I don’t plan to ever take down this blog entirely, as the archives go back to my earliest days of blogging on Myspace. I’m just not going to own the suburbankitsch.com domain name anymore.

I do plan to pick up blogging again at some point in the future, but it will likely be under an entirely new name and domain. So sayonara for now, and have fun reading the archives.

This video also features “Boonee” aka “Bunny” aka Bunee Tomlinson, up and coming young Okie filmmaker. I was impressed with his short film Safe at last year’s deadCENTER, and I look forward to seeing what he does in the future.

Now if only Lucas Ross would stop lying about the $500 he owes me…

After I mingled with strangers, friends, and Two Movie Guys (Lucas says I owe him $500… I remember it the other way around), we headed on over to the Kerr Auditorium for the screening of 8: The Mormon Proposition.

The film was aptly titled. Before the film, I had not realized just how much the Latter Day Saints church had been directly involved in the passage of Proposition 8 in California, which simply added these few words to the California constitution: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” According to the film, only 2% of the population of California is Mormon, yet 71% of the monetary contributions toward the passage of Proposition 8 can be traced back to members of the LDS church and to the church’s finances directly. During the final week of the campaign to pass the Proposition, $5M in contributions came in via out-of-state sources, and specifically from Salt Lake City alone (Mormon headquarters). In order to pass a ballot issue in California, it was said, you need three things: money, volunteers, and a message. The LDS church had all three in abundance. With very minor assistance from a coalition of other (mostly religious) groups, they were successful in getting the Proposition passed.

As the film continually emphasized, the campaign for marriage equality has always been about people rather than politics and money. Laws have implications on real people who are trying to live their lives in the best way they can. The most heartbreaking part of the film were the details of numerous suicides by gay Mormons. One young gay man, feeling he had no one to turn to and was even hated by his family, even killed himself with a bullet to the head at a Mormon temple. Apparently Utah has one of the highest suicide rates in this country, and it has an even higher rate than most other countries in the world. The filmmakers used this statistic to imply that the high suicide rate is because of the alienation experienced by gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transsexual Mormons due to actions by their families and the church. I would need to see more solid research rather than anecdotal evidence before I could accept that particular hypothesis, but it is definitely the case that many young gay people have killed themselves and are continuing to do so because of the hate expressed to them by the Mormon church.

One of the Mormon apostles/prophets quoted in the film stated that, “the face of sin bears the mask of tolerance” and the preservation of the traditional (i.e. 1 man, wive/wives, children) family is “a core principle upon which the Gospel of Jesus Christ is based.” Being a Christian myself, the last time I checked, the core principles upon which the Gospel of Jesus Christ is based are forgiveness and redemption. The Gospel is about Christ’s sacrificial atonement for the sins of the world because of the deep love of God… Last time I checked there was nothing in the core principles of the Gospel about the preservation of the “traditional” family, whatever that means (a “traditional” family excludes childless married straight couples as well, as a friend has very eloquently pointed out). But what do I know, anyway?

After the Proposition 8 documentary, we headed over to the Iguana Lounge for some more drinkin’ and talkin’. As is always the case with Iguana, the food and drinks were fantastic! I’m about to head over to Iguana again right now for the Friday night Oklahoma Film & Music party. After that, it’s on to see Simmons on Vinyl and later the Midnight Shorts. Cheers!

While I still don’t find the subject matter (BMX biking) to be terribly inherently interesting, The Birth of Big Air turned out to be a solidly entertaining documentary. Mat Hoffman, in his interviews throughout the film and during the Q&A afterward, came off as quite a likable guy. It really is amazing what Hoffman was able to accomplish, using his creativity and innovativeness to push the boundaries further and further of just how high it is possible to jump using a BMX bike on a vert ramp. Hoffman even came up with the idea of having a motorcycler pull his bike in order to gain enough momentum to make well over 20′ jumps. His body has paid the price, with a busted spleen and so many broken bones and surgeries I can’t even remember. It makes sense to me now why I had always heard the guy called one of Oklahoma’s “hometown hero” celebrities. He even tried to break records while flying an Oklahoma flag at the top of his ramp, and sported an Okie flag t-shirt during his appearance on Thursday night.

The highlight of the evening for me was, of course, seeing Spike Jonze in the flesh while he introduced the movie and stuck around for the Q&A. Even better than that was one of the questions from an emotional girl in the audience who declared her love for Jonze and stated that his movie Adaptation had changed her life. It was just the kind of honest moment I love to experience at these kind of events. It was simply adorable. She almost brought tears to my eyes.

Jonze talking about how cool Hoffman is. Hoffman trying to look bashful.

My tentative schedule for the rest of the festival has been mostly solidified; But as always, it’s subject to change based on peer pressure, whims, or exhaustion. My downtown hotel room will be a nice oasis in the case of the third contingency. Looking at the schedule, there are quite a few films I’ll be upset if I miss, but we’ll see how it goes. Here’s what I’m most looking forward to:

8: The Mormon Proposition: Mormons! Gay marriage! Prop 8! What more fascinating subject matter could there be? Knowing quite a few Mormons personally, I am very interested to find out just how the LDS church was involved in the campaign for and passage of Proposition 8 in California. I will freely admit that I am not the most unbiased of people when it comes to the beliefs of the Mormon church, but I am curious to see whether this documentary really is as even-handed as it claims to be. The deadCENTER summary states that the film “is careful not to succumb to emotional rant but chooses instead well-researched data and a range of interviews with politicians.” The film screens twice during the festival but I plan to see it Thursday night at the Kerr Auditorium.

Heart of Now: This seems like just the kind of drama that I would love. According to the synopsis, “HEART OF NOW is a quiet and understated debut feature that explores the inclination to define ourselves by the people who leave us.” This film screens Friday afternoon at 2:00, and I really hope I’m not called in to work that day (I had to agree to be “on call” for Friday. Ugh.) Zak Forsman, the director, is scheduled to be in attendance, as is the lead actress and music director.

Simmons on Vinyl: According to the author of this article, Simmons on Vinyl is fantastic! And I’m going to take his word for it. Surely he’s not biased … Wait … He’s the director of the film, you say? Oh … Well, at any rate, I’m always excited to see anything Singletree Productions comes out with. Mark Potts, Cole Selix, and Brand Rackley have a wonderful ability to make me laugh my ass off. And I like to laugh my ass off. Singletree Productions has another film screening this year during the Comedy Shorts as well, The Bedazzler.

I’m pretty excited about quite a few of the short films screening this year too, including Blastula: The Making of Embryonic (the Flaming Lips, yay!!!), and Mr. Hypnotism. I always enjoy short films, and some of the Comedy Shorts last year were my favorite films of the entire fest.

Only one more day, people. My only wish is that Cuppies and Joe will sponsor the Kick-Off Party again so I can eat my fill of Vanilla Sky cupcakes (or as I call them, my addiction). It would also be nice if the little rapping Wimgo guys from last year would perform at one of the parties. (Please, please please!!!)

I’ll see you all tomorrow night. I’ll be the one drinking the Stella Artois. Oh, wait…

I’ve had fun making my pre-preliminary schedule, which I will solidify further as it gets closer to the big event and I hear a little more buzz about the films. Until then, I’ll just be counting down the days… Just 16 to go until mini-vacation of delight.

Wish me luck, ya’ll. And grant me grace for neglecting my blog, please. Yes, you two readers… I’m talking to you.

1. Inglourious Basterds

2. [500] Days of Summer

3. A Serious Man

4. Up in the Air

5. Antichrist

6. Funny People

7. Capitalism: A Love Story

8. Paranormal Activity

9. District 9

10. Moon

11. Up

12. An Education

13. Away We Go

***I have not yet seen the Hurt Locker, the Road, Invictus, the Messenger, the White Ribbon, Crazy Heart, Public Enemies, the Last Station, or a Single Man. Yes, I have seen Precious. Meh.

I am on page 154 of your book thus far, and here are a few comments. I will lay them out in the form of an email I typed to a fellow blogger, Sarah of Two-Headed Blog, who blogged her way through Atlas in 2008, just as I am doing now. Here is a link to the first entry Sarah wrote while reading the book. It’s called Blogging the Atlas.

After reading to almost the point in Atlas Shrugged that Sarah was at when she wrote the entry above, I decided to read her detailed thoughts on the book thus far. Afterward, I sent her the following email, which sums up my thoughts as concisely as possible (I could write so much more):

Sarah,

I just read your first blog entry on Atlas Shrugged where you were about as far in the book as I am now (I don’t want to read your thoughts ahead of my own while wading through the book), I have to say that I find hardly anything I disagree with you on. I think your analysis was very well written and I greatly appreciated the brutal honesty that came with reevaluating your own views in light of Rand’s ideas.

I, too, think that Rand brings some very good points to light in the book so far. The biggest impact to me so far has actually been that the book has been really inspiring. I mean in the sense that it makes me actually want to ascribe to her Nietzsche-esque “uberman/superman/hero” ideal and go out and PRODUCE SOMETHING. I find something inspiring in her exultation of the highly achieving individual. It makes me want to try to BE more of that myself.

My main critique comes from the fact that the people and situations in her invented world DO NOT exist in reality. She writes straw man arguments and characters and then tears them down with the utmost of ease. She writes wooden caricatures, not characters. No one exists like that in real life — either on the extreme idol-worship “producer” side, or on the bumbling bureaucratic “everything is for the public good” moocher/looter type. Her black and white categorical morality gets really old really fast. In her world there is no room for gray areas, utilitarianism (of even the most modest kind), democracy, compromise, or even complexities. She sees everything as very simple.

But that’s just not how the *real* world works.

Despite myself, I really enjoy the book as a work of thoughtful fiction. However, I still can not comprehend why so many people find this thing to be soooooo freaking compelling that they would change their entire worldview based on one reading. The dialogue reads like it was written by a robot. One wonders if she ever had a conversation with an actual human being in her life. But perhaps the wooden caricatures and dialogue can partially be explained by her acquisition of English as a second language???

Plus the rampant misogyny bothers me… a lot. Ayn Rand… a self loathing woman? I vote yes. She REALLY had a thing for being dominated. She was obsessed with the inherent “superiority” (not just her preference) of male domination in the sex act and in relationships in general. It’s a little unnerving.

I look forward to reading your subsequent posts as I plow my way through this behemoth of a book.

Faithfully trudging along,
Kathy

A part of Sarah’s reply to me was as follows:

I’m the same way…I hate to read what other people have written about something before I’ve read it myself.I had the same reaction you describe (feeling “inspired”). It really boosted my work ethic for awhile, and made me want to feel joy in the act of working and being productive. I also agree with your straw man criticism. She is very black and white, and I remember having the thought that in a perfect world, she may be right about some of this stuff…but it’s soooo not that perfect world.

Weirdly though, I don’t recall being quite so struck by the misogyny. I may have cut her some slack, and chalked it up to her being a product of her time. Although, since you’ve mentioned it, I agree it’s appalling.

I’m anxious to hear your thoughts as you read on.

Regarding Ayn Rand and her warped sense of superiority/inferiority as it relates to the male/female sex act, I don’t think I could say it better than Robert M. Slade did in 1998:

Both family and sexuality are rather hideously portrayed. First, is it ridiculous to call a woman a misogynist? Rand seems to rail against the “keep ‘em barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen” mentality, but also manages to put women very firmly in a subordinate position. Sexual activity (tame as it is) seems to be more of an “acquiescence to rape” than any kind of romance. (One also suspects that Rand was into bondage, considering a great many of the descriptions and comments.)

Marriage vows in an objectivist church would probably run along the lines of “Do you promise to attempt to dominate and subdue this woman until such time as you grow bored?” “Maybe.” “Close enough. And do you promise to applaud this man`s production until such time as you find someone with a bigger … corporation?” “Whatever.” “By the power vested in me by having scammed you guys out of a marriage license fee, I now pronounce you man and appendage. May you be unencumbered by small persons.”

There are many quotes throughout Atlas Shrugged along those lines:

Hank Reardon (a hero protagonist) reflecting on his wife, “She seemed to be a woman who expected and deserved a pedestal; this made him want to drag her down to his bed. To drag her down, were the words in his mind; they gave him a dark pleasure, the sense of a victory worth winning … He felt – a profound pride at the thought of granting to a woman the title of his wife … almost as if he felt that he wished to honor a woman by the act of possessing her.”

Yes, posessing her. As in owning her.

And perhaps the most telling quote of all so far comes from another hero protagonist:

Francisco d’Anconia, speaking to Dagny Taggart: “I wish I could tell you what a relief it is to see a face that’s intelligent though a woman’s.”

That statement is rampant with subtext! I suppose Rand believes intelligent women are so few and far between that it is worth commenting on. I could forgive Rand for this due to the time she was writing in, but she created an entire world right out of thin air for her books. Rand’s New York City never existed.  People like the characters in her novels never existed. Thus she could have written anything she wanted regarding the roles and propensities of women in her made up world. It simply appears that Ms. Rand had such a low opinion of women in the real world that this animosity naturally bled over into her writing. In The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged both, the “strong” intelligent female protagonist desires nothing more sexually than to be violently dominated by (and even subservient to) “the right kind of man.” At one point in Atlas, Dagny tells her mocking brother that the reason she hasn’t shined Francisco d’Anconia’s shoes is simply because he hasn’t asked her to.

Ayn Rand as feminist? Um, no. Ayn Rand as misogynist? I’m leaning heavily that way.

Today while getting an oil change I had a brief conversation with the guy working at the auto shop that made me ridiculously happy. Whenever I’m running errands that I think might involve any amount of sitting in waiting rooms I try to remember to bring some reading material along with me. Upon getting out of the car with my book, the auto shop guy noticed it and exclaimed dramatically in a tone of disgust and astonishment (direct quote):

“Atlas Shrugged?!?! Is that for pleasure?!?!”

Me (kind of laughing, yet trying to deflect as to avoid an awkward conversation): Um, not exactly. No it is not.

Auto Shop Guy (obviously restraining himself from saying anything he might regret, i.e. commenting his feelings on the book): Ugh! Good.

He went on helping me with car stuff for a few minutes, and then veered back to the topic of the book.

ASG: So what class is it for?

Me: Well, it’s not exactly for a class.

ASG (again looking astonished): Then why on earth are you reading it?

Me (again laughing and smiling): Because I know quite a few people who are lovers of Ayn Rand …

The look of horror on his face was epic!

Me: … and after being told so many times that just I don’t understand the delicate nuances of her philosophy and having it implied to me that “if you just read Atlas Shrugged you would understand,” I decided to finally read it. It’s kind of an intellectual exercise.

ASG (body language and facial expressions showing his disgust for the book, and completely stammering to not say something to a customer that he might regret): Wow. Um, yikes. Well. I could… no, I shouldn’t.

Me (now super-happy and continuing to laugh): Hey, it sounds like we agree on this topic!

ASG: Yes. Yes it does.

It made my day.