Historical irony of the day goes to …

Adolf Hitler, who was recently discovered to have descended from Jewish and African people.

Adolf Hitler has some Jewish and African blood in him, according to new DNA tests carried out on his relatives. The tests reveal he is biologically linked to the races he sought to murder.

Adolf Hitler, who called Jews and Africans “sub-human,” is actually a descendant from both those backgrounds, DNA tests reveal.

I might quip that this is self-loathing to the nth degree, but I don’t think these kinds of revelations ever broaden our understanding of history.  Whatever the case may be, we are still a long way from really hammering out what prompts someone to do Really Bad Things and thus be remembered as a Really Bad Person.  I get slightly outraged that anyone, much less the majority of our culture, can accept the mantra of “no such thing as bad publicity,” as if the #1 goal in life is to be remembered at any cost.

Oh, right:  they have a name for that.  And another one.

The terrifying faces of Mickey Mouse

Caught this Photoshop Phriday feature on Something awful – “Draw Mickey’s Mouth!” SA forums users submitted photoshopped versions of a page from a Mickey Mouse activity book; some are strange, some are the stuff of nightmares, but all of them are hilarious.

And while some of these are forums in-jokes that few outside of it would get, it’s far from the internet circle-jerk that one might find on Fark or 4chan. Thus, even if you’ve never visited the site before, Photoshop Phriday updates are usually 10 minutes of one’s time well spent.

My favourite is the Ren and Stimpy Horse one. Yes sir, I do like it.

I heart Samuel, and you should too

Here’s the thing about pop music:  if done right, it can really catch your ear.  Well, maybe not yours, but definitely mine, and that is the case with Samuel’s “I Heart NY,” a track that soars from the opening bells to the dah-dah-dahhhhhs later on.  Neon Gold Records has a blog where everything awesome goes to live, and if you’re interested I’ll direct you that-away for the MP3.  The reason I post about it now, however, is that Samuel and the guys from The Knocks have teamed up for a video for the single, and you can check that below.

[Either I'm retarded or the embed function isn't working (probably the former), but the video is available over at Vimeo.  Go there.]

I know it’s already August, but this one is a must for any summer playlist worth listening to.

Winner of the 2010 Yo-Yo Championship

This is random but too-good-not-to-post.  It’s also one of those “man, I wish I was that awesome” moments.

Alejandro Jodorowsky almost made a Dune movie, and I never knew that

Mind blown.

I just stumbled upon this link here, and reading Jodorowsky’s craziness makes me want to see this movie, even though it was just a (lucid) dream of a Chilean film god, metaphysical horror master H.R. Giger, and French comic legend Moebius, among others. And if you don’t know who Alejandro Jodorowsky is, he’s an avant-garde filmmaker who made El Topo, Santa Sangre, and The Rainbow Thief, the last of which is a movie I always get mixed up with The Serpent and the Rainbow. It’s kind of like how I always, strangely, get Dustin Hoffman and Donald Sutherland mixed up. Don’t ask how, it just happens. Fun fact: he was also a guest of honour at Marilyn Manson’s last wedding.

Anyway, it’s an interesting read, if you’re as big a fan of Frank Herbert’s Dune as I am. It seemed to attract the most interesting of filmmakers for an adaptation. And, from what I’ve read, the brainstorming of this movie was the seed that led to people like Giger and Dan O’Bannon helping make Alien a part of sci-fi movie canon.

Let’s talk about Shutter Island

Haven’t seen Shutter Island?  Allow me to spoil it for you.  Or, just don’t read the last four paragraphs.

Let's untangle this film, boss.

There are a handful of living filmmakers who, against the Hollywood odds, manage to make plot-driven films that offer something different from your standard fare.  Cinephile I am not, but I can kind of sort the wheat from the chaff with regards to big-budget action/thriller films.  Having already reflected on one film that betters its competition both critically and commercially, there is at least one other 2010 action film that deserves a word or two:  Shutter Island (it’s a psychological thriller, obviously, but I use the term “action film” quite liberally).  Does Scorsese need to be lavished with even more praise for his esteemed career?   Probably not, but that hasn’t stopped me before.

Before I get to the movie, though, I want to say a word or two about my personal criteria for what constitutes good art.  While I conform to the argument that great art always has a discernible utility – especially with regards to morality – I also tend to think that great art shouldn’t necessarily have an “absolute” worldview.  By this I mean I find more value in artists who are inclined to weigh and incorporate a variety of competing views; that way, the artist, in part, allows his or her audience to have a part in determining what the text, or film, is trying to say.  It shouldn’t be so unclear that the reader or viewer is lost in a mud-puddle of ideas; rather, it is the artist’s obligation to provide a framework for interpretation and determining what the meta-lesson is.  On top of all that, of course, the art object must also serve its audience by being a pleasurable experience (though communicating ideas is, in my opinion, an equally important purpose).

That’s a kind of broad rundown of my conclusion on some headache-inducing issues of theory and criticism.  These kinds of things have been debated for like two-thousand years, though, and you can fill entire libraries on the subject, so I won’t waste anyone’s time with the mind-numbing rabbit-hole that is literary theory.  Still, I think it serves as a good introduction to why I think Scorsese is brilliant:  in his films, he usually doesn’t put an absolute stamp-of-approval on a single interpretation of his theme.  Think of Aviator.  A fantastic film, obviously.  Why?  Well, it’s entertaining.  Sure.  But by the end you’re not entirely sure what Scorsese wants us to extract from his take on Howard Hughes’ life.  Obviously he admires and sympathizes with Hughes.  But is it also critique of the greed and amorality of capitalism?  Or is it a celebration of the work and dedication it takes to build such a huge empire from ground-up (which is basically the foundation for capitalism)?  In my opinion, it’s both and neither.  If you disagree, let me know in the comments.

Back to Shutter Island.  It may or may not be an illustration of crippling narcissism, where Ted Daniels is unable to know or comprehend any reality outside of the one that he’s living in his own head (think Memento).  For him, it might (or might not) be a psychological condition, but it’s far more likely that, if Scorsese wants us to take this route, we’re being told that his condition symbolizes a broader cultural issue.  Not a bad point (if he’s making it, that is):  we’re all a little seduced by the narrative fallacy and find it difficult to accept a worldview or reality that doesn’t fit neatly with our own.  I would even call it a challenge of the human condition (cliché, I know, but hey, it has to be said).

A second interpretation is that Scorsese is showing how social institutions are able to mold individuals and create groups that are complacent and “comfortable” with the lives they’ve been provided.  But, after all, he’s also suspicious that it’s an illusion upheld by a questionable distribution of power.  “Law” or “justice” seems to be a kind of unbiased player that is capable of balancing the scales, at least in this movie (as Teddy Daniels pursuit shows).

The way of thinking about Shutter Island that I have outlined in the paragraph above guided my understanding of the whole film – up until the last 15 minutes.  Then, the tables turn and we find out that Daniels, not the institution, might be the one steering and living his own illusion: a fantasy that absolves him of guilt (again, think Memento).

With Daniels’ final words, Scorsese may have been pointing toward the first interpretation, but I still can’t untangle the threads.  The most satisfying part is that Shutter Island makes me think at a level that most big-budget thrillers don’t, but from this director, should I expect anything less?

Trent is outsmarted by a high school valedictorian. What else is new?

I’ve long suspected that there is more to be desired from the education system as it stands.  The “deferred life plan” as some call it — slave, save, retire — seems pretty taxing if you don’t get excited by the work that you do.  The same, I think, could be said for certain programs in school, where the goal is sometimes not to enlighten and excite but to condition the mind.

The unfortunate reality, though, is that students also need to learn discipline and work ethic — two qualities that you sort of need to be a success whether by your own standards or society’s.  The argument of Erica Goldsen, recent graduate and valedictorian of Coxsackie-Athens High School, is that our current system places far too much emphasis on rote and systematic learning and not enough on allowing students to explore interests and be creative.  And yeah, she sort of puts forth the argument in her valedictorian speech — against the grain, much?

The text itself is a bit contrarian and idealistic at times, but overall I think there’s a lot of wisdom in here that’s far beyond her years.  In fact, probably even beyond mine, if that counts for anything.

Read it here or check out some highlights below:

School is not all that it can be. Right now, it is a place for most people to determine that their goal is to get out as soon as possible. I am now accomplishing that goal. I am graduating. I should look at this as a positive experience, especially being at the top of my class. However, in retrospect, I cannot say that I am any more intelligent than my peers. I can attest that I am only the best at doing what I am told and working the system.

But now, I have successfully shown that I was the best slave. . .I excelled at every subject just for the purpose of excelling, not learning. And quite frankly, now I’m scared.

You still have the opportunity to stand up, ask questions, be critical, and create your own perspective. Demand a setting that will provide you with intellectual capabilities that allow you to expand your mind instead of directing it. Demand that you be interested in class. Demand that the excuse, “You have to learn this for the test” is not good enough for you.

I think her self-honesty and self-awareness is the best part of the speech.  She knows that her own success is a result of being fashioned by the monster she describes, but I think that this can lead to more people confronting their own successes or failures with the broader perspective that she provides.