Saturday, July 17, 2004
>
July 17, 2004
GOING NOWHERE
We cannot expect to see any improvements in the quality of movies and related forms of
entertainment as long as we continue to accept the antiquated, grossly inaccurate and highly mailable system of merit we are stuck with today.
Profitable production of good motion pictures is still possible – and with firm standards of quality maintained to actually can bring about an increase in the actual number of person- the young, not-so-young and oldsters – who would attend movies with regularity and not only on the basis of shock pre-view enticements.
Unless such action is taken seriously, we can expect in a short time, the total demise of an industry which has been an intimate part of our American culture for many decades. Entire generations of movie goers have served well as good citizens of our nation and few families are without the influence of the good movies its members have shared. Such values can live once more.
At the moment, there seems to be very little enthusiasm for change on either side of the controversy which has, with media attention, been relegated largely to community bickering and a sporadic sounds of cash registers zinging fitfully when the ”newest” films are marketed in barn-like, big-box, multiple-screened wholesale sites.
<> Present day movie producers, actually growing in number and daring-do, business persons are entering the lucrative field and they are, at their very best, almost totally devoid of any pretense that they intend to produce artistically worthy films of real merit. By this time cadres of technically efficient young people have been recruited who now provide a firm, more workable basis for a profitable and growing business venture.
<> We have been blessed in recent years by the instructional capability which has maintained the ability to make movies of quality and enduring vitality. The knowledge gathered in the
past has been retained from the Golden Age of filmdom's finest, and it has, furthermore, been engendered with new potentials by the most modern communications techniques known to
to Mankind. There is no better moment than now to make an attempt to regain firmness in the creation of good, quality movies - far better than the past, due to technical advancements and and the presence of an indomitable, creatively ambitious and artistically adventurous element of Youth. Little remains of any old-fogey holdovers from a dead entity. This is not a “revival”,
a “re-make”, or a "modification."
<> One great wrong persists! And, you can do something about changing it!
<> We must change our method determining what movies are best.
Examine the present system and see the damage it
is doing!
<> Our aim is simple and straightforward. At the present time the “best” movie is judged
by the total monetary value of all tickets of admission used in all exhibit locations in the nation. The cost of admission varies from a“few” dollars to “many” dollars. To quote them seems almost obscene, but the amount of money laid-down by such lookers actually determines what they make to seem to be “the best” movie made. The more they spend, the better the film
becomes.
<> Change is urgent! The average one of us, through the Media (which is till worthy and reliable in many ways, in spite of its occasional eccentricities) can change it all by insisting that films be judged on the basis of the actual number of paid admissions by people to see the film.
Think about that simple, direct solution. As such - it is in danger of being overlooked by the very people who can best bring about the change!
Get with it! Now!
A.L.M. July 16, 2004 [c603wds]
Friday, July 16, 2004
July 16, 2004
THE COTTON FAMINE
After World War II we started using the term ”global war”, and we often overlooked the fact that sometimes we fail to realize how a conflict within any nation affects the course of world history. Here in the United States many citizens are still fighting a “local war” albeit it, most of the time in re-enactments, which took place from in 1861 to 1865. It was our “Civil War” - about as local as a war could be – and we have often failed to mark the suffering which that war cause in other parts of the world.
No war is a “local” war. You realize that anew when you study the events called “The Cotton Famine” - 1861-1865 in England.
It happened in Lancashire where England's cotton manufacturing industry was then concentrated. At that time, until 1861, eighty-five percent of the cotton used in the manufacture of finished goods in those mills came from the southern portion of the United States of America. With the start of the American Civil War that supply was cut abruptly.
The years of 1859 and 1860 had been years of tremendous prosperity for the English cotton trade. They imported tremendous stocks of raw cotton and the inventories of manufactured goods were unusually high - yard goods and fine fabrics. Economists viewing their years of success with the benefit of hindsight pointed out that the cotton market was due for a sudden drop off anyway - a logical period of market depression resulting from over production.
Because of this exceptionally wide stock the Federal blockade of the Southern ports - underway effectively in July 1861, caused no particular hardship right away. It was effective when it was started in July 1861 but it was not until the early days of 1862 that the pinch was really felt in Lancashire. The cotton trade suffered for a while from lack of demand, but wartime changes, caused such demands to quicken and stocks were rapidly depleted. The need for new supplies became pressing and there were no raw materials available to keep the Lancaster mills going.
Mammoth relief schemes came into being. Various relief committees distributed ever one million 750- thousand Pounds (roughly three to four million dollars by monetary values at the time). Company systems poured an additional 112 thousand Pounds into the fund that year and around two million Pounds a year after that crisis time. The total loss – estimated, of course, reflecting loss of wages, profits and other elements of economy ...has been set at around thirty million Pounds – well over thirty million Dollars.
That came about all because of a “local” war taking place far off across the Atlantic Ocean in America. One other reason for the severity of the Cotton Famine in England was due to the business practice of trans-shipment of English raw material stocks to the United States where there was also a strong demand for bales from the Southern States. Suppositions have been made which suggest that British financial interests felt the war would be short-lived and sold some stocks while prices were to their marked advantage. Then too, India had become a cotton-growing country once again as had Australia, Brazil, and Turkey and, in particular, Egypt - but the total amount from all those sources – much of very poor quality with the exception of that from Egypt - never was enough to keep the mills of Lancashire running on even a half-time basis.
During that period the price of cotton ranged from 7-pence in the early months to 32-pence 1864. Fast blockade runners were built but never available in sufficient number to make any real difference. Even with return of peace in America it was a long time before the devastated lands of the south could raise enough cotton to meet their own needs much less those of foreign markets.
Perhaps we would be wise, today, when we use the term ”global” in relation to wars, rumors thereof, and Terrorist attacks we, we should reflect on “The Cotton Famine” as one instance – and history has scores of them - in which thousands of people thousands of people,;living thousnds of miles away suffered great loss and deprivation because of a ”local” war.
Conflict today is of global concern. The textile workers of Lancashire, England could have told us all something about such loss.
Now, more than ever before, we are never alone.
A.L.M. July 13, 2004 [c745wds]
Thursday, July 15, 2004
POLITICAL FABLE
NOTE: I write this to be set aside for someone to read, perhaps fifty years or so from now, so they may marvel at the strange things people thought about and said in the year 2004 when the century was young.
It will not go away!
Ever since the present political current got to running seriously to place Senator John Kerry in the White House, rumors have been ebbing and flowing rather freely at various levels, saying that Senator Hillary Clinton was less than enthusiastic about the idea.
The background for such opposition was said to be founded in the idea that Hillary Clinton has plans to occupy that office herself, not right away, of course, but in time...soon. The plan called for the Clintons, as the team they have always been and are in political planning, to support a Democrat they really didn't think could win against incumbent chair-owners in the White House. Those who felt they were on to something, predicted that, at the last minute the Democratic Convention in Boston assembled might even turn from old-hat, Viet Nam war hero Kerry to now-power Hillary Clinton. Even now there are some writers of this devious bit of scheming who say it is not too late for to still happen. If in the final hours of pre-convention, rush strange things might happen.
Regardless of how it goes, this will remain a topic of serious discussion with political historians. This week I have read news reports saying Hillary Clinton will be among the speakers at the Democratic Convention, but the media is now wondering why she is not disturbed by the fact that she has been excluded - the exact word has been used - from the official list of speakers. Husband Bill will speak, not fellow book-writer Hillary.
Is it all too fantastic? Are undercurrents spinning far faster than many think? The media today is talking about an undercurrent become a torrent now that the John Edwards enthusiasm has been added to the campaign. He poses a direct threat to Hillary's ambition to run as a Democrat against a Republication president in the next national election. Win or lose this time, Edwards remains a potential barrier to her dream.
Leading conservative radio talk shows have, in many cases, bought into the idea and a few still think of it as valid and possible, .even if not in immediate consequences. Other have seen humor in the all, and ridiculed the entire concept as a piece of marketable tale of make believe.
Something is going-on, and it is certainly more involved that the Clintons selling their new books.
It is puzzle and it will interesting to see how it all works out.
Imagine talking about such a scheme decades from now and wondering that you were actually a part of it all.
A.L.M. July 4, 2004 [c482wds]
Wednesday, July 14, 2004
BOTTLE BATTLE
Because it is in a colorfully labeled bottle, water is thought to be much better for drinking purposes is thought, by many people tolday, to be the very best..It is, when so packaged, said to be better than water anywhere in anything, or flowing free from a pristine spring or fountain in a woodland far removed from all human contamination. Even under such perfect conditions, it can't be that good.
Citizens who used to take great civic pride in their efficient city water system, now find it better to buy all their drinking water in neat little plastic bottles than to drinking commonly from a tap or public water fountain. People spout endless aphorism about ?purity?, ?maintaining good health, and do lengthy condemantions of ?contaminants? of many kinds and their levels of viciousness. And they work at such studies until they arrive at some point which seems to justify buying and selling water in a glittering array of plastic containers as a special advantages. It didn't take long for some enterprisng individuals to discover that they could make a better living selling water than they could selling food. Soft drink distributors found it to be worth their while to send delivery trucks along their soda beverage routes for those drinkers who now consume bought supplies of bottled water without any foreseeable limit
.
One trucking company, which was having a difficult time making a living hauling freight commercially, also had trouble with a spring flooding their parking lot. They started bottling the overflow of the offending tar-covered wellspring until health officials questioned the source of their ?sweet, pure water from natural springs? and put out a ?cease and no-no? order which turned their bottled water source off. By that time, they were well established, it is said, and contracted for water supplies from various other sources .- all. ?springs?, of course, and all ?natural? and from other locations than under their parking area.
The local city water supply system delivers water to their homes through a modern system of secure pipes and they treat the water with purifying chlorine to kill and disease bearing microorganisms, fluoride to prevent dental problems and water softeners to reduce hardness to less than one hundred parts per million. All of that can be important to those persons who - young or old ? are in any way immuno-compromised by such maladies as cancer, treated with chemotherapy; people who have HIV/AIDS and other such immune systems disorders, old or young alike, anyone at risk from infections.
If you should need it your water supply system has cryptosporidium and other such microbials available for you. They are health providers in the total sense of the term rather than mere bottlers of water.
I suppose we ought to be thankful as a nation that the craze has centered on aqua pura rather on one of the fermented liquids.
If you find yourself being excluded socially because you are not sipping on a colorful bottle, buy a few and keep them filled with tap water.
You would find that's what more and more of your in-style friends are already doing.
A.L.M. July 11, 2004 [c533wds]
Tuesday, July 13, 2004
NEW WORD
I have, just recently learned the meaning of the word “capsulotomy” and it has given me, quite realistically, some new insights. I learned about it the easy way,having been warned in advance that he removal cataracts quite often results in a new for laser surgery to remove what is common referred to as s :scar tissue;from the cataract removal process.
It did not come as a surprise to find that I was among the thirty to forty per cent of cataract removal patients who need additional attention after a year or so to remove what is referred to as “scar tissue” from the actual correction of the cataract problem. Very often it frightens some patients who have e not been told, when they find they are in need of "laser" surgery. The use of that term frightens some people because they associate the word “laser” with death-beam ray guns, planet- powdering space cannons and other such warlike applications. I found the rather fearsome medical routine to be anything but frightening or harsh.
The treatment is an in-office” routine procedure without any hospital equipment other than a chin brace to hold you head steady as you stare into a reddish light ahead. I was reminded of a TV game the children played at home which provided them with ray gun of a sort which hey used to fire away at a duck leaping up form the b rush on screen. They hit the duck and it went to a million pieces.
On my case the doctor had the:gun:L in hand an d he fired away at the masses of fiber and related m mish-mash on my eye surface. His sots reslted in a total break up of the total breakup for such masses and after a few minutes attention to each eye – removing “the motes in a B Biblical sense ,perhaps,- he was finished. The laser routine was over and it was a success. The offending fragments were gone, and other than few floaters which drifted cross my line of vision for a week or two after the operation, all went well.
That “floater” phase is normal, too. All went well, and I will now, with my new glasses, be restored to “20-20 “ vision status once again. My spell-checker on the com pouter will be e pleased with that chance,I am sure and I will e paying a more confident visit to the Department of Motor Vehicles examinations room soon, too..
The word is “cap-se-lot-o-me” and it is usually it is qualified as a rule with the word “posterior:” designating the back area of the eye on which the procedure is applied. It is absolutely painless, in case you are wondering, unless you have trouble with just having drops put in your eyes or with looking intently into a binocular arrangement. You will want to wear sunglasses for a few hours after the operation, if it is a bright, sunny day. And you can get some fun out to that by “playing that Hollywood role” with friends, family and gawking tourists. Be ready to sign any proffered autograph books, too, if requested to do so.
Andy Worhal promised each of us our “fifteen minutes of fame” so you will want to make the most of being a ”laser surgery”survivor. Such a simple treatment can enhance your appreciation of color in everything you see and bring the true joy of living to a new high point. I say, go with it.
A.L.M. July 12, 2004 [c588wds]
Monday, July 12, 2004
SPECIAL PLACE
It may be that you are among those old enough to remember when many homes had a room called a “parlor”?
There was also a living room, and they were pretty much the same with the parlor little bit fancier, perhaps, and quite different because no one went into the parlor unless there was special company. It also took on special meaning for state affairs of the family such as weddings and funerals.
The parlor was kept closed, “shut up” was the term so often applied,and it was kept dark and shaded most of the time. Heavy drapes were drawn because sunlight faded the colors in upholstery, rugs and coverings. If the house had outside shutters they, too, were kept closed to tempt early morning coolness to remain in the parlor sanctuary. It was very often musty and many
parlor fireplace mantels had little cast-iron, oriental-like incense burners to counteract that natural tendency for a place so set apart and sealed.
The other “everyday” parlor - called The Living Room – was used a great deal more depending on the weather conditions outside. A dependable fireplace or stove was necessary, in most cases, too. It was intended to be a place for relaxation and comfort and the chairs were much less formal and much more sittable than in the formal parlor. In truth, most of the family's real day-to-day living was done in the kitchen and dining room . A long, stretch-out sofa was usually a standard part of a room intended for living rather than show, several deep chairs. It was, as the years moved along, invaded by a “gramophone”, card and game tables,. then “radio”, and, in time, TV.
These encroachments on Living Room comfort eventually saw the formal parlor in our house and others mutated into a Rec Room oror Den with stereo, TV, VCR, tape recorders, computers, electronic games an other alphabecially identified units were added as the came in to being. The parlor as such , ceased to be, on the whole, I think that has been an improvement especially for Mom ,or whoever was charged with maintaining the monster . When the preacher called, for example, Mom had to rush ahead in to the parlor to let in just enough light to keep the accumulated dust hidden a bit. She dusted the family Bible with quick swipe of a cloth or handy, real-feather dust brush keep nearby for just that purpose.
House-living has changed a great deal in recent decades with more emphasis on visiting rather than staying. So many home today are, quite logically, coming to be places of visiting rather than staying. The very design of smaller homes has changed. Look down the street in your development and notice how many homes consist of a two-car garage sticking out toward curb side along the street like piglets at a trough, with rooms appended above or in back of the garage. Real estate dealers, not too proud of this typical home they are selling so well, when conversing with one another , call them “snouthouses.”
Not a parlor in sight anywhere, and you will also find it difficult to locate what used to be called a “Living Room” which is on the way out. Snouthouse living calls for a large, fully-equipped g/p-room behind the two-stall car enclosure with beds/baths attached all-round. Gone forever are such isolated, inefficient divisions such as the Living Rooms and Parlors.
Practical. Home discrete home.
A.L.M. July 9, 2004 [c566wds]
|
