Monday, March 18, 2013

Goya's Portrait of St. Ambrose


I would like to say a few words about this spooky and darkly beautiful painting done by Francisco de Goya in about 1796 or so that hangs in the Cleveland Museum of Art.

           First off, the painting is quite big; bigger than the biggest flat screen t.v. on your block, say. Here sits St. Ambrose in his bishop vestments emphasized boldly in white and gold, huge beard and tall hat with a large open book on his lap and quill pen poised to write. He is looking upwards. The background is pure black darkness. Out of the total nothingness we see St. Ambrose huge, imposing with a tortured look upwards towards his God. His expression indicates that a communion with God in all his immense power is about to take place and is no small matter.
          This bishop seems to tell us with his look that when the awesome force of God hits you you feel it in your body and soul and are made to remember your own earthly limitations by being totally exhausted from such an experience.He looks up as if to say, "O  Lord, one more time and then let me rest tomorrow night, let me rest for one night until the overwhelming force of your truth blasts my consciousness once again." The man looks like a tortured soul.
          The painting itself demands attention. Out of a deep darkness emerges the holy man in his elegant clothing on the cusp of another direct communication blast wave. Here comes the light. He's got his paper and pen ready. He's got that look. I imagine he takes a deep breath. He is outside of time.

Thursday, March 7, 2013

Poem of the Month (March) Larry Fopote


                                                   Tantrum In The Lockeroom

                  
               Gee, how many nails can I fit into this hammer
               and how many hours has the t.v. been on?
               Another Dollar Store is being built in town
               And no body likes M.C. Hammer anymore

                Why must we throttle and king prattle thru life lying about almost everything?
                Have we no guardian angels to helps us seek truth in this day and age?
                You mean to tell me, lowest of lows, that they don't have an app for that?

                We'll then to hell with it. I'm gonna throw a tantrum and shake my brooding soldier
                And imagine we're in the locker room
                And its half time of the biggest game of our lives.



Larry Fopote

Pilot Mountain, North Carolina

About the Poet:
Larry Fopote was born in Boon, West Virginia in 1974. When he was seven years old, his father, who was a Cardiologist landed a job at a prestigious hospital in Boston, Massachusetts moving the whole family in 1981.

From the age of seven until the age of twenty he was a big city kid. Then in 1994 he dropped out of Boston College and went to live deep in the woods in Southern Canada for a year on his own. The experience would have a profound impact on his life. He began writing poems during this time and eventually his first book of poems, 'Cry Me A River' was published by Wild Goat Press a year later. His poem, 'An American Gigolo With A Stutter' was included in the Anthology 'Best Mid-American Poems' of 1996 as selected by Jim Daniels. In 1997, Mr. Fopote absconded from society once again, this time relocating to a trailer in the middle of the desert ninety miles south of Alberqurque, New Mexico. Here he wrote his second book of poems entitled, "Taco Abuses and other Yellow Flowers" published a year later by the New Mexico State Press in collaboration with Milk It Arts Ltd. His poem, 'Fake Flinchers Make Lousy Bedfellows" was included in the Anthology 'Best  Mid-American Poems of 1999. That year he went back to Boston College to finish his degree in Social Economics and graduated in May 2001. He wrote only a handful of poems in those two years. In 2002 he dropped out of poetry all together explaining to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, "There's so much bad poetry that its an avalanche. There's so many hungry poet dogs out there that I might as well let 'em keep yakking and eating eachother." He used his student loan money to finance a trip to Europe the last two months of 2002. He wrote only one poem in Paris, and legend has it it was a real doozy but he gave it to a waitress to whom it was dedicated and no one else has ever read it. In 2003 he was invited to give a Poetry Reading at Michigan State University as part of their Young Poet's Series.
 After reading the first two poems it became apparent he was intoxicated and Fopote stopped in the middle of the third poem and went on a fifteen minute rant on how technology was killing attention spans which spun into him insulting the crowd for their own stupidities. Somebody jokingly tossed a banana up and it hit him in the foot and this so infuriated Fopote he jumped into the crowd causing a melee. He was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct. He was arrested again in 2004 in Maine for possession of Cocaine. Three months later he marries a school teacher and they have one child and live in a cabin in Maine woods. in 2005 despite the incident in Michigan, he is asked to read his poems and does at Vermont University's, 'Young Poet's On the Rise' Series. By all accounts he's the most interesting and most authentically 'blue-collar poet' out of the group. He continues to work odd jobs to raise his child but in late 2006 in busted for possession of Cocaine. His wife and child leave him. His two previous books of poems are selling well for such small presses and were in the process of being reprinted. In 2007 His wife remarries and a long custody battle over their child ensues. While intoxicated crashes his car in Montreal and spends a month in the hospital.
While in bed writes first new poems in several years. The Book becomes 'Hokie Fudge Incinerator', a series of twenty eight poems. It wins the New England Young Poet's Award for 2008 and is nominated  for best book of poems by several magazines and journals.  He's arrested for drunk driving later in the year and also is beaten up by six men outside a bar in Manhattan during a visit to see his family. 2009 loses all award money and loan money in a three day gambling binge in Las Vegas. Arrested for a disorderly conduct outside a strip club in Vegas. Checks into a rehab facility in Maine in November of 2009. Stays until May 2010 when he marries a lady he meets while there and they have one child. They have been living happily tucked away in the woods in Pilot Mountain, North Carolina ever since and Missing Manifest Blog is glad to have received Mr. Fopote's first public poem in over three years and we think it should be our poem of the month for March.



Tuesday, March 5, 2013

Cleveland Museum of Art and Its Love for Technology

          Gallery One at the Cleveland Museum of Art is the new gallery space devoted to using touch-screens as a way to enhance information about various art works in the collection and as a way to interact more directly with a particular piece. Touch the screen in one spot and it may give historical context to the actual painting that hangs three or four feet behind the flat-screen on the wall. Touch the screen in another spot and it might give you information on how the painting's particular process is carried out. On another screen you can drag your finger and it gives you a splatter/drip effect with which you can fill up the screen with colors and it informs you that you're painting like Jackson Pollack used to do.(Of course Pollack had his canvas on the ground and would physically encircle it, but nevermind) Kids love it!
          On another screen, this one equipped with a camera, you see your self and when you strike a pose, the screen searches a particular sculpture in the museum's database that some how matches up to the position your body pose is in. It then takes the picture with the art work next to you posing and you can email it to a friend. People get a kick out of seeing their pose linked with a Greek statue or a Religious figure. They laugh and have fun with it and a trip to the museum should be fun and loose and a sense of play should be encouraged to an extent.
          The problem, and it is a major problem from my point of view, is that the museum is elevating the technology over the experience of looking at the actual physical artwork itself. In Gallery One, in one area there is a flat touch screen and three or four feet behind it is a Picasso from his Cubist period. All day long kids and students, young and old, go up to the screen and touch it and learn about the historical context of Cubism. They can drag with their finger the different parts of the painting on the screen and re-arrange them in collage fashion and be silly with the arrangement. They can do all kinds of things with the touch-screen. But all day long what barely nobody did, was to go up to the actual painting and just look and take it in. Cleveland, we have a problem.
          Another aspect of CMA's emphasis on technology for the experience of the casual visitor is in the ability to sign out i-pad's equipped with a special art app so that when you wander around the museum and stop at certain pieces in the collection with an 'Art Lens' distinction on the placard, you raise up the i-pad and look at the piece thru the i-pad screen (thereby forfeiting an experience with the painting in its real size and presence) and you learn all sorts of historical context or scientific analysis on the layers underneath the painting or even little video tutorials on process. I can't help but to think we are infatuated with more and more information while at the expense of less and less meaning. It's a big mess when it comes to approaching a painting and absorbing its presence.
This culture has made mere 'image' everything. I'm all for using new technologies to enhance the learning about and better appreciating of artworks and I'm all for finding ways to get young children interested in the art museum but I'm not for any of it (and neither should the director) when these technologies are to the detriment of experiencing the actual art work. Everybody needs to take a deep breath and figure a way to help people realize that a picture of a Van Gogh on a digital screen or in a book or on a website is not the same and not as real as the actual painting. At this rate, in fifty years there will just be ultra hi-def digital reproductions of paintings hanging up in museums while the real ones collect dust behind the scenes and no one will seem to mind very much at all.

Thursday, February 14, 2013

(From the Craigslist Universe Archives--Missed Connections)



 h255d-3607445574@pers.craigslist.org 
Posted: 2013-02-10, 12:44PM EST

D&W Gashlight Village Meat Dept. - w4m - 25 (Gashlight Village)


I came in yesterday with my friend to get some pork sirloin and fava beans for dinner. You were the gentleman in the black framed glasses that helped me out. You seemed very professional and established, so I was shocked to see you on that side of the counter. Either way, you were super cute and now I feel guilty for not saying something to you at that moment because I was with my friend and she can be like a rabid dog at times if she sees me flirting with a cute hipster cub. And anyways my tongue locked and my mouth froze when I went to speak to you. You looked in my eyes as if to say, 'This is a Long Life" and handed me the wrapped sirloin. Perhaps next time I'll have the courage to say something to you if there is a next time.I'm moving to Zimbabwe in two months to teach English. I know you probably won't see this, but if you do, please respond.
  • Location: Gashlight Village
  • it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests or flannels

Mystery Image of the Month (February)


Tuesday, February 12, 2013

George W. Bush, The Painter

          I was annihilated by shock and awe when I saw the recently leaked images of oil paintings made by none other than former and possibly one of the worst presidents ever, George W. Bush. Who knew? But the wildest, most wacked out thing about it is that I actually really like the paintings. I have only seen two. Both are paintings of a man in a bathroom. Presumably these are self-portraits though you can't really see his face in either one. In the first, he stands without shirt on, grey haired, facing away from the painter.
          The only glimpse we get of his face is in the small circular mirror in front of him. We can barely see it and so there is no obvious resemblance to the 41st President of the United States. The other one is a view that just shows the man's legs in a tub of water as he takes his bath. Its, well, odd. Although each one doesn't necessarily  reveal the presence of some great draughtsmen like Da Vinci or Rafeal or whoever, they fascinate me and not only because of who the painter is.
         There is a playfulness to them. They are not hyper-detailed ultra realistic depictions of the human body in a closed space. They are painted and you can tell.
Already I have seen stories from various websites where big Art critics have come out of the wood-work to spew their psycho babble in a cohesive manner. One guy from the New Republic linked the bathtub painting to G.W's regret over his handling of Hurricane Katrina. Really? What can we tell from the actual paintings by looking at them with out a thought about who painted them?
         A few things: The subject does not want to be looked at. He faces away from the painting and the view of the painter, who is doing the looking and from us. The subject is alone in a space that is usually closed off from others while being used. (Aka: a restroom in the home) Issues of Isolation, Reflection, and Peace vibe off the paintings without trying too hard and that's a nice thing to pull off. They are wonderfully simple. I like the playful style and the odd, sorta anti-portrait portrait function thats going on. They are also unpretentious as hell. I just wish the man who made these two paintings would have been a painter instead of a President.

Saturday, February 2, 2013

The One Thing I Like About John Boehner and Another Reason I Love Youtube

        
          Though I do not agree with virtually any policy issues that he may espouse and though I may view him and his Republican cronies as the real culprits for the gridlock and impotency of Congress, there is one thing that I actually respect about John Boehner. I like that he is a man who cries in public. I appreciate the fact that he shows emotion. It sounds too simple to say but I like a guy who isn't afraid to cry. John Boehner's ideas about how to run the country may be complete bullshit but he can't be all bad I say to myself.

          Recently I found myself watching youtube clips of pregnancy announcements and of marriage proposals and of surprise reunions and I didn't just watch one or two. The other day I watched these types of clips for about two hours straight! Was there something wrong with me? Did I develop a strange hormonal imbalance now that I am in my 30's? Would I still pee standing up?

          I think what I became addicted to was seeing authentic emotion. In most of these clips you see honest tears of joy. In a society filled with surface realities and a society where the media is always touting guns and violence and bad news it was so refreshing and rewarding to see people still celebrate joy in their hearts and still express love for one another. Then I stumbled upon a clip of Comedian and Talk Show host, Steve Harvey. During a taping of his show on his birthday, his producers told him they had a surprise. Via live satellite from Florida they showed a couple who looked like they were in their fifties wishing him a happy birthday. He started to sob. It was beautiful. Watch the clip for the explanation as I slide the Kleenex box a little closer.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1oxEitLU9ps

Sunday, January 27, 2013

Urban Meyer Is From My Hometown--So What

        


          In my hometown of Ashtabula, Ohio there are now three signs posted in various areas on main roads as you enter into city limits from the east, from the west and from the south. They announce that Urban Meyer was born here. Urban Meyer is a college football coach and by college football standards, a very good one. He became well known to college football fans in the last half dozen years in large part by his winning two National Championships as the head coach of the Florida Gators between 2005 and 2010. Last year, in a sorta homecoming, he became coach of the Ohio State Buckeyes and in that first year they did not lose a game (Although they were Bowl ineligible due to NCAA Violations and thus didn't get to play in a big finale.) He's probably the hottest football coach in the land.

          In terms of Division 1 A Football Programs, Urban Meyer's winning percentage ranks first out of all active coaches. He has coached at Bowling Green St, Utah, University of Florida and now Ohio State and has had major success at each program, not to mention becoming a multi-millionaire in the process.Ok. So he is a really good football coach at the collegiate level and a wealthy individual. I think we can all agree on that.

          But does this fact really give credence to having his name being erected as representative product of the pride of Ashtabula? I have my doubts. Is this what Ashtabula is trying to extol as some sorta demented claim to fame? And do you really need three signs so as to not miss a single person entering into 'Urban' territory and have them miss out on the idea that they are in the glorious proximity of where once Urban Meyer might have walked down the street?

          Though of course he only lived in Ashtabula until college and never moved back he has made special appearances in Ashtabula over the years helping out local sports organizations and their ilk.
From what I can gather he has donated his time and money and influence and is prolly not a bad guy.

          But c'mon. HE IS A FOOTBALL COACH.

          So he was born in Ashtabula and left as a teenager. If we take even a cursory glance at the History of Ashtabula we can find great people who maybe weren't born in Ashtabula but spent the majority of their lives there and whose actions are deserving of serious public recognition. Surely if Urban Meyer has three signs posted up than some one like William Hubbard, who was a member of the Ashtabula County Anti-Slave Society, and who ran a house on the underground railroad to help free slaves in the times before the Civil War should have just as many or more. Its unknown precisely how many slaves he helped but his house was very close to Lake Erie and so he would house them until they could escape across the lake and into Canada.

         One surviving record indicates there were 39 slaves hiding out in his basement and hay loft at one time. To them the place became known as 'Mother's Hubbard's Cupboard'.

         To Ashtabula's credit, the old Hubbard House still stands and is now a museum open in the summer and is actually cool as hell if you're history nerd like myself.(Too bad its only open in the Summer.)

         I'm not bashing Urban Meyer or demanding that his shiny aluminum signs be torn down or defaced but it would be nice if the leaders of Ashtabula, whoever they may be nowadays, exercised a little perspective.

         In a place whose downtown is filled with abandoned buildings, whose unemployment runs rampant, where only shreds of community involvement still exist, (outside the sports community) where old school building get torn down and where the only thing being built are 'Family Dollar' stores, it would be nice for them to understand this basic truth: You have to be extremely intelligent to be a great football coach but dumb enough to think it matters.




Thursday, January 24, 2013

Lets Talk About Guns!




Guns! Guns! Guns! What do we do about them? How does what we decide to do about them affect out 2nd Amendment rights as American citizens? Guns! This is the hot topic nowadays on CNN  or your local facebook news feed or where the hell ever and I'm sure the tone and texture of the conversation differs depending on which part of the country you happen to be in at the time.

Obama has passed a series of executive actions related to gun control ( though I hardly doubt any of which will actually prevent something like the Newtown massacre from happening again.) Senator Diane Fienstein of California wants to ban all assault weapons and is introducing a bill to that effect which according to CNN's Wolf Blitzer has no chance of passing. Guns! Guns! Guns! We Americans love our Guns don't we? Do we?

I like watching Bruce Willis cap the bad guys in DIE HARD just as much as anybody. I grew up playing with GI JOES and each little action figure came with his own special gun. We grew up watching movie upon movie upon movie where no matter the plot, gunplay figured a prominent role. Recently, as a Christmas gift I bought my little two year old nephew a toy gun that shoots soft darts that couldn't hurt a fly. But then afterwards I thought, is this where we start our infatuation with guns?

Maybe I should have got him that rad coloring book instead. Now wait. Just because I like DIE HARD and just because I grew up watching action movies where people getting shot and killed was routine, does that make me a homicidal maniac? Does it even mean that I might enjoy firing a gun at a target or an unsuspecting deer out in the woods during hunting season? What the hell does it all mean?

And if the government bans assault weapons, will this keep innocent people safe from violence? Or is it really a tactic to get guns out of the hands of citizens so the government can enact their tyrannical master plan and control the masses without the masses being able to fight back? The latter seems to be the opinion of conservatives who lately have been defending their Second Amendment rights with the zeal of a baptist preacher on Sunday.
I go to the art museum and look at the guns and rifles from the middle ages. Aesthetically speaking, some are quite beautiful with their ornate stocks carved from ivory by hand by a craftsmen five hundred years ago.

On this topic everybody seems to have their opinion and their diatribe ready to unfurl. I don't know what to add or what to subtract. I personally am not a gun owner. I see no reason to own a gun. Some people feel the need to own a gun for protection. Ostensibly, that makes sense I guess. I lived in NYC for three years and never once felt like I needed a gun for protection. Some people like to go hunting. I get that. I can understand that when you go hunting, you use a gun.OK, but it does seem stupid to be a 'proud gun owner'.  Some people are just so proud of their guns and of the power they possess and that rubs me the wrong way and seems about as dumb as being proud of your shiny new car. Maybe if I owned my own gun and started shooting at the moon I'd get hooked and love guns and understand better those who are furiously against the government trying to control them.

Maybe if I had my own assault rifle like the kind used in the massacre in Newtown, I'd get a big rush of adrenaline and feel its power course thru my veins as I obliterated pop cans in some field or blew away a deer in five seconds easy and as soon as I got back on facebook I 'd post a big splashing sincere defense of my Second Amendment right to own firearms. For the time being, I'll just watch DIE HARD 2 and next Christmas I think I'll buy my little nephew a book instead.

Saturday, January 19, 2013

Mona Lisa Is Now A Space Explorer

           Leonardo da Vinci's 'Mona Lisa' is one of the world's most recognizable paintings and paradoxically, probably the least truly looked at image in contemporary life. Its become so ubiquitous and so manipulated, with its use on credit cards, t-shirts, websites, social networks, TV shows, etc., that who the hell nowadays actually takes the time to experience the actual Mona Lisa? Art Critics and Art Historians and Academic aficionados? (Of course this all points to a much larger issue I have with Art in 21st century life but will not digress into at present.)You might answer: all the millions of tourists or visitors who go to the Louvre each year. Right? Well, not so much as you find out when you actually go to the Louvre to see for yourself as I had the chance to last summer.
          I mean, I didn't go to the Louvre with this as my purpose in mind, but I was certainly curious. Anyways as soon as you locate where in the museum the painting resides, you enter in and see a throbbing mass of people with their cell phone cameras out and clogging in front of the small, framed, object. Nobody is actually looking at the actual painting. 
          A million digital pictures are being taken through various quality cameras. Hours and hours of digital video accumulates and incorporates the crowd and the noise and the other picture takers. I bulldozed in as far as I could, got the best look I could but the swarm was too much for me and a few minutes later, I retreated. 
         Did you know that just the other day NASA( you remember them) beamed a digital image of the Mona Lisa 240,000 miles to a Satellite near the Moon? Its part of experiments in communication between earth and space and to eventually transmit information through space. There's a brief thing about it on slate.com. You might want to check it out.
         NASA broke down the image by a 152 by 200 pixel grid and then used a lazer to send it. Special software then rebuilt the image when it arrived and corrected all sorts of blemishes and fragments caused by the journey itself. Its safe to say the mona lisa is now the most fucked with image of a painting of all time. And it also reminds me of something William Burroughs wrote--something to the effect of "when scientists with all their money and gadgets discover the outer reaches of space, they'll find that artists got there first." Something like that. It also reminds me that when it comes to art works nowadays, we live in a 'surface' culture. 

Tuesday, January 15, 2013

On Federico Fellini's 8 1/2

        

          To me and my way of experiencing movies on the big screen, Fellini's film, '8 1/2' is a true masterpiece of cinema and great piece of Art. It gets better every time I see it. Where to begin? Well, here's what I like about it: The film has a fluid and poetic movement that never subsides even when we go into melancholy flashback sequences or when we slow into serious conversations between Guido and his wife about Guido's infidelities and constant lying. The camera moves and pans and dips and rises. The characters are always moving too; whether it be shuffling in line to take the 'cure' or dancing or wondering around the grounds of the health spa or goofing around or the last scene where all the characters gather in a circle and hold hands and rotate in a communal celebration of life and love and art.

         And then we have the score by Nino Rota which when combined with certain imagery moves me to the verge of tears especially when Guido flashes back to when he was a child and he's placed in the wine cauldrons with the other kids who are jumping up and down and splashing in the grape liquids and how he's carefully and tenderly tucked in bed by maternal women. There are so many things in this movie that strike a personal nerve with me I won't go into all of them. ( I was basically raised by wonderful and caring women as well.) That theme by Nino Rota, ah how beautifully melancholy and full of the pangs of time having gone by. When I recently saw the film at the Cinematheque in Cleveland, it was during this scene I had to wipe my eyes to keep my friend from noticing. I love how Fellini blends reality with memory and imagination and does so in such a seamless way.

         Marcello Mastroianni as Guido is pitch perfect as Fellini's alter ego.Whatsmore, Guido's own shortcomings and flaws when it comes to relationships with woman can't help but to remind me of my own.  It's not fun to admit how well I feel like I can relate to Guido throughout the movie and there is an element of confession that I find interesting even if it can't right all his wrongs.

        And I would be leaving out a huge element of appeal if I failed to mention the beautiful black and white cinematography by Gianni di Venanzo. Heart of Hearts, I LOVE this film. It bursts with the joy of life, the pain of regret and what sometimes seems like the unbridgeable gap between men and women.

Friday, January 11, 2013

Nostalgic Glimpses Are Sweet


Hints To Figure Out Who The Person Is In The Mystery Image

Mystery Image for the Month (January)


Hint # 1: She was born in the 1800's on the outskirts of an Eastern European town.

# 2:  She was leader of a radical feminist movement that revolted against the men of town.

# 3: One of her nicknames was 'The Bitter Queen'

# 4 She was rumored to have castrated three different men. That claim has never been verified.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

Packet of Chicklets When You're 6 yrs Old


(From the craigslist universe archive #2) I wish I could afford an assault weapon and Holy Cow Pies Batman


I wish I could AFFORD an assault weapon



Date: 
 qwdfdeffcceei@craigslist.org
I've been to the gun shows looking for one of these high quality/high capacity guns.
Must be nice to have that much money to piss away.
Same goes for a higher caliber pistol.

It will be cheaper to move somewhere far away from assholes.
That's exactly what I am going to do.
  • it's NOT ok to contact this poster with sermons or other solicitations








re.holy cow pies batman (nc) (okayyyy???)


Date: 
 xphdk-352343434972@pers.craigslist.org
In the first place asshole-I am a black female. I have plenty to make me happy. I just like visitin' this board cuz it be a fun place to spew off nonsense n have a lil fun. 
2. I don't give a fuck about who be havin guns or what they do with 'em(unless I am involved I don't give a rats ass).........................so for you to pass judgement you lil bitch(or i'm startin' to get the inclination that you are perhaps a fat white bitch hoe) is arrogant and u need to shut your conceited trap biotch!!!! I think that's 'nuff said cuz I have a feelin I know who yo ass is biotch!
  • Location: okayyyy???
  • it's NOT ok to contact this poster with services or other commercial interests
PostingID:35256567774




Thursday, January 3, 2013

On 'Django Unchained'

A few words on Quentin Tarantino's new film 'Django Unchained'.

                        I have several friends on facebook who are ranting and raving about this film and clamoring to go see it immediately a second time because to them it was just that good. I wish I shared in their unbridled enthusiasm and full acceptance of the film. I love Quentin Tarantino. I don't like everything he's done equally but I am always glad when a new Tarantino movie comes out because no one makes 'em like he does and he is, in my opinion, one of the top three or four most influential directors of the last 50 years no matter what. He is able to distill our collective love for movies in general and lay it out for our enjoyment in clever ways. I like all the self referential humor, the pop violence, the centrality of the music, the way he has his characters put on an act so it becomes and act within an act and of course, just the way his films look.(Credit to some wonderful Cinematographers)

                       The first half of this movie is borderline great. The Dr Shultze character played brilliantly again by Christophe Waltz in some ways steals the show and for me in some ways overshadows Jaime Foxx's Django. The early scene where Dr Shultze comes upon the slave traders in the night is Tarantino at his best from beginning to end.  The whole bounty hunting section with Django gaining confidence and wearing new fashionable clothes was funny, violent and entertaining and we're flowing along with bursting colors and natural locations from cinematographer Bob Richardson, and the pacing is good and then we bumble into the Leonardo DeCaprio section with Django trying to find his wife and rescue her. For me, this is where things become very unfortunately flawed. Here's just a few: Why concoct the ruse that Django and Dr. Shultz are in the business to buy a Mandingo fighter if Django's wife can simply be purchased? I could understand it if Leo's Mr. Candy's character was in love with her--then an elaborate ploy would make more sense. But apparently Mr. Candy didn't really mind giving her up as long as it was for enough money.The scenes back at Candyland just didn't work well.  If it was a place renown for its Mandingo fighting, we saw no visual evidence of it--And really, for me, as soon as Dr. Shultze's character is removed, the movie loses a big part of its magic.

                       In conclusion, something still bugs me about Jamie Foxx in the role as Django. I wonder if Will Smith or somebody would have made a better fit. Still, its the most realistic western I have ever seen and probably one of my favorites within the genre though to be honest I haven't even seen most of the classic westerns. The source of much controversy, the constant use of the N word, in my opinion, keeps the reality of the piece in its authentic skin and vibe. While I didn't go as berserk for the film as some of my friends, there is still alot to like and admire and soak in with this picture. It may not be my favorite Tarantino film but its certainly not my least favorite either. What if, because of how beautiful she was and how she spoke fluent German, Dr. Shultze falls in love with Django's wife and conflict ensues? Or even if Mr. Candy... Oh, I don't know. Maybe I'll go see again myself. What the heck.

Van Gogh's Portrait of Adeline Ravoux

                      If you are ever in Cleveland and you don't know what to do, if you think it's all abandoned buildings and ole' steel mills and grey smoke stacks and bleak skies, well then take a turn and visit the Cleveland Museum of Art. There, among many many things, you will find a painting that Mr.Vincent Van Gogh painted in the last months of his life in 1890. It is the portrait of 13 yr. old Adeline Ravoux. Though I get annoyed at reading descriptions of paintings in Art books, I'm gonna give it a shot as long as you remember the only real way to experience paintings, is in the physical world, in their presence/absence sorcery exchange.

                    Up close you can see the thick brush strokes of her face and light hair. Her eyebrows are bent in consternation. Before I read officially that the person in the painting in real life was 13 yrs old I figured she was several years older. The thick globs of paint for her hair, her dress and especially her face with its look of resigned sadness as she peers out at nothing in particular indicate a laborious heaviness. She seems to carry the look of one who has been put to work hard her whole life. Her look says I am sick to death of manual labor and I will not wear a false mask or put on an act. Since she was the daughter of the man who owned the Inn where Van Gogh was staying in Auvers, north of Paris, one could assume she was kept busy tending to rooms and guests and a multitude of chores.

                    And it seems we juxtapose this heavy, gritty blue collar feel against the beauty of this vital young lady with her long hair pulled back in a tail and whose colors and color combinations do something to me mysterious and effect the overall vibe of the painting like the colors in a hip current film by Tarantino or the Cohen Brothers and seems futuristic for its time. Imagine sea-foam green, almost a fluorescent green but not really,(this is her dress) and imagine it against a thick black background.  Now imagine her face. She does not look at the viewer. She seems to be biding her time until she may be freed from this posing obligation.

                    Perhaps the girl's Father wanted a painting of his daughter and maybe it paid Van Gogh's rent for a few days. I don't know and I don't need to know. Every time I am in Cleveland and at the Museum I go back to this painting. I like to see her as someone in her twenties who didn't let the grime and shit and labor of life bring her down. Instead she shined and followed her dreams. I thought about easy metaphors about the city itself but I thought again. Then I thought about how this painting was once owned by one of the wealthiest families in Cleveland. Let me re-focus.

                   She is the way I like women. No make up, nothing opulent and gaudy. Though Van Gogh's use of color is bold and full of force and a big reason why this appeals to me on different levels, its also the appeal of Adeline's disgruntled yet stoic patience as she waits to be set free from the pose, perhaps from the Inn, her Father, from her life style. She's too damn pretty and too damn smart to just be the Inn Keeper's Daughter.