sunday salon, redux

I’ve been noodling around with cameras since I was in my teens. The mechanics of photography — all of that aperture, shutter speed, depth of field, ISO business — have been second nature to me for years; I rarely need to think about them.

But nine years ago I realized I was almost entirely ignorant about the medium itself. I’m talking about photography as history and culture. I was familiar with the names of a few of the photographic big hats — Ansel Adams, Cartier-Bresson, August Sander — and I could recognize some of their more well-known images, but basically I had no understanding at all of what had been done in photography, or who had done it, or what they were thinking when they did it.

I was the Jon Snow of photographic culture. I knew nothing.

New York City #1, 1976 (Joel Sternfeld)

(Joel Sternfeld)

Homer Page? Never heard of him. Ralph Meatyard? No idea. Mike Brodie, Ara Güler? Hadn’t a clue. Tina Barney, Tony Ray Jones, Lewis Baltz? All cyphers. Guy Bourdin, Helen Levitt, Anders Petersen, O. Winston Link, Milt Rogovin? Meant nothing at all to me.

So I set out to correct that. I decided to educate myself. I’d pick a photographer’s name and do some research. I also decided to share what I’d learned (or thought I’d learned) with the members of Utata, a Flickr group of smart, creative, funny, curious people who enjoyed photography and discussion in equal measure. I’d write a short essay on the photographer, include an example or two of the photographer’s work, and we’d chat about it. Or debate it. Or argue about it.

(John Vachon)

(John Vachon)

It was fun. Everything about it was fun — the research, the discussion. At first, I did them every week. I’d publish them on Sunday and we’d discuss them all week. I took a very catholic approach to selecting the subjects. Street photographers, portrait photographers, fine arts photographers, fashion photographers, sports photographers — there was something to learn from all of them. I looked at the usual dead white guy photographers, at little-known contemporary photographers, at cult and niche photographers, at niche photographers, at photographic curiosities. I ran through the alphabet, from Berenice Abbot to Guillaume Zuili.

(Guillaume Zuili)

(Guillaume Zuili)

The salons, I admit, weren’t always well-written. And there have been a few embarrassing mistakes in research. Some of the more controversial salons led to a harsh arguments. But it was fun. At first.

As the discussions became more informed and intelligent, I felt the need to spend more time doing research. The essays became longer, and included more examples of the photographer’s work. The extra research meant I could no longer keep up the once-a-week schedule. I began doing them every other week.

(Lu Guang)

(Lu Guang)

After a few years of this, it became a chore. A pleasant chore, for the most part, but still a chore. I stopped doing them every other week and began publishing the Sunday Salon at irregular intervals. A month might pass between salons. Maybe five or six weeks. I posted fifteen salons in 2010. Only four in 2011. Seven in 2012, and only three in 2013 — and two of them were on the same photographer.

And then I stopped.

I just didn’t want to do it anymore. I continued to read about photographers, but the idea of writing an essay about them was simply too much unpaid work. And I was okay with not writing them anymore.

(Lillian Bassman)

(Lillian Bassman)

Until I re-watched Paris, Texas a couple of weeks ago. Wim Wenders, that man knows how to frame a shot. Then coincidentally, Wenders re-released his photography book Written in the West, with a few new photographs. The photos were mostly shot when Wenders was scouting locations for Paris, Texas. So I started to read about Wenders.

And the Sunday Salons were reborn. It had been two years since I’d written one. I believe I’ll start writing them again, though not on any schedule.

(Wim Wenders)

(Wim Wenders)

So here’s the Sunday Salon on Wim Wenders. And here’s a list of the published Sunday Salons. I don’t know how many there are — somewhere between 150 and 200, I suspect. Some of them — especially the earlier ones — may look a wee bit wonky; Utata shifted publishing platforms a few years back, and not everything translated easily to the new platform. But they’re there if you’re interested.

it’s a fucking miracle, is what it is

When brainstorming about what to do with the area, the idea of a gun range came up.

The area in question is behind the Rocky Mount United Methodist Church in Jemison, Alabama. According to Pastor Philip Guin, the area was a gully “full of kudzu, snakes and other vermin.” Nobody in Jemison like kudzu, or vermin, or snakes. They fucking hate snakes in Jemison. Totally hate those slithering little bastards. So they decided to clear the area and turn it into…something.

Pastor Phillip Guin

Pastor Phillip Guin

We don’t know what other suggestions for the area might have been considered and rejected. A community vegetable garden, maybe. That would have been nice. Or maybe somebody suggested planting a few trees, maybe build a little gazebo — a nice, quiet place for community picnics or concerts given by the Jemison High School Jazz Band. Or hey, how about a couple of basketball hoops? You know, keep the local kids busy and out of trouble. A baseball diamond might work, or a soccer pitch (though that might be seen as unAmerican).

The thing is, there were LOTS of inexpensive, community-oriented options open to the Rocky Mount United Methodist Church. Options that would be in keeping with church doctrine. But no…the idea of a gun range came up.

It just came up! Just like that, out of the blue, completely unexpected. It was like divine inspiration! Like a miracle!

“We had quite a number of church members, some elderly ladies, for example, and some not so elderly women that had purchased guns, but didn’t know how to use them.”

Okay, I’ll admit the thought of a bunch of old folks unfamiliar with firearms having guns in their homes is disconcerting and alarming. But…a question: why the fuck are the elderly women of Jemison, Alabama arming themselves? We’re talking about a town with a population of about 2500 people. Total. There can’t be much crime there. The Jemison Police Department has only eleven full-time officers. Eleven. That includes the park ranger at Minooka Park. Who the hell are these women planning to shoot?

granny with guns

The whole purpose of this range is to provide recreational and gun safety in a warm, loving, Christian environment.

Uhh…well…lawdy. Okay, then. Recreational gunfire in a warm and loving…oh for fuck’s sake, are you insane? We’re talking about a church, here. A building used for religious activities, for worship. I’m not a Christian, but even I understand that there’s a fundamental disjuncture between a structure dedicated to a religious figure called the prince of peace and a goddam gun range. Jeebus on toast, what the fuck is wrong with you people?

“This is an opportunity for us to reach out in the name of Jesus Christ in a setting that is completely unique.”

No. No, it’s not. It’s not even remotely an opportunity to reach out in the name of Jesus. It’s an opportunity to pimp some seriously distorted Jeebus figure into a flag-waving Second Amendment Martyr.

Don’t be blaming this bullshit on the old women of Jemison, Alabama. I’m just guessing here, but I really most sincerely doubt it was an old woman who raised her hand during the discussion of what to do with that overgrown area behind the church and said “Hey gang, let’s make a gun range! You know…for Jeebus!” I’m pretty sure it was a guy who suggested that. I wonder if anybody other than elderly women have a use for a handy firing range.

The range has also become a favorite of the Jemison Police Department

Yeah. Well, there’s a coincidence.

you get trump

[T]he same blustering verbosity that has fueled Trump will inevitably be his downfall.”

No, it won’t. It really won’t. It should be his downfall, but it won’t. It won’t because Donald Trump is precisely the sort of candidate the Republican party has been evolving toward. Trump is the distillation of the modern Republican party perspective.

Donald Trump

If you spend a quarter of a century telling members of your party (and anybody else who’ll listen) that government is always the problem and never the solution, you get Trump. If you convince your party that compromise equals failure, you get Trump. If you keep repeating that government should be run like a business, you get Trump. If you promote bluster and saber-rattling over diplomacy, you get Trump. If you equate financial success with leadership, you get Trump. If you frame personal selfishness as the hallmark of the free market, you get Trump. If you tell your party members that their economic problems are a result of illegal immigrants and lazy minorities, you get Trump. If you dismiss science and expertise in favor of fervent belief and loudly stated opinion, you get Trump. If you consistently stress that the value of a conservative is measured by how much he or she offends liberals, you get Trump.

If you cease to be a political party that’s genuinely interested in governance, you get Trump. And you get Palin. And you get Cruz and Gohmert. You get an entire political party firmly grounded in the immediate, reactive gut feelings of Joe the Plumber.

You get what you deserve.

Donald Trump

So no, the ‘blustering verbosity’ of Trump won’t be his downfall. But if we’re very, very lucky, it’ll be the beginning of the downfall of the modern Republican party. If we’re lucky, eight more years of Democratic presidents will force Republicans to evolve back into a party of principled conservatives who are more interested in getting government to work than in posturing.

That’s what the American people deserve.

a brief introduction to the republican candidates

       So, what are we up to now? Fourteen?
Seventeen.
       No, seriously…how many Republicans are running for president?
Seventeen.
       No fuckin’ way.
Jim Gilmore just filed his papers.
       Who the fuck is Jim Gilmore?
I know, right?
       No, I mean who the fuck is he?
Oh. He used to be the Governor of Virginia. Like thirteen years ago.
       Christ. Has he got a shot?
Who the fuck is Jim Gilmore?
       Yeah, that’s what I thought. So who else have we got?
Well, there’s Rick Perry.
       The guy who couldn’t count to three during the debates.
That’s him. He’s the only person running for president who’s talked about
seceding from the Union.
       Oh yeah, forgot about that.
Perry’s hoping everybody will forget about that. He’s also the only candidate
currently under indictment.
       You’re shitting me. For what?
Abusing his power as governor to undermine Texas’ political ethics agency.
       I don’t fuckin’ believe it.
It’s true.
       No, I mean I don’t believe Texas has a political ethics agency.
It’s like Bigfoot. You hear about the occasional sighting, but the picture’s
always murky.
       No way Perry can win.
No. Then you got Lindsay Graham.
       C’mon.
He’s in the race. John McCain loves him.
       He’s gay, isn’t he, Graham?
He says not.
       A Republican denying he’s gay? Imagine my shock.
Doesn’t matter, really, if he is or not. Enough Republicans think he’s gay, and they’re not exactly a gay-friendly community. But Graham’s always wanting to start a war, though. Republicans are usually willing to vote for wars.
       Yeah, but do they want a war badly enough to elect a gay president?
Nope. Then you got George Pataki.
       Who the fuck is George Pataki?
I know, right?
       No, I mean who the fuck is George Pataki?
Oh. He was the governor of New York during the 9/11 business.
       I thought that was Rudy Whatshisname.
Giuliani. No, he was the mayor of New York City.
       Same fucking thing to anybody who doesn’t live in New York. No way Padlecki
Pataki. George Pataki.
       Yeah, no way that guy can win.
Nope. Then you got Rick Santorum.
       Pffft. Sweater vest, bad haircut Snowball in Hell. Next.

Eleven-seventeenths of the Republican candidates for President.

Eleven-seventeenths of the Republican candidates for President.


Mike Huckabee.
       The preacher, right. Wasn’t he selling vitamin supplements on the teevee.
Something like that. Reverse mortgages, maybe, whatever the hell those are. Something just a step up from used cars or aluminum siding.
       People like Huckabee, don’t they? Religious people?
Yeah, pretty much.
       So he’s got a shot, doesn’t he?
Nope. His son hung a dog.
       The fuck? He did what?
Kid hung a dog.
       He hung a dog?
At a Boy Scout gathering.
       Uhh…uhh…uhh…I don’t even know what to say.
You can say g’bye to Huckabee as president. Next you got Carly Fiorina.
       A dog? Are you fuckin’ serious?
Totally serious. So moving on. Carly Fiorina.
       Why? I don’t understand. A dog?
I don’t know. Maybe he couldn’t find a canine-size electric chair. Who knows why these people do anything? So, Carly Fiorina.
       Yeah, okay. The woman who ran Hewlett-Packard into the ground.
Well, yeah but…
       Laid off like a million employees or something.
Yeah, but in her defense, I think HP had pretty much crossed that event horizon before she was promoted. Probably wasn’t anything she could have done to prevent it.
       Could she have done something to make it less horrible? For the workers, I mean.
Yes.
       Did she?
No.
       So, I guess her campaign’s also going into the ground then.
Like a fucking lawn dart. And that brings us to Ben Carson.
       I’ve heard the name. Business guy? Pizzas or something?
Pediatric neurosurgeon, and a pretty good one apparently.
       Not pizzas, then. Still, doesn’t really qualify him for being president.
No. He’s the guy who said Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery.
       Aw, fuck him in the neck. White people need to stop comparing things to slavery.
Ben Carson is black.
       What? And he said…wait, what?
Affordable care, worst thing since slavery. Don’t ask me to explain.
       You know what you can compare to slavery?
More slavery?
       Bingo. So, we’re about done, right?
Nope.
       Who’s left?
Marco Rubio. He’s Cuban.
       Well, there’s progress. Republicans have a Latino, a black guy, and a woman running.
Crazy doesn’t recognize gender or racial borders.
       Point to you. I remember Rubio. Glass of water.
Yeah. The anti-Rubio commercials write themselves.
       Yeah. Okay, so he’s got no chance of winning either.
None. That brings us to Rand Paul.
       I have a question.
Yes?
       Is there anybody you’ve named who wouldn’t benefit from electro-shock therapy?
And that brings us to Ted Cruz.
       Oh Jeebus, fuck me with a chainsaw. Ted fuckin’ Cruz.
He’s got support.
       Why did I start this conversation. What about Bush? You haven’t said dick about him.
What is there to say about Jeb Bush? His brother was president, his daddy was president, now he wants his turn.
       He’s raised a buttload of coin.
Multiple buttloads.
       So he’s got a shot.
Yeah. But he’s still Jeb Bush.
       No way to get around that. That’s a lot of Republicans running for president.
Still not done. There’s Bobby Jindal.
       Him? Fucking disaster.
He is.
       Best thing about him is his momma named him Bobby.
But she didn’t. His actual name is Piyush.
       It’s what?
Piyush Jindal.
       Where the hell did the Bobby come from?
The Brady Bunch.
       Now you’re just fucking with me, aren’t you.
No. At least I don’t think so. That’s what Jindal claims. He says he used to come home from school and watch the Brady Bunch. He says he identified with Bobby Brady. So that became his nickname.
       Should have stuck with Piyush. Are we done yet?
Nope.
       Fuck. Kill me now. Stab me right in the fuckin’ eye.
There’s Chris Christie and Scott Walker.
       Laurel and Hardy.
Both of them are being investigated, but neither of them is under indictment yet.
       Yet, great. Walker has a chance, doesn’t he?
Yeah. Don’t ask me to explain it, but yeah. He’s completely fucked up Wisconsin, but yeah, somehow he’s got a decent shot at the nomination.
       I just remembered who we haven’t mentioned yet.
Right, John Kasich.
       Oh god oh god oh god who in the holy fuck is John Kasich.
I know, right?
       Dude.
Oh. He’s the governor of Ohio, which is a pivotal state in the election. And he served in Congress for almost twenty years, where he was the Chair of the House Budget Committee. He was a commentator on FoxNews for a while. He used to be an investment banker, so he’s got friends on Wall Street.
       Is he under indictment?
No.
       Has he compared anything to slavery?
Not that I know of.
       Has he said anything irredeemably crazy?
Not really.
       Not even when he worked at FoxNews?
Not compared to the common FoxNews standard of craziness.
       Has he, or any member of his family, hung any dogs?
Nope.
       Or any large mammals. Or small mammals. Or, I don’t know, amphibians.
Don’t think so.
       Has he molested any kids?
If he has, he hasn’t been caught.
       So then he’s actually got a shot at being the nominee?
Maybe. Probably not. Got into the race late, he’s not well known, a lot of the people who do know him don’t like him.
       So, he’s sort of Christie Lite?
Pretty much.
       Trump, that’s who I was talking about earlier. Are we down to Trump yet?
We are.
       No way Trump gets the nomination.
Only if the debates and primaries are held in Bizarro World.
       Where’s the first debate being held?
It’s being hosted by Fox News.
       ….
….
       ….
I know, right?

louie gohmert — more testing is required

I sometimes forget about Louie Gohmert, the Republican Congressman from Ohmygodisthisguyfuckingstupid, Texas. At least I try to forget about him. I would sincerely like to forget about him. But then he opens his gob and makes word sounds that are so astonishingly stupid that it sucks intelligence right out of the air. As he begins to speak you can actually witness intelligence wither, turn crisp and dry, and crumble like charred bits of paper, to be blown away by the next passing breeze.

On this occasion, a few days ago, Gohmert was speaking at a forum of a college chapter of the Eagle Forum, a conservative ‘interest’ group formed by Phyllis Schlafly. Schlafly is Louie Gohmert’s intellectual equal. She has claimed sex education was like a Tupperware party for abortions. She once said sexual harassment wasn’t a problem for virtuous women. She’s mean-spirited, socially blind, vindictive, and petty. She could be Sarah Palin’s wicked godmother.

Phyllis Schlafly

Phyllis Schlafly – won’t catch her whoring at a Tupperware party, no sir.

But back to Gohmert. His topic at this forum was the Supreme Court of These United States and their role in marriage. And yeah, you’d think it would be a short speech. Something like this:

But no, this is Louie Gohmert, whose approach to public speaking is to say something stupid, then support it by saying something stupider. He suggested Supreme Court Justices Elana Kagan and Ruth Ginsburg ought to be impeached for participating in the landmark same-sex marriage case.

“I think they ought to be impeached, I think ought to be removed, and until Congress shows that we do have some say in the Constitution over the courts the abuses are just going to get worse.”

The abuse he’s talking about? Both Kagan and Ginsburg attended or participated in unholy same-sex marriages before making their ruling, which Gohmert apparently believes is evidence (or actual proof) that they weren’t basing their decision on the merits of the law. Or something. Although he didn’t actually say this, I can only assume Gohmert believes it was perfectly okay for the other seven judges to have participated in holy opposite-sex marriages before making their ruling because they were Jeebus-sanctified.

Does this make sense? No. Did it please his audience? Absolutely. But Louie Gohmert wasn’t just there to make his audience happy; he was there to make a case — to provide evidence to support his certainty that marriage equality was unnatural.

Louie Gohmert --this guy is actually a member of Congress, seriously.

Louie Gohmert –this guy is actually a member of Congress, seriously.

So Gohmert attempted science. He proposed an experiment. A thought experiment. I mean, Albert Einstein did thought experiments. He did them all the time, and he was just a Jew from Austria. Or Switzerland. Someplace foreign. So how hard could it be for a Republican from Texas?

“We could take four heterosexual couples, married, and put them on an island where they have everything they need to sustain life. Then take four all-male couples and put them on an island with all they need to sustain life, take four couples of women, married, and put them on an island, and let’s come back in 100 to 200 years and see which one nature says is the preferred marriage.”

There it is — the scientific method, filtered through the brain of Louie Gohmert. Apparently, by his reasoning, if we put four unmarried heterosexual couples on that island and came back after a couple hundred years, we’d find the skeletons of eight dead virgins.

The ancient Greeks used to believe the function of the brain was to cool the blood, and had nothing to do with the process of thinking. The scientific method strongly suggests they were wrong. Maybe more testing is required.

story of my life

“What are you doing?”
       “Taking a photo.”
“Of what…that thing? With the wheels?”
       “Nope, the lines.”
“Lines?”
       “Lines.”
“Like…lines?”
       “Yes.”
“I don’t get it.”
       “I know. It’s okay.”
“Lines.”
       “Yes.”
“Okay then.”

lines

what? another mass shooting?

Its either black gangs, an ADD/autistic drug white boy on antidepressants, or a moslem.

Oh, FreeRepublic, you never fail me. America dishes up another serving of mass murder, and y’all rush to ladle the paranoid gravy over it.  Let’s rely on our almost total lack of information and wildly speculate on who’d do a horrible thing like that, shall we?

In order, here are the odds: 1) Moose-slime jihadist, 2) A son of Obama, 3) Criminal invader from across the Rio Grande, 4) Leftist (like Dylan Roof, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley, James Earl Ray…)

Could be ISIS-Arab—out to take some Americans and go to Paradise?

But wait…what’s this? News reports indicate the shooter was “an older white male”? Oh no, how can it be? What can it mean? Could it possibly be…a woman’s fault?

Just a guess that ex went to the movies with someone the shooter didn’t want her going to the movies with.

Maybe he was after the woman who was in his life at one time, and she was now with someone else.

John Russell House, alleged white guy (possible ISIS plant or maybe even a Democrat)

John Russell House, alleged white guy (possible ISIS plant or maybe even a Democrat)

But if it’s not a woman’s fault, it must be Obama’s. Or maybe just random Democrats. Or liberals in general.

Simple. Rampant liberalism is the cause. The axis of evil in the White Mosque has set up an environment for leftists to engage in these killing sprees. Aside from the shooter, hussein, holder and jarrett are equally guilty. As long as the regime remains in place, it’s vital for Patriots to be well armed.

How many mass shootings does that bring us to now under this “wonderful administration”? Seems like it’s almost weekly now. What a country we turned out to be!

Well, if it does turn out that he was white — which is still doubtful in my mind — note that his political party isn’t mentioned in that media release. Typical of the drivebys. That’s proof he was a DemonRAT — like all of the other mass murders.

Given that liberalism is mental illness, it’s a sure thing this utterly crazy and evil man in Lafayette was a registered ‘RAT.

The very high 90th percent of this crap is done by liberals. ‘Tea Party types” doing this is almost non-existent. Liberalism is the ultimate cause. No self control, no morals, lots of mind altering drugs and victimhood delusions pushed by other liberals. They should all be caged.

The real scandal is a nutjob who should’ve been institutionalized, but b/c of decades of leftists policies, was allowed to roam free. Also, the types & amounts of taxpayer-provided welfare the @-hole was sucking in that allowed him to move around the country, live in motels, and purchase disguises, weapons, & ammo.

But oh no, there’s some suggestion by news sources that the shooter might have been a member of the Tea Party! How dare the news media leap to conclusions based on nothing more than the suspect’s name and race! How dare they make conjectures without any objective supporting evidence!

Anytime there’s a shooting the first thing the media does is check the names of anyone who ever joined a “tea party”.

How quick the media find a Tea Party connection. We’ll be hearing that non-stop.

Of course, it’s possible this could be a ‘false flag’ operation by Obama-led liberals intended to make it appear as if the shooter was a Tea Party fuckwit. Not just possible, really, but probable. In fact, it’s almost a certainty.

A 58 old white male involved in a national news shooting when we have stories this week of the govt desiring to link social security with whether someone is competent for owning a gun? Yeah a little too convenient..

Member of a FAKE Tea Party group run by a lawer who doesn’t pay his bills and belives in big government. Does that sound like a Tea Party member to you? Other REAL Tea Party members are even saying he’s fake.

And then the shooter. A guy who is reportedly homeless yet he’s staying in a Motel 6 and has a handgun and wigs and disguises and he supposedly used to own a bar and several business but he disappears off the radar sometime in 2006? Really? You know what this sounds like? A spec op. You know who else has disappears off the grid for years? Spooks. And they borrow other people’s identities or use fake ones that are completely fabricated that the feds create for them through credit agencies. I know this for a fact. Does all of this sound like bull$hit to you? It should.

FBI agents discussing how to plant evidence to frame Tea Party, probably.

FBI agents discussing how to plant evidence to frame Tea Party, probably.

But one thing is absolutely, totally, incontrovertibly clear. Everything would have been perfectly fine if more people in the theater had been armed and prepared to return fire.

Gun-free zone?

The safest place for a criminal is a gun-free zone. The safest place for Conservatives (good guys) is where an abundance of guns can be found. Killings at gun shows and gun ranges are close to non-existent.

Criminals flourish when law-abiding Patriots are unarmed. My church of Christ congregation here in Texas is NOT a gun-free zone. The preacher always places his gun in a shelf under the pulpit and most members are armed during services. We’ve never had an incident like that in Charleston. Should a leftist come in and try to do such a thing, he’ll be graveyard dead thanks to a flurry of hot lead in the head. Praise the Lord

More guns, yes, of course. That’s the answer. If only this country had a cadre of brave, patriotic, armed American citizens willing to park their asses in lawn-chairs outside movie theaters and military recruiting stations — men of iron will and brass buttocks, who know weapons and how to use them (mostly) — men who will lay down their lives and their Big Gulps to protect others (though not quite willing to actually enlist in the military).

Feel safe now?

Feel safe now?

Let’s face it, nothing will make you feel safer after you’ve been attacked by a stranger with a gun than to have multiple strangers with multiple guns loitering around outside your door. Just think how secure you’d feel if this was what you saw when you went to buy your tickets to see Bruce Willis in Pride and Predator 3 (Jane Austen’s back…and this time she’s armed and angry!).

Praise Jeebus, keep your ammunition dry, and always choose the 64 ounce drink (it’s the best value).