Girl in the Ashes, part 1
MOTHER.
Don’t cry. Please don’t cry.
CINDERELLA.
Are, are you, are you going to, to get better?
MOTHER.
You don’t need to cry.
CINDERELLA.
Are, are you still going to take care of me?
MOTHER.
Don’t be sad.
CINDERELLA.
Are, are you and Father going to still love each other?
MOTHER.
Sh, baby, shhh.
CINDERELLA.
I’m scared. I’m so scared.
MOTHER.
Listen to me. Listen: I am very, very sick. And I’m not going to get any better.
CINDERELLA.
No.
MOTHER.
Sh, now listen. The world has just taken too much out of me. I just don’t think I can go on any more. And it isn’t you, and it isn’t your father, and it isn’t any one thing. It’s just time for me to go. I love you, more than you know, more than anything in the world. But I’m too weak to go on.
CINDERELLA.
No! I’m scared.
MOTHER.
Don’t be scared. Everything will be fine, and you have to trust that. Have faith. Listen: when I go, you have to promise to be good. Be good. Do you hear me? And if you are good, every day, as good as you can be, heaven will help you out of trouble, and I will be your guardian angel. Okay?
CINDERELLA.
But –
MOTHER.
No but. Be good. Okay?
CINDERELLA.
Mother –
MOTHER.
Sh. Tell me you’ll be good. Will you be good?
CINDERELLA.
Yes. I’ll, I’ll try.
MOTHER.
That’s all I can ask. Come here baby.
(They embrace. INTERPRETER addresses the audience.)
INTERPRETER.
My mother died of intestinal cancer when I was sixteen years old. Cinderella lost her mother at a similar age.
I can’t remember the first time I was ever told “Cinderella.” It was just always around, with Hey Diddle Diddle and the Cat in the Hat. But I always liked “Cinderella,” and since everybody else liked it too, I never really thought too much about it, just a fairy tale with a happy ending. But it spoke to me in a very specific way which I didn’t understand for years and years. Somewhere back in my early childhood, I found in “Cinderella” nothing less than a blueprint for my life.
(CINDERELLA at her mother’s grave.)
CINDERELLA.
Mother, I’ve tried so hard to be good. I, I really have, but it’s so hard. Father has married again and the woman is so, is so mean to me. I, I know that it’s wrong to judge other people, and I know it’s wrong to think bad thoughts about other people, and she and her daughters are very, very beautiful, but it’s so, so hard to keep loving them and loving life when they are so mean to me. They think they’re so much better than me, and they’re not. And if you’re watching me, then you know they’re not. It, it makes me so, so confused, to be so good and to be treated so bad. If I could just, if I could just, if I could, could just –
(In the kitchen, the STEPMOTHER and STEPSISTERS.)
STEPSISTER 1.
Uh huh, she’s out back talking to the dead mother again.
STEPSISTER 2.
What a drip. She’s disgusting.
STEPSISTER 1.
Mom, do we have to live with this obnoxious little toad?
STEPMOTHER.
Now sweethearts, her father is very wealthy and soon I hope to be his grieving widow. Be patient with her: at least we don’t have to waste money on a maid.
STEPSISTER 2.
Yeah, but she’s so annoying!
STEPSISTER 1.
Yeah, she really makes me sick! Can’t we do anything about her?
STEPSISTER 2.
Yeah mom, please? It’s agony just living in the same room with her.
STEPSISTER 1.
Yeah mom, don’t you love us?
STEPSISTER 2.
Pleeeease?
STEPSISTER 1.
Pleeeeeeeease?
STEPMOTHER.
All right my darlings, all right. I’ll see what I can do.
(CINDERELLA enters.)
CINDERELLA.
Stepmother dear, I’ve finished cleaning out the septic tank.
STEPMOTHER.
That’s nice dear. Now you need to mend my dresses, cut ribbons for your sisters’ hair, feed the animals, milk the cow and I think we’d like dinner at six.
CINDERELLA.
Yes ma’am. Of course ma’am.
STEPSISTER 1. (aside to 2, mimicking)
(Yes, ma’am, of course ma’am.)
STEPSISTER 2.
(What a jerk.)
(They crack up. Father enters.)
FATHER.
Good morning wife, good morning step-daughters, good morning my darling child! I’m off to the fair! Is there anything I can get for you?
STEPSISTERS. (ad lib)
Oh yes! Yes! Oh yes please!
FATHER.
Hold on, kids! One at a time!
STEPSISTER 1.
I want a beautiful dress!
STEPSISTER 2.
I want a string of pearls!
FATHER. (to CINDERELLA)
And you, my sweet one, what would you like?
CINDERELLA.
I –
STEPSISTER 1.
Oh, she’s too shy to ask for anything.
STEPSISTER 2.
She did say earlier that she wanted a, a –
STEPSISTER 1.
A stick.
STEPSISTER 2.
Yes, a stick.
STEPSISTER 1.
A stick.
FATHER.
A stick? You mean, like, from a tree?
STEPSISTER 1.
Yes, just a stick.
STEPSISTER 2.
A plain old stick.
FATHER.
Huh. Okay. So: dress, pearls, stick. Got it. All right, I’m going, be good!
(He exits. STEPSISTERS laugh. CINDERELLA begins to exit.)
STEPMOTHER.
Oh, dear, don’t leave quite yet. There are going to be a few changes in the house you should know about. I’m, mm, getting a new wardrobe tomorrow, and I’m afraid the only place to put it is where your bed is now. And you’re such a good girl, I assume you won’t mind sleeping, mm, somewhere, mm, else.
(STEPSISTERS giggle.)
CINDERELLA.
But, but where?
STEPMOTHER.
Well child, since you’re, since you spend so much time here in the kitchen, perhaps it would be more efficient if you were to sleep down here. And look! You’ll have the whole room to yourself, won’t that be nice?
STEPSISTER 1.
Wow, the whole room to herself.
STEPSISTER 2.
Just like a princess.
CINDERELLA.
Um, um, I’m sorry Stepmother, maybe, um, maybe I’m just, um, stupid or something, but um, there’s, um, there’s no place to, to sleep. In the kitchen. There’s no place to sleep.
STEPMOTHER.
Nonsense. That’s just not true. Why, there’s a bench, and a, there are cupboards –
STEPSISTER 1.
And the fireplace –
STEPMOTHER.
Why yes of course, the fireplace, that’s a wonderful idea! You can sleep in the fireplace, it’s always so nice and warm there.
STEPSISTER 2.
Wow, she gets to sleep in the fireplace.
STEPSISTER 1.
I wish I could sleep in the fireplace.
STEPMOTHER.
Now girls, you know that I will not allow jealousy in my household. Now go and give your step-sister a hug.
STEPSISTER 1.
Yes Mother dear.
STEPSISTER 2.
Of course Mother.
(They run to CINDERELLA.)
STEPSISTER 1.
Oh Step-sister!
STEPSISTER 2.
We love you!
(But instead of hugging her, they shove her into the fireplace and laugh.)
STEPSISTER 1.
Ah hahahahahahahaha! Look at her!
STEPSISTER 2.
She’s all covered with cinders and ashes!
STEPSISTER 1.
We should call her – Cinderella!
(They laugh.)
STEPMOTHER.
Oh my clever children, come let’s go make ourselves beautiful for your step-father’s return.
STEPSISTER 1.
Oh boy!
STEPSISTER 2.
Yipee! I can’t wait!
(They exit.)
INTERPRETER. (to AUDIENCE)
Of course, everyone hates their siblings. It’s only natural. I was the youngest of four children and I always knew there was some diabolical conspiracy against me. My siblings worked tirelessly, night and day, to make me feel worthless and disgusting. In direct contradiction to all the things my mother did to make me feel special and useful. I spent far too much of my childhood feeling untouchable. It was hell. It was hell. I felt like I had been born into a world that had already ended. I was living in ashes.
iTunes catch of the day: Dean Elliott’s Zounds! What Sounds!
I have no idea how this LP ended up in my family’s record collection in the mid-60s (except that my father worked tangentially with animators in Hollywood for a while), but I discovered it when I was about 7 and it immediately became my favorite record of all time (surpassing “Snoopy vs. the Red Baron” by The Royal Guardsmen. Whole afternoons would pass while I played Zounds! What Sounds! over and over in a state of bliss.
What the record is, basically, is a collection of jazz and swing standards conducted by Dean Elliott, who, as far as I can tell, was to Tom and Jerry cartoons as Carl Stalling was to Bugs Bunny cartoons. The arrangements on Zounds! are jumpy enough all by themselves, but then they are augmented by what can only be termed “wacky cartoon sound effects.” And so a song called “Trees” is driven by the sounds of rhythmic sawing, a song called “It’s a Lonesome Old Town” is festooned with spooky crickets and hooting owls, “The Lonesome Road” is punctuated by the sounds of backfiring cars and tooting horns, and a song called “I Didn’t Know What Time It Was” is inundated with the sounds of a thousand clocks and watches ticking and bonging. Boy, that sounds really stupid and annoying, doesn’t it? And yet it comes off as endlessly inventive, infectiously enthusiastic and wildly ecstatic. Or at least it did to my seven-year-old brain.
Then my family went bankrupt, my mother died, I ran away from home and endured about twenty years of soul-crushing poverty, and forgot all about the innocent joys of Zounds! What Sounds! so much so that before long I thought perhaps I had dreamed it.
Many years later, I was at the Brooklyn Academy of Music watching a show by Pina Bausch, who uses whole dump-trucks of music snippets in her marathon 3-hour dance pieces, and out of nowhere, between the German cabaret numbers and the Ligeti, “The Lonesome Road” by Dean Elliott came blasting out of the sound system. Needless to say, I forgot all about the cerebral, angular, angsty choreography on display and was once again a seven-year-old in the suburbs of Chicago, innocently, joyously leaping about the house like a bug-eyed idiot to the manic strains of Dean Elliott and his Swinging, Big, Big band. The record I had come to think of as long gone had been found! By a skinny, severe, middle-aged German choreographer! By jiminy, I said, if Pina Bausch can find this record all the way over in godless Germany, I can certainly find a copy in New York City!
Which I did. Needless to say, it was long out of print and never a popular item to begin with (I’m guessing), but I was able to track down a bootleg CD copy at the now-long-gone Footlight Records, which specialized in obscure recordings of Broadway showtunes and other music outside the purview of Tower Records. Hearing it again after thirty years, I was instantly transported back to simpler days, when jazz standards hoked up on cartoon sound-effects could supply all the adrenaline I needed.
When I got my iPod, Zounds! What Sounds! was one of the first CDs I transferred, but it’s only 12 tracks in an ocean of over 18,000, so it doesn’t come up much on shuffle (which is what I almost always have iTunes on). Today “I Didn’t Know What Time it Was” came on, sandwiched in between Fiona Apple and John Zorn, both of whom I think would have been comfortable with the comparison.
For those interested, apparently Basta! has done a proper re-mastering of this left-field classic.
Movie night with Urbaniak: Performance
Neither
![[info]](http://stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
nor I had ever seen Nicholas Roeg’s 1969 druggy, draggy landmark of 60s Weird British Cinema before, so we were on equal footing for this viewing.
Myself, I’ve come to believe that the cinematic form demands a certain complexity of plot. Others, obviously, disagree. In any case, I’m always keeping my eye out for novel plotlines, so I kept a pad of paper and pen handy to record the plot of Performance. Here’s what I wrote:
“Chas is a cockney gangster in the 60s” (James Fox is quite startling in this part, seamlessly playing a snide, brutal thug, not unlike Michael Caine’s gangster roles of the same period, and looking a lot like Paul Bettany in Gangster #1 (which is set in the same time period).
“He gets in trouble with his boss and has to go on the lam. He scams a room in a creepy dive, a townhouse that happens to be owned by a guy named Turner, who used to be some kind of pop star.” (Turner is played by Mick Jagger, who is always fascinating to watch, but the part is drastically underwritten, I’m guessing intentionally so, to keep him enigmatic and weird.)
That’s Act I, and it’s straightforward enough. The editing is, to my taste, a little show-offy and grating, but up to here it’s still pretty much a 60s Cockney Gangster Movie (this genre would be revived in the 80s by movies like The Long Good Friday and Mona Lisa, and in the 90s by Guy Ritchie, whose movies had show-offy editing of their own).
(One of my favorite things about Cockney Gangster Movies is that everyone freaks out whenever someone pulls out a gun. You, essentially, have Gangsters Without Guns, because guns are a relative rarity in Britain. Here in the US, it’s assumed that all gangsters (at least in movies) carry guns at all times, but when a Cockney Gangster pulls out a gun, everyone hits the deck — watch out, he’s got a gun! No “Mexican Standoffs” for Cockney Gangsters, it’s all punch-ups and thrown chairs. At the climax of The Long Good Friday, Cockney Kingpin Bob Hoskins goes to war with somebody or other, calls his guys to his HQ, and passes out guns — “okay boys, here you go, come and get ’em.” Imagine Al Pacino in Scarface having to supply his thugs with guns at a special meeting.)
At the end of Act I, Chas dyes his hair red and puts on sunglasses and a trenchcoat, and begins to look disturbingly like David Bowie in 1975 (which I’m beginning to think is not a coincidence — that was the year Bowie performed in Roeg’s similarly plotted The Man Who Fell To Earth).
Act II
“Chas tries to figure out what the hell is the deal with Turner.” Turner himself is uncommunicative to the point of opacity, but he has a couple of birds who live with him who are more than happy (delighted, even) to share their secrets with him. They wander around the house, take baths, take drugs, dress up, have sex in various combinations, talk about philosophy, essentially lead a burnt-out late-60s version of the hippie dream. Turner, we eventually find out, used to be a pop star but has lost his inspiration, is looking for something new. “A time for a change,” says Turner, over and over, quoting Mick Jagger, who happens to be playing Turner. There’s a child, I don’t know whose, who also lives in the house. Turner wants Chas out, but then decides to let him stick around.
Act III
“They try to fuck him up — why? Chas freaks out.” Turner’s girlfriend feeds Chas a psychedelic mushroom. Chas has a bad trip. The themes of Act II are pushed to their abstract extremes. Incident drops severely as Chas’s concerns turn within. And I have a confession to make: I have about as much patience with movies that try to describe altered states of consciousness as I do with people who try to describe altered states of consciousness.
Anyway, Chas freaks out for a long, long time, and then, just when the movie has lost all semblance of form, it bursts through into a weird, four-minute musical number where Mick Jagger, now made up as a Cockney Gangster, sings “Memo From Turner” to Chas and his Cockney Gangster Pals, backed by the able Rolling Stones. The scene makes no sense in any way I feel like trying to discern, but it is electrifying, and I’m guessing it was inserted by studio people who said “What? You’ve got Mick Jagger in your movie and he’s not going to sing? Then what the hell is he doing there?”
“Chas’s pals come and get him.” Because the movie has to end somehow. Chas’s pals find out where he’s hiding (he doesn’t make it very hard for them) and show up. And there he is, now wearing a chestnut wig and hippie clothes, looking less like David Bowie and more like a member of Spinal Tap. It’s the Lord of the Flies moment, where “order” is suddenly restored and we see how far gone the protagonist is.
But the movie isn’t quite over yet. Something happens between Chas’s pals showing up and Chas (or someone, it’s not clear who) getting in the car with them. Someone shoots someone else in the head, someone winds up dead in a closet, someone else is shown covered in blood in an elevator. I’m not trying to keep a secret here, I honestly have no idea who’s doing what to whom.
The End.
TODD: So, I’m sorry, wait — I have a question. What just happened there?
JAMES: (Cockney accent) Well, it’s about identity, innit?
James, I will have to say, got a lot more out of this movie than I did. He recognized that it was saying something about its time (the 60s), and how the world seemed to be exploding with all these new avenues of psychological and spiritual investigation, and here’s two guys who are coming to the end of that decade from two different directions, the gangster on the lam symbolizing the “establishment” and the burnt-out pop star representing “bohemia,” and they’re both stuck in this purgatory-like house, their lives on hold as they try to figure out where to go now that all the rules have been suspended. And it’s true, the movie does do that. I just wish it would have done it with more plot.
Sam has a question
Because of images like this (courtesy of
), Sam (6) is under the impression that Buddhists once lived on Naboo. We attended a wedding over the weekend at a Zen temple and all Sam saw in the garden was “Buddha statues, you know, like on Naboo.” So for him, that’s pretty much where Buddhism started — a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.
I see no reason to contradict him — as far as I know, there is no rule against bodhisattvas showing up on other planets in ancient history. Anyone know who these ancient statues are supposed to be? When were they built (in Star Wars time), who built them, why? And is it sacrilege for a Gungan to perch on one when calling his army to battle a bunch of robots?
TIE fighter!
So, a few months ago Sam (6) comes toddling into my office and says “Can we make a TIE fighter?”
And I say “You mean like get a modeling kit, where you put it together?” And he says “No, I mean make it.” And I say “You mean, like, make a TIE fighter?” And he says “Yeah, like make one.” And I’m like “Like, make it out of — what, exactly?” And he’s like “Well, what are they made out of?” And I’m like “Well, they’re made out of some kind of metal from another planet, dude.” And he’s like “Well, but what could we make it out of that we have around here?” And I’m like, “I don’t know — cardboard?” And he’s like “Sure, cardboard, we could do that, right? And tape. And glue, right?”
Anyway, many months later, here is our TIE fighter, after countless production delays. It wouldn’t fool a stormtrooper, but I think it looks pretty good for a cardboard TIE fighter made by someone who’s never made anything crafty before in his life (by which I mean me, not Sam).
For those of you troubled by the color scheme, there was a long discussion between the client (Sam) and the builder (me) about what color to make it. In the movies, the TIE fighters are shown to be a pale bluish-gray. The toy TIE fighter we own (a 1997 re-release item) is a tad more bluish, but the TIE fighters shown in Sam’s Lego Star Wars video game are shown to be a dark cobalt blue. Then we found out that George Lucas actually wanted the TIE fighters to be the cobalt blue, but it was too close to the blue of the blue screens he was using for his special effects of the time so they had to make them gray. Sam is a stickler for accuracy, so for him the gray of the movies isn’t accurate and neither is the bluer gray of the toys — the cobalt blue of the video game is the most accurate color scheme.
Sam’s initial plan was to have a working hatch on his TIE fighter, and an actual cockpit inside with controls and things for the pilot to operate. Months of delays (while the builder worked on a TV show) forced him to accept a simpler version, and when he saw this mean-looking pilot hunkered down in his forced-perspective cockpit, all was forgiven. One of these days I’ll buy a ruler and I’ll be able to accurately paint an octagon.
Watch out, Santa Monica! There’s a rogue TIE fighter loose among your suburban palms!
Mantis update update
Hoppy gets his first taste of freedom. He likes it. He likes it a lot.
Since posting the splendid news about Brownie’s new wings, one of the other mantises, Gimpy, has shuffled off his mortal coil and joined the choir invisible. Gimpy, the reader will guess, had a bum leg for the last month or so of his life and frankly I’m surprised he made it as far as he did. But his death sort of pressed the issue of a mantis’s normal life span and what we, as responsible pet owners, should do now.
Brownie and Hoppy both seemed still sturdy and curious about life, so we have decided to roll the dice and hope that one is a male and the other a female, and have let them go forth into the garden, just like Adam and Eve (except in Santa Monica) to live out the rest of their lives in natural suburban splendor.
We had a little ceremony where we took the lids off their Critter-Keepers and let them roam around on the patio table. Sam and Kit called out words of encouragement like “Make a nice big egg sac, and bring back hundreds of baby mantises in the Spring!” and “I love you Hoppy! Have a good life!” I felt like singing “Born Free” but it probably would have made everyone cry. We wanted to take pictures but the camera battery was dead after a long wedding reception the day yesterday (the wedding was for some humans we know, not mantises).
After delivering our exhortations to Brownie and Hoppy on what we hope to be their wedding day, we carried them over into the bushes and put them well into the brush to keep them from getting eaten by birds. Brownie didn’t seem too keen to go, but then a moth fluttered by and, no joke, she charged off after it like a cheetah gunning for an antelope.
Take care, Brownie! Go get ’em, Hoppy!
Mantis update
We named this mantis Brownie because he suddenly turned brown one day. The change was so sudden that we all assumed he was about to roll over and croak. We were wrong! Brownie has not only stayed alive, he’s gotten bigger! He is now the largest of all the mantises we have and, what’s more, he’s suddenly grown wings! Show us your wings, Brownie!
Here you can not only see his wings, you can see him lick what I can only imagine are cricket-guts off his foot. Cleanliness is next to insect-like behavior, Brownie!
There’s a slightly better shot of his wings. It’s hard to hold a mantis with one hand and take a picture with the other. Anyway, he’s gotten huge, as you can see, and he’s ready to take on flying insects! No place is safe from this winged menace!
Heck of a job, Brownie!
The mysteries of iTunes
It is not an exaggeration to say that iTunes changed the way I listen to music, literally overnight. And I do mean literally.
I used to worship at the Altar of the Physical Object. I own about 4000 vinyl records and perhaps 1000 CDs, and they have always gotten the premium wall-space in my house. I used to sit for hours listening to them, holding the jacket or jewel-case the disc came in and perusing it as I listened, on headphones if the rest of the household was sleeping. That’s how I listened to music for about 30 years.
Then, one Christmas a few years ago I got an iPod, plugged it into the computer and started downloading CDs. By morning, I had downloaded all of the Beatles, all of Bob Dylan and all of Elvis Costello onto my iPod, about 2000 songs altogether, and had barely even begun to put a dent in the storage capacity of the thing. And I turned around and looked at those racks and racks of CDs and thought “Why the hell do I own all these things? They take up so much room.”
Well, I still own all those CDs but the fact is, I don’t ever listen to them. I bring a CD home from the store, I load it directly into iTunes and it goes into rotation, along with the other 19,000 other songs, all playing in a random order. I like to think of iTunes as a radio station that only plays things I like to listen to. And at 19,000 songs, it’s amazing to me the things it comes up with I have no memory of ever hearing before.
I rarely listen to one album at a time, if I’m in a specific mood for something I listen to everything by an artist or genre on shuffle. If there are a number of recent purchases I put them all into a “new stuff” playlist and listen to them all on shuffle (currently, my “new stuff” playlist includes new albums by Springsteen, Graham Parker and Sinead O’Connor, plus a McCartney live CD from a few years ago I picked up for free in a “buy three used CDs, get the fourth free” deal). I haven’t sat down and listened to a CD from beginning to end in years and I have a feeling I’m not alone in this.
So I’m pretty impressed with iTunes, I gotta say. I do have one question: the album graphics feature — how does that work? Because the whole thing is a mystery to me.
It seems that when I load a CD into iTunes, iTunes goes to its database and sees if there is artwork available for it. If there is, that artwork gets downloaded onto your computer. But if that is so, why do a great number of my albums not have artwork available?
The Beatles I get — their work is not available through iTunes (yet). But then what about Paul McCartney? He just recently, to great ballyhoo, made all his stuff available through iTunes, but none of his album artwork shows up on my iPod. With one curious exception — London Town, which, for some reason, does not show up as London Town at all, but rather as something called Continuous Wave by a Paul-Weller-looking lad called PMB.
Similarly, I have a Led Zeppelin box set, and iTunes gives some albums artwork and ignores others. The comical thing is that the artwork it grants is not only not for the appropriate album, it’s not even for a Led Zeppelin album — rather, it displays in all cases the cover of Dread Zeppelin’s Un-led-ed — which, I’m sure you will agree, is not the same thing. Even stranger, iTunes illustrates Big Black’s hardcore classic Songs About Fucking with what looks like the cover to an earthy soul album called Still Conscious, an album so obscure I can’t even find a reference to it at Amazon (which is saying something). The Breeders’ Safari EP is illustrated with the cover of the album Safari by someone named Bent Hesselmann. Selections from Beck’s Guero are illustrated by the cover from Beck’s Guerolito, which makes everything very confusing. Songs from Stereolab’s Refried Ectoplasm are illustrated by the cover of Stereolab’s ABC Music. And so on.
Of the 59 Elvis Costello albums in my collection, iTunes provides artwork for The Delivery Man, The Juliet Letters, Mighty Like a Rose, North, Spike and When I Was Cruel, but ignores all the others, even though they’re all for sale through iTunes. Similarly, I have something like 110 John Zorn albums in iTunes, and some of them are pretty darn obscure, but iTunes recognizes some (like Ganyru Island) and is confounded by others (like The Circle Maker), and it doesn’t seem to have anything to do with whether they’re available through iTunes.
In other instances, iTunes will correctly identify a song, but assign it to a different album — it takes the selections I have from a Little Richard greatest hits album and gives them the cover of a different Little Richard’s greatest hits album. Or it will take a hit song from one album and display the cover for a greatest hits album (which I might not even own) because that song also appears on the greatest hits album. Or it will display a different edition from the one I own, like it does for Miles Davis’s ‘Round About Midnight, where it displays the “Legacy” edition instead of the plain-old rotten edition I have.
Brand-new albums, like Lucinda Williams’ West or Springsteen’s Live in Dublin or McCartney’s Memory Almost Full get no illustrations at all, despite being heavily promoted on iTunes, but the White Stripes’ Icky Thump comes sailing through with no problem.
Does anyone out there know how this works and what accounts for these bizarre discrepancies?
A NOTE ON THE ILLUSTRATION: This is a screenshot of my iTunes file, arranged by Play Count. Those with a large-enough monitor can readily see the impact of having two small children in my life — songs from Yellow Submarine and They Might Be Giants’ Here Come the ABCs make up 21 of my top-25 songs, the result of having the iPod in the car with the kids (and Tom Waits’s “Underground” is there as the result of showing up in the soundtrack to Robots). Soon these songs will be overtaken by selections from the Star Wars soundtracks.
Millipede!
By popular demand, here are some pictures of Sam’s millipede.
I don’t know the creature’s sex, that is, I don’t know if it’s a “Millie” or a “Petey,” so I’ve just been calling it “the millipede.”
Movie Night With Urbaniak: The Lady From Shanghai
I was, until last night, completely unfamiliar with The Lady From Shanghai. Mr.
wanted to see this 1947 Orson Welles picture for the performance of Glenn Anders, who plays a giggling, weird, creepy heavy, and I was interested because I haven’t seen enough Welles.
When James comes over for movie night, silent contemplation is not the order of the day. The two of us essentially talk through the movie, discussing the various performances — what the actor seems to have been told to do, how he or she deals with challenges of the scene and larger narrative, how his or her makeup works (or does not), what he or she seems to be striving for and how he or she achieves his or her goal or falls short.
Welles movies are great to watch in this regard and The Lady of Shanghai in particular has a peculiar assortment of performances in it. Everett Sloan and Glenn Anders seem to be in one movie, nominal star Rita Hayworth in a second, and Welles in a third. They’re even lit and made up differently, so that when Welles cuts from one to another in the midst of a dialog scene, one’s face will be shiny with sweat while the other’s will be given a matte finish, one will be lit with a distorting, grotesque light and the other will be lit like a movie star. The performances are all good, but sometimes seem to literally be taking place in different movies. How much of this is intentional I have no idea.
Whenever a performance as odd as Anders’s comes along, I, crouching under my screenwriter hat, must stop and wonder what the director was after. In this case, I think Welles directed Anders to be so strange and unsettling in order to distract from the big reveal at the end of the movie, which, if you’ve seen a few noirs in your life, isn’t that big a reveal.
The only really bad performance is Welles’s — he’s miscast in a part that is a genre type, the homicidal, simple-minded “big lug” who’s bound to be manipulated by the smarter, cannier society folk who have a use for him. On top of being obviously “too smart” for the role, Welles puts on a distracting, phony-baloney Irish brogue that somehow makes him sound more like The Brain than himself. It’s a very “technical” performance, full of all sorts of wonderful tricks and intellectual nuances, designed to draw attention to the actor’s proficiency than an emotional truth.
Whenever I watch a Welles movie, I cannot help but be reminded of the Coen Brothers. They have similar outlooks on acting and have no trouble finding (or creating) contexts for all manner of oversized, twisted, exaggerated performances. Somehow, they have been able to spin gold out of this outlook in a way Welles, another cinematic visionary, never could. The Lady of Shanghai could have easily been a Coen Bros movie, an eclectic noir with indelible characters, a skewed point of view and a twisty, unpredictable story.
