The World This Week: Hong Kong

In a flashback to 1989, pro-democracy protests are in full swing over in China. In a bit of a deviation from the aforementioned situation, Hong Kong, rather than Beijing, is the locus of the protests. As of now, these protests are ongoing, with no end in sight. Clashes with the police have begun, inciting mixed reaction among the protesters. Some pro-democracy groups have called for the protests to end, while others have cheered those who stayed out on the streets.

To put the events into perspective, check out the slide show at the beginning of this article:
http://www.cnn.com/2014/09/28/world/asia/china-hong-kong-students/

Anyhow, this is hardly an insignificant event. Protests of this sort are no small thing in China. The 1989 protests, centered in Tiananmen Square, were quelled by a full military response, complete with tanks and the like. It's likely that such an event may occur, should the protests continue. In spite of some efforts to liberalize the country, China remains one of the most authoritarian regimes in the world. Mao's China saw many more deaths than Stalin's Russia, and many times more deaths than Hitler's Germany. To be fair, Mao didn't order the majority of those deaths, but his policies did encourage them. Another factor at play here is Hong Kong's history. Up until the first of July, 1997 (exactly one month before yours truly made his big debut), Hong Kong was part of the British Empire. As such, it enjoyed freedoms unknown to the overwhelming majority of the Chinese people. Hong Kong retains more freedoms than the bulk of China, with a high degree of autonomy from the People's Republic. It isn't anything like America, though. I won't bore you with an in-depth analysis of Hong Kong's political structure (for a brief overview, I'd recommend the BBC's profile of the region: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-16517764). At any rate, democratic sentiments are high in Hong Kong. It'll be interesting to see how this scenario plays out on the world stage.

The Accidental Masterpiece Chapter 2

This second chapter of Kimmelman's The Accidental Masterpiece, entitled The Art of Being Artless, focuses on "art" created by those who are hardly artists, or rather, art marketed to the masses. The chapter starts with a discussion of the history of photography and the ways in which it became widespread (technically the chapter starts with an anecdote to the author's past, but I'll discuss that later). Kimmelman discusses how the camera became a way for people to try to preserve themselves and what they did for posterity, which links back to a theory we discussed last year: all art is inspired by the human fear of death and desire for immortality. He goes on to delve into the ways in which photography was "art-made-easy," recounting instances of other artists who tried to make art simple for the common man. He discusses the extent of this phenomenon, noting that the people who delved into these simple forms of art ranged from common criminals to world leaders. In the end, Kimmelman links it all back to photography, and discusses the theme of the chapter as I interpreted it early on (this is where the anecdote to his past comes in): photographs hold a certain meaning for those who were involved in taking them, especially amateur photographers. When you don't know the people in the photograph, or who the photographer is, the meaning is open to interpretation. I think that's a really powerful point. An amateur photograph taken seventy years ago, if it was taken by a family member or family friend of yours, can have as much meaning to you as a Picasso or a Pollock. Perhaps even more, if you personally knew the subject.

Oh, and one last note: I had to see if I could find any pictures of paintings done by Churchill, which Kimmelman mentioned. And he was right - the old Prime Minister wasn't half bad. Churchill had an excellent eye for detail and the interplay of light with a landscape. In a way, I suppose, that shouldn't come as a surprise.

Update: Scotland's Referendum

The announcements are underway. One by one, the subdivisions of Scotland are beginning to submit their totals. At this point, twelve out of thirty-two have declared. The current standing: 47% Yes, 53% No. And something about this has changed me. More specifically, it's made me question my dislike of the English. I can't even bring my self to say hatred at this point. I'm starting to feel bad for the Brits, almost as though I've misjudged them. The England I hate wouldn't have allowed a referendum of this sort to take place at all. Perhaps even more instrumental in my change of heart is the realization of how this would impact the US. I mentioned a few of the impacts on the world yesterday, but the realization of how an independent Scotland could damage one of our strongest allies never quite set in until now. It could greatly impact the UK's military capacity, at a time when it needs to be stronger than ever. It would take away a huge source of the UK's wealth and derive them of a huge source of their economic power - as previously mentioned, Scotland has huge oil reserves. And there's no guarantee that an independent Scotland - which is a very real possibility at this point - would want to align itself closely to the United States. I'm getting a bit worried at this point, and I'm starting to think that a choice of "No" might be better for everybody. I never thought I'd say this, but I'm saying it: Scotland might be better off if it stays with Great Britain.

Yea or nay, long live Alba.

The World This Week

This week - and by this week, I mean tomorrow - Scotland is holding independence referendums. What this means is that by tomorrow evening we should know whether Scotland will become its own nation (in more than name) and secede from the United Kingdom. As of right now, the two camps - the nationalists and the unionists - are just about even in the polls. The big reason for the nationalists' desire for independence is neither cultural nor economic - it's political. The Scots feel that they're being underrepresented in the English Parliament. Prime Minister Cameron and the Queen have offered a compromise which would give the Scots more power, but it may have been too little, too late. We'll find out tomorrow, I suppose. And I'm sure many of you who've read my blog before can guess which camp I support. But the western world will be rocked if Scotland secedes.

1) What will happen to the British government?
In an ironic twist of fate, British conservatives - the main voice of unionism south of the border - stand to gain the most from an independent Scotland. Britain's Labor Party - roughly the equivalent of our Democratic Party - has a great deal of support in Scotland. Britain's Conservative Party - the counterpart of the Republicans - currently holds the majority of the British parliament. The Labor Party would take a hit in its number of seats if Scotland were to secede. The Conservatives would not. At the very least, Scottish independence would not be a factor in helping the Labor Party or hurting the Conservatives.

2) What will happen to Europe?
If Scotland becomes independent, it will have to answer two very important questions: will it join the European Union? And what about NATO? Well, Scotland's as-yet-unofficial leader, Alex Salmond, intends to try and join the European Union, but there's no guarantee the Scots will be welcomed, or even accepted, into the organization. The Spanish Prime Minister in particular, no doubt fearing that an independent Scotland would inspire Catalonian nationalists, is virulently opposed to admitting the Scots into the union (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11101758/Spanish-Prime-Minister-gives-EU-warning-to-Scots.html  ). As for the second point, an independent Scotland would have to join NATO, which Salmond seemingly intends to do. Such action could be vital for Scotland, which brings us to my final point:

3) How will the British react?
In theory, if the Scots vote for independence, the British will pack up and leave. Theory and practice, history has taught us, are seldom the same thing. There's no guarantee that Cameron's government will simply let Scotland go. Scotland has huge oil reserves, enormous fish stocks, and no standing military. English troops may very well remain within Scotland, or attempt to hold onto the country for their motherland. If Scotland joins NATO, this would solve that problem for them - England can hardly invade a nation they're bound to defend as a brother. But if the Scots remain outside of the organization, which seems likely in the near future (Salmond insists on removing all nuclear weapons from Scotland if the nation becomes independent, which would be a bit of a headache for the leaders of NATO) - well, Britain is our ally. We would stand with Britain. Obama might not, but I'm not sure how much weight his voice holds in Brussels.

Oh, I'm in a bit of a predicament. The Irish nationalist in me wants Scotland to become independent, but the American nationalist in me wants Scotland to stay with the UK and in so doing remain our ally. We'll just have to see what tomorrow brings.

Critique of Bonnard's Work

This first image is Bonnard's The Open Window, a work completed in 1921. Part of what appeals to me about this piece is Bonnard's impressionistic style. It isn't overly realistic, but it doesn't have to be. In fact, if it were realistic, I feel that it would have less impact. What really catches my attention are the vertical bars of brown and blue. There's something about the contrast, and the way in which the two colors compliment each other, that really appeals to me. There's a sense of contentedness about this piece, as evidenced by the predominantly warm colors and the soft edges and images. It's almost refreshing to see this sort of artwork.

Here we have Bonnard's Dining Room on the Garden, completed on 1935. Although its images are not so unlike The Open Window, the work has an entirely different feel. For one, the majority of the colors in this piece are cool blues, greens and violets. Even some of the reds have a cool feel. What's more, unlike The Open Window, this painting features an image of a woman, probably Marthe, half-hidden in the upper right corner. Even though she has a smile on her face, there's something dark, almost spectral, about her presence there. It seems to show how Marthe controlled so much of Bonnard's life and that his relationship with her, albeit loving, was somewhat strained. It's a more somber piece than The Open Window, and that gives the work its own appeal.

This final piece is La Sieste Au Jardin, completed in 1914. This painting is considerably more realistic than The Open Window or Dining Room on the Garden or almost all of the pieces I saw during my search. The woman (again, most likely Marthe) is more tangible here than the woman in Dining Room on the Garden. This seems to represent the fact that, at this point, Bonnard felt less pressured by his wife. Or it could be a mistress of his. Only Bonnard could tell us for sure, and he can't, for obvious reasons. My personal appreciation for nature is what caught my eye. This work contrasts with Bonnard's other works, as I mentioned before, in that it is significantly more realistic, reminiscent in some respects of pre-modern landscape art. I appreciate this kind of art, more for the calm, peaceful scenes it portrays than any deeper meaning. The simplicity of it portrays a sense of innocence and tranquility, and everyone needs that in their life sometime.

Scene from Bonnard's Life

Here's a satirical scene from the life of Pierre Bonnard, loosely inspired by events entailed in Michael Kimmelman's The Accidental Masterpiece.

Bonnard enters from the balcony, writing in his journal. Marthe stands at the kitchen table, disapproving.

Bonnard

            Ah, c’est très beau aujourd’hui. Vivre la France!

Marthe

            Pierre, get your scraggly-bearded ass in here!

Bonnard

            Merd.

Walks over to Marthe.

            What is it, my dear?

Marthe

            Your little whore killed herself today, genius. You’d better not be going to her funeral.

Bonnard

            What? Who’s dead? You don’t mean…Renee?

Marthe

            How many other little whores do you have? Wait a second…just how many other little whores do you have?

Bonnard

            None, none, none but Renee. Quite obviously, she was my only mistress. The only woman I ever slept with outside of marriage.

Marthe

            So there were at least two others?

Bonnard

            Merd…how did you find out about my fling with Renee, anyway?

Marthe

            Well, I use my shopping budget to hire men to spy on you.

Bonnard

            That explains why you spend the money and never actually buy any clothing…I should have caught on sooner.

Marthe

            Maybe you should have paid more attention, you crapbag!

Bonnard

            I did break things off with Marthe. Poor thing must have killed herself over it! Oh, how did she die?

Marthe

            Well…

Bonnard

            No, no, no, I can’t bear it! It’s too unbearable to hear!

Picks up a newspaper. Marthe raises an eyebrow.

            I never said anything about it being to unbearable to read.

Marthe

            You artists are all crazy.

Bonnard

            Thank you, dear…Well, this is a bit odd.

Marthe

            What is?

Bonnard

            Well, this first paper says that Renee shot herself, but this paper says she drowned herself! And this third one says that she was found in a garden!

Marthe

            Well…maybe it was all three, Pierre.

Bonnard

            What are you talking about, Marthe?

Marthe

            Well, Pierre, you know I’m sort of the jealous type.

Bonnard

            I’m quite aware, sweetie. You insist on modeling for me, and you won’t let any other artists in for fear they’ll steal my ideas. You won’t even let Matisse over for a beer.

Marthe

            Don’t even get me started on that Matisse. And you insist on me modeling for you, dumbass! Anyway…I decided to make sure she wouldn’t try and steal you away from me again, so I went over to her house yesterday.

Bonnard

            You killed Renee?

Marthe

            Yep.

Bonnard

            How? Did you shoot her? Or did you drown her? Or did you bury her alive in her garden?

Marthe

            Wow, you’re taking this pretty well…

Pauses.           

            I drowned her in the bathtub. Then I shot her for good measure, and chucked her out the window for good measure.

Bonnard

            That’s a bit over-the top, Marthe. I didn’t know you had it in you.

Marthe

            Oh, for God’s sake, you dumbass, I didn’t kill Renee! I just said I did to scare you out of cheating on me again.

Bonnard

            That would make a lot more sense, I suppose. I mean…you’re not really a bodybuilder.

Marthe

            I would have hoped that a man who spends half his waking hours painting nudes of me would know that.

Bonnard

            That’s true…well, I’m off to Renee’s funeral. Don’t wait up, dear.

Marthe

            Oh, hell no! First off, it’s eight in the morning. Second of all, you’re going to spend your days getting rid of all the pictures of her! Photographs, paintings, and so on! You’re never talking about this skank again, comprenez-vous?

Bonnard

            Oui, Madame.

Marthe

            Bon. Now go to your room!

Bonnard

            Oui, Madame.

He exits. SCENE.

The Semi-Independent Work Continues...

Our little group made quite a bit of progress yesterday. The session, though cut short in the beginning by a fire drill, accomplished a great deal. At this stage, we have a fairly concrete idea of what the final project will look like. It's going to be a profound little film, neither overly long nor overly complex, and yet touching. It will also be mostly silent, as we all essentially agreed that dialogue would take away from the meaning of the piece. All in all, it isn't going to be hard to make. I doubt we would need more than two or three days to film the piece, and the editing process could probably be complete after another day or two. At the end of the day, it'll be a short little film, about three or four minutes, with two main characters and one or two lines of spoken dialogue. But I'm not going to give much away just yet. Why spoil it?

Independent Work Update

Today's session of semi-independent work was quite productive. Our little group managed to shoot down plenty of not-quite-good ideas and focus in on a solid idea. As it stands, our film will chronicle a section of the life of a man (played by me) who is coming to terms with being an abject jerk, loosely inspired by the comedian Louis C.K. The character, as he stands now, is essentially a regular guy who used to be a big shot and has sunk to a minor position, resulting in his embittered attitude. We got a reasonable amount of work done today. I had to duck out for music for the duration of ninth period, but when I left, we had a good bit of writing done. I think Jessica will be doing the brunt of the screenwriting for this film. I can say with an acceptable level of surety that the movie will be completed, in its entirety, by the end of October. Not to set goals for my group as a whole, but that seems a reasonable deadline to me. The independent work sessions over the next two weeks or so will probably be spent writing and working out logistics. After that will come the filming, and after the filming the editing. All in all, I'd say it was a good start to the project.

Semi-Independent Work

Tomorrow begins our first in-class day for independent work. As you all have undoubtedly guessed, my independent work won't be completely independent: I'll be brainstorming alongside Jessica, Emily and Michelle for a film. For tomorrow, we'll need laptops and paper. Beyond tomorrow, I can't say anything with certainty. I expect that the entire project will take seven or eight sessions of independent work in-class, coupled with work done on our own time. When we have a more tangible version of the final project we wish to attain, we'll provide more information on the nature of the materials we'll require and the issues we'll need to address, both the artistic and the technical.

As of now, we don't have a schedule packed down. My assumption is that the majority of the time will be spent discussing ideas for a script. I'm sure Jessica and Emily have plenty of ideas, as do I. Of course, quite a few of my ideas involve political figures I enjoy poking fun at, namely our old friend Putin. Rest assured, I have plenty of other ideas, and I can work with other ideas.

In related news, I now have a laptop. This is the first of many posts which will be typed on this laptop, and I'm sure it will be the first of many more assignments. This computer has to last me until the day it dies. Or I die; whichever comes first, I suppose. But I like this computer. Even though it lacks the capacity to undo typing and isn't quite sure if it knows how to cut and paste, I've decided that it is my ally. Perhaps I won't be going to war with this particular piece of modern technology after all.

The World this Week

This week, the radical terrorist group ISIS threatened another world leader.  This time, though, they probably should have picked a different world leader. They didn't threaten President Obama, you see. Nor did they threaten the United Kingdom's David Cameron, or Germany's Angela Merkel, or Francois Hollande of France. No, the masterminds of ISIS decided to threaten the man who is the main architect of what I like to call the Second Cold War, and is regarded by many as one of the world's most dangerous leaders. Don't believe me? Check it out:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2741979/This-message-addressed-oh-Putin-ISIS-threaten-Russia-ties-Syrias-Assad-promise-liberate-Chechnya-Caucasus.html

Now, I don't know Vladimir Putin personally. However, he doesn't strike me as the type of man who takes threats from upstarts. Obama's a different story, mainly because a) he's more of a work-things-out type of guy and b) the commander in chief of one of the world's strongest militaries. I'm not sure if Putin will view ISIS in the same light as Obama, though. At this point, there are three possible scenarios, each of which would impact Russia - and the world as a whole - in a radically different way.

1. Putin scoffs at the threats
This is, in all honesty, the most likely option. It would be parallel to how Vlad has reacted to the west's demands over Crimea and Georgia. I hardly think Putin would see ISIS as a major threat to the Russian Federation, with its vast swathes of territory, inexhaustible resources, and powerful military. In this circumstance, Putin would likely respond by shoring up security in the Caucasus and in Chechnya, and that would be the limit of his response.

2. Putin goes in and crushes ISIS
This situation, though unlikely, is not impossible. There are a number of reasons why Putin would never do such a thing. Then again, there are plenty of reasons why he would. Or rather, one big reason: Russia's image, specifically when compared to America's image. If Putin sweeps into the Middle East and crushes the Islamic State with the full force of Russia's military might, he will look strong at Obama's expense, especially after the latter's "We don't have a strategy" gaffe. That could swing our Middle Eastern allies away from us and towards Russia.

3. Putin makes a plan alongside NATO
This event is the least likely to occur, for obvious reasons. Due to that, this circumstance is mostly wishful thinking. But as it sometimes happens that your enemy's enemy is your friend, it isn't impossible. Then again, Putin could have Stalin's views on the matter: your enemy's enemy is still your enemy. A pact between the west and east could potentially ease the tensions distancing the two camps and end Cold War Two in its infancy. A Russo-American alliance has existed before, you know. It was a very strained relationship, of course, but a relationship nonetheless. Putin probably wouldn't come to the table for this sort of thing, but stranger things have happened before.

Well, I'm Back...

People of the Internet, I have returned.

I'll spare you all from a variant of MacArthur's speech and get right to the point: I'm back on the web after the summer. And what a summer it was. First and foremost, I learned how to drive. I don't have my license yet, thanks to the Department of Motor Vehicles. I'll be taking my road test in October...on a Friday...at ten in the morning. But that's hardly important. In addition to my escapades behind the wheel, I participated in a production of the renowned Cole Porter musical Anything Goes as the British aristocrat, Sir Evelyn Oakleigh. I can say without a doubt that I've never had so much fun playing any character in any musical as I did last month. To cap off the summer, my family hauled down to Charleston for a week. It's radically different from New York, even though both cities are centuries old: while Manhattan has sprouted and boomed, Charleston remained content as a quiet harbor town through the years. The architecture was stunning, as were the views, and the chunks of Civil War artillery shells embedded in some walls were right up my alley.

On an academic note: this quarter, in STAC, we'll be reading The Accidental Masterpiece: On the Art of Life and Vice Versa, a novel by Michael Kimmelman. Starting now, my reflections on the text will compose a portion of my blog. Having read the introduction, I'm hardly displeased. The book certainly seems to be interesting, and not only for those who love the fine arts. The author's style is flowing and poetic, reminiscent in a way of Shakespeare. Kimmelman has that gift for making history seem fresh and interesting, rather than drab and dull. Each anecdote was perfect, and not a single simile was out of place. Perhaps it's my affinity for history talking, or maybe my love of lyrical prose, but the introduction was - for lack of a more fitting word - a pleasure to read. The allegory to one Dr. Hicks, who amassed an astonishing collection of light bulbs, appealed to me in some odd way. I'm neither a hoarder nor overly sentimental, but Kimmelman made it easy to understand Hicks's fascination with the bulbs. The highlights of Hicks's collection certainly attracted my attention, thanks to my infatuation with the historical. If The Accidental Masterpiece lives up to its introduction, I'll definitely enjoy the book.