Kumar Rocks

I read that the actor with the stage name of Kal Penn, mostly known for his stoner roles in the Harold and Kumar movies has taken a sabbatical recently to work as "associate director of the White House Office of Public Engagement, a gig he landed after working his way up through Presdent Obama's campaign operation." Using his real name of Kalpen Modi he will serve as an Obama liaison to Asian-Americans and Pacific Islanders, as well as the arts community.

The idea that somebody would chose working for their government over the rewards of Hollywood celebrity is simply astonishing in our culture. In the New York Daily News he is quoted as saying "We are doing some very serious work.... I consider it the greatest honor to be doing this." I can only hope that this might inspire others. What if more people were to turn away from the pursuit of fame and fortune to look for more humble but honest work rebuilding our country?

Blogger Headaches

I can't seem to be able to access this account anywhere but on my home computer using the Opera browser. So, it won't be around for a month while I travel in France. But I have a bunch of drafts that are worth polishing up, and will have a observations to share from my trip. So look forward to new content in the beginning of August.

new review

http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6648614.html

American Feud: A History of Conservatives and Liberals. DVD. 90 min. American Feud. 2007, 2008 release. $15 (home use), $195 (pub. perf.)
Gr 9 Up— American Feud offers an insightful and refreshingly unbiased review of how we got to where we are in the political divide. Using a chronological theme ranging from the formation of our country up to the results of the 2006 general election, the film traces the development and evolution of the divergent political philosophies of conservatism and liberalism. The producers have utilized a variety of clear interviews with historians and other observers of our unique system (Noam Chomsky, G. Gordon Liddy, Donna Brazile, and many others), crisp graphics, a remarkable collection of archival photos and live-action footage, and a smooth narration to present this impressive program. Viewers effortlessly follow the sequence of both international and domestic events which affected the electorate. Commentary includes the philosophies from all aspects of the political spectrum and does so in a wonderfully nonjudgmental manner. Viewers are left with a challenge to consider what our country's collective future holds in the political arena. One word of caution: the film contains an unfortunate and completely unnecessary expletive which might be an issue in some settings. Classroom teachers as well as individual researchers will appreciate the chapter selection option and the number of extras included in this useful title.—Dwain Thomas, formerly Lake Park High School, Roselle, IL

The State of Documentary

An overdue post from about a month ago. I was able to attend some of "SilverDocs", a week long documentary film festival. Docs in Progress, a new non-profit established to help nurture documentary filmmakers at all stages of the process, helped to coordinate additional activities for filmmakers. Through them I connected with a number of filmmmakers I had only known virtually through an internet forum called "D-Word".

I was struck by the variety of things we filmmakers combine with our doc making. As in Documentarian and activist/teacher/non-profit innovator/math nerd/scientist/author/parent etc. And we all complain about not having enough time to work on our films, and yet amazing films somehow get made.

I can't remember who said that shaky camera work was out. I agree that there probably was less of it. But I think it's more that shaky camerawork for the sake of appearing hip or young is out. I saw a variety of cinemagraphic styles and other formal elements this year. But in almost all cases technique worked in service of the story. To quote an old high school English teacher "form submerges, content floats". Which may be the hallmark of a "golden era" for our art form.

The return of The Dick

I don't mind Dick Cheney getting all this attention. He has the right to speak and to defend himself. I do mind the lack of critical questioning of his line of rhetoric. He asserts that he and the Bush administration saved us from another 9/11. The few who are saying, "yes, but you didn't protect us from the first 9/11" aren't given their due.

structural problem

I've been reading a book called "Africa Doesn't Matter" by Giles Bolton. It's an interesting and extremely pragmatic take on what can and should be done to help the poor in Africa. It includes many pages on the flaws and limitations of our current way of trying to help.

One thing that resonated for me was the fact that reducing poverty takes long term planning and action. I think he's correct when he says "The wider reason for our inactivity, however, is that governments respond well to problems that havea maximum four to five year time scale - in other words, not longer than an electoral cycle". He calls this a "structural problems of democracy". We tend to penalize those leaders who try to do things that may be wise for future generations, but lacking in immediate gratification.

Outside of a better educated electorate, I'm scratching my head as to what else can be done about this "structual problem".

Faith

This little film somehow just keeps chugging along. It's certainly not a blockbuster, and I have my moments of despair. But one day I notice the blog has a follower, another day there's an inquiry from another educational distibutor and a few days after that a Youtube video has a comment. Someone has posted a new review on Amazon. Long after I'd given up on festivals I got a notice today that we've been accepted into one in Philadelphia:

http://www.philadelphiaindependentfilmfestival.com/

Overall I think I've learned to have faith that the film will find its niche.

Talking about democracy

Looks like an interesting affair:


http://www.unh.edu/democracy/conference2009/

The problem of constituency

We've been told by viewers on both the Left and the Right that our documentary is "biased". Which gives us confidence that we are have been generally successful in being non-partisan. The problem with this approach lies in the marketing - whom should we be targeting? My feeling is that our audience is the small, but I think influential people who are thoughtful and open-minded. (not to mention interested in politics and ideas).

It's a constituency I'd like to encourage, and not only for self interested reasons:

http://e-democracy.org/

hosts several issues forums relating to encouraging thoughtful discussion. One way they do this is to make sure that people use their real names so that they can not make destructive comments under the cover of anomity as so many in the blogsphere do.

The United States Issues forum will open after 100 members sign up. It needs 37 more as of this date.

http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/us

So check it out.


FROM THEIR WEBPAGE:

Opening Soon - Join us for a civil, more deliberative discussion of national public policy issues and politics in the United States among people with diverse political perspectives. Conversations include topics from today's Congressional hearings, White House press briefings, breaking national news stories with public policy implications, new think-tank reports, etc. Modeled on legislative debate where one may not speak a second time until others have had an opportunity to speak, participants may only post once every 12 hours. In addition, name calling of any kind (including using political labels as pejoratives) and personal attacks violates the rules all participants agree to upon joining. Multiple rule warnings leads to participant suspension for this forum. Also, those posting use their real legal name (as your "Display Name" when you register) and list their city and state of primary residence on their member profile. New members will be prevented from posting until they fill out their profile. This requirement differentiates us from other discussion forums across the Internet, but is a critical element of E-Democracy.Org's foundation

Out of the mouths of (celebrity) babes

This comment is a little late in coming. But I'm afraid the idea is as timely as ever. During the Inaugural festivities singer/actresses Beyonce was quoted as saying about Obama that "he makes me want to be smarter". I found this comment quite touching, as the lady is already quite gifted in the looks and talent department. For all the challenges we face today, we all will need to be a whole lot smarter. We will need to learn to stay calm and use our intellect to guide our emotional response and not the other way around. Hopefully Obama had inspired alot more people then this one celebrity in that regard.

a first lady's role

There has been much talk about what Michelle Obama's role should be. While there are certainly a range of worthy possibilities, it occurs to me there is one that the chattering classes are missing. When we watched the vast enthusiastic crowds at the Inaguration, Richard wondered "how could that not go to your head?". Bush critics all over the spectrum frequently used the word "hubris" in connection with him and some of his decisions. Later on in the evening I caught an episode of the PBS documentary series "Frontline", which was reairing a special feature on Obama's life story. What struck me was the scene depicted when he was getting ready to give his famous speech in front of the Democratic convention in 2004. He was telling someone that he "had game", he was "like Kobe Bryant" (one of the reigning basketball stars of the time). Michelle told him something the equivalent of "don't blow it buster", which both calmed and humbled him. It occured to me then that this could be one of the most important functions of a first lady - prevention of hubris. Let's hope she does a better job than Laura Bush.

words, words, words

So many things were said by so many people about the Inaguration that I decided I wanted to to let my thoughts settle. I also remodeled my home office (the stained old dust mite infested carpet is gone and replaced by "green" marmoleum", and the walls are now a bright new shade of purple). Like the country as a whole I've been longing to start fresh. With all my junk temporarily displaced to the living room, it did indeed look like a whole different space. But then the junk (somewhat reduced, cleaned and re-organized) had to go back. It's still a much needed improvement. But like the country as a whole, it still contains the miscellaneous artifacts of its past. It remains the workspace of a compulsive recycler/reuser/craft supply addict. What came before affects what it is now - there is no way to start completely fresh. But it is possible to improve. At least at the microcosm, change for the best can happen.

Too Dumb or Too Crooked

It's not yet certain whether Timothy Geithner's tax mistake was due to stupidity or a deliberate attempt to avoid taxes. The facts so far cause me to lean towards the later. I once made a mistake on my taxes, so I know it is certainly possible for well intentioned people. But this does not appear to be a similar case.

What confuses me more however is that our nation's leadership thinks this is the best person we can find for the job. The lack of concern among both parties is stunning. I don't know what to make of it except that perhaps they are terrified of doing anything that might possibly hold them accountable for the worsening of the current financial crises. A sad statement about our "leadership" indeed.

The media in action

The American Film Institute in Silver Spring decided to offer the public a chance to watch the Inaguration in its beautiful theatre instead of braving the elements in downtown DC. It seemed like a great compromise to me, as well as too many others. There were literally hundreds of people in line. Even though my friend and I got there an hour early, the free tickets were quickly gone. Neighbors who had been suffering in the cold for 2 and a half hours missed out as well. Some folks were irked at the situation, but most left without complaint.

When it became clear the tickts were all gone, I saw a bleach blond reporter from a local cable news station ask the crowd "is anybody here angry and want to be interviewed?". Eventaully she found an older woman angry enough to want to rant on camera.

Some of us stuck around a bit to find out about the waiting list. The general feeling seemed to be that while there might have been some things AFI could have done differently, it was just a difficult situation that was handled pretty well. Somebody even said "thank you" to the AFI employee who came out to apologize and explain the situation.

Yet my impression of the situation will be far different from the person watching the angry women on News Channel 8. Will they think she is representative of the crowd, or realize she didn't represent most people's feelings there? It's hardly a new insight that news reporting gravitates towards conflict and drama. But this little incident reminds me of how slanted news coverage can be - not necessarily to the right or left, but to the old maxim "if it bleeds it leads".

INAURGURATION NIGHTMARE?

Like many folks in this area we are debating whether to go downtown for the Inaguration. Some say that it would a lifetme of "should of" to miss out on such a historic occasion. We should at least go and leave early to get a sense of the crowd. Others, who are much more pragmatic cite the numerous logistical challenges and mammoth effort it will undoubtedly take to actually get in site of even a Jumbotron. And most of us carry all of these thoughts in our head at once, going back and forth depending on the latest report about Metro capacity, expected number of tourists etc.

It occurs to me that this is a dilmena similar to many others - one where you vaciliate between hope and fear. Sometimes there's no obvious middle ground to settle upon. I suspected it may turn out symbolic of many such decisions this country will be facing in the future.