Art Machine
Just another former infatuation junkie

San Francisco’s civil disobedience continues thanks to two judges who know their job cold. First came one judge who managed to postpone his official decision until Friday on the basis that those seeking the injunction failed to give adequate notice to the city.

While those involved in the anti-gay marriage side of this particular case gnashed their teeth and spat flames over the fact that a judge would actually allow four more days for gay couples to marry, they consoled themselves in the fact that theirs was not the only case being made against gay marriage. Another judge would have to hear a case, and this one just might go through.

Except the judge knew his grammar.

The proposed court order was denied because a single semicolon was out of place. The judge refused to pass on a grammatically incorrect order.

It appears that in order to stop San Francisco from marrying gay and lesbian couples, there’s going to have to be some serious organization – because the judges will be checking grammar and paperwork for the slightest flaw.

Which is, after all, their job.

And all I can really say is, Go, San Francisco, go!

Now, on a purely pragmatic note, I have to point out the amazing amount of good this little bit of civil disobedience in high office is doing for California. Consider that California is running some serious debt right now and the Governator’s policies seem to be doing more harm than good. Bush’s “lot, lot of favors” seem not to be forthcoming.

Now consider that San Francisco has issued well over 2,000 marriage licenses since the mayor approved gay marriages. Each of those marriage licenses requires a fee of eighty dollars. That’s well over $160,000 in one short weekend.

Now consider that under California state law, you do not have to be a resident of California to get a California marriage license. Many of the couples marrying are coming from out of state. All of those people need some place to stay, some place to eat, some place to celebrate their new marriage. This means business for hotels, restaurants, bars, honeymoon spots, stores – a steady flow of cash from out of state. And the longer the marriages are allowed to continue, the more people will make their way to California to get hitched.

Is it just me, or is it really possible that gay marriage could be just what the California economy needs?

In the “let’s report anything we can” column of Yahoo! News you’ll find that Polaroid is advising people not to shake their pictures while developing.

The image “never touches air, so shaking or waving has no effect,” the company said on its Web site.

“In fact, shaking or waving can actually damage the image. Rapid movement during development can cause portions of the film to separate prematurely, or can cause ‘blobs’ in the picture.”

A Polaroid spokesman added: “Almost everybody does it, thinking that shaking accelerates the development process, but if you shake it too vigorously you could distort the image. A casual shake typically doesn’t affect it.”

Wow. Between Rosa Parks, Polaroid, and the Native Americans, Outkast is in a lot of trouble right now. It’s a good thing they didn’t go with their original plans for the performance – or Charles Schulz’s estate would have had a field day. (warning – the video is just fine, but some ads on the linked site may not be strictly safe for work)

There is no musical collaboration that could possibly be as hotly-anticipated as the upcoming track from William Shatner and Henry Rollins.

It’s been a long time since I did one of those internet test thingies. First – on the halfway-serious front, I’ve just taken the Super IQ Test.

Glen, your Super IQ score is 141

Your overall intelligence quotient is the result of a scientifically-tested formula based on how many questions you answered correctly. But it’s only part of what we learned about you from your answers on the test. We also determined the way you process information.

The way you think about things makes you a Creative Theorist. This means you are a highly intelligent, complex person. You are able to process information of nearly every kind with ease, using both creativity and analysis to make sense of the world. Compared to others you also have a very rich imagination.

How did we determine that your thinking style is that of a Creative Theorist? When we examined your test results further, we analyzed how you scored on 8 dimensions of intelligence: spatial, organizational, abstract reasoning, logical, mechanical, verbal, visual and numerical. The 3 dimensions you scored highest on combine to make you a Creative Theorist. Only 6 out of 1,000 people have this rare combination of abilities.

Then for kicks, I took the same site’s “What’s your theme song?” quiz.

Owwww! Nothing gets you going like an all-out, full force, soul-meets-jaguar, call of the wild. You’ve got natural soul that comes out in the closed-eye, full-grinned, screeches that James Brown made famous in this song. You don’t even need music playing to feel the beat.

It’s one of my hobbies – I just love collecting stories about human beings volunteering to be guinea pigs for cocktails of illegal and perscription drugs, stimulants, and amateur chemistry experiments. I think it’s amazing the lengths people will go to, the risks they’ll take, and the money they will spend just to see if they can get a little bit high off of something. I think it goes back to having two (count ‘em, two) college roommates who were desperately trying to find the chemstry student on campus who was running “Electric Kool-Aid” experiments (quick update: it was an urban legend then, it’s an urban legend now).

So I just can’t get over the latest report from Scotsman.com that folks are going nuts over inhaling vaporized alcohol.

Bristol bar Il Bordello became the first venue to offer its customers the device last week and owner Liz Lewitt said it had proved a hit with drinkers.

The inventor of the Awol machine, Dominic Simler, claims this method of consuming alcohol reduces the effects of a hangover and is calorie-free.

But alcohol experts described the device as �diabolical� and warned that inhaling alcohol could cause serious brain damage.

Professor Oliver James, head of clinical medical sciences at Newcastle University, said: �By snorting the alcohol it can go directly into the brain without being filtered by the liver.

�What is getting into your brain could be the equivalent of many times more than by drinking it.”

This story has everything. An untested delivery system for a controlled (but legal) substance, a high price tag (one bar charges customers six quid a shot to use the vaporizer), folks lining up aroun the block, and the all-important right-response-wrong-phrasing by the anti-drug coalition. Look at that again.

Professor Oliver James, head of clinical medical sciences at Newcastle University, said: �By snorting the alcohol it can go directly into the brain without being filtered by the liver.

�What is getting into your brain could be the equivalent of many times more than by drinking it.”

Now, look at it the way the target audience for the alcohol vaporizer would look at it.

Professor Oliver James, head of clinical medical sciences at Newcastle University, said: �By snorting the alcohol it can go directly into the brain without being filtered by the liver creating a really wicked high that a breathalyzer can’t catch, man! You’ve got to try this thing and try it now!

Folks, most of us already have enough stupid to last us our entire lives – don’t go around snorting more of it.

If you managed to stay tuned through the homophobic rantings of staunch conservative Dr. James Dobson (Focus on the Family – I wonder if he’s still telling people to spank their kids at least once a week because “they’ve done something to deserve it – even if you don’t know about it”), and then managed to sit through Karen Tumulty’s attempts to minimalize the story about Bush’s (non)service in the Air National Guard, you might have heard something odd.

Bob Schieffer – himself no slouch at idly dismissing the Bush story – took a moment to explain why he’s suddenly feeling much more receptive to the idea that it might actually be news. The logic is very reasonable. The syllogism goes thusly:

• The White House has a history of releasing information they want to disappear either late Friday night (to make the story appear in the weekend newspapers, which have a lower readership) or right before a holiday (so people will be more concerned about having fun than about keeping up with the news.
• Bush released his files to the public – files which weren’t anything new and which did nothing to answer the charges against him – late on a Friday night which just happened to be the eve of Valentine’s Day and the beginning of the President’s Day weekend.
• Therefore: The Bush administration must consider this story embarassing and/or potentially damaging enough that they want to bury it quickly and quietly.

Is it proof that Bush did something wrong? Of course not – but the fact that he’s hustling to cover it up makes the idea much more feasible.

But we don’t really need the hustle to convince us – there’s already the conspicuous absence of records which would reflect Bush’s attendance (or lack thereof) from even the latest spew of White House paper, the lack of credible witnesses to Bush’s service, or the statements made by his commanding officer at the time to the effect that Bush never even checked in for duty.

But, please – continue debating whether this story is actually a story or not.

We all know that the Bush administration knows how to use photography to get ahead. All through the campaign, Bush was photographed handing out barbecue, shaking hands with folks in ball caps – all situations that made him look like a real folksy guy. That is, if you ignore the fact that the bloke in the baseball cap paid $2,500 to get into the fundraising event. Or that the person being handed the barbecue had put together a “bundle” of $500,000 for the privilege.

Then there was Bush on the aircraft carrier in the flight suit, and that banner reading, “Mission Accomplished.” That was sheer genius – as long as you ignore Bush’s non-existent service record and the fact that at the time the mission was far from complete.

And who can forget Bush serving turkey to the troops in Iraq, gettin’ all Big Poppa on our asses as he stood there with the big family turkey on the platter. Too bad it was a prop turkey that he only picked up for the purpose of the shot and the President “serving” the troops didn’t look anything like that – or that the troops he “served” were hand-selected for the very important photo op.

Unfortunately, it now seems that the Republicans have learned the value of Photoshopping the pictures. In particular, they’ve learned to Photoshop pictures of their opponents.

As a 20-year-old photographer documenting the country’s struggle over the Vietnam War, Ken Light snapped the picture of John Kerry at a peace rally in Mineola. It captured the future senator alone at a podium, squinting into the sun.

Light did not photograph Jane Fonda on that warm June Sunday in 1971. The actress, who is reviled by many Vietnam veterans for her vocal stance against the war, did not even attend.

But when opponents of the Democratic presidential hopeful began e-mailing Light’s picture to one another four days ago, it depicted Fonda standing by Kerry’s side. The photo had been doctored.

“I’m horrified,” said Light, 52, who grew up in East Meadow and now heads the graduate photojournalism program at the University of California at Berkeley. “I think this kind of alteration is probably one of the scariest forms of trickery, particularly when it’s done against a political candidate.”

Remember – according to the Republicans, the Democrats are running a “dirty” campaign by asking the President if he actually served his time in the military. Or when they bring up the fact that Bush’s “jobless recovery” has made it harder for the average American to keep food on the table – or even keep the table, when it comes to that.

But it’s all right to alter photographs of Democratic candidates.

I say unto that: Feh.

Satire site BBSpot reports on a set of changes Lucas is making to the DVD release of the Star Wars trilogy that would be laughable if it weren’t so close to the truth.

I’m of two minds on the subject of Lucas’ infamous “Special Editions.”

On the one had, I firmly support the right of the artist to make changes in their work as much as they wish. William Shakespeare made changes in his plays even after they premiered. Neil Simon is fond of revisiting and rewriting his works. Mel Brooks retooled The Producers for the stage. Sometimes the changes are fantastic and build well upon the original, adding further depth and exploring new directions. At other times, the original is still the best. Lucas is well within his rights to issue “Special Editions” of his work and proclaim them to be the movies he always wanted to make.

On the other hand, I feel that Lucas is contributing to the destruction of cinematic history by refusing to distribute the movies in their original form. Neil Simon rewrote The Odd Couple to star female versions of the original characters, but the original play is still published and is still available for production. Mel Brooks’ The Producers is now a Broadway musical, but that doesn’t stop people from seeing the original film with brilliant performances by Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder.

George Lucas’ special editions, however, have replaced the original Star Wars in the market. I happen to own a VHS set of the last time the originals were released on video – the THX re-mastered editions that still have the original scenes and the original special effects. Lucas declared the Special Editions to be the versions of the movie he wants to be remembered – he wants them to go down in history as the real Star Wars trilogy.

But the fact is these new editions won’t go down in history, because the originals have already occupied that space. What Lucas did with special effects in the original trilogy – while limited compared to today’s technology – was groundbreaking. Without the pioneering efforts of the original effects teams, we probably would never have seen special effects come this far. It’s still amazing to watch Star Wars (call it Episode IV, call it A New Hope – it’s still Star Wars to me) and see what the movie was in its time and to see that in many places it still holds up, today.

By comparison, Lucas’ new scenes featuring slick, computer-animated characters and a plethora of computer-generated lens flares look out of place, cheap, tawdry, and pedestrian. These are not the movies that raised the bar on epic Science Fiction cinema and launched a thousand imitators – the original edits were. These are not the movies that pushed the limits of the technology and expanded the horizons of speculative fiction on film, the originals were.

And this is not my beautiful house. This is not my beautiful wife—
Sorry. Went off on a tangent there.

The point is – I do not fault Lucas for seeking to “correct” any “imperfections” that made the movies less than successful in his eyes.

But I do fault Lucas for failing to relize that the original movies are part of our cinematic history and heritage.

Come on, Georgie – Han can fire first. He is a rogue, after all.

I wonder if Lucas feels any shame that people are more excited about the release of the original Star Wars trilogy on DVD than they are about Episode III coming out.

Talkleft finds that CNN is willing to admit that it has overplayed Dean’s “scream.” Not only that, but cable and broadcast news showed the “scream” 633 times.

Well, that’s not so bad. I mean, 633 times in how long? A couple of week—
Holy Crapola! 633 times in the first four days, alone! Dean’s pep rally cheer has gotten more play than Janet Jackson’s boob!

I mean, more media play. I mean, the media has been all over—
Ah, screw it. I can’t even tell what I’m talking aboob anymore. BOUT. I mean, talking about.

Damned sensationalistic media.