Thursday, March 29, 2007
Gay in Iran
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) produced a short documentary on gay rights (and lack thereof) in Iran that aired on March 7, 2007. Under the current regime, homosexuality is a capitol offense. Check it out at http://www.cbc.ca/sunday/2007/03/030407_1.html
Living with Alzheimer's
There is a great article on Alzheimer's in today's New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/health/29alzheimers.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
It examines the rocky road in the relationship between a person with Alzheimer's and his/her spouse turned caregiver. The writer looks at how people afflicted search for coping techniques especially in the early stages - when they must stand witness to its devastating effects.
It examines the rocky road in the relationship between a person with Alzheimer's and his/her spouse turned caregiver. The writer looks at how people afflicted search for coping techniques especially in the early stages - when they must stand witness to its devastating effects.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
San Francisco Ahead in Environmental Policy
Kudos to environmentalists in the city of San Francisco. Mayor Gavin Newsom just signed a proposition to ban plastic bag use in supermarkets. See the following link for more information: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8888798
This is a good lesson for cities such as Los Angeles which do not have the ban. Please know that:
In this country, an estimated 12,000,000 barrels of oil are required to produce the 100 billion plastic bags used annually
and in every square mile of ocean it is estimated that there are over 46,000 pieces of plastic.
This is what I do when I go to the supermarket:
- Do not use plastic baggies for your fruits and veggies. Just take them au natural and wash them well when you get home.
- Take canvas bags, or reuse paper bags when you go grocery shopping.
Also,
- Re-use pastic sandwich baggies and ziplock bags at home.
And, this is a BIG one.
-When you go to Starbucks, or any other coffee shop, do not ask for a to-go cup. If you are planning on enjoying your beverage in the store, then ask for a ceramic mug. They all have them available per request only. If you plan on taking your coffee to go, then bring your own reusable canister or coffee tumbler.
When it comes to protecting the Earth, don't let the lure of convenience haze your moral compass.
This is a good lesson for cities such as Los Angeles which do not have the ban. Please know that:
In this country, an estimated 12,000,000 barrels of oil are required to produce the 100 billion plastic bags used annually
and in every square mile of ocean it is estimated that there are over 46,000 pieces of plastic.
This is what I do when I go to the supermarket:
- Do not use plastic baggies for your fruits and veggies. Just take them au natural and wash them well when you get home.
- Take canvas bags, or reuse paper bags when you go grocery shopping.
Also,
- Re-use pastic sandwich baggies and ziplock bags at home.
And, this is a BIG one.
-When you go to Starbucks, or any other coffee shop, do not ask for a to-go cup. If you are planning on enjoying your beverage in the store, then ask for a ceramic mug. They all have them available per request only. If you plan on taking your coffee to go, then bring your own reusable canister or coffee tumbler.
When it comes to protecting the Earth, don't let the lure of convenience haze your moral compass.
Friday, March 23, 2007
Sarko? Segolène? U.S. Media Missing Out On Dynamic Presidential Election
It seems like we just rang in the New Year and already the battle for presidential contender is well underway. Obama? Clinton? Edwards? Giuliani? How much do we really care? As a registered voter and once-upon-a-time college activist, I used to wear my politics on my shirt. But now, I’m just not that interested anymore. Besides, there’s a much more interesting presidential election just around the corner in France. What you don’t know? I’m not surprised. However abundant coverage of the 2008 U.S. presidential election is locally, reporting on the French election has proved embarrassingly non-existent. If Katie Couric can’t be bothered to mention a G8 presidential election then she should just pack up, go back to NBC, and introduce party planning tips on the Today Show.
If I weren’t in Paris this past winter, I would have been in the dark myself. Let me fill you in. Chirac is on his way out. The two forerunners are Segolène Royale and Nicolas Sarkozy. Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French version of Pat Buchanan, is also in the race. Le Pen may be campaigning hard, but I think the French take him as seriously as we did Buchanan.
The favorite to win is Sarkozy, and I’m thrilled. He is a self-described Gaulist with a young energy and strong presence who wants to shake things up in the government. He reminds me of Tony Blair. Of course not everyone is as excited about him as I am. A French friend of mine in his sixties doesn’t see the appeal. “He doesn’t have the charisma of Chirac”, he tells me. I was puzzled. I didn’t realize Chirac had charisma. Truth be told, I never paid a good deal of attention to French politics until I was caught swimming in it. In Paris, it couldn’t be ignored. It was on the radio, in print, in conversation, and of course, on TV. TV - That’s what did it for me.
I caught Sarkozy on a French television special one night after dinner. The show was called “Un Question A Vous Poser” or literally “A Question to Ask You”. Despite my less than perfect French and jaded penchant for all things political, I was hooked. I was enthralled. Charisma? Sarkozy has it oozing out his suit and tie.
The format was Q & A with roughly 50 voters in amphitheatre-style seating while Sarkozy stood squarely on stage behind a podium. It was as if he faced a tiered firing squad. There was a host somewhere in the background. The show started at 8PM and lasted for nearly 3 hours. And this was primetime television.
The program was a great demonstration of how the French do democracy – with honesty, pride, and passion. There were questioners from the city as well as the country. Young and old. Married and single. Classy and classless. But that didn’t matter. They each had a question to ask their potential president.
Questions ranged from social security and retirement, to the extended workweek and racism against French-Arabs. Questioners, for the most part, had complete free reign over the microphone. Sure, they had chosen their topics beforehand and provided this information, along with their demographics, to the producers. The host called on questioners accordingly. But this was it as far as organization goes. Things did tend to get out of hand.
Case in point. France does not approve of gay adoption. Neither does Sarkozy. Three passion-filled gentlemen openly disagreed with him. One asked how he could champion equal rights for all French people, and blatantly deny those same rights for homosexuals. They put him on the spot. They interrupted him when he spoke. Consistently. It was great. The host didn’t interject, and there was no Sarkozy PR wizard ready to pull the plug. Lack of censorship on French TV isn’t just naked women on commercials. It is true democracy in action.
Such occasions also provide the ultimate opportunity for great political contenders to shine. And shine Sarkozy did. He asked to defend himself. He didn’t squirm at a touchy issue like gay adoption. He held on to his convictions. Pandering was nil. What an honest politician.
That episode wasn’t the only one where Sarkozy seemed to face a firing squad. But for nearly three hours, he really held his own. It didn’t only make for good democracy, it made for good television.
One of the most salient lessons I learned in college was to question authority. You may think this is the framework for anarchy, but it’s not. It’s the framework for democracy. It’s the framework for cooperative government. France has come a long way since the French Revolution. Now instead of using a guillotine to question their leaders, they use their words. Bravo! Now this makes for politics I can get interested in. I just hope U.S. media gets in gear before it’s all over.
If I weren’t in Paris this past winter, I would have been in the dark myself. Let me fill you in. Chirac is on his way out. The two forerunners are Segolène Royale and Nicolas Sarkozy. Jean-Marie Le Pen, the French version of Pat Buchanan, is also in the race. Le Pen may be campaigning hard, but I think the French take him as seriously as we did Buchanan.
The favorite to win is Sarkozy, and I’m thrilled. He is a self-described Gaulist with a young energy and strong presence who wants to shake things up in the government. He reminds me of Tony Blair. Of course not everyone is as excited about him as I am. A French friend of mine in his sixties doesn’t see the appeal. “He doesn’t have the charisma of Chirac”, he tells me. I was puzzled. I didn’t realize Chirac had charisma. Truth be told, I never paid a good deal of attention to French politics until I was caught swimming in it. In Paris, it couldn’t be ignored. It was on the radio, in print, in conversation, and of course, on TV. TV - That’s what did it for me.
I caught Sarkozy on a French television special one night after dinner. The show was called “Un Question A Vous Poser” or literally “A Question to Ask You”. Despite my less than perfect French and jaded penchant for all things political, I was hooked. I was enthralled. Charisma? Sarkozy has it oozing out his suit and tie.
The format was Q & A with roughly 50 voters in amphitheatre-style seating while Sarkozy stood squarely on stage behind a podium. It was as if he faced a tiered firing squad. There was a host somewhere in the background. The show started at 8PM and lasted for nearly 3 hours. And this was primetime television.
The program was a great demonstration of how the French do democracy – with honesty, pride, and passion. There were questioners from the city as well as the country. Young and old. Married and single. Classy and classless. But that didn’t matter. They each had a question to ask their potential president.
Questions ranged from social security and retirement, to the extended workweek and racism against French-Arabs. Questioners, for the most part, had complete free reign over the microphone. Sure, they had chosen their topics beforehand and provided this information, along with their demographics, to the producers. The host called on questioners accordingly. But this was it as far as organization goes. Things did tend to get out of hand.
Case in point. France does not approve of gay adoption. Neither does Sarkozy. Three passion-filled gentlemen openly disagreed with him. One asked how he could champion equal rights for all French people, and blatantly deny those same rights for homosexuals. They put him on the spot. They interrupted him when he spoke. Consistently. It was great. The host didn’t interject, and there was no Sarkozy PR wizard ready to pull the plug. Lack of censorship on French TV isn’t just naked women on commercials. It is true democracy in action.
Such occasions also provide the ultimate opportunity for great political contenders to shine. And shine Sarkozy did. He asked to defend himself. He didn’t squirm at a touchy issue like gay adoption. He held on to his convictions. Pandering was nil. What an honest politician.
That episode wasn’t the only one where Sarkozy seemed to face a firing squad. But for nearly three hours, he really held his own. It didn’t only make for good democracy, it made for good television.
One of the most salient lessons I learned in college was to question authority. You may think this is the framework for anarchy, but it’s not. It’s the framework for democracy. It’s the framework for cooperative government. France has come a long way since the French Revolution. Now instead of using a guillotine to question their leaders, they use their words. Bravo! Now this makes for politics I can get interested in. I just hope U.S. media gets in gear before it’s all over.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
On Actors...
I watched Oprah’s Oscar special on Thursday night. Famous Oscar winners were paired up and let loose. The first pair was George Clooney and Julia Roberts. They barbequed at Clooney’s Hollywood Hills and took a call from Brad Pitt. It should have all seemed too glamorous and intangible to the home viewer – but it wasn’t. Watching these people in a pseudo-natural habitat ( come on, how natural can you be with cameras and assistants all around), made me realize something big – no HUGE : Actors are rather boring people.
Their blocking was off, the lighting could have been tweaked, and the script was all over the place. Most importantly, their dialogue needed a lot of work. Julia repeated the same question incessantly (“are you dating anyone”) to the point where someone needed to yell “cut”!
And as to George being such a funny guy? Well, he wasn’t NOT funny. He remined me of a fun bachelor-type uncle you visit who has the same one-liner that made you laugh when you were a kid. He was funny in a self-deprecating kind of way.
The second pair was Russell Crowe and Nicole Kidman. These two were really something. Actors are so sensitive. Both were constantly on the verge of tears. It makes sense. If they are good actors (especially of the dramatic variety) then they need to tap into a well of sensitivity just below the surface. That’s why they are so unpredictable.
And it wasn’t like they were talking about losing a dog, or a child, or a parent. What made them tear up were issues they battled with themselves. Nicole: “I don’t understand why people think you are so volatile and aggressive”. Russell: (holding back tears) “They just don’t understand.” That’s not word-for-word but close enough.
As for Nicole Kidman, ten years married to Tom Cruise was plenty of time for the aliens to re-shape her body into something un-human. Is that even her real hairline? What’s with the monotone voice, anyway?
The third pair was Sidney Poitier and Jaime Foxx. I’m not sure how I feel about Jaime Foxx. He is definitely a great entertainer - I saw him at a fundraiser and he rocked the piano with his colorful Ray Charles impression. He managed to get a few hundred 60+ Jewish philanthropists to get up onto their feet and boogie like they were black. But I’m starting to think that’s what his shtick is - he is a great entertainer, not necessarily a great actor. Does anyone remember “In Living Color”? Sure he knows how to “do” Ray Charles and even “do” Sidney Poitier right in front of him – but I feel like it’s all his gimmick. Sidney Poitier, on the other hand, seemed like a great person. Really genuine, and human.
So, my overall impression of Oprah’s first ever Oscar pre-show? Actors are a pretty boring bunch……with a mess of issues. They are too sensitive, self-critical and self-involved (what, you’re surprised?). They like to gab with their friends about anything and nothing, and they have in-jokes which only they understand. My conclusion? Actors are pretty normal people. Without a great writer and a great script, they are just like you and me (well maybe you - I am a writer, after all).
Their blocking was off, the lighting could have been tweaked, and the script was all over the place. Most importantly, their dialogue needed a lot of work. Julia repeated the same question incessantly (“are you dating anyone”) to the point where someone needed to yell “cut”!
And as to George being such a funny guy? Well, he wasn’t NOT funny. He remined me of a fun bachelor-type uncle you visit who has the same one-liner that made you laugh when you were a kid. He was funny in a self-deprecating kind of way.
The second pair was Russell Crowe and Nicole Kidman. These two were really something. Actors are so sensitive. Both were constantly on the verge of tears. It makes sense. If they are good actors (especially of the dramatic variety) then they need to tap into a well of sensitivity just below the surface. That’s why they are so unpredictable.
And it wasn’t like they were talking about losing a dog, or a child, or a parent. What made them tear up were issues they battled with themselves. Nicole: “I don’t understand why people think you are so volatile and aggressive”. Russell: (holding back tears) “They just don’t understand.” That’s not word-for-word but close enough.
As for Nicole Kidman, ten years married to Tom Cruise was plenty of time for the aliens to re-shape her body into something un-human. Is that even her real hairline? What’s with the monotone voice, anyway?
The third pair was Sidney Poitier and Jaime Foxx. I’m not sure how I feel about Jaime Foxx. He is definitely a great entertainer - I saw him at a fundraiser and he rocked the piano with his colorful Ray Charles impression. He managed to get a few hundred 60+ Jewish philanthropists to get up onto their feet and boogie like they were black. But I’m starting to think that’s what his shtick is - he is a great entertainer, not necessarily a great actor. Does anyone remember “In Living Color”? Sure he knows how to “do” Ray Charles and even “do” Sidney Poitier right in front of him – but I feel like it’s all his gimmick. Sidney Poitier, on the other hand, seemed like a great person. Really genuine, and human.
So, my overall impression of Oprah’s first ever Oscar pre-show? Actors are a pretty boring bunch……with a mess of issues. They are too sensitive, self-critical and self-involved (what, you’re surprised?). They like to gab with their friends about anything and nothing, and they have in-jokes which only they understand. My conclusion? Actors are pretty normal people. Without a great writer and a great script, they are just like you and me (well maybe you - I am a writer, after all).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
