Have you heard? It’s in the stars. Next July we collide with Mars!
I’ve always loved this scene. They even look like they’re having fun.
And somehow I’ve lived this long without being aware of this version.
God bless YouTube.com
May 21, 2008
May 20, 2008
Gays (all four of them) in newspaper comics
“But then he proceeds to list all the reasons why gay characters wouldn’t fit into most strips. Doonesbury and For Better or For Worse, for example, are ‘set in a time that’s now. In other strips, it’s vaguer, less characters that live in the real world.’
“Why couldn’t gay characters exist in a world with more fantasy elements? When pressed, Salem admits they could. But then he’s quick to point to the reluctant newspaper editors he has to consider — the folks who buy the strip from the syndicates on a daily or weekly basis, and who can drop it at any time.
“‘It’s a conservative business,’ Salem says. ‘At this time, we may not be able to sell [a 'gay' strip]. I can’t say you can read on the comics page what you see on television. It’s a different art form, a more conservative medium.’
“Salem says that gay characters and storylines have Universal Press Syndicate’s full support — but the reality seems to be that only applies when they’re coming from established, lucrative cartoonists like Gary Trudeau and Lynn Johnston, who they’d be absolutely crazy to alienate.”
The Cartoon Closet, AfterElton, May 18, 2008
Yeah, newspaper comics must be a conservative medium since the default setting, with a few exceptions, is still white and male, gay or not. But I guess it’s progress to have four visible out white gay guys in the funny pages (Mark, Lawrence, Seth and Mark), progress for whom, other than white gay guys, is kind of up in the air. But I guess it has to start somewhere. Nothing against white men, but “progress” never seems to get much farther than that. Oh well, I guess that’s why newspaper comics are a conservative medium. Gutless, too, but maybe newspapers really are dead, which is sad, in a way, but I read all those strips, and the newspapers they’re in, online because I hate reading actual newspapers. The newsprint gets all over my hands, ew. So go right ahead and be a conservative medium; it’s not like you’re losing any money on me.
May 19, 2008
Welcome to Clintonville, Senator Obama
“The GOP, should I be the nominee, can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record,” Obama said. “If they think that they’re going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful because that I find unacceptable, the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family.”
Obama tells Tenn.’s GOP: ‘Lay off my wife’, SF Gate, May 19, 2008
I like this response, I think it’s the only one for the situation. But at this time in history, does Mr. Obama, who wants to be President, think the GOP giver a good goddam what he finds unacceptable? Does he think they’re going to lay off just because he told them to? Does he think he can govern the madhouse the US and the world have become this way? Well, okay. I certainly don’t have any better ideas. But in future, Senator, don’t bring a knife to a shoot-out.
Full disclosure: I’ll vote for whoever gets the Dem nomination, but this is exactly why I’ve been leaning towards Senator Clinton. At least she knows what she’s up against in today’s GOP. And if/when/whatever Hillary doesn’t get the nomination, I hope she and Bill righteously kick some GOP ass before they fade into oblivion (if either of those things are even possible).
May 18, 2008
Reclaiming the “F” word
“Mentioned on this web log from time to time, L.A.’s irreplaceable Center for the Study of Political Graphics (CSPG) has once again curated an exhibit of great importance to designers, artists, and activists. Reclaiming the “F” Word: Posters on International Feminisms, will premier at the California State University Northridge Art Galleries. Reading from the CSPG press release for the exhibit:”
Reclaiming the “F” word, Art for Change, May 18, 2008
May 15, 2008
Either gay marriage is legal in California…
Or the ban on gay marriage is illegal in California…
“Under the strict scrutiny standard, unlike the rational basis standard, in order to demonstrate the constitutional validity of a challenged statutory classification the state must establish (1) that the state interest intended to be served by the differential treatment not only is a constitutionally legitimate interest, but is a compelling state interest, and (2) that the differential treatment not only is reasonably related to but is necessary to serve that compelling state interest. Applying this standard to the statutory classification here at issue, we conclude that the purpose underlying differential treatment of opposite-sex and same-sex couples embodied in California’s current marriage statutes – the interest in retaining the traditional and well-established definition of marriage – cannot properly be viewed as a compelling state interest for purposes of the equal protection clause, or as necessary to serve such an interest.
“A number of factors lead us to this conclusion. First, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the designation of marriage clearly is not necessary in order to afford full protection to all of the rights and benefits that currently are enjoyed by married opposite-sex couples; permitting same-sex couples access to the designation of marriage will not deprive opposite-sex couples of any rights and will not alter the legal framework of the institution of marriage, because same-sex couples who choose to marry will be subject to the same obligations and duties that currently are imposed on married opposite-sex couples. Second, retaining the traditional definition of marriage and affording same-sex couples only a separate and differently named family relationship will, as a realistic matter, impose appreciable harm on same-sex couples and their children, because denying such couples access to the familiar and highly favored designation of marriage is likely to cast doubt on whether the official family relationship of same-sex couples enjoys dignity equal to that of opposite-sex couples. Third, because of the widespread disparagement that gay individuals historically have faced, it is all the more probable that excluding same-sex couples from the legal institution of marriage is likely to be viewed as reflecting an official view that their committed relationships are of lesser stature than the comparable relationships of opposite-sex couples. Finally, retaining the designation of marriage exclusively for opposite-sex couples and providing only a separate and distinct designation for same-sex couples may well have the effect of perpetuating a more general premise – now emphatically rejected by this state – that gay individuals and same-sex couples are in some respects “second-class citizens” who may, under the law, be treated differently from, and less favorably than, heterosexual individuals or opposite-sex couples. Under these circumstances, we cannot find that retention of the traditional definition of marriage constitutes a compelling state interest. Accordingly, we conclude that to the extent the current California statutory provisions limit marriage to opposite-sex couples, these statutes are unconstitutional.”
Summary of Supreme Court same-sex marriage opinion, Mercury News, May 15, 2008
Or whatever. But the California Supreme Court just made me very proud to be a Californian today. See, people? We can all just get along sometimes.
Update: Wow, George Takei is getting married. Marriage Equality Comes to California, May 16, 2008.
May 13, 2008
J Bloglandia volume 1, issue 1 now available at Lulu and Amazon
You can buy the 8.5×11″ version at Lulu for $7.00 or the 6×9″ version at Amazon for $9.00.
And I’m already working on Issue 2, so if you like what you see here, and you or someone you know would like to have a blog essay in Issue 2, please refer to these guidelines and send the essay on in. Feel free to get in touch with me at editor AT j-bloglandia.info if you have any questions the guidelines don’t address. The deadline is when I have enough pages to publish. Thanks!
May 8, 2008
Robert Johnson
Eric Clapton on Robert Johnson:
via
Totally lovin’ Clark’s Picks
Related: Couldn’t find Stones in my Passway, but this will do, maybe moreso. You can still hear what Clapton was talking about.
You may bury my body down by the highway side
So my old evil spirit may catch a Greyhound bus and ride.
May 4, 2008
The Agony and the Ecstasy of LA Murals
“I’m sure there are those who assume Twitchell is now ‘set for life’ because of his settlement with the government, and that he can now retire to the lap of luxury. He is under no obligation to continue being a productive artist, and with his murals coming under attack from every direction, some would ask why doesn’t he just give up. That would be a complete misreading of the artistic spirit. Twitchell has devoted his life’s work to muralism, and knowing his devotion to the art, it’s a certainty he’d much rather have his mural of Ed Ruscha standing in pristine condition than to be awarded a cash settlement – no matter how large. Twitchell’s admonition that muralists ‘cannot coexist’ with graffiti vandals is more an avowal to stand firm than it is a statement of surrender, and in the effort to re-establish the tradition of community based murals – I’ll stand shoulder to shoulder with the muralists.”
Kent Twitchell: The End of Muralism?, Mark Vallen, May 4, 2008
~~~
“Ginger Mayerson: What are the most important aspects and experiences in your practice of art now?
“Leo Limon: I’m Mr. Old G.
“GM: What?
“LL: Oldie but Goodie. But young people call me Mr. A Old G, which is Ancient Oldie but Goodie. It seems like the youth find there’s no future, you know, so the things they do now, they say ‘Yeah, I smoked for three years, man, I almost killed myself, but you know, I got out of it.’ And I’m looking at this 18 year old kid, and I’m going ‘Yeah, wow, my uncle smoked for 80 years.’
“GM: Do they really think there’s no future?
“LL: Yeah, the kids I find out there — I’m looking for taggers — and I find them. There’s thousands of them, literally thousands of them, and they’ve grown up, because of the change of times, in a different generation. There used to be a gang, the neighborhood is called whatever it is and the gang would mark the territory (with graffiti that was the name of the gang ED). And then Maria’s or Johnny’s little brother decided to be part of a crew, which is three or four or five or six at the most kids, who go out and tag. Now they’ve learned through Heavy Metal magazine and interpretations of air brush, well, a spray can gives that look.
“GM: Are they tagging for a gang for themselves?
“LL: Themselves.
“GM: Oh, so this is Me-Tagging?
“LL: Yeah, Me-Tagging.
“GM: I’ve seen some amazing tags in my neighborhood. Especially on the freeway and on billboards. I’m amazed they can do that without killing themselves. I mean, do you consider these taggers to be, like, the new muralists?
“LL: No, because these kids know nothing about the local art history, they’re tagging the murals. There’s commercialism in tagging. Like I said, I have a certificate in sign painting, and these guys (taggers ED) are signing, but they’re not saying anything. Their tag, which is their art, is their signature. And they sign them, and they actually put a copyright on them, with a stencil.”
Interview with Leo Limon, J LHLS, June 20, 2005
~~~
“In mid-October (2007), some of the murals were whitewashed without warning. (Gloria) Molina and the Department of Public Works denied involvement, but in December, Molina got the county Board of Supervisors to pass an emergency motion giving the Friends of the Los Angeles River 90 days to paint over the murals or pay up to $70,000 for their removal.
“County crews removed about 60 million square feet of graffiti in 2006 at a cost of about $32 million, county officials have said.
“The Friends group stands by the idea of having art by the river, spokeswoman Shelly Backlar said. But the organization, which is scrambling to rebuild its stock with the county and the agencies that supervise the river, concedes some of what the artists put into the mural might not belong there.
“‘It’s their permit and their event, and we’ve been pulled in because of the work that we do,’ Backlar said. ‘It’s not what we thought it would be.’
“Councilman Ed Reyes, who originally supported Poli’s project and authorized the permit, said he regrets that decision because he believes the art has attracted gang members, who have added their tags to the riverbed walls.
“The graffiti ‘spilled out of the river channel, into the sidewalks, onto the handrails, into buildings,’ Reyes said. ‘Before it was a neutral place, but now we have clear indicators that rival gangs and taggers are showing up there.’”
Graffiti project painting grim picture. L.A. riverbed being turned into art, but critics argue many of images are obscene, inappropriate, by Raquel Maria Dillon, AP, April 6, 2008
Goat cheese lady at Atwater Farmers’ Market
People of NE Los Angeles:
GO to the Atwater Farmers’ Market, Sundays 10-2, buy some lemon and lavender infused goat cheese spread from the goat cheese lady (next to the sage honey lady), buy some strawberries from the stand across and slightly lift from her. Put spread on strawberry. Eat. I saw God, but you might have a different experience.
Just FYI neighbors. DO IT!
