Sunday, June 29, 2008
Writing with Rain Water
The irony is not lost on me!
Judge Rejects 'Obscene' Name Change
SANTA FE, N.M. (June 28) - A New Mexico appeals court on Friday ruled against a Los Alamos man who wanted to change his name to a phrase containing a popular four-letter obscenity.The man appealed after a state district judge in Bernalillo County refused his request to change his name to "F--- Censorship!"
Judge Nan Nash ruled that the proposed name change was "obscene, offensive and would not comport with common decency."
woo, visitors!
P.S. My biceps are screaming.
a vice is a vice is a vice is a vice
“There’s nothing better than smoking cigarettes in the city,” I said as I exhaled, smoke escaping from my lips into the moist night air. I watched the red-hot end of my cigarette burn down the white paper, and wondered how I could gain so much satisfaction from knowingly consuming something poisonous.
“Especially when drinking,” Sarah added, flicking the ash from the end of her cigarette.
I was silent for a moment, continuing to contemplate my vice. I shook my head, redirecting my attention on the present. “Natasha often tells me I’m a consumer, and she’s completely right. I love smoking, drinking, eating, shopping, all of it.” I paused and took a deep drag. “And the city is entirely based around consumption and the need to serve and be served. To stake your claim. I think that’s why I feel so at ease here. I feel so much more in my element, with all the resources I could ever need to fulfill my desires at my very fingertips.”
Sarah merely nodded and crushed out her cigarette under her foot.
“I wonder if they’re still doing these three dollar Buds,” I think aloud, gesturing at the chalkboard next to me.
“Let’s hope, because there’s no way in hell I’m paying another ten bucks for a drink.”
(Yes, those really are my initials.)
Saturday, June 28, 2008
moving day
Packing to move always involves taking stock of where I've been, where I'm going, and what I'm taking with me. Every time I move, I end up with less than I started with. Yet, as few possessions as I feel like I have, it is always startling to see just how much it adds up to when it's all stacked up together. The bulk of it is books, bedding, and clothes. As far as kitchenware, all I have is one plate, two mugs, a bowl, three plastic cups, and two french presses. My electronics are limited to a printer, an alarm clock, and a laptop. I'm leaving all my furniture, which is only a small end table, one old lamp without a shade, and a set of drawers. The loft bed is staying too, but it was already there when I moved in. I don't need my mattress, either.
I'm subletting a room in an apartment for the month of July until my roommate-to-be returns from California in August. Truthfully, I'm looking forward to the quick turn around. I get restless when I live in one place for too long. When I was a kid, my family moved about every three years, so I never really had one neighborhood I belonged to. Before I moved into this apartment, I was moving every 3-4 months, which was terrible in New York without a car or friends with cars to help. You have to experience it to really fathom it. Try paying $60 in cab fare to transport your life, with a cabbie who does as little to help you as he possibly can. And that's if you're lucky enough to be moving somewhere in the same borough as you lived before. Try moving from Manhattan to Brooklyn or Queens or from Downtown to Uptown. Of course, there's always U-haul, but try driving one of those things in Manhattan, I dare you. But I am lucky this time. My good friend is driving all the way down from Westchester to move me. I have to pay her for the gas, but we'll also be hanging out afterwards, so it will be all right.
Anyway, the situation being what it is, I'm going to leave most of my stuff in boxes while I'm there, so repacking will be minimal. I suppose I've paid some of my dues as a New Yorker, because not only is one of my friends work for Rapid Realty and hooking me up when Andy and I have to apartment hunt, but there is a chance my family will roadtrip to the city at the end of July for my brother's birthday, so I very well might get moved for free with extra man power. Today it will be just me and Allie, hauling it all up four flights into a stranger's apartment. I've yet to have an apartment that was fully mine. I've lived in dorms, sublets, and I've filled a vacancy in a friend's apartment. All of them were already furnished, already decorated, and I had to accomodate my needs to my roommates'. All I have to do is put in my time for one more month and I will finally have the blank slate I've been longing for.
Friday, June 27, 2008
Chambers
more nuggets of wisdom from DJ
at 8:11pm on May 29th, 2008
Have bebeh inya?
at 11:59pm on June 11th, 2008
any new HobBIes?
at 6:59pm
Hey! Boy, I have big issues here, but I have boldly insisted he buy it. How 'bout it?
Conversations with DJ, the first installment
Auto Response from DJ
Aeschylus' Trilogy
Orestes Pursued by the FuriesWilliam Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905)
In the spirit of posting papers I wrote for literature courses last year, here is another (shorter) gem that I got an A on. For those of you familiar with Greek mythology, especially the events immediately preceding the Trojan War, then you might enjoy this. For those of you unfamiliar, here is a brief summary: Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia to Artemis so the Greeks could sail with fair winds to Troy. Upon his return, his wife Clytaemnestra murdered him and his captive/sex object Cassandra (the prophetess of legend). Orestes, sent away from home as a boy, returns to avenge his father and murder his mother (in this version, at the divine command of Apollo). However, he is forced to flee his land because he is being pursued by the avengers of parent killers, the Furies. He flees to Athens where a trial is held, Apollo on the defense, the Furies on the prosecution, and Athena presiding, but the verdict is a draw. Athena then declares Orestes absolved of guilt, and thus Athenian democracy is founded, creating the precedent of judicial process in Greece.
Of the many motifs in the Oresteia that of the coiling serpent best exhibits the unknotting of imagery and the progressive literalization of metaphor from one play to the next. The knot begins in the Agamemnon with the complicated weaving of ferocious animal imagery around Clytaemnestra and Agamemnon. It is teased out in the Libation Bearers with Clytaemnestra’s prophetic dream of the suckling snake. Lastly, it is made literal in the Eumenides with the serpent-headed Furies in relentless pursuit of Orestes. Most importantly, the shift of the serpent from the husband-killing Clytaemnestra to the mother-killing Orestes and finally to the matricide-avenging Furies reveals the movement of the play away from the impious tribal justice of the house of Atreus towards the divine Justice of the house of the gods. It is Aeschylus’ most striking animal metaphors because it belongs to the avenger in each play. It is the disruptive act of vengeance to which each play is responding.
Necessarily, each instance of the serpent image is tied up with other motifs in the beginning of the trilogy. Upon committing the act of murder, Clytaemnestra emerges from the house and identifies herself as a serpent, yet simultaneously invoking the motifs of the net, robe, and sacrifice.
… our never ending, all-embracing net, I cast it/wide for the royal haul, round and round/in the wealth, the robes of doom, and the I strike him/once, twice, and at each stroke he cries in agony—/he buckles at the knees and crashes here!/And when he’s down I add the third, last blow,/to the Zeus who saves the dead beneath the ground/I send that third blow home in homage like a prayer (Ag. ll. 1401-09).
The coiling around of Clytaemnestra’s action represents the circularity of the curse of Atreus and the cycle of violence perpetuated by the blood vendetta. By profaning the murder of Agamemnon with the image of the sacrifice, she is invoking the justice of the gods and inviting her own destruction. The tightening coil of the curse of Atreus crushed Agamemnon; arrogance and pride lead Clytaemnestra to believe she is unsusceptible to the very same coiling trap. The Agamemnon ends with a self-righteous and ignorantly confident declaration that it is in her power to return order to the house of Atreus, when in fact her actions will merely turned the wheel of the curse round to crush her.
As with the Agamemnon, the appearance of the serpent image in the Libation Bearers is accompanied by other motifs. Clytaemnestra dreams that a snake she bore would draw blood from her breast as it suckled and waking from the dream sends libations to Agamemnon’s grave to appease his restless spirit. Again the image of the sacrificial ritual is tied to the serpent, as well as being interwoven with the fabric of her dream. Her misinterpretation of her dream, as well as the consequences of her profane sacrifices becomes her undoing. What is interesting about how Aeschylus introduces the motif of the serpent in the Libation Bearers is that while the image arises from Clytaemnestra’s dream, it is in fact Orestes who accurately interprets the dream by identifying himself as the snake.
No,/ I pray to the Earth and father’s grave to bring/that dream to life in me. I’ll play the seer—/it all fits together, watch!/If the serpent came from the same place as I,/and slept in the bands that swaddled me, and it’s jaws/spread wide for the breast that nurse me into life/and clots stained the milk, mother’s milk,/and she cried in fear and agony—so be it./As she bred this sign, this violent prodigy/so she dies by violence. I turn serpent,/I kill her. So the vision says (Lib. ll. 526-537).
It is Clytaemnestra’s lot that the same viciousness with which she struck down her husband would culminate with Orestes divine orders to destroy his mother. Most importantly, the dream is an element of the growing literalization of the metaphor as the trilogy advances towards resolution. The snake in the vision is quite literally a snake, seen vividly, as though real, by the dreaming Clytaemnestra. The viciousness of her crimes is reborn in Orestes, and upon her death, is reincarnated in the Furies, with snakes in their hair. The Furies are not represented physically on stage until the Eumenides, but Orestes is seized with the terrifying vision of them moments after the matricidal act:
No, no! Women—look—like Gorgons,/shrouded in black, their heads wreathed,/with swarming serpents!/--Cannot stay, I must move on. . .
No dreams, these torments,/not to me, they’re clear, real—the hounds,/of mother’s hate (Lib. ll. 1047-50, 52-54).
Finally, in the Eumenides the metaphor of the serpent is physically embodied in the three Furies on stage. As the punishers of matricides they are in pursuit of Orestes as he flees Mycenae. They are spurred on by the ghost of Clytaemnestra and the image of them is once again coupled with the motif of sleep; first, the sleepless phantom of Clytaemnestra and secondly, the agitated sleep of the Furies which she spurs after Orestes. This time, the Furies are recognized in a vision by a priestess of Apollo at Delphi. The way she is made to describe her vision is a key to the final unraveling of the images and the action of the story. She envisions them encircling the bloodstained “abomination to god”(Eum. ll. 42) that is the suppliant Orestes.
But there is a ring around the man, an amazing company—/women, sleeping, nestling against the benches . . ./women? No,/Gorgons I’d call them; but then with Gorgons/you’d see the grim, inhuman . . ./I saw a picture/years ago, the creatures tearing the feast/away from Phineus—/These have no wings,/I looked. But black they are, and so repulsive./Their heavy, rasping breathing makes me cringe./And their eyes ooze a discharge, sickening,/and what they wear—to flaunt that at the gods,/the idols, sacrilege! (Eum. 48-59).
The priestess first mistakes them for Gorgons but dismisses them as not inhuman enough. She then mistakes them for Harpies but corrects herself for their lack of wings. She has never seen such creatures, but they are disgusting. It is very important that she recognizes them opponents of the gods, because her speech is a foreshadowing of the conflict that will arise between the Furies and Athena, through which the last of Atreus’ line will be absolved of his wrongdoing. As not wholly inhuman, the Furies are the earthly incarnation of the price of the curse. However, it is that potential which allows the trial to be resolved in the manner it is, with the Furies vile robes of their past replaced with the robes of Athenian honor, Orestes’ casting off the guilt of his actions, and the powers of vengeance and justice being married into prosperity, dignity, and a reaffirmation of the community.
The motific knot unwinds itself from abstract metaphor in the Agamemnon to a more clearly defined image in the Libation Bearers and finally to the physical manifestation of the serpent with the Furies in the Euminides. The evolution and simplification of the imagery throughout the course of the three plays make possible the transformation and resolution of the trilogy’s end. The cyclical spiraling of the curse represented by the serpent eventually chokes on itself and spawns a new species full promise and balance—the civilized Greek man respectively coexisting with the dynamic cosmic forces of his universe.
Auster vs. Eggers: What is Postmodernism?
[Primary texts: "The Locked Room", the New York Trilogy, Paul Auster & A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, Dave Eggers; Secondary text: The Norton Anthology of Theory and Criticism]
Self-Reflexive Fiction as a Symptom of Postmodernism
"No one wants to be part of a fiction, and even less so if that fiction is real.”
Paul Auster, “the Locked Room,” the New York Trilogy
Complexity, he insists, cannot be sidestepped by simple visions of right and wrong or simple models of all-encompassing systems. And he wants an art that is attentive to complexity, that grapples with the multiple meanings of our past and the plural realities of our present (1611).
It would seem that in this interpretation of Lyotard, he believes art in general, and postmodern art in particular, should attempt to portray the complexities of reality, including the role of the past in creating present realities. To complicate the question, we can further ask, how does self-referential fiction, by blurring the line between fiction and reality, distort the very relationship between the past and the present that Lyotard was concerned with? Likewise, how does it change the relationship between the author and this work, and the author and his reader? These are questions drawn from Foucault’s concerns in “What is an Author?” In both Paul Auster's "The Locked Room" and Dave Egger’s A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius (AHWOSG) there is a striking recurrence of self-referentiality, which creates another dimension to the question that must be addressed. To begin to formulate an answer, one must first locate specific instances in the texts in which all these relationships are displayed, and how they illustrate what Foucault called the “author-function”. One example from “the Locked Room” is the story the narrator tells of working as a census taker in Harlem. Another is the epiphany the narrator has in the cottage in Southern France as well as his encounter with the young Peter Stillman in Paris. All of these moments serve to illustrate Auster's fascination with blurring the lines between truth and fiction, interior and exterior realities, and the past and the present. As for Eggers, he employs a self-reflexive dialogic device that allows for him to subtly yet noticeably break character in order to have a conversation with himself, to the effect of foregrounding his self-consciousness as a writer recreating his own past.
The entire story comes down to what happened in the end, and without that end inside me now, I could not have started this book. The same holds for the two books that come before it, City of Glass and Ghosts. These three stories are finally the same story, but each one represent a different stage in my awareness of what it is about. I don't claim to have solved any problems. I am merely suggesting that a moment came when it no longer frightened me to look at what had happened. If words followed, it was only because I had no choice but to accept them, to take them upon myself and go where they wanted me to go. But that does not necessarily make the words important. I have bene struggling to say goodbye to something for a long time now, and this struggle is all that really matters. The story is not in the words; it's in the struggle."
This passage is no longer the narrator speaking as a fictional character in a made up story about a sensational writer and his childhood friend. This passage is Paul Auster speaking directly to the reader, confessing his ultimate reason for writing the Trilogy. This is surprisingly similar to various moments in AHWOSG in which Eggers, employing an interview dialogue as a device to converse with his self, reveals his intentions in writing the novel and portraying himself and others as he does. Auster's story is indeed fiction, but it is a lie that conceals a deep truth. Alternately, AHWOSG is presented as fictionalized truth rather than truthful fiction, so the lies are harder to discern though they are no less important than in “the Locked Room”. The bottom line for both is that it doesn't matter what truth is, and as a result the reader comes to recognize her own inner struggle with truth. By defying the boundary between reality and fiction, Auster creates a mystery that takes the reader into the darkest hidden places of her own secret past, bridging the gap between the confessor and the confidant. The narrator’s story becomes a metaphor for anyone who has struggled with the line between fantasy and fact, memory and identity, self and other.
[Relationship of fiction to reality:
“As opposed to the story writer, I was offering my creations directly to the real world, and therefore it seemed possible to me that they could affect this real world in a real way, that they could eventually become a part of the real itself. No writer could ask for more than that" (295). Though this is written by Auster, it very well could have been written by Eggers.
Relationship of author to his work, blurring of line between author and narrator:
“Fanshawe's power had to be broken, not submitted to. The point was to prove to him that I no longer cared--that was the crux of it: to treat him as a dead man, even though he was alive. But before I proved this to Fanshawe, I had to prove it to myself..." (317). It is difficult to draw the line between the narrator and Fanshawe.]
Fanshawe was there, and no matter how hard I tried not to think about him, I couldn't escape. This was unexpected, galling. Now that I had stopped looking for him, he was more present than ever. The whole process had been reversed. After all these months of trying to find him, I felt as though I was the one who had been found. Instead of looking for Fanshawe, I had actually been running away from him (344).
The novel is thick with double-meaning. Reading it, one feels she is reading the story of her life. The same can be said of Eggers. However, Eggers, instead of creating an entirely fictional persona, uses himself as a trope. Fanshawe is the fear of success that can keep the writer from achieving his full creative potential. He is a myth, a tragic muse that exists only within the blankness of the imagination. Finally, the narrator’s submission to the inevitability of Fanshawe is a moment of empowerment that gives him the power to use language to manipulate reality. That is part of the significance of his encounter with the young Peter Stillman in Paris. By embracing that Fanshawe’s identity is a lie the narrator/Auster/the reader is finally taking asserting the power of his own imagination. The man who was Fanshawe relinquished his identity. He is no one. Because of that he is anyone the narrator chooses.
My happiness was immeasurable. I exulted in the sheer falsity of my assertion, celebrating the new power I had jsut bestowed upon myself. I was the sublime alchemist whou could change the world at will. This man was Fanshawe because I said he was Fanshawe, and that was all there was to it (348).
Likewise, Eggers, as author, has sole control over who his characters become; ex: 272-3.
Eggers is clearly struggling with his own egotism for wanting to tell what he considers to be a remarkable story while simultaneously feeling it to be a necessary part of the process of grief and healing. He longs for approval and recognition yet is wracked with paranoid fantasies and shame for the way he is living and raising his brother. He is drowning in a whirlpool fed by resentment towards obligation. Auster’s narrator feels similarly trapped by the inevitability of his past and the obligations which restrict his self-realization in the present. For both the writing process is a way to ultimately forgive themselves their flawed humanity. By the end of both stories, neither is asking for anything any longer from the reader or himself, but rather they are merely making their offerings to the past and moving onward with the present. For both, it is a matter of learning to recognize that you cannot live in the present until you have accepted the fixed nature of the past. This process is beautifully illustrated by Eggers introduction of the metaphor of the snake. By employing the structure of the interview, he allows himself the opportunity to slip out of character and directly address the reader, offering up a rationalization of why he is writing. Though there are many instances of this trope throughout the course of the novel, the metaphor of the snake seems among the most candid and straightforward of the bunch.
We feel that to reveal embarrassing or private things. . . we have given someone something, that, like a primitive person fearing that a photographer will steal his soul, we identify our secrets, our pasts and their blotches, with our identity, that revealing our habits or losses or deeds somehow makes one less oneself. But it’s just the opposite, more is more is more—more bleeding, more giving. These things, details, stories, whatever, are like the skin shed by snakes, who leave theirs for anyone to see. What does he care where it is, who sees it, this snake and his skin? He leaves it where he molts. Hours, days or months later, we come across a snake’s long-shed skin and we know something of the snake, we know that it’s of this approximate girth and that approximate length, but we know very little else. Do we know where the snake is now? What the snake is thinking now? No. By now the snake could be wearing fur; the snake could be selling pencils in Hanoi. The skin is no longer his, he wore it because it grew from him, but then it dried and slipped off and he and everyone could look at it (215-6).
Of course, Eggers is the snake and the skin he sheds is the novel. One cannot carry the past with him and remain in the present. That is the irony of his attempt to fully immerse himself in the moment with his brother, various women, and his absurd paranoid daydreams. However, he has displaced his grief and resentment and anger about the condition of his life with his grandiose plans of riding Might magazine to the top, by manipulating and mocking those people he claims to want to help. He cannot even see that he is a vindictive, self-loathing excuse for a person who cannot even see how he is failing himself, his friends, and his family. He is trapped raising his brother, who is the living image of all his inescapable failure. That is why again, employing dialogue as his trope, Eggers uses his brother as the displaced voice of his conscience with respect to his staging the death of a washed up child star.
Again this is the ambiguous blurring together of Eggers two selves, similar to the merging together of Auster’s narrator with Fanshawe. Like Auster, Eggers is lost to himself and so searches for some fragment of self-realization in the people he knows.
Ultimately, the only reality we know is what we create for ourselves. We cannot know another's thoughts, only what they tell us of them, and vice versa. Each person’s mind is a locked room, and some of them have keys and some of them do not. Fanshawe always knew this, but the narrator had to struggle to realize this about himself, and that was the struggle to find Fanshawe. This is likewise Egger’s struggle, to wrestle himself free of his obligations to the past. It is the struggle to distill for oneself some idea of an essential self from the constantly evolving text of one’s experience.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Goodbye George: A Playlist in 7 Movements
Saturday night was our Farewell 497 party. George is our roommate's handsome kitty (see above). This is the play list I crafted for it:
Movement 1
"Afternoon Speaker" The Sea and Cake
"If You Fall" Azure Ray
"American Flag" Cat Power
"Baby Britain" Elliot Smith
"I'm a Cuckoo" Belle & Sebastian
"Dirty Dream Number Two" Belle & Sebastian
"Ce Soir Je Vais Boire" Claude François
"Since I Met You" The Anniversary
"Go" The Apples in Stereo
"Goodbye Girls" Broadcast
"The Dope" The Dandy Warhols
"Staring at the Sun" TV on the Radio
"The Well and the Lighthouse" The Arcade Fire
"Time to Pretend" MGMT
(I just had deja vu of typing this up.)
Movement 2
"Heavy Metal" Clap Your Hands Say Yeah
"Dear Sons and Daughters of Hungry Ghosts" Wolf Parade
"Flower Gardens" Chad VanGaalen
"The Party's Crashing Us" Of Montreal
"Fine +2 Points" Minus the Bear
"Race for the Prize" The Flaming Lips
"Swimmers" Broken Social Scene
"Another View Point" Cornelius
"Music" Cornelius
"Yeti" Caribou
"Did You See The Words?" Animal Collective
"Oslo in the Summertime" Of Montreal
"Satellite" TV on the Radio
"I am a Scientist" The Dandy Warhols
Movement 3
"Saturdays" Cut Copy
"Dead Wrong" Frausdots
"Dream On" Depeche Mode
"Digital" Joy Division
"Crystal Days" Echo & the Bunnymen
"Seven Seas" Echo & the Bunnymen
"Disco 2000" Pulp
"Panic in Detroit" David Bowie
"Pump It Up" Elvis Costello & the Attractions
"Cracked Actor" David Bowie
"Lip Service" Elvis Costello & the Attractions
Movement 4
"Gone Daddy Gone" Gnarls Barkley
"Panda" Dungen
"To Hell With Poverty!" Gang of Four
"Hollywood Babylon" the Misfits
"Born to Raise Hell" Motorhead
"Search and Destroy" the Stooges
"The Passenger" Iggy Pop
"Heart of the City" Nick Lowe
"Whips and Furs" the Vibrators
"Victoria" The Kinks
"So It Goes" Nick Lowe
"I'm Waiting for the Man" The Velvet Underground & Nico
Movement 5
"I Am the Resurrection" The Stone Roses
"Hideaway" The Olivia Tremor Control
"This Will Be Our Year" The Zombies
"Ing to Me" Millenium
"I Don't Believe You" The Magnetic Fields
"Black Cab" Jens Lekman
"Higher and Higher" Howard Huntsberry
"Lovers" The Tears
"No Cars Go" The Arcade Fire"
Movement 6
"Kids" MGMT
"Ego Tripping (Self-Admiration With Blow-Up Mix)" The Flaming Lips
"Breezin'"Cornelius
"Too Young" Phoenix
"Witness (John Tejada Remix)" The One Am Radio
"Movement" LCD Soundsystem
"Let's Run" Le Tigre
"The Devil" The Rapture
"A Kick In the Teeth" Fischerspooner
"The Equalizer" Junior Boys
"Everything Is Everything" Phoenix
"People in the City" AIR
"Ooh La La" Goldfrapp
"The Coming of Spring" The Rapture
"Autobahn Music Box" Cut Copy
"Something Isn't Right" Herbert
"Sunshine" Simian
"(Far From) Home" Tiga
"Track 07" TOSCA
"We Share Our Mother's Health" The Knife
"Don't Save Us From The Flames" M83
"Xtal" Aphex Twin
Movement 7
"Theme From Conquest of The Irrational (The Prunes Remix)" DJ Vadim
"Introspection" Jazzanova
"One" Pelding
"Culture Consumers" The Tongue
"Ty versus Detchibe feat Tyondai Braxto" Prefuse 73
"Pagina Dos feat The Books" Prefuse 73
"Afternoon Love In" Prefuse 73
"Goodtimes Roll" RJD2 vs. Jay-Z
"99 Problems (Explosion)" RJD2 vs. Jay-Z
"Change Clothes (Lost Your Mind)" RJD2 vs. Jay-Z
"Encore (Butterfly Caught)" RJD2 vs. Jay-Z
"Gin and Juice" Snoop Doggy Dogg
"Protect Ya Neck" Wu-Tang Clan
"Gravel Pit" Wu-Tang Clan
(epilogue: "When the Night Feels My Song" Bedouin Soundclash)
Thursday, June 19, 2008
government warning
I lie down like a tired dog, licking his wounds in the shade.
I bought color film for my camera the other day. I asked for a film with a deep saturated color, and I'm excited to see how my first roll turns out. Unlike black and white, which taught me how to see in shades, since I bought this color film, I have started seeing things in hues. I now have the full spectrum (of visible color) at my availability, and now that it's nearly summer and the sun will be at it's more intense and colors will be at their most brilliant. I am excited to try this something new.
Saturday, June 7, 2008
Crosses all over the boulevard
Last night I dropped my friend's camera in my
vodka-sprite-water beverage. She managed to salvage the memory card, but the camera was not so lucky. I feel like a jerk.
Here is one of the pictures I took before tragedy struck.
Most Furniture, aka Kevin Mulligan, made music in his kitchen in Jersey City. Other featured artists included the Immigrant Mothers (Tiana Femano) and Westward Ho! (Meredith Heil, BenKelley, and Kevin Mulligan).
Next time I won't damage any electronics except those which belong to me.