DUFF & NONSENSE!

'Becks' shows us more than just his knickers!

I was fairly repelled the other evening when, inadvertantly, I looked up at the TV and caught 'Becks' modelling his new style knickers for men.  Alas, I barely glanced at them because I was transfixed by the multiplicity of tattoos that cover most of his body.  Tattoos are, of course, entirely a matter of taste and in a free society people should be free to choose to deface, desolate, destroy, vandalise, ruin and violate their bodies and thus indicate to the world that they are brain-dead imbeciles!  See, tolerance, that's my motto!

Were I a bearded, spectacle-wearing, yo-yo playing member of the Psycho-Babble-Ologist profession, I would, no doubt, suggest that some hideously fat, ugly, three-toothed, acne-rearing 'youf' or 'youfette' was covering up his or her all too obvious deficiencies by covering their bodies in ghastly and badly drawn pictures in order to make up for their inherent, and well-based, lack of worth.  But what of 'Becks'?  He's dead good-looking, possessed of an athlete's physique, probably richer than the Queen of England and idolised the world over.  So, Herr Professer Freud or Jung or whatever, how do you explain that one, eh?!

What a piece of work is a man, how noble in reason, how
infinite in faculties, in form and moving how express and
admirable, in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like
a god! the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals—and yet,
to me, what is this quintessence of dust? Man delights not me—
nor woman neither, when they cover themselves in stupid, hideous bloody pictures!

 And, yes, I am in a grumpy mood this morning, thank you for asking!

 

And talking of artists, here's a very good one, indeed!

I lost them!  They're gone!  Never to return!  Well, actually, one of them did, thank God!  (I know, I know, you're wondering what the old fool's on about - again!)  Look, I'm talking about a book and my memory.  For years, and I mean several decades, I had a book of photo images of work by a mid-twentieth century, American artist whose work I liked immensely.  First the book went, and where I do not know.  Secondly, my bloody, er, you know, um, that thingamebob, wotsit, you know . . . memory! . . . went as well and I simply could not remember his name.  But today, sitting watching Chelsea lose a 3-0 lead over Manchester United, suddenly, it came to me - Ben Shahn!  Mind you, having now remembered his name and via Google finding examples of his work I am now re-spitting blood over that lost book which has definitely not returned!!

Like so many immigrants - he was from Lithunia - he became even more steeped in American mores that native Americans.  Rather like Rockwell he recorded the America he saw which was from a very different viewpoint given that he was a hopeless old Leftie.

Even so, there is an authenticity to his work even if it has a red tinge to it!  Not that he was a fixated painter of the proletariat.  He was quite capable of producing works and subjects from a variety of sources.  This one, Still Music, reminds me of Klee in one of his playful moods:

Just delightful!  But no sooner drawn and painted than he would come up with a much more stark, dark and haunting image, as in this work called Hunger:

Or even more shocking, his Death on a Beach, showing in close-up detail the body of a dead soldier, only the blood telling you that he is not sleeping:

I can't tell you how delighted I am to have finally dredged that man's name from the sump of what passes as my memory.  Still, at least I never forgot his pictures and I suspect his shade will be pleased by that!  I will continue to drop some of his work into this blog from time to time.

 

'He's a very McNaughty artist!'

Well, actually, his name is McNaughton but he's still "a very naughty boy"!  He has painted this picture of 'The One' standing on - SHLOCK-HORROR - the Constitution with poor old James Madison pleading with him to lift his foot off it.  Behind him are a whole selection of past presidents and you can sense from their body language, or lack of it, what they feel about Obama's disrespectful attitude.  If you go here you can see a bigger version of the painting and by hovering over each of the figures in the back ground you can identify them.  Sitting in the foreground, of course, is your average 'Joe Doe', out of work, out of money and, by the look of him, out of hope, never mind change! 

The Forgotten Man painting by Jon McNaughton (Photo Credit: Jon McNaughton)

Another of his works can be seen here in a painting which depicts Christ handing down judgment with most of the guilty men (and women) gathered in front of Him.  Again, you can hover over the characters and they will be identified for you.

According to CBS News, McNaughton's pictures have raised great controversy which in turn has helped, no doubt, in the massive sale of reproductions of his work.  They are not, in my view, great art or anything like it, but they are certainly very fine political cartoons even if the humour is somewhat heavy-handed.

 

'Ullo, John, wanna a noo motor?

You are very, very lucky, sir, this has just become available and, between you and me, you need to be quick on your toes, know what I mean?  Once the news gets out there's going to be an almighty rush for this collector's item and the price will go through the roof!

Here it is, sir, a genuine 2005, Hemi-powered Chrysler 300C with only ... sorry, sir, what was that?  Hemi-powered?  Er, well, it's, er, sort of powered by,um, Hemis, know what I mean?  Latest thing Hemis, very good for the environment, your kids will be able to brag to their school friends that you drive a Hemi.  Now, sir, the great thing about this car is its history - oh, yes, and boy, oh boy, do I mean history!  This has one very careful owner, someone you might know of, sir, someone who is very, very famous - President Barack Obama!  Oh yes, we don't sell no rubbish here, sir!  President Obama himself drove this car.  What was that , sir?  How much?  Well, look, what with you being a regular customer and all, I'll tell you what I can do for you.  It breaks my heart but just for you - I'll take a million dollars.  Sir!  SIR!  What's wrong ?  Did I say something . . . ?

Well, enough of that nonsense, but according to the WSJ a million dollars was being asked on Ebay for that car and, surprise, surprise, no-one wanted to buy it!  Perhaps it was the colour - no, no, not his, the car's - do behave yourself!  Or perhaps people are nervous of contracting Hemi-rroids, I don't know.  Anyway, there it is and apparently they are waiting to see how things go - or not - in November which might change the valuation.

 

'Absent Friends': Alan Ayckbourn

"How all occasions do inform against me", what with several not-to-be-missed movies all arriving at once; not one, not two, but three birthday celebrations; and yesterday, a theatre trip to London courtesy of 'SoD'!  So, apologies to you all for my tardiness and I will get round to responding to several comments which have been left as soon as I can.

Absent Friends is a relatively early Aybourn play written in the mid-seventies.  It is a domestic comedy of bad manners featuring, as so often in his plays, a set of couples, although on this occasion the husband of one of the ladies is absent in bed with what sounds like terminal hypochondria; and the partner, actually the fiancee, of one of the men is also absent due to her accidental death by drowning!  Great efforts are made by all concerned to avoid the subject of her death but, as you would expect with Ayckbourn, they fail miserably - but hilariously.  Already in this early play Ayckbourn is investigating one of the basic elements of theatre - Time.  In this play he abides by part of what they call 'the classical unities' in that stage time and real time are synchronous.  As time went by Aykbourn pushed, stretched and tested the fundamentals of theatrical time and space which is part of why he is more, far more, than just a superb writer of comic situations in which various mirrors are held up to audiences who are almost dared to see if they can recognise themselves in his plays.  (I once did, and still shudder at the memory of suddenly seeing myself in the form of one of his more buffoonish inventions!)  Ayckbourn has a bleak eye for human nature and whilst we laugh it is sometimes tinged with uneasiness.  It is difficult ever to like many of his characters even as we laugh at them.  Even so, it is very rare for Ayckbourn not to provide you with an excellent evening in the theatre and this production at the unfortunately-named Harold Pinter Theatre is no exception.

 

Gone AWOL - again!

Sorry, off to London to today for a theatre trip with 'SoD'.  Snow forecast for this evening, so will I ever return?  "I'm going out.  I may be some time!"

Bad news for lawyers so good for us - er, I think!

A somewhat esoteric subject arose in Der Spiegel which reported on a legal case brought by descendants of Italian citizens massacred by German troops in 1944.  The case was joined by similar litigants from a small town in Greece where a similar atrocity took place.  In both cases the claim for reparations was pursued by individuals not by their national governments.  The highest Italian court judged in favour of the litigants and allowed them to pursue a policy in which German-owned property in Italy could be seized and sold if the German government refused to pay up.  The case went higher, to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which on Friday pronounced in favour of sovereign governments and against individuals.  In effect, what they said was that whilst one government can sue another, individuals may not.  To be honest, I'm not sure what to make of this.  On the one hand, I am always and forever anti-governments; on the other hand, I am sick and tired of foreigners suing my government - or me, as I like to think of it when it comes to shelling out money!  If any of my readers have a view I would be interested to hear it.

"The Descendants": dir. Alexander Payne

I went to see this rather excellent film last night and I recommend it.  I am tempted to describe it as 'an everyday story of Hawaiian folk' but, of course, a wife in a coma on a life-support machine and about to have the plug pulled is hardly an 'everyday story'.  I learned beforehand that there were two juniors in it, a 10-year old girl (Amara Miller) and a 17-year old (Patricia Hastie).  American 'kids' in films are a breed I normally avoid but these two, as well as being well-written roles, were both well-acted.  Given the tragic undertones I was expecting hysteria but in fact the sorrows and shocks as a hitherto private life was slowly uncovered was beautifully played by all concerned.  Clooney avoided both the light touch which makes him such a superlative comic actor and also any tempation to play the tragic elements too hard.  In fact, this was a slice of one family's tragic life and like most families everywhere, they - coped withal!  Oddly enough, that was more moving than mass hysteria and doom and gloom would have been.  This is not 'A Great Film' but it is an immensely satisfying film with a quiet sort of conclusion that leaves you thinking that perhaps there is hope for their future.

 

Hurrah - a double-bubble celebration day today!

First, and far and away the most important reason (he added quickly) for celebration is that today is the 'Memsahib's brithday.  All sorts of events will now ensue - fireworks, a coachride through the village so that the locals may show their appreciation, a masqued ball tonight in the Townhall - that sort of thing, or perhaps just dinner for two at our favourite local restaurant.  Of course, nothing would force me to divulge her age - well, a few Harry Redknapp readies in a Monaco bank might do the trick - so suffice to say that thanks to years of tender loving care from me she has aged elegantly and well.

But secondly, to add to the joyous tone of today's celebrations, we have the heart-warming news that the 'Lesbian-straightener' has been nicked!  The 'honourable' member for Eastleigh, Mr. Chris Huhne, has been charged with perverting (no,no, not that - behave yourselves!) the course of justice.  Oh dear what a pity never mind!  Yes, I do realise that indulging in schadenfreude indicates a small, nasty, mean-spirited mind - guilty as charged m'Lud, now pass the champagne and make mine a large one!  Alas, his ex-wife, who I believe was the one who blew the gaff, has also been charged which is very silly when what she deserves is a seat in the Lords!

I have it on very good authority that 'Big Bubba' in D-wing is very excited at forthcoming prospects!

 

"Georgia on my mind"

You can almost get to love lawyers, er, so long as they are 'over there'!  In Georgia there is a delicious little legal squabble going on in which those stalwarts, who cling to their belief that Obama is not an American citizen because he has failed to produce convincing legal proof of it, are pressing a case in the Georgia courts to have him struck off the list of presidential candidates in Georgia unless he furnishes proof of his citizenship.  Faced with this naughtiness, Obama and his legal team tried haughtiness!  They simply ignored the court proceedings and the subpoena which had demanded their presence.  Instead they simply wrote asking the judge to quash the proceeding on the grounds that it was "baseless, costly and unproductive" and that no President of the United States should be forced to attend a State court.  The judge indicated that they might be right but unless they offered him some legal precedents to support their assertion the case would continue.  Obama's lawyers simply went over the head of the court by writing to the Georgia Secretary of State asking him to put a stop to matters.  He replied that under State law he had no power to intervene and warned Obama and his legal team that they would ignore the legal proceedings at their peril.  Meanwhile, the disrespectful Georgian hayseed who had the infernal nerve to challenge a POTUS has now gone further and filed a "motion for contempt of court" against one, Barack Hussein Obama.  Gotta love those Yanks - and their lawyers!

My thanks to The American Thinker.

 

Hope 'n' Change!

Well, we must all cross our fingers in the hope that Obama loses and that a change will occur in the White House and on this cold arctic morning I bring you both courtesy of Gallup as reported by Con Carroll in The Washington Examiner:

 

According to Gallup:

Overall, Obama averaged 44% job approval in his third year in office, down from 47% in his second year. His approval rating declined from 2010 to 2011 in most states, with Wyoming, Connecticut, and Maine showing a marginal increase, and Massachusetts, Wisconsin, Minnesota, New Jersey, Arizona, West Virginia, Michigan, and Georgia showing declines of less than a full percentage point. The greatest declines were in Hawaii, South Dakota, Nebraska, and New Mexico. (My emphasis)

Hawaii!  But . . . but . . . wasn't he born there?  Yes, of course he was, how could anyone doubt it?  However, the main point is that if he went down from 47% to 44% in his third year approval ratings then how far will he drop in his fourth year?  I seem to remember some American 'wiseacre' writing that if he ended up in the very low 40s then he was dead meat.  Shame - not!

Now, it is a truth universally acknowledged, by which I mean that the 'Memsahib' believes it completely, that I do not understand women.  Proof, were it needed, can be found in the, to me, incomprehensible behaviour of MDS (My Darling Sarah) Palin.  She is such a tease, that girl, and whilst chaps quite like a little bit of teasing it can only go on for just so long.  She teased us over whether or not she would stand herself, and now she is acting all coy over whether or not she will endorse Newt Gingrich.  She tells people to vote for him in the primaries but holds back from total commitment.  Alana Goodman at Commentary offers an explanation but doesn't sound too convinced:

So why no endorsement? There are plenty of possible explanations, but two initially come to mind. First, Palin could lose whatever remains of her reputation as a “kingmaker” if she throws her weight behind Gingrich and he loses. Second, she could be holding out hope for a brokered convention – plenty of conservatives still do – and maybe thinks she could end up getting tapped for the nomination.

Jonathan S. Tobin at Commentary is far more definite in his conclusion:

We will, no doubt, continue to hear a great deal from her so long as she remains on Fox’s payroll. But as the primary season proceeds with more opportunities for her counsel to be ignored by GOP voters, her stock will continue to sink. All of which ought to remind Palin’s credulous fans as well as journalists that the idea of her influence over Republican voters is more myth than reality.

Oh Sarah, my Sarah, if only you had replied to my letters I could have advised you and all would have been well.  Women!  Heh!

 

An idle thought for an idle day

It is definitely an idle thought and, moreover, it is not a particularly original one, either.  Oh stop complaining, if you want original thinking try Anna Raccoon's place(*)!  Anyway, as I was driving back from the pool this morning - have I mentioned that I go swimming every morning at the crack of dawn? - oh! I have! - well, no need to be like that about it - where was I? - oh, yes, it was reported yesterday that they had found a copy of the Mona Lisa painted by one of Leonardo's apprentices.

I must confess that I have never particularly liked the painting and I did once see the original in Paris but it left me unmoved.  Looking at these two, I prefer the apprentice work on the right but only because it seems to have retained its colour rather better than Leonardo's.  So, setting money aside, in this instance I would rather have the copy than the original.  But the minute you bring the money back into consideration it is obvious that there are people out there who would pay anything for an original and nothing for a copy even if it was exact in virtually all details.  Why?  Er, sorry, but that is my idle thought for the day.  If the copy is well executed and faithful to the master's work why would it not be as attractive?  We all go to hear concerts of the same piece of music but interpreted differently by different conductors and usually, because most of us couldn't tell a crotchet from a quaver, we thoroughly enjoy it.  So, if paintings of slightly plump girls with ambiguous smiles on their faces 'presses your buttons', so to speak, does it matter which is the original?  And if it does - why?

 (*) http://www.annaraccoon.com/politics/bbc-supports-the-right-to-smoke/#comment-53271

"The Artist": dir. Michel Hazanavicius

YOU WILL SEE THIS FILM, THAT'S AN ORDER! 

Gosh, I can get jolly regimental when I'm in the mood, don't you think?  It brings out the little corporal in me!  Let me try and be serious.

The Artist is a delightful, delicious, dollop of romantic goo into which I insist you dive.  It is a whimsical romantic tale of 'Hollywoodland' (as it was known originally) at the time of the change from silent movies to 'talkies'.  In other words, it is everything that I would normally avoid like the plague.

But the fact is that it is a super-sophisticated piece of highly original film-making, truly a film you will never quite forget not least because you will never have seen its like before - or ever will again, is my guess.  Full of wit and style, superbly shot with sets and costumes giving exactly the right 'feel' to it all.  The actors have obviously studied the mannerisms and techniques of the silent film actors and give us the flavour of it but without over-exaggeration.  Needless to say, 'Uggie' the dog steals the show but, my goodness, he had a hard job against Jean Dujardin and Bérénice Bejo who play the leads.  What a pair, simply superb!

Please, please, take my word for it, see this film in a cinema, don't wait for a DVD version.  You will go a long day's march before you see anything so witty, sharp, elegant and original as this film.

 

The answer to my question is - YES!

Some time ago I asked if David Ruffley MP was the most pig-ignorant MP in the Commons and today I have my answer - a resounding YES!  I happened to catch a fragment of Sky News in which some loud-mouthed oik was haranguing poor old Alistair Darling who is, whatever other faults he might have, always quiet and reasonable in his tone.  However, that did not stop the mouthy yob facing him who appeared to be the amalgam of all the Saloon Bar 'know-it-alls' you could ever wish to avoid.  "Is he that shit-for-brains MP I once wrote about?" I wondered just as a sub-title came up telling me that it was indeed Mr. David Ruffley MP for Bury St. Edmonds which should change its name as rapidly as possible to 'Bury David Ruffley'!

Oddly enough, I was intending to write a post today pointing out what a deeply nauseous experience it is watching and listening to MPs howling after Sir Fred Goodwin and now cheering because his knighthood has been removed - which is why I shall continue to give him his title.  Has Sir Fred committed a grave crime?  Fiddled the books at his old bank, perhaps?  Given his PA a seeing-to over a ministerial desk as some of our, er, 'Honourable Members' are prone to do?  No, all he did was what vitually all bankers were doing in the 'naughties' only he did it bigger and when his bank went broke it went broke with a louder bang.  And what was Mr. Ruffley doing whilst this was going on?  Well, apparently he was trying to top himself by jumping under a train possibly because of his conscience - do stop giggling! - over his exorbitant expense claims.  Or, possibly he knew the crash was coming and thought he'd end it all!  I don't know but what I do know is that, incompetent even in self-destruction, this buffoon missed both the train and the live wire.

Alistair Darling, having some regard for natural justice, entirely missing from Mr. Ruffley's legal experience - well why not, he's only an ex-solicitor after all - was pointing out the dangers of picking and punishing one man for a misdemeanor of which many were guilty.  I would also suggest that David 'when's the 6.49 due in' Ruffley also takes a look in the House of Lords and checks to see how many Lords and Ladies there are with criminal records but still on the public payroll?

Finally, one is reluctantly forced to ask the question as to exactly how stupid are the voters of Bury St. Edmonds?  I realise that one's suspicions are raised on account of how very much they all resemble each other but surely they still retain their sense of smell!