Saturday, January 31, 2015

Did you know Eyes Wide Shut holds the Guinness Book of World Records...record for movie longest in continuous production? Well, it does. Did Kubrick die or something before it was completed because there sure are a lot of loose ends left hanging, huh? Yes, like, viz:

-What happened to Nick? Bruise-on-his-face, left-with-two-big-guys Nick. Are we to believe that Jewish guy's explanation that he's probably already in Seattle banging Mrs. Nick? Don't make us laugh.

-What was with the almost-not-quite hooker, the one in the apartment? That was not the same girl as the one who passed out at the party. The one who passed out at the party was the one in the morgue. So why did Kubrick have the apartment hooker getting HIV? What was the point of that?

-What was with the party hooker/morgue girl? Are we to believe the Jewish guy's explanation there too that it was just a coincidence that she ended up dead a day after sacrificing herself for Tom Cruise? Wait...wait...wait. Maybe that's a different girl.

     You have the girl who passed out from a drug overdose in...What was the Jewish guy's name?...Ziegler's upstairs.

     You have the hooker who warned Tom Cruise and then sacrificed herself for him, who knew him.

     You have the hooker in the morgue--she's the same one as the girl who passed out because Ziegler referred to her as the girl with the "big tits."

    You have the hooker in the apartment.

All right, let's do this:

          Scene 1: Hooker with big tits passes out. That happens when Cruise is at the party with Nicole                            Kidman.
          Scene 2: Next night, Cruise almost hooks up with the hooker in the apartment.
          Scene 3. Cruise goes to the satanic orgy with the keyboard and synthesizer--That is sooo not                              true to life--and the orgy hooker recognizes him and warns him.
          Scene 4: Orgy hooker sacrifices self for Cruise.
          Scene 5: Apartment-hooker has HIV. So she's still alive. 
          Scene 6: Cruise reads about hooker's death.
          Scene 7: Ziegler says the orgy hooker is the same as the dead hooker.

So we have two, not three or four, hookers of interest: (1) Passes out/Recognize Cruise/Warns Cruise/Dead hooker. (2) Apartment hooker.

Okay, that is impossible. Kubrick totally botches that. It's impossible because (1) The hooker who passed out barely opened her eyes when Cruise revived her and yet, (2) The next night she has sufficiently recovered to be the orgy hooker and (3) Immediately recognizes Cruise, who is in full face mask costume, and whose bare face she barely saw, if at all, the previous night when Cruise revived her.

I was hoping for three hookers, one girl as all three because that would have leant religious significance, three in one, the Trinity, to the movie. It would have fit with sacrifice, death, especially dying for someone else, someone else's sins too. But NOOO.

-The dead guy's daughter's kiss scene. Was that another cul-de-sac? I thought she was going to turn out to be the girl who warned Cruise. We never heard or saw her again if that's the case. Just another temptation?

-The threatening letter the guy at the mansion hands Cruise when Cruise goes back to the mansion.

-Ziegler's goon who was following Cruise. Could the guy have been any more obvious? He was like a stalker. I thought he had a gun under his trench-coat. Or had an erection and was going to flash somebody. I think if you're following somebody surreptitiously you should be surreptitious about it. I think that's in the rules.

-"It was all a charade." That's what Ziegler says. What was all a charade? Which was what Cruise asked, too. The girl in the morgue wasn't a charade, as Cruise says. Was she? How about the threatening letter the guy at the mansion hands Cruise when Cruise goes back to the mansion--charade too?

Was the whole movie, Kubrick's plot, a charade? Was all of "it" somebody else's dream, like Kubrick's or the novel author's?

The whole movie is sort of one big "edging" thing, no climax. It's disjointed, like a dream; there are cul-de-sac's, like a dream. It is not real, like a dream is not real. When you wake up.

I don't know. Unless it was intended to be a dream Kubrick spent record time producing a movie that ended unproduced.

Ukraine Has Not Yet Died.


Russia is invading Ukraine again. "Dozens" killed, 5,000 this year. The September peace agreement just slowed Russia down, didn't end the land grab and Russia intensified the fighting this week. Peace talks again today ended without even a cease-fire agreement. Merkel and Hollande called Putin today, too. Will there be a new round of sanctions? It doesn't sound like Obama and Putin are even talking anymore, Obama is not even bothering; I don't blame him. So maybe more sanctions from the U.S. If Merkel and Hollande are still talking to him maybe not from the EU.
Yes, we need to do that as soon as possible. 
"I'll tell you everything!"

First of all...ladies and gentiles...Gentiles... Menz: Do not ever, EVER, tell her "everything." Okay? Thank you. 

Second of all, What does he have to "tell?" Wtf did he do wrong? He didn't kill the dead girl! He didn't screw the hooker! Ah, they're the same...Well he didn't kill OR screw her! Why is he balling his eyes out? How did that fucking mask get on his pillow. I thought Nathalie Portman* Nicole Kidman was dead, I thought that's what that meant.

UPDATE, Feb. 1, 12:21 am: Shit. Apologize for any inconvenience.

I have been that close to a pretty, nude, dead girl's face.
Okay, the druggie girl he revived at the party. No prob. Dressed the same she was at the party too. 
Only a half hour to go! No blood running down the walls! Only dead person so far is old Lou!
Ah jeez, sailor boy again. Why did she tell him about sailor boy in the first place? That's number one. Number two, ladies and gentiles...Just ladies. Womenz: If you have a dream like that, don't tell your fucking husband about it. Okay? Thank you. 
Back to "Why don't you tell me the rest of it."

I don't think this is a good idea. 
This is a little embarrassing to admit but...Okay...The last Stanley Kubrick movie I watched was The Shining, okay? I watched it in broad daylight with the windows open in a 25th floor apartment overlooking the ocean. And I had to sleep with the lights on that night! I was only 30 years old.


Did that really happen? A keyboard and synthesizer? Real satanic sex parties use organs, lmao. I don't think any of this really happened.
Number two: I've had some challenging days, you've had some challenging days. I have never had a 24-hour period where I attend a party with my wife one night, the next night my wife crushes me with the revelation of a fantasy love affair, a dead guy's daughter comes on to me in full view of the dead guy, I almost get my ass beat by some anti-gay toughs, I almost pick up a prostitute and I crash a satanic sex orgy, have my cover blown and my life and my family's lives are threatened.

Now, taking those one-by-one:

1. "Attend party with my wife:" Yes, I have done that.
2. "Next night wife crushes me with fantasy love affair:" No. Not the next night or any night.
3. "dead guy's daughter comes on to me." I already covered that.
4. "almost get beat by anti-gay toughs:" No.
5. "almost pick up a prostitute." No...Well... "almost," okay almost. Yes.
6. "crash satanic sex orgy:" Never once.
7. "cover blown, threatened." No.

That's two out of seven in my life! Seven out of seven in one day, that's a bad day.
That's number one. 

This is a little embarrassing but...Okay, here goes: Although I have been in plenty of rooms with dead people I have never been in a room with a dead body and had the attractive, engaged daughter of the deceased kiss me full on the mouth and tell me she loves me.

It was found in the middle of the Nevada desert, well-tramped now but once no man's land on the frontier, set up against the tree just where the frontiersman had propped it, weathered now so as to become part of the tree and the brush, undisturbed for 135 years.

Friday, January 30, 2015

"Why don't you tell me the rest of it."  Pause. I don't want to hear the rest of it tonight.

Good night.
Ha. Strangers in the Night, yes indeedy.
Hey. Fidelio.
Holy Molio, it is 16 degrees in Northern Cambria, Pa. right now and the sun is still up! Jeezus. It's 25 in Yurino, Russia where it's the middle of the night. For more on "Towns of the World With a Population of Exactly 4,199," This is Public Occurrences.
There is definitely a change.

Teacher Brooks says real adults don't play chess. In the Middle East. There's a limit to that complexity thing; try KISS instead (Brooks doesn't say that but he does use "simple" four times.). There's a limit to that pragmatism thing. Do the right thing, he says, do the "moral" (his word) thing, stick to your pluralist values and keep your word. To the Syrian rebels, for instance.

So too, Adult Friedman. "Don't say stupid stuff," his phrase! Tell the truth, call a spade a spade (Call a coup a coup? He doesn't say that.). That big Obama confab on "extremism?" That's an adult table Friedman doesn't think Obama should have set. Me neither! Friedman derides Earnest Josh's parsing of Islam and extremism: This isn't a confab on Islam or even Islamic extremism, it's on extremism, we need a global strategy for dealing with Presbyterian extremism, islamicextremism, extremism wherever it exists among those otherwise peaceful--equally peaceful!--religions.

Fuck that shit! (Friedman doesn't say that). The extremist problem the world faces is within (not with) Islam, Friedman says, it's between the Sunnis and the pluralists. (Those Federalist Society sleeper cells that are everywhere in the Muslim world, yearning to speak freely. Hey! It's a start.) When you start talking like that you come very close to saying that the problem is Islam since Sunnis are 75%-90% of all Muslims worldwide. Obama's focus on the marginalization of Muslims in Europe...Obama needs to defocus, he's seeing too much complexity, he's seeing the trees but not the forest, he's seeing his navel, what he's not seeing is that the problem is within Islam, Friedman says. It is definitely a change.

There is wisdom coming from the adults' table, intelligible to us kids. 

Thursday, January 29, 2015


Oh, it's Friday! Yes, of course.
I remember that. A trompe l'oeil.

Don't remember that. Didn't know about that. Clearly Charlize Theron, therefore not anonymizing or depersonalizing. So what's the purpose of painting Charlize Theron gold? To see Charlize Theron painted in gold. Okay.

Is it cheating if you wear underwear? I think it's cheating.

Guys too! I think that's beautiful. I like that liquid gold. Charlize Theron's gold looks like a fake bake.

Okay, that's the custom-car look I was familiar with before all this. Dumb.

There's an entirely separate category "Chinese Auto Shows." :o

"Silver body bathing in gold river," that one's called. I like that! (That's not from the Chinese Auto Show.)

Like that. But it doesn't anonymize. Why paint a guy gold? To see guy painted gold. Okay. That's from pizzaexpressnews.com. For some reason.

Cheater, cheater punkin' eater! What is the purpose of having your whole body painted and wearing underwear! Especially if you're not revealing anything. Dumb. There are tons of faces. They're not anonymized in the slightest. I could pick her out of a lineup.

That's just dumb.

Is there a paint fetish? Seems like anonymizing isn't the function at all in these. When did we develop a paint fetish? Why did we develop a paint fetish? I don't know.
Continuing our popular series "Women Covered in Paint:"

Yves Klein, Venus de Milo (1960).

Yves Klein, Winged Victory of Samothrace, (1962). 

MH370.

Hey! A development. The Malays have "officially" declared it was an "accident." As opposed to a deliberate act. Wonder how they did that. Since they never found the plane. AND the Malaise say there were NO survivors. Wow. Stepping up to the plate there. Query, Malaise: Is the inability to find the plane after 11 months ALSO an "accident?" 

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Guido Zentai.

When I first saw this photo I thought the dancer had been objectified as a pendant, it looked to me like a peace symbol on a necklace. But she clearly is gripping the ring, as if it were a standard dancer's exercise circle or something, I don't know! In looking at it more closely it is a necklace chain, not the suspension cable for, like, a heavy bag or whatever. So, I don't know what the ring is. Whatever.

The point is, objectification,"women as objects."


In many cases I and others would be opposed to that. Above is women objectified! Sex objects, too. I don't object to the sink legs. When I first saw a similar installation some years ago I was delighted by the whimsical creativity. But perhaps I am a swine.

The Argentini above is also objectification of women. Don't have a problem with that either. It's too beautiful to be objectionable. I do not think "Artemis,"


is objectification.

The practice of some Jews to have sex only through a hole in the sheet, the rest of the woman completely covered, that--That is totally bizarre--is rendering the woman a sexual object. A hole in the legs accessed through a hole in the sheet.

Zentai...Argentini... Zentai completely anonymizes human beings. But zentai does not objectify!



Clearly, that is a human being and--I think that's a female--she is not doubling as an object or posing as an object. Even the gender in zentai is ambiguous sometimes. But the zentai suits are so form-fitting I don't think you can say they de-gender. Argentini certainly does not de-gender. The effect of covering a person from head to toe, whether with fabric or with paint, is to depersonalize them, They are uniform in appearance, stripped of their identity. Okay...Is that bad? I don't know. What does it do for the viewer?

This is where I don't get zentai. I think zentai is some sort of sexual fetish. Like a lot of sexual fetishes it just may not appeal to individual viewers. It does not to me but I'm unsure about the fetish because I don't see the possibility of sex! How the hell do you have sex with a zentai person? I don't know. Zentai seems to de-sexualize the wearer and it can't be a sexual fetish if you take out the sexual. I don't think. Zentai seems like the Muslim Burqas or Sherpas or whatever they're called. And the burqa is intended to de-sexualize.


Miss April. Western fashion model.

                                           Masquerade full-face with head scarf.

Anonymity creates mystery, mystery can be sexually exciting. I find beautiful masquerade masks on hot-bodied women sexually exciting. I don't consider the runway model's face mask beautiful. Therefore even though she has a hot body I don't find her sexually exciting. The masquerade woman's mask is beautiful but I can't see any of her body and so don't find her sexually exciting.

There can be sexiness in anonymity, depersonalization, and objectification. There's a lot of that in
one-night stands and casual sex and there are a lot of one-night stands and casual sex! You can throw away your inhibitions when you're not you.

So:

Zentai--anonymizes, depersonalizes, desexualizes, does not objectify, semi-de-genders.
Argentini  amonymizes (pretty completely), depersonalizes,  does not desexualize, sometimes objectifies, does not de-gender.
Jewish practice--anonymizes, sexually objectifies.
Muslim burqa--anonymizes, de-personalizes, de-sexualizes, de-genders--except that everyone knows only women wear burqas.
Western full face mask fashion (there's actually a House of-----(French) that specializes in those things)--anonymizes, depersonalizes.
Masquerade full face mask--anonymizes, depersonalizes.

So, yeah. Imo.

Tuesday, January 27, 2015


Now, that is about the coolest thing I've ever seen. The Italian photographer Guido Argentini has a series of photographs of dancers, live human beings, body-painted in silver. Sort of like zentai, it anonymizes, desexualizes. But zentai is a sexual fetish, I think. I guess I don't know, I guess I don't get zentai. I get Guido and "Artemis." Absolutely beautiful. Stunning.
The universe can be dark, you know what I mean?
Zentai comes from our friends the Japanese, as does Oculinctus, which I shan't define or illustrate as it makes my eyes water, you'll have to look it up your ownself.

Inn-teresting culture, the Japanese. Never had a notion to go to Japan.

Zentai fashion.



                               Pretty girl.

Damnedest thing I ever saw.
Hey.


   Zentai.

Why?

This is Public Occurrences!

Search keyword:

felayed maodared

?

Monday, January 26, 2015


The universe...The universe can be bleak, you know what I mean?

"1 in 4 Americans Believe God Will Decide Who Wins The Super Bowl."-Huffington Post.


"Scientists find Belichick’s explanation plausible."-Boston Globe.


The highest compliment one can pay a New York Times writer is to say he or she is "subtle" or "nuanced." There are fifty shades of grey to the grey lady. Ross Douthat, compliment.
They're having a food fight over at the adults' table.

One of the New York Times columnists wrote a post-Charlie thing; other pencils, Salon, Glenn Greenwald wrote their own, and a polite, finger-food, brain-food fight broke out. Ross Douthat was impressed enough by some of the other arguments that he changed his mind. This is what Douthat originally wrote:

"...the kind of blasphemy that Charlie Hebdo engaged in had deadly consequences, as everyone knew it could … and that kind of blasphemy is precisely the kind that needs to be defended, because it’s the kind that clearly serves a free society’s greater good. If a large enough group of someones is willing to kill you for saying something, then it’s something that almost certainly needs to be said, because otherwise the violent have veto power over liberal civilization, and when that scenario obtains it isn’t really a liberal civilization any more.

...But when offenses are policed by murder, that’s when we need more of them, not less, because the murderers cannot be allowed for a single moment to think that their strategy can succeed."


Now, The Restatement of Douthat:

"I think my original language might reasonably be amended to something like this: “When offenses are policed with murder, we need more speech that challenges/offends the murderers,” leaving more room for prudential and moral judgment about exactly what form the new challenge/offense should take."

I, Benjamin Harris, do solemnly swear that I read those two sections an exasperating number of times before I saw any difference whatsoever and when I did the first change I noticed was that Douthat had changed "by murder" to "with murder" which if there is a distinction with a difference there I don't know what it is. And I got so exasperated I didn't want to know! Then I noticed "speech." Douthat had changed "we need more of them" to "we need more speech."  That is a difference! But not in context. Grrrr. Dearie me, this whole food fight and both Douthat posts were on blasphemous speech, on Charlie Hebdo speech, on whether other media should reprint the offensive cartoons. If Douthat intended to draw a distinction between speech and act with his "amendment" neither he nor any of the other adults ever discussed blowing up mosques or other acts. 

So, I don't know what The Restatement of Douthat is about and it exasperates me. 

Sunday, January 25, 2015


The northeastern U.S. is in for a blizzard manana. Like in that 1956 Eisenstaedt photo. It is already snowing in Northern Cambr-eye-ay, Pennsylvan-eye-ay Oblast. The high Monday is going to be 27 and the low 21 which presents the advantage of not having to take clothes off, put them on again, take them off. So annoying. In Yurino, Tver Oblast, Rooski there is only a 20% chance of snowski with an expected high of 12 and an expected low of 10...which is hard to believe but that's what it says.

Hey! If you ever think, "I wonder if Ben knows---," like I wonder if Ben knows who Klayton*What the fuck was that...--Thompson is or who Hasan** Hassan Whiteside is OR if you ever think "I wonder if Ben knows that Game of Thrones is an HBO television series with tons of nudidity on it and not a video game"--assume I don't. And tell me. Thanks. Good night.

*UPDATE, 3:21 am, Jan. 26.
**UPDATED UPDATE, 3:26 am. Swine memory.

Star Stuff.*

I did not know that Klay Thompson was a sibling.

As I did not know there was a Klay Thompson.

"Hassan" "Whitehead." "Whiteside."
Hassan Whitehead Whiteside. Sibling of the universe.

Our brothers' names may not be familiar but oh my oh my.

On Friday night young Klay Thompson, a professional basketball player, scored 37 points. Tremendous game. That would have been a tremendous game for young Klay Thompson or anyone but young Klay Thompson did it in one quarter of one game. I had never heard of such a thing on accounta it had never been done before. Thirty-seven points in one quarter is a National Basketball Association (NBA) record.

Hassan, who looks so young he looks like our baby brother, just finished playing a game with the Miami "Heat" against the Chicago "Bulls." As I pen this it is not clear exactly how tremendous Hassan was today. The first headline I saw, on ESPN, was "Hassan Whitehead Whiteside Blocks 14 Shots," and I went "what?" right after I went "who?" I have since read that Hassan blocked 10, 11, or 12 shots. CBS says Hassan blocked 5 shots in 7 minutes. And they have video. Which I have seen. Ten or even 14 blocked shots is not a record (17 is) but 5 blocks in 7 minutes may be if they keep those records which I don't think they do. Whatever! If young Hassan blocked even a measly 10 shots today he would be only the 43rd player to do it. Which isn't a lot since there have been billyuns and billyuns of players in the NBA.

Klay Thompson was averaging 22 points/game before Friday night. That's very good, Klay Thompson is a very good player but 37 in a quarter...well, when a player gets on a streak like that other players say he is just "unconscious." Klay Thompson was unconscious in the third quarter Friday night.

Hassan Whitehead Whiteside...I have never heard a player being described as "unconscious" in blocked shots...and Hassan was not considered a very good player before today. He played one year of college basketball. In his NBA "career" he was averaging 1.3 blocks per-game. Which isn't a lot. Whether "unconscious" or not, Hassan Whitehead Whiteside was something today.

*UPDATE, 9:53 pm UTC. Oh hell, it's Whiteside not Whitehead, I sincerely apologize to Brother Hassan, and ESPN now has it as 12 blocks.



The Ross Ice Shelf in Antarctica is 2,500 feet thick. Under all of that ice, in preternatural darkness, is ocean water. We have found life on Earth in the hottest geothermal springs, in the coldest depths, in complete darkness, wherever there is water we have found life for water is the great solvent of life. As if in proof of that maxim scientists have now found life, translucent fish, beneath the Ross Ice Shelf. They are children of the universe.

We are not alone. There was once water on Mars. Where there was water there was life and we will find the fossilized remains some day. There is water elsewhere in our solar system. We will find life on Europa and the other places. They will be our siblings in the universe.


Heavens made more* comprehensible.

UPDATE, 10:02 pm UTC: "more" added.

The heavens oughtn't be so large as to be incomprehensible, they should be...comprehensible. On a normal earthly computer screen. 
Sunday morning is not alright for fighting. Nor for dancing. Not any of them things.

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Yes, they are!

About 1,000 rallied in Australian. They're not Australian! They're not French! See?



Snipers and Courage, Cowards and Heroes.

"military" "education" ".org." Okay, militaryeducation.org, what say ye about snipers? Militaryeducation.org has a list of the Top Ten Deadliest Snipers. Numero Uno is Simo Häyhä who I have always thought was particularly hot:

"Nicknamed “White Death” by the troops of the Red Army — whom he tormented, dressed in his snow camouflage...he preferred to use iron rather than telescopic sights, which ensured he presented less of a target to enemy gunmen."
                                                          It didn't work one time.

I don't know what Michael Moore had in mind when he said snipers were cowards but there is that "hiding" aspect, "dressed in snow camouflage...iron rather than telescopic sights...presented less of a target to enemy..." Don't all soldiers dress in camouflage? Yes, they do. Isn't, like, the point to present less of a target? Yes, it is. I am not articulating well. I use analogy.

If Osama bin Laden had been killed as he was walking on a dusty road from Afghanistan to Pakistan by Bryan Sikes, Sniper, would there have been a movie or documentary or book, would it have resonated the same way with the public? I don't think so. The raid that killed bin Laden was a made-for-retelling drama. Not much drama in "I saw this tall gray-bearded guy walking along the road and shot him in the head."

The sniper is not exposed to the same danger as the raider. That's a big part of the drama of course but a bigger part of courage. That was a dangerous mission the Navy SEALS were on, good God. Helicoptering in to Pakistan, to a military area, under radar, without Pakistan knowing--that's dangerous. If OBL had been killed by a sniper the sniper could have been posting on Facebook the moment before he saw the tall gray-bearded figure walking on the road.

Lee Harvey Oswald was a sniper. He was not a hero to anyone, not courageous, but not a coward either.


The Confederate sniper who drilled General Reynolds, the best U.S. general, on the first day of Gettysburg--anonymous. Nobody knows who the sniper was.


Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain epitomized Hemingway's definition of courage, "grace under pressure." The Confederate sniper, not so much.



In any other area of life a sniper is called a murderer.
                                                           Charles Whitman, sniper.

Before coming across Selma Hayak on "militaryeducation.org" I had read of the most decorated Soviet sniper during World War II. I felt only revulsion toward that guy. The Soviets were the only army that specifically trained snipers. The other nine guys on militaryeducation.org's list are Soviets.

On the other hand, I've seen Captain Phillips, that movie portrayed the Navy SEAL snipers as heroes! I felt they were heroes! That was dramatic! Then there was just silence. The crisis had reached its apex, the pirates were panicking, everybody was yelling and screaming and then "three green lights!" the shots, and then silence. There is a strange anti-climax to a sniper operation.

Snipers have all the advantages. Their targets have none.


I have hunted. That is not a hero, that is not courage. Nor cowardice. That's a sniper. A hunter of men and beasts.

What is Bryan Sikes going to do when the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq end? What is he going to do when he has to return to the U.S., when he doesn't have live targets to kill? The advantages he had as a sniper he will not have in a civilian job. What skills does he have that will translate? The job he would be suited for best would be a cop.