July 19, 2010, Phoenix--In light of Arizona's draconian new anti-immigration law, several members of the New York Mets opted out of this week's series against the Arizona Diamondbacks. Fearing jail, deportation, or flogging, those Mets not born in the United States--Manny Acosta (Panama); Luis Castillo, Jenrry Mejia, Jose Reyes, and Fernando Tatis (D. R.); Henry Blanco, Fernando Nieve, Francisco Rodriguez, and Johan Santana (Venezuela); Oliver Perez (Mexico); Jason Bay (Canada); Raul Valdes (Cuba); and Hisanori Takahashi (Sweden--just seeing if you were still paying attention)--remained in New York.
Although probably not subject to deportation, Puerto Ricans Alex Cora, Pedro Feliciano, and Angel Pagan decided to remain behind as well. And although they were born in California, catcher Rod Barajas, manager Jerry Manuel, and broadcaster Keith Hernandez thought it best to be on the safe side and not make the trip, as did broadcaster Ron Darling. When asked to comment, Darling replied, "Hey, I was born in Hawaii, just like Barack Obama. And look at all the grief that he's been getting. And he's the President!"
With only eight players available, the Mets have decided to go with two outfielders in the series. Two of the four infield positions, as well as catcher, will be fielded by pitchers.
The Diamondbacks will be shorthanded, too, with five of their players having been deported early last month. When asked to comment on the loss of hometown players, Governor Jan "Forcefield" Brewer, quipped, "Well, they are baseball players. I should think they'd have been happy to make it home."
Tonight is "Patriot Night" at Chase Field. The national anthem will be sung by Toby Keith, and all fans fifteen and older will receive a free white hood emblazoned with the Diamondbacks logo. All fans are requested to bring proper documentation to show upon entering the stadium.
Welcome!
Thanks for stopping by! If you like what you read, tell your friends! If you don't like what you read, tell your enemies! Either way, please post a comment, even if it's just to tell us how much we suck! (We're really needy!) You can even follow us @JasonBerner! Or don't! See if we care!
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Friday, April 30, 2010
Joe Q. Public--Cup of Joe, That Is
Leslie Buck passed away Monday. Who's Leslie Buck? His original name was Laszlo Buch. Still nothing? OK, OK: Leslie Buck was the man who designed the classic New York coffee cup, officially known as the Anthora:
That should ring a bell for anyone who has ever lived in or watched a cop show set in New York. The Anphora was a regular part of the background noise of Big Apple life from the 1950's on (although you don't see them as much anymore), right up there with subway stations and hot-dog carts.
Thinking about Leslie Buck, though, makes us think about the ubiquity of design: Every manmade object you see or hear or taste was actually devised by somebody. We recognize this when appreciating a painting or a movie or a piece of music, but we don't stop to consider the amount of creativity that goes into populating the realm of our day-to-day existence. The famous "I-[heart symbol]-N-Y" logo? Somebody designed that! Those four musical notes at the end of every Intel commercial? Somebody composed that! The uniquely addictive taste of McDonald's french fries? Somebody concocted that!
Design is the water through which we swim, but we are generally unaware of the individual drops that fill the ocean. As you make your way through the waves, try to take notice.
That should ring a bell for anyone who has ever lived in or watched a cop show set in New York. The Anphora was a regular part of the background noise of Big Apple life from the 1950's on (although you don't see them as much anymore), right up there with subway stations and hot-dog carts.
Thinking about Leslie Buck, though, makes us think about the ubiquity of design: Every manmade object you see or hear or taste was actually devised by somebody. We recognize this when appreciating a painting or a movie or a piece of music, but we don't stop to consider the amount of creativity that goes into populating the realm of our day-to-day existence. The famous "I-[heart symbol]-N-Y" logo? Somebody designed that! Those four musical notes at the end of every Intel commercial? Somebody composed that! The uniquely addictive taste of McDonald's french fries? Somebody concocted that!
Design is the water through which we swim, but we are generally unaware of the individual drops that fill the ocean. As you make your way through the waves, try to take notice.
Thursday, April 29, 2010
More Musings
Do you suppose that a priest has ever gone into a brokerage house to discuss investments in vestments?
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
We're Flattered?
Received a strange compliment yesterday. We were at the drive-thru of a major clown-themed fast-food establishment. After placing our order, we pulled up to the cashier's window. She complimented us on our ordering technique: "I like the way you order. Very clear, you know what you want, no hesitation."
After shrugging this off with a humble grin and some half-witty remark about practicing in the mirror, we reflected:
On the one hand, it's always nice to receive compliments.
On the other hand, we've gotten waaaaay too good at ordering at McDonald's.
After shrugging this off with a humble grin and some half-witty remark about practicing in the mirror, we reflected:
On the one hand, it's always nice to receive compliments.
On the other hand, we've gotten waaaaay too good at ordering at McDonald's.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
Fortress Arizona
In light of the recent immigration law, Arizona police are required to check the residency status of those believed to be in the country illegally. Members of the state's Navajo Nation have asked policemen to check out Governor Jan Brewer.
Well, not really, but wouldn't that be cool?
This lady is quite the piece of work. Previously, she took steps to redefine "dependents," thus eliminating domestic-partner benefits for state workers--benefits that largely help gays and lesbians.
So, she doesn't like gay people. She doesn't like immigrants. She's one minority group away from winning a Glenn Beck t-shirt! We're rooting for paraplegics. There's just not enough official discrimination against the disabled.
At the risk of sounding naive, we don't even understand how this immigration law is supposed to work. Proponents claim the law will not lead to racial profiling. Let's say we accept that at face value. Since the law calls on police to check the documents of anyone who is "believed" to be in the country illegally, then police must do one of two things: Stop everyone who "looks" foreign, which is profiling no matter how you slice it; or just ask for papers from everybody. (On the plus side, this will ensure that we get rid of all those feckless Canadians marauding across the greater Phoenix metropolitan area.)
Police stopping people randomly, demanding to see "zeir pa-pers!" Is this Arizona or Berlin circa 1938? And yet the Tea Party would have you believe that Barack Obama is the one taking away our freedoms.
Well, not really, but wouldn't that be cool?
This lady is quite the piece of work. Previously, she took steps to redefine "dependents," thus eliminating domestic-partner benefits for state workers--benefits that largely help gays and lesbians.
So, she doesn't like gay people. She doesn't like immigrants. She's one minority group away from winning a Glenn Beck t-shirt! We're rooting for paraplegics. There's just not enough official discrimination against the disabled.
At the risk of sounding naive, we don't even understand how this immigration law is supposed to work. Proponents claim the law will not lead to racial profiling. Let's say we accept that at face value. Since the law calls on police to check the documents of anyone who is "believed" to be in the country illegally, then police must do one of two things: Stop everyone who "looks" foreign, which is profiling no matter how you slice it; or just ask for papers from everybody. (On the plus side, this will ensure that we get rid of all those feckless Canadians marauding across the greater Phoenix metropolitan area.)
Police stopping people randomly, demanding to see "zeir pa-pers!" Is this Arizona or Berlin circa 1938? And yet the Tea Party would have you believe that Barack Obama is the one taking away our freedoms.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Heartfelt Advice (A Brief Post)
Every meeting has one: The person who has to comment on everything. The person who seems, for whatever reason, to fervently desire long meetings.
Nation: Don't be that guy.
Nation: Don't be that guy.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
You Haven't Read the Book. Now See the Movie.
We continue to make our way through the Oscar nominees, most recently having watched "Precious"
and "Up in the Air."
Both these movies are based on novels: The official title of "Precious" is "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire";
"Up in the Air" is based on the novel of the same name by Walter Kirn.
While both of these movies are perfectly fine as far as they go ("Up in the Air" is more entertaining than "Precious," but the latter is worth seeing if only for Mo'Nique's academy-award winning portrayal of Precious's abhorrent mother), what struck us upon watching them is how utterly unnecessary they both are. We haven't read either of the books, but we cannot imagine that the movies add much of anything to one's appreciation for the books' underlying stories.
The basic problem is that the stories are not especially "visual." "Precious" is the story of a teenage girl (played by Gabourey Sidibe) in Harlem, who is pregnant (for the second time) after being raped (for at least the second time) by her father. The movie tells of her gradual self-empowerment through education. "Up in the Air" is the story of Ryan Bingham (George Clooney), a man who fires people for a living. He practically lives in airports, and he is working towards his goal of racking up 10,000,000 frequent flier miles.
"Up in the Air" does have a distinctive "look" to it: a sort of washed-out monochromatic blue palette conveys the soullessness of the modern airport and also reinforces the essential sameness of all these "non-places." The only real cinematic moments in "Precious" are those that convey the title character's fantasies, whether they be of musical superstardom or of transporting herself into a foreign film playing on television.
There's certainly nothing wrong with adapting a book for a film, and we would imagine that the authors of these novels are pleased by the final products. Both movies display technical skill on the part of the filmmakers (both directors received Oscar nominations), and both are chock full of strong acting performances: In addition to Mo'Nique, Sidibe received a Best Actress nomination, and the cast of "Up in the Air" received three nominations, including Best Actor (Clooney) and two for Supporting Actress (Vera Farmiga--who is terrific--and Anna Kendrick). But we're still left to wonder why the writers and directors felt the compulsion to turn these particular books into movies.
And then, of course, we realized why: The filmmakers, Lee Daniels ("Precious") and Jason Reitman ("Up in the Air"), presumably love the source material. They read these books and were inspired, uplifted, devastated--whatever. They probably told all their friends to read these books; they probably talked them up whenever they could. But they realized then that we are living in a somewhat post-literate age. Nobody reads books anymore. So if the stories they loved were to be disseminated to the broadest possible audience, they were going to have to be liberated from the gilded cage of the front and back covers.
and "Up in the Air."
Both these movies are based on novels: The official title of "Precious" is "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire";
"Up in the Air" is based on the novel of the same name by Walter Kirn.
While both of these movies are perfectly fine as far as they go ("Up in the Air" is more entertaining than "Precious," but the latter is worth seeing if only for Mo'Nique's academy-award winning portrayal of Precious's abhorrent mother), what struck us upon watching them is how utterly unnecessary they both are. We haven't read either of the books, but we cannot imagine that the movies add much of anything to one's appreciation for the books' underlying stories.
The basic problem is that the stories are not especially "visual." "Precious" is the story of a teenage girl (played by Gabourey Sidibe) in Harlem, who is pregnant (for the second time) after being raped (for at least the second time) by her father. The movie tells of her gradual self-empowerment through education. "Up in the Air" is the story of Ryan Bingham (George Clooney), a man who fires people for a living. He practically lives in airports, and he is working towards his goal of racking up 10,000,000 frequent flier miles.
"Up in the Air" does have a distinctive "look" to it: a sort of washed-out monochromatic blue palette conveys the soullessness of the modern airport and also reinforces the essential sameness of all these "non-places." The only real cinematic moments in "Precious" are those that convey the title character's fantasies, whether they be of musical superstardom or of transporting herself into a foreign film playing on television.
There's certainly nothing wrong with adapting a book for a film, and we would imagine that the authors of these novels are pleased by the final products. Both movies display technical skill on the part of the filmmakers (both directors received Oscar nominations), and both are chock full of strong acting performances: In addition to Mo'Nique, Sidibe received a Best Actress nomination, and the cast of "Up in the Air" received three nominations, including Best Actor (Clooney) and two for Supporting Actress (Vera Farmiga--who is terrific--and Anna Kendrick). But we're still left to wonder why the writers and directors felt the compulsion to turn these particular books into movies.
And then, of course, we realized why: The filmmakers, Lee Daniels ("Precious") and Jason Reitman ("Up in the Air"), presumably love the source material. They read these books and were inspired, uplifted, devastated--whatever. They probably told all their friends to read these books; they probably talked them up whenever they could. But they realized then that we are living in a somewhat post-literate age. Nobody reads books anymore. So if the stories they loved were to be disseminated to the broadest possible audience, they were going to have to be liberated from the gilded cage of the front and back covers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)