Categories
We Recommend We Recommend

monday, 31

Go visit the Stax Museum of American Soul Music.

Categories
News The Fly-By

THE SUBJECT WAS ROSES

From The Tennessean: Two biochemists researching cancer and Alzheimer s disease drugs at Vanderbilt University have made a startling discovery quite by chance — and it could prove to be the grand prize for rose lovers yearning for that elusive blue rose. The pair of researchers took a gene from the human liver and added it to bacteria. Surprisingly enough, the bacteria turned blue, causing the HGTV set to rejoice at the prospect of producing the hitherto unheard-of blue rose which, as everyone knows, makes an ideal gift for Alzheimer s patients everywhere.

Categories
News News Feature

THE CAMERA EYE

REMEMBERED. At a 2001 local Republican event three revered nonagenarians Ð l to r, former city councilman Bob James, longtime Republican figure John T. Williams, and GOP activist Peggy Hemperly — posed for the camera. WilliamsÕ death last week and JamesÕ death earlier this month both occasioned generous tributes from a wide variety of friends and admirers.

PANOPLY:A fundraiser for District Attorney General Bill Gibbons at the midtown home of Rex and Johnnie Amonette last week turned out a large and diverse group of supporters. In this picture can be seen former Shelby County Mayor Jim Rout (far left) and guest-of-honor U.S. Senator Lamar Alexander (second from right). Others include Shelby County Mayor A C Wharton (next to Gibbons), former mayoral/council candidate George Flinn (far right), state Sen. Mark Norris, and Republican national committeeman John Ryder. Harold Collins, a sometime aide to Mayor Willie Herenton, is poised at the door to admit late arrivals. One of those expected who did not arrive was U.S. Rep. Harold Ford Jr..

WOMAN TO WOMAN: U.S. Sernator Blanche Lambert Lincoln (D-AR) last week was the second speaker in the current yearÕs Greater Memphis Area Chamber of Commerce ÒFrontline PoliticsÓ series, this year co-sponsored by the Memphis WomenÕs Foundation and featuring prominent women in politics. Here the senator talks things over with Memphis city council member Barbara Swearengen Holt.

LEGISLATIVE VETS. Three former members of the Tennessee General Assembly gathered last week at a fundraiser for Republican legislative candidate Chuck Bates. The three, all former state representatives, were (l to r) Harold Sterling, Chris Turner, and Larry Bates (father of the honoree). Another former legislator present at the affair but absent from this picture was Ed Williams, also a veteran of the Shelby County Commission. Sterling, a former assessor, is running again for his old job. Turner, now General Sessions clerk, is in a reelection race.

Categories
We Recommend We Recommend

sunday, 30

Talk about a fabulous 1970s flashback; Todd Rundgren is at the New Daisy tonight.

Categories
We Recommend We Recommend

saturday, 29

At Murphy s tonight, The Limes Vinyl Release Party features The Dutchmasters and C.C. Riders. Haven t been to The Blue Worm yet on Airways, but any bar that calls itself that can t be bad and The Fieldstones are playing there tonight. Down in Tunica, Lou Rawls is at Gold Strike Casino. And here at home, Memphis in May comes to a close with the Sunset Symphony; this year s event, Praise in the Park, adds a gospel touch with various gospel groups, including Kevin Davidson and the Voices and O Landa Draper s Associates, all followed by a fireworks display.

Categories
News News Feature

THE WEATHERS REPORT

WHY I WON’T WATCH FAHRENHEIT 9/11

I rented Michael Moore’s movie Bowling for Columbine recently. After 15 minutes, I shut it off. Michael Moore’s movies make me squirm–but not for the reasons he intends. I squirm because I belong to that shrinking minority of Americans who don’t like to see people embarrassed in public.

Michael Moore embarrasses people in public, and I don’t like it. I’m not talking about public figures like Charlton Heston or George Bush or Roger Smith (the General Motors executive Moore eviscerates in Roger and Me). I have no problem with Moore pointing out the stupid, venal, or dangerous policies of actor-shills, presidents and corporate executives. No, I have a problem when Moore embarrasses ordinary citizens–a GM security guard, a bank clerk–in order to wring a little laugh from the audience or make a point that can be just as well made in another way. In the first fifteen minutes of Bowling for Columbine, for example, Moore goes into a bank that offers a free gun to anyone who opens a new account. He opens an account, asks for a gun, and gets it. Granted, this is a telling statement about how easy it is to get a gun in this country–from a bank, no less. But along the way, Moore also seems to be politely mocking the sweet teller who opens the account for him and the perfectly nice bank manager who hands him the gun. After he’s handed the gun, Moore then ambush-interviews the bank manager, peppering him with well-rehearsed questions about the socio-political correlativism of guns and banks. The manager, clearly not prepared to answer such complex questions on the spur of the moment, hems, haws and stumbles. We laugh at him. But which of us could answer such questions cogently without some time to think about them? Moore is trying to make a statement about guns in this country, but I came away from this segment angry, not about stupid American gun laws, but about rude American film directors. I felt sorry for the bank manager. That’s when I turned the movie off.

Public humiliation has become the most popular sport in America. Virtually every hit “reality” show on television is really a “humiliation” show. People get fired by Donald Trump, thrown off the island on “Survivor,” rejected by The Bachelor, and reduced to screaming fools on “Fear Factor.” We watch and laugh, or gloat, as if we were better than them. And then there’s the hugely successful “American Idol.” Don’t tell me that the viewing public watches “American Idol” to discover talented singers. No, you and I both know that we watch in order to laugh derisively at the poor fools who think they can sing, or dream they can dance, but who in fact have no talent whatsoever–unless you count their willingness to make fools of themselves in public. Okay, I’m pretty sure most of the talentless know they are talentless and just want their two minutes on national tv, but that doesn’t change the fact that Americans watch in order to laugh at them.

Public humiliation on television goes back almost to the medium’s origins. I still remember a show from the 1950s called “Queen for a Day,” on which women stood before the audience and told the pathetic tales of their lives–drunk husbands, children with polio, accidents in the kitchen–in order to earn the audience’s sympathy. The wife with the most pitiful tale won a refrigerator. I hated that show. It embarrassed me. In more recent years, we’ve had the “I Slept With My Boyfriend’s Dog” school of Jerry Springer television, which simply took the public airing of besmirched underwear to new depths.

The question now is this: Are Americans still capable of embarrassment? More importantly, are we capable of being embarrassed for someone else? Do we feel sympathy any longer for someone who has been or is being publicly humiliated?

I of course haven’t seen Michael Moore’s newest film, Fahrenheit 9/11, which just won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival. I understand from the reviews that the movie blasts the Bush administration for its ties to the Saudis and its failures before and after 9/11. That’s fine with me. A politician’s policies are fair game. Besides, no one can embarrass George Bush more than George Bush embarrasses himself every time he tries to speak off the cuff. (If I need to establish my anti-Bush bona fides here, let me say that I just sent the Kerry campaign a check for 2% of my annual income. If you haven’t done the same, you’ll have no right to complain if Bush wins and gets to appoint Scalia clones as the next three Supreme Court justices, thereby embarrassing the whole country for the next 30 years.)

Anyway, I’m sure I’ll agree with the politics of Moore’s new film. But not necessarily with the tactics. There’s one scene in Fahrenheit 9/11 that all the reviewers have mentioned as one of the “best” and “funniest” in the movie–”vintage” Michael Moore. It’s a scene in which Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy defense secretary and chief architect of the Iraq War, is preparing for an interview. Wolfowitz, unaware that his actions will later be seen by millions, sticks a comb into his mouth, wets it with spit, and then runs it through his hair. Apparently we are expected to laugh with gleeful superiority at this picture of the Bush administration’s biggest brain behaving grossly. But I wouldn’t laugh. I would simply be embarrassed for the poor man. After all, who among us doesn’t pick his nose when he thinks no one is watching? Who doesn’t bite his finger nails and spit them secretly into the corner of the motel room when he’s alone? Who doesn’t have some disgusting habit which, if revealed to our friends, would make us want to crawl away and die? I hate Wolfowitz’s unilateralism, his imperialist arrogance, and his conduct of Middle East foreign policy. Only Michael Moore could make me call Paul Wolfowitz “poor man.”

I don’t plan to see Fahrenheit 9/11. All the “news” in it is old news to anyone who reads and is interested in politics. Mostly, though, I don’t care to see people publicly humiliated. I would think by now that we Americans would have learned what a callous indifference to the humiliation of others can lead to. If you’ve forgotten, just take another look at the photos from Abu Ghraib.

Categories
We Recommend We Recommend

friday, 28

It s the last Friday of the month, which means all of the South Main Arts District s galleries and shops will be open late for the South Main Trolley Art Tour with free trolley rides. Openings in the area include those at Durden Gallery for work by Streater Spencer; 544 S. Main for work by John Robinette; Jay Etkin Galleryfor An Evening of Improvisation, with musicians and dancers from Breeding Ground; and at Butler Street Bazaar, where there will be two shows a closing reception (but with new art work) for It s Okay toi be a gypsy, with work by eight artists, and It s Not What it Seams, a Midtown Food Co-op fund-raiser that includes a fashion show by Jessica Sumner, Jessica Buttermore, and Rough Cut, along with music by DJs Ivan Lablanco and Lawrence Cadassio and live music by Snowgloble, Amanda Lefevre, and Augustine. The Memphis Redbirds kick off their four-game run against Albuquerque tonight at AutoZone Park. Bob & Susan Salley are at Kudzu s tonight. DJ Mr. White has some surprises in store in the M Bar at Melange. As always, The Chris Scott Band is at Poplar Lounge. And one of the best shows in town tonight is The Sophisticats and The Sophistikittens at the Blue Monkey Midtown, where the New Orleans Bump, Grind, and Go-go band will crank out their 50s and 60s-era rock-and-roll dance music before heading off to Riverfest the next night in Little Rock.

Categories
News The Fly-By

OH CAPTAIN, MY CAPTAIN!

LifeDesign magazine, a Mid-South publication that, according to its ads, targets 30-something women with college educations and an income in excess of $40,000, recently published a story titled Entertaining your Guests: Viva Las Memphis! The article is a handy-dandy rundown of Memphis most obvious attractions: The zoo, the Redbirds, Beale Street, and so on. But one assemblage of words (just a verb shy of an actual sentence) caught the Fly s attention: The Rendezvous for ribs, Chez Philippe for a culinary dream (yes, Jose still sets the standard here), Automatic Slim s for N.Y. style and great drinks, Erika s for a German lunch, Cafe Samovar for a Russian treat, or catch a sunset over a beer at Captain Bilbo s. Perhaps LifeDesign should market itself to college-educated, 30-something women who make in excess of $40-G and who have access to a time machine, since the legendary Captain Bilbo s closed its doors sometime in the mid-1990s.

Plante: How It Looks

Categories
Film Features Film/TV

It’s Our Pleasure

Directed by prolific Korean film-maker Kim Ki-duk, perhaps best known for his extreme 2000 thriller The Isle, Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and Spring is a Buddhist parable notable for its deliberate pace and serene mood.

As the title suggests, the film has a cyclical structure, divided into five sections, each one taking place in the titular seasons but spaced about a dozen years apart. The film tracks the lives of an adult monk (Oh Yeong-su) and his young apprentice (played by three actors over the course of the film, including the director in the final sections), who live on a small, floating monastery in the middle of a placid lake, surrounded by an idyllic landscape of gentle streams, stone monuments, and wild herbs that they grind into medicines.

All five sections take place in this setting, each section framed in more ways than one by a free-standing gate at the shore of the lake. Each section each season begins with the opening of the gate’s decorative wooden doors to reveal the floating monastery, always there, never changing. This motif of a doorway punctuating a wall-free border seems to function as a reminder of propriety, with the moment in the “summer” section when the young monk first ignores the decorum of the doorways signaling a fundamental change.

In the first section, the apprentice (Kim Jong-ho) is a very normal little boy, with a slingshot at his side and a puppy chasing after him. And this earthiness, which only becomes stronger in succeeding sections, softens the spiritual severity one might glean from the title. One day, while playing in the stream, the boy takes great glee in tying stones to a series of creatures a fish, a frog, a snake and watching them struggle to move. The older monk witnesses this, and when the boy awakens the next day, he has a large stone tied to his back, which the older monk refuses to remove until he has found the creatures and freed them. He warns the boy that if any of the creatures have died, he will “carry a stone in [his] heart for the rest of [his] life.”

As you might expect, these kinds of lessons continue in other sections, until the younger monk has an apprentice of his own, but the journey is complicated considerably when the younger monk’s teen years coincide with the arrival of a pretty young woman who seeks healing.

The meditative quality of Spring, Summer (its sparse dialogue and commanding visuals lending it a gravity not unlike a good silent film) and the film’s spellbinding location might well create converts to Buddhism, though apparently most of the Buddhist rituals and talismans in the film were invented by the director, who was raised Christian.

But even if you don’t know much (or care much) about Buddhism or reject the film’s notion that lust inevitably leads to misery, Spring, Summer still works as a succession of entrancing images, especially for American viewers no longer accustomed to seeing organic wonders instead of computer-generated ones. And wondrous images is one thing this film is filled with: A frog struggling through the water, a rock tied to it; a man hacking through a frozen waterfall; a man practicing calligraphy on the deck of his home using a brush dipped in water, his writing disappearing only moments after it appears, and, later, carefully painting a series of instructions on the same deck using the tail of a mewling cat as a brush; an infant crawling across a frozen lake in search of its mother.

The title and concept of Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and Spring makes it sound like either a forbidding bore or a pop-Buddhist travelogue for film fans who equate cinematography with landscapes. It is neither. With its earthy but lyrical tone and almost surrealistic series of eye-popping images, it is instead quite accessible and an utter pleasure to watch.

Chris Herrington

Imagine that you are a 7-year-old girl and that your favorite movies are Disney animated fairy tales. Consider the classics: Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Snow White. What do you a 7-year-old girl learn about yourself by watching these romances about pretty princesses who cannot themselves conquer dire circumstances and must await the arrival of cooperative, vapidly handsome princes to save the day and validate them with marriage? These princesses are very thin and very beautiful and, typically, very dainty (observe Disney’s Snow White as she warbles “Some Day My Prince Will Come”) and helpless in the face of danger. They also marry princes whom they do not know. Where is the romance? Where is the courtship?

Consider, now, the modern classics: The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast. In The Little Mermaid, Ariel falls in love at first sight with Prince Eric and sacrifices first her voice and then her life as a mermaid to be his bride. We learn that the voice was a foolish trade, but the de-mermaid-ization is never questioned. In Beauty and the Beast, we learn that beauty is only skin deep, since Belle falls in love with Beast regardless of how he looks. However, once she loves him, the spell is broken and he becomes a beautiful Adonis, and everyone lives happily ever after. At least in the newer films, there is a courtship, but how much better is it that any worthy spouse must also be gorgeous?

I am not deploring these classic movies. However, I sympathize with the 7-year-old who dreams of being a princess with a small waist and big boobs and realizes at some point in her life that princess-dom isn’t in the forecast. She is trained (is she not?) to seek out a prince: handsome, vain, preening, charming.

There is a line in the Sondheim musical Into the Woods where Prince Charming confesses to Cinderella, “I was raised to be charming not sincere.” That’s the thing about princes. So, for these reasons and for many others, I think it’s very important that Shrek and now Shrek 2 be as canonical in the cinematic diet of young girls (and boys) as the greats mentioned previously. The Shreks, flatulent in their humor as they may be, have a single, overriding message that no Disney animated film can claim with equal success and style: It’s okay just being you.

Shrek and Princess Fiona (voiced by Mike Myers and Cameron Diaz) are enjoying their honeymoon. They are summoned to a land Far, Far Away to attend a ball in celebration of their marriage. Fiona’s parents think she has been rescued and wooed by Prince Charming (Rupert Everett), so they are less than thrilled to find that Fiona is now a large green ogre and that she has married one as well. “Not that there’s anything wrong with that,” adds the Queen (Julie Andrews) to her King (John Cleese), who disapproves of Shrek and unattractive green suitors in general. He enlists the aid of the Fairy Godmother (Absolutely Fabulous‘ Jennifer Saunders) to magically ward Shrek off, as well as the mercenary kitty Puss In Boots (a hilarious Antonio Banderas) to take him out.

Shrek ends up befriending Puss and falling prey to a Godmother potion that makes Fiona human again and he into a strapping princely type (a dead ringer for Beauty and the Beast‘s Gaston) but Shrek must kiss Fiona by midnight for the potion to be permanent. He must also beat Prince Charming to kissing her, because the King has been given a potion that will make her fall in love with the first man who kisses her. Are all these potions confusing you? Message: Stay off drugs and alcohol, kids.

Shrek 2 is very funny. But beyond the funny and beyond the spectacle of the animation (pay attention to how beautifully detailed the mottled-glass windows are when we see through them), Shrek 2 has many obvious and hidden messages. Shrek’s colorful assortment of buddies (blind mice, pigs, a Pinocchio with a secret, and a wolf that dresses up like a grandmother all the time) sends the message: It’s not important what other people think about you if you like yourself. Being different is okay.

Shrek 2 is a sequel that lives up to (and surpasses) the first, and both kids and adults will enjoy it wholly. More importantly, however, they will come out liking themselves a bit more in the process. Bo List

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Riverfront Cafe Society

If improving the riverfront promenade isn’t a justifiable public expense, then what is?

And why do both sides continue to insist that the job can be done for nothing or next to nothing in the way of public funds? The Riverfront Development Corporation says private development will pay for most of it. Friends for Our Riverfront says its alternative plan will cost $7 million.

Seven million dollars will buy a starting player and a backup on the Memphis Grizzlies for one season, or a waterfront lot on the Gulf of Mexico and a big house in Destin or Gulf Shores. So how can you bury two parking lots, tear down and relocate a fire station, move a public library, put the University of Memphis Law School in the Customs House, and build a big park and some sidewalks for $7 million?

Private investors can take their pick from a downtown garage sale of empty or half-empty buildings with river views, some of them on Front Street. The headquarters of National Commerce Financial may be added to the list now that the bank has agreed to be acquired by SunTrust. How can you pay for the promenade makeover by building 150-foot office buildings on the west side of Front? And who wants them?

Taxpayers already are paying for parking garages for Beale Street, Peabody Place, FedExForum, and Mud Island. Using public money to pay for downtown parking garages is well established. A promenade plan that doesn’t account for public parking is no plan at all. What happens during any disruption? And if new public garages are built, who gets to use them and when?

“Whether the RDC plan is implemented or not, we need the estimated 1,000 parking spaces that are in the two garages on Front and Monroe and Front and Jefferson,” said Jeff Sanford, executive director of the Center City Commission. “There is already demand for more public parking than exists.”

Public funds should pay for other components of the promenade. The Cossitt Library could be moved to another building. But the fire station could cost $15 million to replace, according to a speaker at last week’s City Council meeting. The University of Memphis, a public institution, would expect some public help to move its law school downtown. Parks have to be maintained. There is no $7 million solution.

So now that the City Council has voted to advance the RDC’s plan to the next first-down marker, it’s time for some ballpark figures. The RDC should put an estimated price on economy-to-luxury options A, B, and C. It should spell out how private investment would pay for public improvements. Property taxes already pay for public improvements. Is there a developer or corporate CEO out there secretly longing to move to Front Street? And will they come only if they can deal with the RDC instead of the City Council? And would whatever payments they make for “public” improvements be limited to Front Street instead of the rest of the more than 300 square miles of Memphis?

Both the RDC and Friends better be careful about overplaying their hand. All that media coverage notwithstanding, the promenade is not a big deal to the majority of Memphians. The proponents and opponents of the RDC plan are more alike than different — white, affluent, and vested in downtown. There were only a handful of black faces in the packed City Council chamber last week. This is no FedExForum, with a construction bonanza and a future Saturday- night sellout against the Lakers. The dream of the promenade crowd seems to be drinking a cappuccino in a sidewalk cafe. Don’t think City Council chairman Joe Brown, who is black and represents working-class North Memphis, didn’t figure this out when he made them wait all evening. The RDC is to some members of the City Council what optional schools are to the Memphis Board of Education.

Sanford, a former City Council member who has been a close follower of downtown’s progress for 30 years, doesn’t expect to see a tree planted or a building erected for several years. But the word is that Bruce Kramer, attorney for Friends, is out looking for common ground with the RDC. The do-nothing option, always a potent force in Memphis, was criticized by nearly everyone, including City Council members.

If it takes creating a slush fund for the heirs to fight over, so be it. Maybe that’s the cost of doing business here. It’s not like it doesn’t happen in class-action lawsuits all the time.

And if it takes public money to dress up Front Street, so be it. But it’s time to be up front about it. Give Memphians and their elected officials more specifics. Except for the annual desecration of Tom Lee Park in the name of Memphis in May, the RDC has made the riverfront a cleaner, prettier, more interesting place. I’m glad they won round one. n