Category Archives: Zeitgeist Movement

DECEMBER 14, 2020

COFFEE-TABLE BOOKS about swimming pools are a surprisingly well-established genre. Lavish, glossy, and tempting, theyre almost like pop-up books their images practically lunge at the reader, a medley of splashes and bodies. They dont look particularly serious and seem to make the perfect winter gift, if you can withstand the tease of aquatic pleasure while its freezing, raining, or snowing outside.

The latest entry in this increasingly crowded field is Lou Stoppards Pools from the house of lavish itself, Rizzoli. Like the editor of most such books, Stoppard is light of touch and low of word count, including just a few choice paragraphs to accompany photographs that are intended to speak for themselves. But what are they saying? To distinguish this book from several similar ones, Rizzoli has wrapped the cover in a latex-like transparent blue sleeve. This slightly kinky touch makes the book appear to be submerged in water, beckoning the reader to dive in. Several of the pictures Stoppard includes have been reproduced before in recent books like Hatje Cantzs stunning album of classic 20th-century images, The Swimming Pool in Photography (2018). Stoppard, however, juxtaposes canonical shots with pool photography from the present, allowing the reader to see how the cultural imagination of the swimming pool has evolved.

These utilitarian exercise machines, these mere accessories to boutique vacations, possess a very varied cultural backstory. Enjoy your workout! my friendly neighborhood pool attendant yells at me just before I enter the water. I always bristle at this aggressively cheerful exhortation, because swimming is much more than exercise. Its a form of ritual that involves a highly deliberate process of transformation: the careful, even fetishistic shedding of a quotidian skin. One doesnt have to accept the Freudian notion that swimming enacts a return to the womb and some form of prelapsarian amniotic nirvana to appreciate that bathing originated in the ancient world as a component of religious ritual, and that the act has by no means entirely lost the aura of a baptismal rite. The Great Bath at Mohenjo-daro in Sindh, Pakistan, which dates as far back as the third millennium BCE, appears to have encouraged bathing for just this sort of reason, and remains an archaeological site of considerable historical value. The ancient Greeks and Romans constructed pools for athletic purposes, it is true, but employed them for many other purposes besides, including ritualized social bathing and the keeping of fish, resulting in the term piscine.

Our modern image of the swimming pool as exercise machine and Olympic arena thus possesses a richly complicating global history. In the early modern era, Europeans shunned bathing as an activity for savages Africans and Asians were brilliant divers whose skills they could barely comprehend, let alone emulate. When Westerners finally embraced swimming again as a mass pursuit by the turn of the 20th century, it was with a dramatic sense of rediscovery and rapture. The avatar of the Surrealist movement Andr Breton rhapsodized about what he called the voluptuousness of swimming, declaring himself born under the sign of Pisces. Swimming not only changed ones body, he insisted, but transformed ones mind, freeing it from the shackles of rationalistic thought to a more authentic dimension of imaginative consciousness.

Lou Stoppards juxtapositions of classic and contemporary photos suggest how the swimming pools cultural meaning has shifted during the century since Breton. Consider, for instance, the following carefully curated double-page spread. On one side, the reader is greeted by Jacques-Henri Lartigues adoring portrait of Marie Helvin at the French Rivieras Eden Roc Hotel pool in 1977. On the one hand, its just another glamour shot: big-name photographer, top model, high-end digs. But the picture is exquisitely realized, a vision of ecstasy. Helvins head thrown back, eyes closed, her expression is beatific. Her jet-black locks dance mesmerizingly in the water around her. The portrait dazzlingly records the play of light on her chest, tracing wild light-lines across her skin, which looks as though it is swathed in sunlit Jell-O. In Helvins profoundly private sense of repose and pleasure, Lartigue captures the paradox of erotic desire as innocent bliss.

Opposite this blast from the 1970s, Stoppard reproduces two bright and striking images by Karine Laval shot in 2010. Laval calls these images Poolscapes. Four-plus decades on from Helvins hedonistic headshot at Eden Roc, Lavals pictures offer few anatomical, social, or geographical coordinates. No details of place or person are deemed worthy of inclusion even in the titles of these shots. Lavals are not pictures of a swimming pool as such, more an exercise in the production of disorientating chromatic-aquatic effects. A submerged human figure, clad in red, can be seen in some sort of agitated pose, like a cubist minotaur strutting against the currents. The viewers gaze is dashed by shards of light and color that come flying out of the image. Brittle and crystalline, they cut up the humanoid form: all that is soft shatters into lines. If this is the picture of a swimming pool, youd never know it, since Laval has abstracted it into a set of tones, lines, and ripples. We have left Bretons voluptuousness of swimming and Helvins fleshy ecstasies far behind. The question is how and why?

Its crucial here to go back to the early part of the 20th century, when Breton and many others dreamt of swimming as a revelatory and paradisiacal form of experience, to understand how the archetypal pool photo was invented. A better description than ecstasy for Helvins portrait is reverie: closing ones eyes while in the water, escaping into a personal and private realm not merely of physical pleasure but intimate emotional and psychological experience, enabled by the act of immersion. This is the classic photographic conceit of the swimming pool as an entity that transports its subject to a dream-like world beyond the quotidian and beyond the limitations of gravity. Invented in the 1920s and 30s during the zeitgeist of Surrealism and psychoanalysis, this kind of photo features the swimming pool not as an arena of competition or consumerism, but as the trigger of subconscious desires for personal transformation.

There are many versions of this archetype, and Stoppard lovingly reproduces several of the best. Perhaps the first great psychological pool picture is George Hoyningen-Huenes masterpiece from 1930 featuring two bathers sitting together on a diving board. Their backs are turned to us and we cannot see their faces. They are modeling elegant designer beachwear, but this mundane act of salesmanship is completely transcended by the existential quality of their pose. They look away to the horizon, following the trajectory of the diving board, perhaps with excitement, perhaps trepidation. We cannot know. But we have been fooled. The viewers mind has responded to the diving board and imagined the presence of water below it. There was no pool: Hoyningen-Huene took the picture on a rooftop high above the Champs Elyses in Paris.

The conceit of the swimming pool as a portal to other mental, historical, and even mythological dimensions is also superbly suggested by Louise Dahl-Wolfe in Night Bathing, shot in 1939. A woman in a delicately striped one-piece bathing suit stands at the edge of a pool by night, mirrored in her pose by a statue of Aphrodite, goddess of love. Both figures look shyly away from the camera, as the darkness presses in. This pool is a scene of metamorphosis; indeed, it is reminiscent of the tales of Ovids Metamorphoses, such as Narcissus falling in loving with his own reflection. The juxtaposition of the two female figures implies the pools hidden power to transform the living woman into a goddess.

Pools, bathing, swimming, swimwear: in the post-Freudian imagination, the superficial accessories of luxurious living become tools of psychological emancipation and emotional self-expression. Yet they also became instruments of fascist conformism, racialist theorizing, and eugenic ideology. Between Hoyningen-Huenes divers and Wolfes Aphrodite, Leni Riefenstahl filmed Olympia, her unsettlingly brilliant documentary on the 1936 Berlin Olympics. Riefenstahls Aryanist dogmas led her to combine bravura images of swimmers and divers competing in front of cheering stadiums in Nazi Germany with a fantastical sequence featuring Greek statues coming to life as German athletes. The modernist swimming pools dream of transformation was as politically dangerous as it was personally alluring.

The psychological pool photo enjoyed a long afterlife, flourishing well into the 1970s. Martine Francks image of a boy in a hammock gazing at sunbathers round the curves of Alain Capeilleress pool near Marseilles suggests those curves as the very contours of his mind. Horst P. Horst who posed as one of Hoyningen-Huenes divers in 1930 shot Janice Dickinson cocking her head to one side, eyes closed, in that eternal yet fleeting instant before exiting a sun-drenched pool. Its 1979, and like Helvin, Dickinson is a nude supermodel. But Horsts portrait is still an image of innocence and experience still the picture of swimming as flight to a private mental paradise.

Such images of bathing as reverie coexisted, however, with two main rivals in the late 20th century: social shots of public pools as riotous lower-class playgrounds; and luxury shots of private pools as pure consumer glamour. Exceptionally, all three visions might converge in the same image, like Helmut Newtons virtuosically overloaded panorama of Pariss Piscine Deligny in 1978. Newton fused sexuality, surrealism, and glamour with dark humor. Worlds collide with magnificently absurd results. In the foreground, two models in black evening gowns pose with incongruous campy melodrama, as male bathers stripped down to their briefs look on with a mix of desire and exasperation under a hot sun. Yet the humorous center of the photograph is a wonderfully oblivious topless female bather who entirely ignores the absurdity around her, hunched with Rodin-like concentration over the book she is reading. Newtons photo captures the invasion of the swimming pool as a public institution and its denaturing by money, glamour, and fantasy, presaging the shift in pool photos since the 1980s from a public resource for ordinary people to a moneyed private oasis. Newton played a leading role in this transformation, especially in all the celebrity shoots he did in the 80s; perhaps the Deligny panorama is a confessional premonition, a mea culpa before the fact. Anyone who has floated idly in the Standard Hotels enticing rooftop pool in downtown Los Angeles, to name just one of todays most photogenic boutique destinations, might well conclude that glamour won, the spirit of the bains publics is dead, and Newton helped kill it.

It would likewise be tempting to read pictures of bathers taken in momentous political years, like Olaf Martenss portraits of swimmers in the German Democratic Republic in 1989 (which Stoppard also includes), in a similar light. 1989, after all, is famously taken to mark the end of the Cold War, the end of history, the end of the public, and the dominance of capital. In the vanished world of the GDR, now a distant mirage of social unity and fodder for Ostalgie, a regimented body is about to spring into a pool like a wind-up toy programmed to win an Olympic medal for the communist bloc. Meanwhile, Martenss portraits of the naked yet submerged Simone evince the distinctive German Freikrperkultur (free body culture) that encouraged public nudism as a form of salubrious self-expression in the absence of political or economic freedoms.

If 1989 does mark the caesura between 20th and 21st centuries, what does recent photography reveal about the cultural meaning of the swimming pool of the present? One answer lies in the utterly banal celebrity culture that Newtons Piscine Deligny image foreshadowed. We have ended up with images like supermodel Gisele Bndchen striding past a pool, staring straight to camera, being ogled by some starry-eyed dude in sunglasses. And with shots of former James Bond star Pierce Brosnans teenage sons Dylan and Paris lounging in jeans, backs turned to their Bel Air pool, occupied instead by two inflatable swans. The pool as designer accessory is wholly evacuated, a reference point you dont even have to look at. Its just a checklist luxury. In the absence of any social realism or public context, glamour, wealth, and privilege have bored themselves, and the viewer, to death, making the pool itself invisible.

A second answer is to be found in Stoppards canny juxtapositions. Opposite Janice Dickinsons glamour shot, for example, Stoppard places a double-portrait taken from 2018 by the fashion photographer Joyce Sze Ng. This picture features two women of color, elaborately clothed in gowns, staring from distance straight at the camera. They stand on the other side of a motionless, mirror-like pool that reflects their dignified yet expressionless faces. The photograph is neither one of pleasure nor psychological depth; indeed, it seems to disavow any invitation to depth. The picture is a hybrid: a fashion photographer evidently making a political statement, but what is the statement? Sze Ngs subjects appear to demand that the viewer acknowledge their presence but without any promise of revelation or intimacy, since they parry the viewers gaze. The inward gaze of reverie has turned outward to repel the viewer. Sze Ng seems to want to make a point about identity but, perhaps wanting to disavow the history of female nudity in pool art, feels it necessary to disavow the pool itself, converting it instead into a conceptual abstraction.

Sze Ngs double-portrait has a self-consciously pristine quality that is even more evident in the photography of Slve Sundsb, although Sundsbs pristineness is of a different character. It is technological, and showcases a third trend in recent pool imagery: the abstraction of pools and bodies into technical virtuosity. Sundsb does still take photos of people in water. One portrait of a young woman in a dark asymmetrical bathing suit shows her gazing wide-eyed under sanitized steel-blue water, like a doll in suspended animation or an amniotic spa. She enjoys no state of reverie, however; her open eyes appear lifeless. But the viewer is distracted by Sundsbs bubbles, which the speed of his camera recasts as beads of blown glass. Sundsb loves his bubbles; other shots engulf human forms in vast bubble clouds that fan out like Rorschach patterns. Sundsb says he strives for purity in such images, but the result is really pure mechanism: one cant help look at these pictures without thinking of the lens rather than the artist. What is absent from this kind of work is not merely the psychological charisma of classic pool photography, but the social reality of the swimming pool and its storied cultural identity. Instead of accumulating and drawing on this history, it is all but erased.

Why has pool art taken these turns? Several predictable answers naturally suggest themselves. We now possess more powerful cameras than ever before, with much faster lenses, and greater capacity for manipulating images. At the same time, our culture has tired of meaning and come to mistrust the promise of depth. We have rejected not only Freud but, seemingly, the whole nave project of self-discovery, settling instead for anti-depressants, cheaper consumer goods, harder bodies, and endless Instagram posts. Most importantly of all, we have retreated from public life to private islands. If photography provides any sort of guide to our collective imagination and it may not we no longer marvel at the grand architectural designs of public baths but dream of the hotel spa and the exclusive infinity pool. Twentieth-century photographers loved social realism and the hedonistic playfulness of the madding crowd; their 21st-century heirs are private clinicians who shun the mixing of different social classes in public waters.

But lets go easy on the jeremiad. Stoppards selections undeniably show that the dream of the swimming pool in all its different forms is far from over. There are a number of contemporary photographers who resist the current vogue for the clinical and the impersonal, the luxurious and the technical. For these artists, the pool is not an abstraction but an enduringly meaningful dream-machine that continues to inspire compelling, humorous, and imaginative visions.

Stoppard includes many extraordinary images of public pools as social panoramas that continue to be shot around the world, showcasing multitudes of bathers clambering en masse for the physical pleasure and psychic relief of water from the multiracial swimmers of the French banlieues to the vast crowds happily hugging the shores of indoor beaches complete with artificial wave machines in Japan. The reverie shot is not dead either, but lives on, poignantly renewed in Diana Markosians portraits of Afghani refugees floating in pools in Germany. They lie on their backs, gazing heavenward, dreaming of a better life. Even America boasts trusty throwbacks to bygone pool pleasures. Alice Hawkins is an expert in the popular sublime: she knows how to take sparkling shots evoking dreams of glamour that are far from faded for her subjects. These include gangs of girls lounging on dusty pool decks, wedding parties thrilling to kitsch joys of liquor and love, and close-ups of a cheeky blondes Lucky Bum, poolside in Vegas. Hawkinss bathers have no doubt that the swimming pool can still sprinkle magic dust on ordinary life.

Finally, Stoppard includes one of the most striking pool photos of recent years, and quite possibly of all time a remarkable untitled image made by the British photographer Polly Brown, taken in France in 2015. Like much recent pool art, the picture admittedly has a clinical quality, lacks an explicit psychological appeal, and offers no portrait of society. Unlike almost all recent work, however, it possesses a genuinely exhilarating grandeur of conception. Browns camera tracks a lone female swimmer in mid-stroke from high above a large multi-laned pool. All geared up, she wears a dark blue one-piece, cap, goggles, and even fins. The aerial distance between camera and subject makes the picture impersonal. Bright but sunless, its steely blue colors cool the viewers eyes. We are too far to sense the swimmers emotions.

There is, however, no flight to abstraction here: this is a swimmer in a pool. Yet we cannot see the pools edges. This is crucial. We cannot see where the pool begins or ends, that it begins or ends. Through her cropping, Brown has given us a subtly yet profoundly suggestive portrait of the pool as an infinite expanse, and of the swim as a limitless odyssey. The notion is reinforced by two telling details. Painted dots mark distance in each lane like repeating metronomic beats; and the swimmer swims through an opening or gate, the width of a single lane, leading her from one section of the pool to another. She is going somewhere. This is not the 20th-century dream of the inner life; indeed, in the pandemic year of 2020, it could be read merely as an image of persistence or survival in an evacuated world. But it is undoubtedly the image of an existential quest. The majesty of Browns photograph lies in its liberation of the viewers mind from the narrowness of much recent pool art, returning the swimming pool at last to the free rein of the imagination.

James Delbourgo is professor of history at Rutgers University, where he teaches the history of science, collecting and museums, and the history of the Atlantic World. His most recent book is Collecting the World: Hans Sloane and the Origins of the British Museum (Harvard University Press, 2017).

Here is the original post:

The Dream of the Swimming Pool - Los Angeles Review of Books - lareviewofbooks

The Lounge Society by Piran Aston

Well, that was a laugh wasnt it?

Officially The Worst Year Ever (at least we could drown our sorrows and sing aloud in 2016), 2020 has turned everyones lives upside down and still has the capacity to do so, but we know all this.

It wasnt just COVID-19 that caused such a year of great upheaval. In Sean Connery and Diego Maradona, the silver screen and the beautiful game lost legendary figures, so much so that we should perhaps start checking up on soon-to-be octogenarian Bob Dylan (although, given hes now $300m richer, hell probably be alright). Meanwhile, in the UK the agonising, incessant stench of Brexit lingered on.

Yet while the music scene lost some legendary figures too (Little Richard, Florian Schneider, Tony Allan and Andrew Weatherall to name but four) and was hugely curtailed by the lack of live music as it frequently it does, it adapted and found creative solutions.

Musicians have also brought the disparities of royalty payments via streaming to the public eye; Tom Gray of Gomezs #BrokenRecord campaign, now being discussed in Parliament Committees with Nile Rodgers and Nadine Shah arguing the case. Gigs are becoming a worryingly distant thing of the past, but the confidence of Live Nation, Michael Eavis and Melvin Benn, as they dangle the carrot of old-school live music in a few months, is a salivating prospect.

So yes, its been gruelling, but the food of love continues to provide nourishment and has mattered more in the dark times, as Live4evers Best Of 2020: The Tracks list can attest.

The dark times obviously included the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis; Run The Jewels captured the zeitgeist with almost mystic precision on RTJ4. Released in the immediate aftermath of Floyds murder, the line, First of all, fuck the fucking law, was among many that added prescience.

Other artists used their outlets to shine a light on the Black Lives Matter movement: so much has been written about Sault over the last few weeks (having achieved a near-clean sweep in the end of year accolades) that any further contributions are superfluous, except to say that Wildfires is angelic in delivery but heartbreaking in content. A beautiful call-to-arms and the centrepiece of the other most significant album of the year, Untitled (Black Is).

Solo artists continued to reign in the first year of this new decade. Alternative musics new lyrical dynamo, Sinead OBrien, inspired the imagination on Most Modern Painting through her spoken illuminations. No-one had a better turn of phrase this year. Meanwhile, on Hu Man, Greentea Peng captured a texture like laying atop cotton wool, a warm embrace put to music, and there were so many highlights to choose from on Waxahatchees rapturously received album Saint Cloud, but the sublime chorus of Lilacs ensured that track just about shaded it for us.

Im not your fucking friend must go down as best opening line of the year, but Im Not Your Dog by Baxter Dury sustained a hypnotic spell, while on Hamilton Leithausers Isabella the Walkman established himself as a singing-songwriting force to be reckoned with.

On the electronic side, Thalassophobia by Nicolas Bougaieff took us on a journey to the dark recesses of our minds, in lieu of a dark recess of an actual club (one day soon). The anthem of The Summer That Never Was was surely Take Back The Radio by Katy J Pearson, which fizzled and sparkled with joy and intent, while Might Bang, Might Not saw Little Simz achieve a level of direct communication that other MCs can only dream of, without losing any of her London grit. Maddeningly catchy.

Guitar groups still resonated with us though: Sludge by Squid was like prog played by punks, a maze of wah-wah guitars and ghostly backing vocals, while Ballad Of You & I (Hotel Lux) was jaunty and slovenly defiant. Peanuts by Yard Act was indie at surface-level, until surprising us with a northern monologue that John Cooper Clarke would be proud of, and elsewhere in the north west Psycho Comedys Pick Me Up was a galloping Lust For Life with added scouse swagger.

Arguably guitar musics biggest success story of the year, Porridge Radio may have already moved on from Every Bad, but posterity will be kind to Lilac, while All Along The Uxbridge Road by Chubby And The Gang was an explosion of relentless pace and power, with a few slaps round the chops added in for good measure. Lastly, and categorically proving that indie music isnt dead, Sports Team supplied the best takedown of everything young people (and society in general) are told as facts on the joyous Heres The Thing.

On the release of A Hymn, it became apparent that Idles Ultra Mono was going to be something special (Teletext now has a place in all of our hearts) and like their forebears, compadres Fontaines D.C. saved a lot of lives when they were needed most with A Heros Death. A lockdown anthem, the repeated meme of life aint always empty had powerful resonance as we faced the same four walls again and again, for hours upon end.

But there can only be one winner. Live4evers Track Of The Year had to go to Generation Game by The Lounge Society. Even when we were participating in Zoom quizzes or socially distanced drinks in the park, many were apprehensive about the U.S. elections in November, a persistent cloud on the horizon; what will the U.S. do?. On a broader scale, the song takes to task the behaviours of North America and how they inform the west, for better or for worse, and the five minutes still feel like an experience.

The answer to the question satisfies some but not all, meaning there are undoubtedly troubled times to come.

But as this year has proved, there will always be a brilliant soundtrack somewhere.

Richard Bowes

See more here:

Live4ever's Best Of 2020: A terrible year soundtracked by brilliant music - Live4ever

The New Yorker has released a preview of the magazines second-to-last cover of 2020. The cover features an original digital painting by David Hockney, titled Hearth. It depicts a fireplace and is decidedly juvenile in execution. The brushwork appears childish and has sparked a Twitter backlash and outcry.

This is very funny. Hockney is perfectly capable of using digital brushes properly, can only assume he hates someone in the TNY art dept, Jo Livingstone of the New Republic noted in now-deleted tweets, Either that or somebody at TNY doesnt care enough to protect his legacy. Livingstone pointed to a number of Hockneys recently exhibited digital paintings as evidence of his mastery, supporting the supposition that the New Yorker cover might be, in some way, a troll.

Along with the cover in question is a brief synopsis and Q&A with Hockney conducted by Franoise Mouly, the New Yorkers art director. In it we learn that Hockney, after doing 220 digital paintings in 2020, will be returning to oils for a large mural in 2021. While not a sweeping or in-depth discussion of his work, the interview touches on his now decade-long fascination with the iPad as an artistic device and his taking inspiration from tapestries. The piece also features a time-lapse of the digital painting being created.

If anything, the interview raises more questions than it answers. Why, if Hockney went to such great pains over the course of the year to produce this great and specific quantity of work, did Mouly not choose to elevate one of better quality? For these short, dark days, she writes, David Hockney offers the traditional comfort of a hearth.

Hockney is 83 years old and considered among the greatest living British artists for his contributions to the pop art movement in the 1960s. Over the course of his career, he has used a wide range of media and has not shied away from technology.

But Hearth simply does not justly represent Hockneys digital work. Just last month The Art Newspaper featured an item on his digital art in quarantine, highlighting the hope that his most recent work is capable of eliciting.

The Art Newspaper featured two digital paintings in particular, first The Big Tree in Autumn, has a remarkable skyblue in the center of the frame, breaking through the clouds behind the branches of the tree. There are layers of gray in the clouds. The details of the trees branches and leaves show deliberate use of different textures and opacities. These are advanced techniques regardless of medium.

The Pond in Autumn, made two days later, is even more impressive. Again the range of detail, color, texture, and gesture, while not entirely controlled or pristine, still shows the hand of a skilled and dedicated artist. The tranquility of the water Hockney is able to portray is masterful.

Given the well-honed skill and style evident in these works and others exhibited over the years, why the New Yorker chose or accepted upon commission such a seemingly anomalous painting is a valid question. Hockney is clearly in command of his faculties, making it seem all the more likely that the irreverence and slap-dash nature of Hearth are an intentional thumbing of the nose at the magazines grandiosity.

This is also not the first iPad sketch from Hockney that has graced the New Yorkers cover. The three previous digitally produced Hockney covers featured beneath the interviewstill lifes from 2010 and 2011 and a landscape from 2018are all vastly more complex and impressive. It is not just that the study of the fireplace is weak or a departure from the other iPad work he has done at largeit is a departure in quality from what he has submitted in the past to this same magazine and this same art director.

Responding to Livingstones critique, Sterling Crispin suggested that Hearth was in continuity with Hockneys previous digital work:

But thats part of the appeal, hard for people to understand its supposed to be sort of shitty, Crispin continued.

Given, again, Hockneys stated mission to complete 220 paintings in 2020, its safe to say we cant expect all of them to be bangers. So yes, some are going to have that intentional shitty crude quality to themthat is not the surprise. The surprise is that he chose to shoddily iPad it in for the cover of one of the most prestigious magazines in the world after a year of social uprisings calling for the cultural standard bearers to be more inclusive in who and what they chose to promote. At a moment when art, almost alone among human endeavors, can offer us beauty and inspiration, or solace and consolation, or distraction and humor, or any other variety of grace, Hockney and the New Yorker give us this?

Kyle Chaykausing a logical fallacy to bait the conversation away from why or why not the painting is shitty and why was it chosen to well actually, it is a virtue that the painting is shittychimed in with this bit of wisdom: making people mad is a great side-effect of art. It can be, yes. It is also the intended effect of trolling.

Chayka goes on to invoke a well-known anecdote of dubious origin:

It always reminds me of the story about the woman who approached Picasso in a restaurant, asked him to scribble something on a napkin, and said she would be happy to pay whatever he felt it was worth. Picasso complied and then said, That will be $10,000.

But you did that in thirty seconds, the astonished woman replied.

No, Picasso said. It has taken me forty years to do that.

This vignette does not contradict Livingstones point, though. Dashing off a scribble for someone seeking, and willing to pay for, the work of a master is inherently an act of trolling: an instance of behaving provocatively or antagonizing someone. The crux is the irreverence and the New Yorkers acceptance and elevation of it.

Suggesting that the iPads paint app is unforgiving is an insult to Hockney, who has demonstrated that he is perfectly capable of producing very fine work in the medium. It is not difficult to grasp that some media are cruder than others. That is not what is at issue here.

Chaykas and Crispins defenses of the cover are silly. To suggest that there is something shallow or misinformed in taking umbrage at the covers juvenile quality is simply pretentious. This is not a case of my kid could do that but a moment to reflect on editorial integrity (and the possible virtues of shitposting). Because ultimately an editor made the choice to feature that image in all its mediocritychoosing to capstone the year by having an old white man dash off an image severely lacking in technical qualities and at odds with his proven abilities and reputation.

Even so, there is something pleasurable about seeing something done so terribly appear on the cover of the New Yorker. The disjunction is genuinely hilarious. Some have gone so far as to call it iconic. By being elevated to the cover it is able to capture a bit of the 2020 zeitgeist. This is not enough to redeem the digital painting as a standalone work of art. A fittingly shitty end to a shitty year.

Abstraction is still difficult for people!!! Chakya exclaims. Indeed, it seems at least some of the meta aspects of trolling have gone over quite a few heads. But saying a work is purposefully bad doesnt make it good.

Read this article:

How David Hockney Trolled the New Yorker - The Bulwark

From being the biggest Korean outfit on the scene, the boy band BTS has now become the biggest band in the world. Its the impression youd get from their majestic presence as the Times Entertainer of the Year & theres no exaggeration in this. If pop stardom in 2020 had a mascot, BTS would be it.

Sure, Taylor Swift has given us some of the best music with a countryside aesthetic a much-needed comfort in the year 2020, but BTS has kept the spirits upbeat. They released multiple albums, broke so many records across the board including their own, had a busy life appearing on live streams & bonding with their fanbase, lovingly referred to as the BTS ARMY.

To be able to do that in a year when all the live, in-person concerts stood cancelled is no mean feat, and BTS has shown what theyre capable of, while simultaneously keeping their empathy & love front & center. Which is why when other celebrities seemed to leverage the lockdown, they seemed disingenuous, but when BTS brought new music, it indicated hope.

When Time says 2020 was the year of BTS, theyve evidence to back it up. They talk of the success of BTS, From propelling their label to a $7.5 billion IPO valuation to inspiring fans to match their $1 million donation to Black Lives Matter, BTS is a case study in music-industry dominance through human connection. This sums up the impact of the band very well, so lets expound this evidence.

When it comes to their sticky popularity, the band has its BTS ARMY to thank. The year began with the release of Map of the Soul: 7, the fourth Korean-language seventh overall studio album by the band. Among the many records that the band broke this year is the most views on the music video for their single Dynamite, where they surpassed 100 million views on its debut day itself.

Today, the video is nearing 700 million views. Even on streaming giant Spotify, BTS took away the metaphorical awards. Dynamite is the most-streamed K-pop song this year and Map of the Soul: 7 is the most streamed K-pop album on Spotify. Dynamite opened at the top spot on Spotifys daily Global Top 50 chart when it released in August this year.

While the boy band garnered money & accolades for their work, they were always empathetic & aware of the trials & tribulations plaguing the world. Their activism has an ethos of anti establishment & compassion. Multiple members of the band have been extremely vocal about their challenges with mental health, the quirks of fame, and have embraced non-toxic masculinity as exhibited in their performance.

Even though same-sex marriage is still not legal in their country, South Korea, theyve been vocal about their support for LGBTQ+ rights. This year, they donated $1 million to the Black Lives Matter movement, something Jin from the band claimed was not politics. It was related to racism. We believe everyone deserves to be respected. Thats why we made that decision.

This donation amount was matched by their fandom BTS ARMY in no time. Thats their impact.

Even though their initial plans for a world tour stood cancelled, they ended the year with a bang by releasing their latest album BE. It has been hailed as the music thats closest to BTS aesthetic. With that album, they debuted a song & album at No. 1 on Billboard charts in the same week. More recently, they got another feather in their cap they got nominated or a Grammy.

Even in their interview with Time, theyre candid, It was a year that we struggled a lot. We might look like were doing well on the outside with the numbers, but we do go through a hard time ourselves, Jimin said.

No one can deny the impact of the band on the current zeitgeist & how they made the tough year better for all of us.

See the original post:

Was 2020 the year of BTS? Here's why 'Time' magazine thinks so - Film Daily

While the comedy movie genre had its heyday many years ago either with the silent classics of Chaplin and Keaton, the absurdist masterpieces of Mel Brooks and the Zucker brothers, or the satirical gems of Elaine May and Albert Brooks the turn of the 21st century brought along a new movement in Hollywood film comedy pioneered by Judd Apatow and Adam McKay.

RELATED:The 10 Best TV Dramas Of The 21st Century (So Far), Ranked

Unfortunately, after the Apatow man-child slacker type lost his appeal, comedy filmmakers seemingly gave up on the genre. All-round bombs like Holmes & Watson and Dirty Grandpacertainly did not help enhance the genre's reputation. Still, there are always funny people who want to make movies, so great comedies will always get made.

Trey Parker and Matt Stones Team America: World Police is a masterpiece. With the same satirical edge as their groundbreaking animated series South Park, Team America lampoons the reckless destruction, inane plotting, and banal emotional scenes of Bayhem actioners by telling its story with Thunderbirds-style puppets.

It also taps into the blind jingoism of those movies, as the titular squad polices the world on behalf of the U.S. government, often failing their missions while leaving behind a path of needless damage. As the icing on the cake, Team America is full of hilarious (and catchy) original songs.

While Anchorman is the movie that put Adam McKay and Will Ferrell on the map and probably remains their most prevalent work in the pop culture landscape, their greatest collaboration is 2008s Step Brothers.

Conceived as a vehicle for Ferrells on-screen chemistry with John C. Reilly (which reached its peak here), Step Brothers ended up being a spot-on satire of Bush-era America.

Martin McDonaghs feature directorial debut,In Bruges, explores deep philosophical musings about morality and fate with a generous peppering of pitch-black humor. Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson star as two hitmen who are sent to hide out in the titular Belgian city after a job goes awry.

Ralph Fiennes steals the show in the movies final act as the duos boss, Harry Waters, while McDonagh deftly maintains his own unique comic tone through some pretty heavy plot points.

Olivia Wilde has been swamped with job offers since her directorial debut Booksmart hit theaters. By recapturing the nostalgic tone of John Hughes high school comedies while subverting their more problematic elements, Wilde updated a stagnant comedy subgenre for the modern age. But primarily, she told a heartfelt story about friendship, warts and all, that connects emotionally.

Ultimately, what makes Booksmart work as well as it does is the on-screen chemistry shared by stars Beanie Feldstein and Kaitlyn Dever, who are 100% believable as lifelong best friends.

Shane Blacks neo-noir comedy thriller The Nice Guys was overshadowed at the box office by Captain America: Civil War and Me Before You. And thats a real shame, as The Nice Guyswas primed to be the beginning of a really great buddy P.I. action-comedy franchise.

RELATED:5 Comedic Video Games That Are Actually Funny (& 5 That Try Way Too Hard)

Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe shared impeccable chemistry in the lead roles, while Blacks command of story and character as a writer-directoris razor-sharp as usual.

Ben Stiller grew up on film sets because his parents were actors, and when he noticed that the stars of war movies returned from the set with the mentality of returning from an actual warzone, the seeds were planted for his absurdist masterpiece Tropic Thunder.

With hilarious supporting turns by Robert Downey, Jr. (who received an Oscar nod) and Jack Black, Tropic Thunder is a pitch-perfect self-aware satire of Hollywood celebrities.

Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi explored what the everyday struggles of vampires would be in their brilliant mockumentary What We Do in the Shadows. The filmchronicles a few weeks in the lives of some bloodsuckers living in the suburbs of New Zealand.

Drawing on every facet of vampire fiction for gags, What We Do in the Shadows is the definitive comic deconstruction of the vampire myth.

Jared Hess gave every indie comedy director with a shoestring budget and a dream hope that their weird little movie could become a big hit with the unprecedented success of Napoleon Dynamite. This movie isso quirky, it makes Wes Andersons films look mainstream.

Theres something about Jon Heders (unfortunately) career-defining portrayal of the titular moody, geeky teenager that makes Napolean's unlikable traits hilarious and strangely endearing.

Sacha Baron Cohen recently reprised his role as Borat for a sequel that, like its predecessor, captured the zeitgeist and forced America to confront itself at a pivotal political juncture. Borat Subsequent Moviefilm was a rare comedy sequel that lived up to its name and brought new jokes to the table instead of rehashing old ones, but it didnt quite reach the cultural landmark heights of the original movie.

RELATED:Hilarious Mockumentaries to Watch After Borat

Despite having an uncompromising comic sensibility, Borat hasnt aged as poorly as most comedies of its era. Its satire is still just as biting, relevant, and eye-opening today as it was in 2006 when it brought the house down in screenings across the world.

The genius of Shaun of the Dead is that theres a regular romantic comedy buried in its zombie-infested plot. Its set up like a run-of-the-mill Richard Curtis rom-com as a down-on-his-luck guy gets dumped and decides to sort his life out. Then, the dead come back to life and start eating people. Its a character-driven movie that happens to feature the undead as gravy.

Edgar Wright established his energetic, inventive directing style in Shaun of the Dead, while Simon Pegg and Nick Frosts real-life friendship created a lovable on-screen dynamic (as it had done in Spaced and would continue to do in their subsequent collaborations).

The Apatow machine has produced a lot of great comedies like The 40-Year-Old Virgin, Superbad, Knocked Up, and Forgetting Sarah Marshall, to name a few. However, its crowning achievement is arguablyBridesmaids, the perfect cocktail of naturalism, absurdity, and earnest character development.

The movie received two Oscar nominations: Best Original Screenplay, for Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolos beautifully crafted script (allowing enough flexibility for plenty of improv while still telling a tightly structured story), and Best Supporting Actress, for Melissa McCarthys scene-stealing supporting performance as Megan.

NEXT:The 10 Best Horror Movies Of The 21st Century (So Far), Ranked

Next 10 Hidden Details Everyone Missed In Hyrule Warriors: Age Of Calamity

Read the original:

The 11 Best Comedies Of The 21st Century (So Far), Ranked - GameRant

PLEASE NOTE: This forecast, assembled by The Hollywood Reporter's awards columnist Scott Feinberg, reflects his best attempt to predict the behavior of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, not his personal preferences. He arrives at these standings by drawing upon consultations with voters and awards strategists, analysis of marketing and awards campaigns, results of awards ceremonies that precede the Oscars and the history of the Oscars ceremony itself. There will be regular updates to reflect new developments.

*BEST PICTURE*

FrontrunnersNomadland (Searchlight)The Trial of the Chicago 7 (Netflix) Mank (Netflix)Minari (A24)Da 5 Bloods (Netflix)News of the World (Universal)Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (Netflix)One Night in Miami (Amazon)Soul (Pixar)The Father (Sony Classics)

Major Threats Promising Young Woman (Focus)Palm Springs (Hulu/Neon)The Invisible Man (Universal)Tenet (Warner Bros.)

Possibilities Sound of Metal (Amazon)The Midnight Sky (Netflix)On the Rocks (A24/Apple)The Prom (Netflix)

Long ShotsBorat Subsequent Moviefilm (Amazon)The Personal History of David Copperfield (Searchlight)Ammonite (Neon)The Outpost (Chicken Soup For The Soul)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Cherry (Apple TV+)Joe Bell (Solstice)Judas and the Black Messiah (Warner Bros.)The Little Things (Warner Bros.)Malcolm & Marie (Netflix)Martin Eden (Kino Lorber)The Mauritanian (STX)Never Rarely Sometimes Always (Focus)Supernova (Bleecker Street)The United States vs. Billie Holiday (Paramount)Wild Mountain Thyme (Bleecker Street)

*BEST DIRECTOR*

FrontrunnersChloe Zhao (Nomadland)David Fincher (Mank)Aaron Sorkin (The Trial of the Chicago 7) podcastSpike Lee (Da 5 Bloods) podcastLee Isaac Chung (Minari)

Major ThreatsPaul Greengrass (News of the World)George C. Wolfe (Ma Rainey's Black Bottom)Regina King (One Night in Miami) podcastChristopher Nolan (Tenet)George Clooney (The Midnight Sky) podcast

PossibilitiesFlorian Zeller (The Father)Ryan Murphy (The Prom) podcastMax Barbakow (Palm Springs)Sofia Coppola (On the Rocks)

Long ShotsPete Docter & Kemp Powers (Soul)Emerald Fennell (Promising Young Woman)Leigh Whannell (The Invisible Man)Rod Lurie (The Outpost)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Lee Daniels (The United States vs. Billie Holiday)Kevin Macdonald (The Mauritanian)Reinaldo Marcus Green (Joe Bell)John Lee Hancock (The Little Things)Eliza Hittman (Never Rarely Sometimes Always)Shaka King (Judas and the Black Messiah)Sam Levinson (Malcolm & Marie)Pietro Marcello (Martin Eden)Anthony Russo & Joe Russo (Cherry)John Patrick Shanley (Wild Mountain Thyme)

*BEST ACTOR*

FrontrunnersChadwick Boseman (Ma Rainey's Black Bottom) podcastDelroy Lindo (Da 5 Bloods) podcastAnthony Hopkins (The Father)Gary Oldman (Mank)Steven Yeun (Minari) podcast

Major ThreatsRiz Ahmed (Sound of Metal) podcastTom Hanks (News of the World) podcast [one and two]Kingsley Ben-Adir (One Night in Miami)George Clooney (The Midnight Sky) podcast

Possibilities Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat Subsequent Moviefilm) podcastBen Affleck (The Way Back)Adarsh Gourav (The White Tiger)Winston Duke (Nine Days)

Long ShotsAndy Samberg (Palm Springs)James Corden (The Prom) podcastDev Patel (The Personal History of David Copperfield) podcastEli Goree (One Night in Miami)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Clayne Crawford (The Killing of Two Lovers)Jamie Dornan (Wild Mountain Thyme)Colin Firth (Supernova)Peter Gerety (Working Man)Tom Holland (Cherry)Jude Law (The Nest)John Magaro (First Cow)Luca Marinelli (Martin Eden)Ntare Guma Mbaho Mwine (Farewell Amor)Jim Parsons (The Boys in the Band)Tahar Rahim (The Mauritanian)Trevante Rhodes (The United States vs. Billie Holiday)LaKeith Stanfield (Judas and the Black Messiah)Mark Wahlberg (Joe Bell)Denzel Washington (The Little Things) podcastJohn David Washington (Malcolm & Marie)

*BEST ACTRESS*

FrontrunnersFrances McDormand (Nomadland)Viola Davis (Ma Rainey's Black Bottom)Vanessa Kirby (Pieces of a Woman)Carey Mulligan (Promising Young Woman) podcastMeryl Streep (The Prom) podcast

Major ThreatsSophia Loren (The Life Ahead)Michelle Pfeiffer (French Exit)Yeri Han (Minari)Kate Winslet (Ammonite) podcast [one and two]

PossibilitiesElisabeth Moss (The Invisible Man) podcastRachel Brosnahan (I'm Your Woman) podcastJulia Garner (The Assistant) podcastRashida Jones (On the Rocks) podcast

Long ShotsAmy Adams (Hillbilly Elegy) podcastRosamund Pike (Radioactive) podcastJessie Buckley (I'm Thinking of Ending Things)Cristin Milioti (Palm Springs)Charlize Theron (The Old Guard)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Nicole Beharie (Miss Juneteenth)Haley Bennett (Swallow)Emily Blunt (Wild Mountain Thyme)Carrie Coon (The Nest)Andra Day (The United States vs. Billie Holiday)Clare Dunne (Herself)Sidney Flanigan (Never Rarely Sometimes Always)Sienna Miller (Wander Darkly)Julianne Moore (The Glorias)Eliza Scanlen (Babyteeth)Katherine Waterston (The World to Come)Evan Rachel Wood (Kajillionaire)Zendaya (Malcolm & Marie)

*BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR*

FrontrunnersBill Murray (On the Rocks)Sacha Baron Cohen (The Trial of the Chicago 7) podcast David Strathairn (Nomadland)Mark Rylance (The Trial of the Chicago 7)Leslie Odom, Jr. (One Night in Miami) podcast

Major ThreatsYahya Abdul-Mateen II (The Trial of the Chicago 7)Billy Crystal (Standing Up, Falling Down)Chadwick Boseman (Da 5 Bloods) podcastFrank Langella (The Trial of the Chicago 7)Eddie Redmayne (The Trial of the Chicago 7) podcast

Possibilities Will Patton (Minari)Shia LaBeouf (Pieces of a Woman) podcastAldis Hodge (One Night in Miami)Jonathan Majors (Da 5 Bloods)Clarke Peters (Da 5 Bloods)

Long Shots Brian Dennehy (Driveways)J.K. Simmons (Palm Springs)Bo Burnham (Promising Young Woman) podcastLucas Hedges (French Exit) podcastCaleb Landry Jones (The Outpost)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Daniel Kaluuya (Judas and the Black Messiah)Jared Leto (The Little Things)Rami Malek (The Little Things) podcastReid Miller (Joe Bell)Jesse Plemons (Judas and the Black Messiah) podcastGary Sinise (Joe Bell)Stanley Tucci (Supernova)Christopher Walken (Wild Mountain Thyme)

*BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS*

FrontrunnersOlivia Colman (The Father) podcastAmanda Seyfried (Mank)Yuh-Jung Youn (Minari)Maria Bakalova (Borat Subsequent Moviefilm)Glenn Close (Hillbilly Elegy) podcast

Major ThreatsSaoirse Ronan (Ammonite) podcastHelena Zengel (News of the World)Ellen Burstyn (Pieces of a Woman)

PossibilitiesOlivia Cooke (Sound of Metal)Marisa Tomei (The King of Staten Island)Marsha Stephanie Blake (I'm Your Woman)

Long ShotsSwankie (Nomadland)Linda May (Nomadland)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Ciara Bravo (Cherry)Connie Britton (Joe Bell)Dominique Fishback (Judas and the Black Messiah)Jodie Foster (The Mauritanian)Vanessa Kirby (The World to Come)Natasha Lyonne (The United States vs. Billie Holiday)Da'Vine Joy Randolph (The United States vs. Billie Holiday)Alicia Vikander (The Glorias) podcastVanessa Williams (Bad Hair)

*BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY*

FrontrunnersNomadland (Chloe Zhao)One Night in Miami (Kemp Powers)The Father (Christopher Hampton & Florian Zeller)I'm Thinking of Ending Things (Charlie Kaufman) podcastNews of the World (Luke Davies & Paul Greengrass)

Major Threats Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (Ruben Santiago-Hudson)Borat Subsequent Moviefilm (Peter Baynham, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jena Friedman, Anthony Hines, Lee Kern, Dan Mazer, Erica Rivinoja & Dan Swimer) podcast [Cohen] The Midnight Sky (Mark L. Smith)The Prom (Chad Beguelin & Bob Martin)

Possibilities The White Tiger (Ramin Bahrani) podcastThe Personal History of David Copperfield (Armando Iannucci)The Life Ahead (Edoardo Ponti)

Long Shots Emma (Eleanor Catton)The Outpost (Eric Johnson & Paul Tamasy)Shirley (Sarah Gibbons)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Cherry (Jessica Goldberg & Angela Russo-Ostot)First Cow (Jonathan Raymond & Kelly Reichardt)The Glorias (Sarah Ruhl & Julie Taymor)Martin Eden (Mauricio Braucci)The United States vs. Billie Holiday (Suzan-Lori Parks)Wild Mountain Thyme (John Patrick Shanley)

*BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY*

FrontrunnersThe Trial of the Chicago 7 (Aaron Sorkin) podcastMank (Jack Fincher)Da 5 Bloods (Danny Bilson, Paul De Meo, Kevin Willmott & Spike Lee) podcast [Lee]Minari (Lee Isaac Chung) Soul (Pete Docter, Mike Jones & Kemp Powers)

Major ThreatsPromising Young Woman (Emerald Fennell)Palm Springs (Andy Siara)The Forty-Year-Old Version (Radha Blank)

PossibilitiesOn the Rocks (Sofia Coppola)Tenet (Christopher Nolan)The King of Staten Island (Judd Apatow) podcast

Long ShotsI'm Your Woman (Julia Hart & Jordan Horowitz)Ammonite (Francis Lee)Sound of Metal (Derek Cianfrance, Abraham Marder & Darius Marder)

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)Bad Hair (Justin Simien)The Climb (Michael Angelo Covino & Kyle Marvin)Herself (Malcolm Campbell & Clare Dunne)Joe Bell (Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana)Judas and the Black Messiah (Will Berson, Shaka King, Keith Lucas & Kenny Lucas)Kajillionaire (Miranda July)The Little Things (John Lee Hancock)Malcolm & Marie (Sam Levinson)Miss Juneteenth (Channing Godfrey Peoples)Never Rarely Sometimes Always (Eliza Hittman)

*BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE*

FrontrunnersCrip Camp (Netflix)Time (Amazon)Collective (Magnolia/Participant)Welcome to Chechnya (HBOThe Truffle Hunters (Sony Classics)

Rest of ShortlistDick Johnson Is Dead (Netflix)The Dissident (Briarcliff) podcast [Bryan Fogel]MLK/FBI (IFC)Boys State (Apple) Acasa, My Home (still seeking U.S. distribution)On the Record (HBO Max)The Way I See It (Focus)The Social Dilemma (Netflix)The Human Factor (Sony Classics)Totally Under Control (Neon) podcast [Alex Gibney]

PossibilitiesMy Octopus Teacher (Netflix)I Am Greta (Hulu)Kingdom of Silence (Showtime)The Fight (Magnolia/Topic Studios)Athlete A (Netflix)The Mole Agent (Gravitas Ventures)John Lewis: Good Trouble (Magnolia/Participant)Be Water (ESPN)All In: The Fight for Democracy (Amazon)Rebuilding Paradise (Nat Geo) podcast [Ron Howard]Miss Americana (Netflix)

Long ShotsFrancesco (still seeking U.S. distribution)Dear Mr. Brody (still seeking U.S. distribution)Oliver Sacks: His Own Life (Zeitgeist)Mucho Mucho Amor: The Legend of Walter Mercado (Netflix) podcast [Cristina Costantini]A Secret Love (Netflix)Circus of Books (Netflix)Red Penguins (Universal) podcast [Gabe Polsky]American Selfie (MTV)Once Were Brothers: Robbie Robertson and the Band (Magnolia)The Mindfulness Movement (Abramorama) podcast [Jewel]

Still to See or Embargoed (alphabetically)40 Years a Prisoner (HBO)76 Days (MTV)Apocalypse '45 (Discovery)Assassins (Greenwich)Beautiful Something Left Behind (MTV)The Bee Gees: How Can You Mend a Broken Heart (HBO)Belly of the Beast (PBS)Belushi (Showtime)City Hall (Zipporah)Coded Bias (PBS Independent Lens)Crock of Gold (Magnolia)Desert One (Greenwich)Disclosure (Netflix)The Earth Is Blue As An Orange (still seeking U.S. distribution)Father Soldier Son (Netflix)Feels Good Man (Wavelength Productions/PBS Independent Lens)Finding Yingying (MTV)The Forbidden Reel (still seeking U.S. distribution)Giving Voice (Netflix)The Go-Go's (Showtime)Gunda (Neon)I Walk on Water (Grasshopper)Kiss the Ground (self-distributed)Me and the Cult Leader (still seeking U.S. distribution)The Metamorphosis of Birds (still seeking U.S. distribution)Mr. SOUL! (self-distributed)My Psychedelic Love Story (Showtime)Nasrin (Virgil Films & Entertainment)Notturno (still seeking U.S. distribution)Olympia (still seeking U.S. distribution)Once Upon a Time in Venezuela (still seeking U.S. distribution)The Painter and the Thief (Neon)The Reason I Jump (Kino Lorber)Reunited (still seeking U.S. distribution)Rewind (Grizzly Creek)Rising Phoenix (Netflix)Softie (Icarus)Stars and Strife (self-distributed)The State of Texas vs. Melissa (Filmrise)Stray (Magnolia)A Thousand Cuts (PBS)'Til Kingdom Come (still seeking U.S. distribution)To See You Again (still seeking U.S. distribution)Transhood (HBO)Unapologetic (still seeking U.S. distribution)The Viewing Booth (Roco)Vivos (still seeking U.S. distribution)Wild Daze (Cinemidgm)Wintopia (still seeking U.S. distribution)Zappa (Magnolia)

*BEST INTERNATIONAL FEATURE*

FrontrunnersCollective (Romania)I'm No Longer Here (Mexico) Charlatan (Czech Republic)Another Round (Denmark)Funny Boy (Canada)

Others (alphabetical) And Tomorrow the Entire World (Germany)Apples (Greece)Asia (Israel)Atlantis (Ukraine)The Auschwitz Report (Slovakia)Beginning (Georgia)Bulado (Netherlands)Causa Justa (Panama)Charter (Sweden)Dear Comrades! (Russia)Emptiness (Ecuador)The Endless Trench (Spain)Exile (Kosovo)Extracurricular (Croatia)The Father (Bulgaria)Gaza Mon Amour (Palestine)Heliopolis (Algeria)Hope (Norway)Impetigore (Indonesia)La Llorona (Guatemala)Land of Ashes (Costa Rica)The Last Ones (Estonia)The Letter (Kenya)Lunana A Yak in the Classroom (Bhutan)The Man Standing Next (South Korea)Miracle in Cell No. 7 (Turkey)The Mole Agent (Chile)My Little Sister (Switzerland)Never Gonna Snow Again (Poland)Night of the Kings (Ivory Coast)Once Upon a Time in Venezuela (Venezuela)Open Door (Albania)Quo Vadis, Aida? (Bosnia and Herzegovina)River Tales (Luxembourg)Roh (Malaysia)Song Without a Name (Peru)Stories from the Chestnut Woods (Slovenia)A Sun (Taiwan)Sun Children (Iran)This Is Not a Burial (Lesotho)Tove (Finland)True Mothers (Japan)Two of Us (France)What We Wanted (Austria)Working Girls (Belgium)

Prospective SubmissionsBad Tales (Italy)The Life Ahead (Italy)The Disciple (India)

See the original post here:

Feinberg Forecast: Updated Oscars Projections as Thanksgiving Approaches - Hollywood Reporter

You f**cking onion dont you f***ing get it?

It could only be Sir Philip Green on the phone. The negative piece the Evening Standard had written on his Arcadia retail empire had ticked him off royally and, as was his wont, he was straight on the phone to bark what he thought of it. And me.

You always knew such barrackings were coming, and when they did, you also knew his initial burst of fury usually with the funniest concoctions of abuse and faux threats of violence - would eventually give way to a joke, a gossip and the invitation to a cup of tea.

It was precisely that mixture of brawn and charm that got him to the riches he achieved as the undoubted kings of the British high street.

As recently as 10 years ago, he held such a position of power in UK retail that his offices at Arcadia, off Oxford Street, were like a sultans palace, where retailers, property barons and bankers would come to have him pass judgement on their feuds and disputes.

For, when it came to retailing of the bricks and mortar type at least there were few big players whose secrets and needs he didnt know.

He was a trader first and foremost. A born negotiator of deals, be they for cloth, property, finance, taxes, and even, latterly, pension liabilities.

Now, as his retail career stands on the brink with the likely administration his Arcadia group, that reputation is in tatters.

So, just how did he get to be in this humbled position?

Green was born in 1952, the North London son of a father who owned property, garages and electrical businesses. His parents sent him to a Jewish boarding school, Carmel College in Berkshire, and gave him a fairly unaffectionate childhood.

He left Carmel with no O-Levels, but learned to be crafty negotiator at the knee of Rodney Geminder, a successful shoe wholesaler based in Old Street.

As told in Oliver Shahs biography Damaged Goods, he learned to buy low and sell high, particularly bankrupt stock, which was traded from the pubs north of Oxford street a district that remained his stomping ground for the rest of his career.

With his mother Alma, he went into clothes manufacturing and importing. Often not successfully and usually underwritten by her money.

But he learned from his mistakes.

With his knowledge of buying stock for Geminder from companies in trouble, he made his first major success in his twenties buying a distressed retail chain called Bonanza Jeans using borrowed money from Bank Leumi.

Green knew it had 400,000 pairs of jeans in stock which had been totally undervalued by the receivers and bought the whole chain for little over 1 million.

Within a month, hed repaid the bank its 1 million and, after roasting its buyers into driving better bargains, he was living high on the hog, working hard during the day and spending fast in the Ritz casino by night.

He learned that menacing style reportedly from an unsavoury loan shark he used to use called Anthony Schneider.

Then, he bought Jean Jeanie, another chain in distress, for around half a million pounds, adding it to Bonanza, turning it into profit and selling the combined group to Lee Cooper for 7 million.

The press, who he assiduously courted even then, called him the Jean Genius.

It was 1986. Green was 34, loaded, and sporting a Spandau Ballet hairstyle.

His barrowboy trading style initially went down well in his next venture, a stock market quoted menswear business called Amber Day. By force of his personality, and trading prowess, he turned the business around, moving manufacturing to Hong Kong for cheaper supplies.

He restructured its Woodhouse and Review chains then bought What Everyone Wants, sending his share price soaring as staid City institutions were drawn to this epitomy of the Eighties , winner takes all zeitgeist.

But when recession came, sales crashed brutally. The same City which once loved his maverick style fled, citing fears of lack of transparency and good practice. They muttered darkly about an apparent share support operation (which he denied) and his connections to characters such as the convicted fraudster Roger Levitt and Schneider.

Green was out, with news leaking about a Department of Trade and Industry Investigation hovering over him. The probe came to nothing and Green was left with a resentment for the Citys posh boys that never left him.

He soon bounced back, teaming up with Scottish tycoon Tom Hunter, fashion importer and now restaurateur Richard Caring and the Telegraph owning Barclay brothers to buy Sears for 548 million. He asset stripped the empire within months, and he and his fellow investors made a 280 million profit.

In 1999, having proved the City he didnt need it to make money, he bid for Marks & Spencer with a view to making a killing selling the freeholds on its 300-strong store estate.

Again though, the double barrelled c***s, as Green called City types were to be his undoing as his banking advisers took fright at dark rumours that his wife Tina had been buying shares in M&S before the bid.

He would not lick his wounds for long. Soon after, he bought BHS in a move that would both propel him to billionaire status and destroy his reputation.

He and his crack management team, including ex-Debenhams chief Terry Green and Allan Leighton of Asda fame, set to work on boosting BHSs profits through skillful buying and stock management, quickly turning a business hed bought for 100 million into a 1 billion one.

He went on to buy Arcadia, where retail veteran Stuart Rose was chief executive, sealing the deal with Rose in a final round of haggling outside the George Club in Mayfair.

Arcadias TopShop brought him glamour as well as wealth. He turned it into the hottest retail property on the street, signing up celebrities like Kate Moss to design ranges and appear with him at parties and fashion shows.

Buoyed by success, he made another bid for M&S, which at that stage was being run by Rose. He failed, and famously had a handbags-at-dawn moment with the suave CEO on the street, jumping out of his limo and grabbing him by the lapels.

At the height of Arcadia-BHSs profitable heyday, Tina, in whose name his empire was owned, took out a record breaking 1.2 billion tax free thanks to her being based in Monaco.

It was 2005, and while some in the business world applauded his success, others found it distasteful. More still were baffled as to how the company could afford it. That question came back to haunt the Greens in future years.

As the retail world moved increasingly online and big, legacy store chains like Woolworths and HMV fell by the wayside, Green neglected to invest in taking his brands digital.

Even in bricks and mortar, competition was leaving his chains behind. Fast fashion chains capable of switching ranges in a heartbeat were beating his brands at every turn. Primark, Zara, H&M began to rule the roost.

BHS was the first of the Green empire to crumble, and the halcyon days of racy profit margins dramatically turned into a miserable tale of contraction.

Worse still, it had a massive hole in its pension scheme.

Green spent his days and nights trying to figure out an exit.

That eventually came in 2015, when he sold the business for 1 to Dominic Chappell, a former bankrupt racing driver.

Green rejoiced at the sale, thinking it had lifted a huge weight from his shoulders. But it was not to prove so.

Chappell turned out to be a spiv (he was earlier this month jailed for six years for tax dodging).

He was totally incapable of turning the business around and the company collapsed into bankruptcy with 11,000 job losses and a 571 million pension deficit.

The row that ensued was to destroy Greens reputation and almost claim his knighthood. He was pilloried by MPs and the pension hole he had left the company with when he passed it on was described as the unacceptable face of capitalism. A bizarre, six hour, performance in front of the business select committee saw him berate one MP for staring at him.

Eventually, he paid 363 million into the pension fund after lengthy negotiations with regulators. Over the years, he and his family had collected some 580 million from BHS in dividends, rents and interest on loans.

He had once been a regular on the party circuit. Newspapers and glossy magazines salivated over extravaganzas as his 60th birthday party, where he flew 150 of his closest friends to Mexico, including Naomi Campbell, Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Moss.

But since the BHS scandal, he has been often exiled in his Monaco base.

Dont feel too sorry for him at the height of the BHS pensions fiasco, he took delivery of a 100 million yacht, Lionheart, on which he spends much of his time.

But even as he hid, the critical stories have followed him. Two years ago, reports emerged alleging that he had made racist remarks, groped female staff and been abusive to other employees claims he vigorously denies.

He became a bogeyman of the #MeToo movement. The friends who remained loyal despaired. Harold Tillman, veteran retailer and former owner of the Jaeger chain, says: Ive known him 40 years. I have seen him do so many kind, good things for people.

But, as even TopShop losses soared to nearly 500 million, he was being seen as a dinosaur in a world of rising online giants like Boohoo, Asos and the Hut Group.

Like his retail empire, he had failed to keep up with the sensibilities of the modern world.

As in so many industries, the coronavirus pandemic accelerated trends that had been running for years.

Covids lockdowns of shops and malls have seen not only Greens own stores suffer like never before, but his sales in Debenhams, the chain on the brink of collapse where he is the biggest holder of concessions.

However, few will feel too sorry for him. The Greens are still one of Britains richest couples.

They have long since diversified their wealth away from retail and into property and other ventures.

But as far as his reputation on the High Street goes, with Arcadia set to follow Debenhams into administration, the king has fallen far.

See the original post here:

The rise and fall of Sir Philip Green, the retail king who fell to ground - Evening Standard

The Open Mind explores the world of ideas across politics, media, science, technology, and the arts. The American Prospect is republishing this edited excerpt.

Heffner: We seem to be living through a dystopia for realists now with the Iran-U.S. confrontation, the global pandemic, and now worldwide protests. Is that a fair way to look at it, or are we going to come out of the dystopia into a utopia?

Bregman: You know its very understandable if people are pessimistic right now. I always like to make a distinction between optimism and hope. I mean, you certainly dont have to be an optimist right now. But I think there are some reasons to have hope because hope is about the possibility of change, right? I think that this moment gives us a lot of reasons for hope as well. I mean weve seen that ideas that just a couple of years ago were dismissed as quite unreasonable and radical and crazy have been moving into the mainstream. Now they still have a long way to go yet, Im talking about ideas like universal basic income or higher taxes on the rich or you name it. But that gives me some hope.

Heffner: Is there a reason to be more cynical about the condition of humankind in the United States right now?

Bregman: Institutional racism and racism and discrimination, these are not uniquely American phenomena. It exists everywhere in the world and in Europe, sadly as well. There are some things though that we can learn from other countries. In the book, Ive got one example of how prisons in Norway are organized. The U.S. could learn quite a bit from that. So what you have in the United States are sort of taxpayer-funded institutions that are called prisons, where you have citizens who go in there for small crimes I dont know, small drug offenses and they come out as criminals. They create this kind of bad behavior.

Now in Norway, they have the opposite. They have an institution where people go in as criminals and they come out as citizens. If you look at these prisons, theyre very strange. Actually theres one prison called Bastoy, a little bit to the South of Oslo. It basically looks like a holiday resort. Inmates have the freedom to relax with the guards, socialize with them to make music. Theyve got their own music studio and their own music label called Criminal Records.

So sort of your first intuition is like these small regions have gone nuts.

Like this is very crazy, but then you look at the statistics, you look at the numbers, it turns out this is the most effective prison in the world because it has the lowest recidivism rate in the world, the lowest chance that someone will commit another crime once he or she gets out of prison. So investing in these kinds of institutions, you will actually get a return on investments. These things save money in the long term because the chance that someone will find a job actually increases with 40 percent.

Your donation keeps this site free and open for all to read. Give what you can...

SUPPORT THE PROSPECT

Now, its just unimaginable that this will ever happen in the United States. But, I try to show that actually it wasnt just the U.S. that was the first country that experiments it with these kind of prisons in the sixtiesjust as the U.S. was almost about to implement a universal, basic income to completely eradicate poverty at the beginning of the seventies. Thats where historians may be useful. They just can show that, you know, things can be different, you know, they can be much better.

Heffner: Those solutions that you describe are innovative and imaginative at a time when this country couldnt even honor the commitment of frontline essential workers.

Bregman: The country is capable of the compassion because we see so much compassion. We see millions of very courageous protesters in the streets. Its just that we need a political revolution here. The short summary of my book would be something like most people are pretty decent, but power corrupts.

For the vast majority of our history, when we were still nomadic hunter gatherers, there was a process going on that scientists call survival of the friendliest, which means that actually for millennia, it was the friendliest among us who had the most kids and so had the biggest chance of passing on their genes to the next generation.

Then you look at current policies and it seems like, well, thats not survival of the friendliest, this is survival of the shamelessand its not only the case in the U.S. its also the case in the UK with pretty shameless politicians like Boris Johnson or in Brazil with [Jair] Bolsenaro. Its a real indictment of the so-called democracy we have created that [its] somehow not the most humble leader [who] rise to the top, but the most shameless leaders.

Heffner: Does your book advocate for a specific tactic that can be used by protestors to try to in this new tech age to actualize their movement for reform when the political means to achieve it really dont seem apparent.

The country is capable of the compassion because we see so much compassion. We see millions of very courageous protesters in the streets. Its just that we need a political revolution here.

Bregman: Its not up to me as a white European to say, I know this tactic is better or that that, that tactic is better. Or if they say that people shouldnt try it or whateverlike Martin Luther King said a riot is the language of the unheard. But it is interesting though, that if you look at the scientific evidence that the approach that the vast majority of protesters are taking right now, very courageously so, the peaceful approach is also the most effective one.

Weve got the work of sociologist called Erica Chenoweth whos built this huge database of protest movements since the 1900s. She discovered that actually peaceful protest movements are twice as successful as violent ones. The reason is that they bring in a lot more people on average 11 times more, right. You bring in children and women and the elderly and older men, and you name it, so everyone can participate in these more peaceful protest movements.

Your donation keeps this site free and open for all to read. Give what you can...

SUPPORT THE PROSPECT

Im not saying that a certain amount of rioting or violence [should not occur]. Im very hesitant to sort of condemn that when we see sort of the horrific brutal savage police violence, thats the real story. Thats what we should really be talking about. Im hopeful and Im so impressed just to see this for ordinary uprising of so many peaceful protestors who are against all odds keeping their self control and doing whats right. Its, its very, very impressive.

Heffner: Do you think that in the wake of the pandemic our economy can recover in a more equitable fashion?

Bregman: Every historian knows that throughout history, crises have been abused by those in power. Think about the burning of the Reichstag and then you get Adolph Hitler, think about 9/11, and then you get two illegal wars and massive surveillance of citizens by the government. This is an old playbook.

But weve got other examples as well. The New Deal, they came up with it in the midst of the Great Depression. Think about the Beveridge Report, the primal text of the welfare state in Great Britain was not written after the war, but in 1942, when the bombs were falling on London. So now is the time to do something like that.

Heres my hope: If you, again, zoom out and you look at the past 40 years, I think you could describe it as the era that was governed by the values of selfishness and competitionthe greed is good mantra. My hope is, and I do sense a shift in zeitgeist here, is that we can now move into a different era thats more about solidarity.

Go here to see the original:

Finding Hope in America's Pandemic Dystopia - The American Prospect

In the wake of the murders of Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and George Floyd, a remarkable number of white people have joined the #BlackLivesMatter movement even some evangelical Christian celebrities not known for making overt political statements. Joel Osteen, for example, participated in a #BLM march in his hometown of Houston to support the Floyd family. But Southern Baptist Convention President J.D. Greear has demonstrated a more tepid support, saying that while he believes that Black lives matter in a theoretical and apologetic way, he adamantly opposes #BlackLivesMatter as an organization due to its liberal causes.

Perhaps an article published by the Falkirk Center for Faith and Liberty best demonstrates this white evangelical opposition to #BlackLivesMatter. The conservative thinktank out of Liberty University argues that #BLMis ostensibly built upon the pursuit of justice, but a different kind of justice altogether than that laid out for us in Scripture. Not only is the organization deeply rooted in a false, cultural Marxist narrative, their secondary and tertiary goals are far more sinister than simply eradicating racism.

Those goals, the article asserts, include the destruction of the nuclear family, supporting Planned Parenthood, and the destruction of Western civilization as we know it by rejecting every godly value upon which our nation was founded.

Although more politically conservative and evangelical voices are joining in the #BLM chants of No Justice, No Peace, there are undoubtedly shaky voices and (perhaps hostile) minds who hold that while Black lives do matter in theory, radical institutional change is far too dangerous and subversive, if not completely un-American. Other Christians, like Washington Times columnist Everett Piper, assert that saving souls and having more revivals, altercalls, and personal repentance experiences are the correct Christian responses to the current racial protests notsupporting a movement that Piper finds contradictory to the faith because of its divisive rhetoric and encouragement of harboring racialresentment.

These key points of opposition ring strikingly similar to Christian opposition of another movement for racial justice: the civil rights movement. Many of the evangelical Christians who point to the civil rights movement, under the leadership of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., as the standard of dignified protesting, are the same Christians who oppose #BLM today.

The Black church was a pillar of the civil rights movement. It served as a resource hub for political mobilization, a meetinghouse for activists, and an incubator for developing the movements key leaders (including King, John Lewis, and Ralph Abernathy). Leaders across faith traditions, from Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel of Conservative Judaism to Archbishop Iakovos, the Primate of the Greek Orthodox Church in the United States, walked hand-in-hand with King and supported the movement during a time when it was considered too radical for white faith leaders to do so.

White Mainline Protestant denominations and their faith leaders were generally readied theologically and politically to support King and the movement toward attaining civil rights for Black people because of their conviction that ushering the Kingdom of God included societal reform as a prerequisite.

Many other white faith leaders, however, were either silent or opposed to King and the civil rights movement, particularly white evangelical and fundamentalistleaders. At best, they saw the civil rights movement as a precursor to protests that could result in societal chaos and disorder. To them, the civil rights movement, and King specifically, were attempting to mend in society what faith alone could heal within an individual. At worst, however, they saw the movement as a ploy of communist opportunists and Soviet-Union sympathizers who sought to add discord to racial relations in tearing the fabric of godly, American society. One Southern, independent-Baptist preacher remarked in his sermon, after questioning the sincerity and nonviolent intentions of King and other civil rights leaders for their left-wing associations:

It is very obvious that the Communists, as they do in all parts of the world, are taking advantage of a tense situation in our land, and are exploiting every incident to bring about violence and bloodshed.

And he continued:

Preachers are not called to be politicians, but soul-winners.

This soul-winning preacher, hailing from a white, blue-collar family in the city of Lynchburg, Va., was a 31-year old minister named Jerry Falwell.

Falwell, like many other Southern fundamentalist preachers, was opposed not only to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, but to outright desegregation initiatives as well. Falwell was highly critical of the Supreme Court case that integrated public schools, Brown v. Board of Education, asserting that Chief Justice Earl Warren and the Supreme Court Justices were ignorant in knowing the Lords will. And according to Max Blumenthal of The Nation, Falwell wasenlisted by J.Edgar Hoover of the FBI to spread FBI-compiled propaganda against King and the movement.

Prior to the Cold War, American fundamentalism arose as a reaction to modernism and the liberal theology rampant in mainline Protestantism that seemed to challenge long-held church teachings. The Platonic philosophical dualism found in the Pauline Epistles of the Bible body vs. spirit, church vs. the world reinforced their separatist beliefs. And their literal reading of the Bible, particularly passages in the Mosaic law that forbade the Israelites to intermarry with the different tribes, were utilized to paint racism as God-ordained and natural, and segregation as a political reflection of the Word of God.

The Communist Party USAs support of the civil rights movement further alienated evangelicals from racial justice. The Cold War had made Communism the boogeyman of conservatives and mainstream culture, and certainly influenced how conservative Christian faith leaders would view a movement like the civil rights movement. (Bayard Rustin, a close advisor of King, was a former member of the Communist Party and openly homosexual, both reasons that forced civil rights leaders to keep him hidden and behind-the-scenes within the movement). This association with communism led many to see civil-rights activism as simultaneously subversive, un-American, and ultimately rooted in an infinite, ideological enmity.

The 1950s saw the United States equating Judeo-Christian values with the sight and sound of The Star Spangled Banner, adding under God in a Pledge of Allegiance that was originally written by a socialist minister, and adding In God We Trust on the dollar to implicitly affirm Gods approval on the laissez-faire market system by which America stands.

At that time, Falwell and his fellow fundamentalists believed religion and politics must be kept completely separate. It is unbecoming of a Christian to engage in worldly affairs, they rationaled, and heaven forbid one should engage in civil disobedience a direct affront to the oft-quoted Romans 13 passage on "obeying the authorities of the land. However, once Falwell saw the effectiveness of protests from the political Left in the70s on Black Power, feminism, and gay rights, he changed his tune on political engagement and activism.

He apologized for his 1965 Ministers and Marches sermon that criticized the civil rights movement, and accepted the wave of Americas cultural tide toward racial-integration. It is noteworthy to point out that Falwell, along with Paul Weyrich and others who founded the Religious Right in 1979, were motivated to organize, in part, due to the federal government retracting tax exemptions on Christian schools that refused to admit Blackpeopleinto their student bodies, which was to them a classic case of state infringement on religious liberties. Several years later, Falwell Sr. would invoke Kings legacy swaying and singing We Shall Overcome with Alveda King (Martin Luther King Jr.s niece and evangelical anti-abortion activist) at a Black church in Philadelphia where he decried the decisions and unrighteousness of liberal judges in the court system.

A young, Hollywood-looking, charismatic preacher named Billy Graham also had some thoughts on King and the rising tide in support for Black civil rights this time from the evangelical perspective. A few days following Kings I Have a Dream speech, Graham said:

Only when Christ comes again will the little white children of Alabama walk hand in hand with little Black children.

With those words, Graham dismissed the I Have a Dream speech. He rejected Kings aspirations for concrete civil-rights legislation in favor of a born-again, eschatological yearning for a racially brighter day across the metaphorical Jordan River upon ones death.

In terms of theology, Graham and Falwell had much in common. Both believed in the divine inspiration and factual inerrancy of the Christian canon, both believed that eternal salvation from the fiery flames of hell was only possible in consciously accepting the idea of Jesus of Nazareth as ones personal lord and savior, and both stressed that societal change could only occur through an inward, individual transformation. The difference, however, and a notable difference that generally and historically marks an evangelical from a fundamentalist, is the formers willingness to engage with the world outside ones own.

Evangelicals (or neo-evangelicals) tended to be first or second generation fundamentalists who were educated in Bible schools and institutes, yet wanted their faith and culture to engage and not shun society. They took the Bible seriously, yet they also read the newspapers. They held a firm, unshakable faith in their convictions, yet carried a sense of dignity and decency in their interactions with non-believers. They came from the lower ring of the socio-economic spectrum, and their beliefs were dismissed as archaic by the religious and cultural elites, yet they desired public respectability. This was the Christian zeitgeist where Grahams persona, convictions, and publicityinstincts developed to help him become the darling and ideal of American evangelicalism even to today. This is also why American evangelicalism failed the civil rights movement.

Initially, a few mainline Protestant figures had high hopes for Grahams ability to convince evangelicals and fundamentalists to push for civil rights. One theologian at Union Theological Seminary at the time, John C. Bennett, wrote thatGraham was possibly the only person who could show Bible-believing Christians the implications of their faith on social matters, particularly on race relations. And to some extent, Graham did push the boundaries vis-a-vis the color line. He integrated his crusades, even personally cutting a cord dividing white and Black audiences at one of his events after one of his ushers refused to do so. And he reportedly bailed King out of jail after one of the civilrights marches. Though he agreed that desegregation was necessary, he also believed that a Christian shouldnt break the law and engage in civil disobedience, much like similar voices today who eschew the tactics, protests, and rhetoric of the #BlackLivesMatter movement.

He then encouraged members of his denomination, the Southern Baptist Convention, to not participate in the civil rights marches. The last thing that America needed was more expansion of federal government power in combating what Graham believed was merely a personal moral failing of the individual(s). If racism was going to be combated, it had to be fought through the born-again experience, and the inner transformation that comes along with a Just-As-I-Amconversion.

Graham regretted deciding not to go to Selma and participate in the civil rights movement. When he received word that King had been killed, Graham was reported to have said, I wish I had protested.

Kings death created a paradigmatic-shift on white tolerance for racism. His assassination marked the moment where support for segregation was no longer culturally acceptable, and that overt racism was no longer welcomed in the public square. Grahams regret perhaps is also the collective regret of many whites, including white evangelicals, today. The evangelicals were silent when King was alive, and they witnessed racism kill King at a bullets speed.

Perhaps this is why we see some whites performing awkward acts like washing the feet of Black clergy at a #BLM protest, or Chick-fil-As CEO Dan Cathy shining the shoes of Christian hip-hop artist Lecrae, or House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Democratic congressional leadership kneeling in silence while wearing Ghanaian kente fabric around their shoulders. To be seen in a humble stance in a public setting, especially in relation to a Black person, is an attempt at optical repentance an attempt to perform a certain symbolic action, infused with rich meaning, to give the performer(s) some feeling of absolution. But symbols are only as good as the realities of which they represent.

Today, the media landscape often blurs the terms fundamentalist and evangelical. An individual who was once seen as a fundamentalist is now described as an evangelical, because the Religious Right has given fundamentalists a medium to not only engage with the world, but a golden opportunity to shape the very world it once isolated itself from in their own image.

Lately, many of these evangelical voices have stumbled in their conversations vis--vis race. Jerry Falwell Jr. is currently facing public scrutiny for the drain of Black members of Liberty Universitys campus following hisblackface-on-mask tweet. Evangelical megachurch pastor Louie Giglios white blessings framing on white privilege was an attempted hot-take that turned into a hot-mess. And Pentecostal megachurch pastor Rod Parsley implicitly made the founding fathers look like they might have also founded racial reconciliation.

But upon George Floyds death, Rod Parsley released a video statement about the state of racism in America, invoking Martin Luther King Jr.:

I remember standing on that balcony when we lost one of the greatest men that ever lived, taken by a racists bullet. I would to God that his anointing will be picked up.That someone will be mantled with that great anointing.That nonviolent heart of God reconciling, restoring, reaching out

Quite a few evangelicals hold King as the standard bearer of civilrights activism, selectively uplifting pious quotes on love, nonviolence, and peace as a way to denounce #BlackLivesMatter. The irony of the prophet is that the prophet is usually only seen as a prophet in hindsight.

The Christians who oppose #BlackLivesMatter today are no different from the Christians who opposed King and the civil rights movement. Their blindness is an inherited racism that comes from the same theological streams from the same nationalistic political mobilizing of the civil-rights era fundamentalists and evangelicals. Likely, several decades from now, these Christianswill wish that they had marched with the #BlackLivesMatter activists those who will one day be considered the civil rights leaders of our generation.

Follow this link:

This Isn't the First Time Christians Have Opposed A Racial Justice Movement - Sojourners

I am not the first to remark on the strange nature of time these days the way months seem to compress into the span of weeks, while hours stretch into fortnights and years into lifetimes. Still, I don't think that fully explains why revisiting the Hamilton soundtrack this week felt a little like discovering the ruins of ancient Pompeii: something monumental had clearly existed here once, but a seismic catastrophe has left it pale beneath a layer of dust.

Hamilton feels, anyway, like a relic from a different era. In a sense, it is: Lin-Manuel Miranda's Pulitzer Prize-winning musical emerged during the sunny optimism of the late Obama era, when empowering applause-lines like "immigrants, we get the job done!" were as much a part of the cultural zeitgeist as "I'm With Her" stickers and the push to get Harriet Tubman on the $20 bill. Half a decade on, we now live in a world where Hamilton has failed to age along with it, having idealistically put its full-throated faith into pre-packaged American values and ideals without acknowledging the underlying forces like the fear-mongering, xenophobia, mean-spiritedness exploited by President Trump that lay siege to them being realized.

When I bought my ticket to see Hamilton in 2015 a stroke of dumb luck, I nabbed a pair for face-value just as a new batch were released the show was already on Broadway but had not yet won its boatload of Tony Awards. Barack Obama was still president, and the Supreme Court had just upheld Obamacare and federally legalized same-sex marriage. When the day of my show finally arrived 11 months later, in September 2016, the nation seemed on the cusp of electing our first woman president. A New York Times reporter had just written an article with the headline: "I Paid $2,500 for a Hamilton Ticket. I'm Happy About It." A month earlier, Hillary Clinton had made not one but two references to the musical during her nomination-acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention. As I waited to enter the Richard Rodgers Theatre, I had no way of knowing we were only a few weeks away from Vice President-elect Mike Pence getting booed by the audience and called out by the cast at a mid-November show; instead, I was swept up by the fans who'd brought a guitar to lead the queue outside the theater in singing "My Shot."

The filmed version of Hamilton, which arrives on Disney+ on Friday, is not radically different than the version I saw. Now short a few F-bombs and restored to the original Broadway cast (I saw the show four months after it was filmed, and some key actors had been swapped out by then), it is otherwise unchanged, allowing Hamilton superfans to relive the experience of the show now that Broadway has closed and the national tour is paused, and bringing the musical for the first time to those who've never had the opportunity to experience it live themselves. (Full disclosure, I have not seen the version that is appearing on Disney+). But how, I wonder, will it land?

Take, for example, the values espoused by the lyrics: the celebration of diversity and immigrants, freedom being "something they can never take away," the Schuyler Sisters rhapsodizing about "how lucky we are to be alive right now," even Jefferson singing that "we shouldn't settle for less" than life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. None of these ideals are wrong, but they do feel now about as blissfully nave as hoping Michelle Obama will be magically nominated at the 2020 Democratic Convention. As the Broadway cast was singing away on stage in 2015 and 2016, after all, Donald Trump was rising to power on the currency of open racism, xenophobia, and sexism, which ended up not being a deal-breaker for the 46 percent of voting Americans that ultimately backed him. Freedom, we've learned in the years since, can be taken away, whether that means separating families at the border and locking children in cages, or teargassing peaceful protesters who are exercising their First Amendment rights. Pence might have been berated by the cast of Hamilton, but at the end of the day, he was the one who went home to Number One Observatory Circle.

Consider also the way that Hamilton was once considered to be a radical and groundbreaking "hip-hop musical," lauded for casting diverse actors in the roles of the country's white Founding Fathers. But the Founding Fathers were, make no mistake, largely slave owners and in many cases, slave rapists. The real Alexander Hamilton, for his part, "mistrusted the political capacities of the common people and insisted on deference to elites," and his opposition to slavery was not quite the defining creed that Miranda makes it out to be. The musical, then, is a project of rehabilitation, not a reckoning. "Hamilton's superficial diversity lets its almost entirely white audience feel good about watching it: no guilt for seeing dead white men in a positive light required," wrote Current Affairs in a 2016 pan. Or, as Brokelyn put it around the same time: "I counted three Black people in the entire sold-out Friday night audience There were 10 times more people of color on the stage than the entire audience combined in a theater filled to the brim This isn't Oklahoma. It's New York, New York! The melting pot of the American dream! It immediately became the most hypocritical piece of art I'd ever seen."

If today's Black Lives Matter movement has proven anything, it's that America and the modern liberal movement have coasted for too long on these kinds of empty gestures. The past four years have illustrated the devastating limits of representation without accompanying fundamental change; as Dr. Cornel West recently put it, "The system cannot reform itself. We've tried Black faces in high places." Hillary Clinton's campaign, which has been criticized by some progressives for relying too heavily on the presumed virtue of electing a woman president, might be seen as in the same pursuit of mere "representation," a failing we can more readily identify these five years later.

Even the musical-theaterized rap in Hamilton functions as a sort of coddling, making palatable a genre that otherwise might alienate the "old, rich white people" who could afford a Broadway ticket before it went to streaming. Yet rap music is historically a genre that compels listeners to reckon with the suffering, violence, and poverty within the Black community; on a Broadway stage, it is effectively re-engineered for a diametrically opposed purpose. Case in point: Hamilton's "Ten Duel Commandments," an exciting little bop describing the honor code for a gentleman's shoot-out, is an obvious play on Biggie Smalls' "Ten Crack Commandments," which would probably horrify and offend many of the same Broadway audience.

Yet even despite my struggles to buy into Hamilton today, I can understand the appeal. Listening to the soundtrack this week, I felt myself escape back to those days of easy, innocent optimism in 2015 and early 2016. I don't fault anyone for being nostalgic for a time when things seemed so simple and within reach, and Hamilton unchanged as it is these years later captures that moment of sunny idealism perfectly.

But as Hamilton also warns us, history has its eyes on you. And surprisingly fast, the musical has already become just that: history.

Link:

Hamilton already feels outdated - The Week