into these two; if my theory is correct , it could be a breakthrough of epic proportions (or a massive waste of taxpayer money, but at least it would be interesting, wouldn’t it? Think of the possibilities!)
2. Steampunk – Just found out about it recently; it seems to be a wide-ranging aesthetic that includes Victoriana, science fiction, fantasy, and various other interests; goggles, torn apart watch parts, corsets, and zepplins seem to be focal points; this necklace sorta feels a little steampunk to me (and I did buy another one that is a torn-apart watch, and I do love it, but I’m not going to be dressing in corsets and wearing goggles anytime soon – well, maybe a corset, who knows?):
3. “The Dick Van Dyke Show” is celebrating its 50th anniversary this month, and is now on TVLand!
I’m baffled as to why this show hasn’t just been on all the time, the way that “I Love Lucy” has been. Great writing, physical comedy, Dick Van Dyke and Mary Tyler Moore, and Carl Reiner as Alan Brady? What has been the delay, people? The episode with the walnuts ranks right up there with “Vitametavegamin” for me. If you have never seen the show, get yourself over to TVLand now – zany ’60s home life with the Petries is black and white bliss.
4. I’ve gone meatless again, yes, it’s true. A couple of weeks ago I decided to stop eating meat, and pretty much just kept going. It’s for a couple of reasons, the primary one being health – not eating meat is kinda forcing me to focus on eating more vegetables, fruits, and grains. I will eat eggs and cheese; just trying to stay away from meat, chicken, and pork (you will catch me writing love poems to bacon, but for now it will be unrequited love). Fortunately, I love tofu and veggie burgers, and Morningstar makes veggie bacon that is crispy (and I was already eating it before giving up meat), so it’s not an enormous sacrifice.
5. The Bowers Museum in Santa Ana has a phenomenal collection right now: “Warriors – Tombs and Temples: China’s Enduring Legacy.” It includes terra cotta warriors, miniature armies, and relics, and is an amazing display. Museums are my treat to myself – whenever I go, I feel like a kid discovering new worlds. I have a group of friends that I normally try to go with, whenever we can coordinate schedules. I think the Getty will be next on the list, and soon – there is a modern art exhibit going on right now, “Pacific Standard Time: Crosscurrents in L.A. Painting and Sculpture 1950-1970,” that looks like something I really would like to see:
(We now return you to your regularly scheduled life…)
I am not a huge fan of realism in art – I do appreciate artists such as Rembrandt, who had the ability to paint figures with faces that seemed lit from within. However, my heart seems to lie with Miro, Dali, Chagall, and Picasso – when I look at their work, I feel better, dunno why. I don’t talk about this to sound like a snooty broad; I grew up with two artists who felt it was necessary to completely misrepresent reality, so maybe I relate better to the bending of visual truth. Same goes for photography – I enjoy photos, and I especially like when someone has taken a photograph that has gone awry, and ended up with a little more than they were expecting. Fuzzy, double exposures, extra backlighting to make the subject look as if they descended from the heavens and plopped right down on the end of the Redondo Beach Pier at sunset – these are the photos that I look at more than once.
While impressionism might be fine for art, it’s not so desirable for writing. I feel as if I’ve reached a plateau, and that I’m repeating the same things over and over; I also feel like my writing is fuzzy, with double exposures, and bores me before I ever finish a paragraph (incidentally, editing before you’ve even completed a paragraph is not the best way to write – my superego gets in cahoots with my left brain, and the results are a big yawn). I’ve started to read “Brief Interviews with Hideous Men” by David Foster Wallace. His writing flattens me, period; there are certain people in my life that I know that I will never equal in terms of creativity and brilliance, and Wallace is one of them. I also started “Infinite Jest,” at the beach a couple of years ago, and discovered that it is no beach read – it is filled with (to me) obscure references, and I know that I will read it, but I have to practice lengthening my attention span so that I can fully appreciate it. And if that’s not enough I’m reading “You Shall Know Our Velocity” by Dave Eggers – I’ve been staying away from fiction, but this novel is so well-written that I don’t want it to end.
Funny how my life seems to have taken on an impressionistic feel these days; it helps me to put horns and three eyes on some people, and drop them through the hole that melted over the side of my desk, or paint others blue, and suspend them over me all day long, so that I wouldn’t be lonely. Definitely not realistic, but once in a while it gets me through.