She Wore Blue Velvet

Rossellini

One of my favorite movie directors is David Lynch. His movies and television programs have a marked surreal quality, which can be off-putting or confusing at first. When I saw his magnum opus, "Blue Velvet" (1986), I found myself thoroughly offended. The movie had violence (sado-masochism, a dismembered ear), kinky sex (mostly implied), and dialog that was confounding -- at times trite, other times cryptic. The movie exposed the dark, turbulent side of a small serene, American town. It had a little film noire going, what with a murder mystery -- and maybe a little bit of Hitchcock too.

A young man returns to his hometown of Lumberton. He’s shocked to find a severed ear in a field. Together with a police detective’s daughter, he embarks on finding where it came from. What he finds is a seamy, bizarre otherworld where a beautiful young woman (played by Rossellini) is under the thrall of a drug-snorting insane sadist (played by Dennis Hopper).

With Lynch, every scene, every street sign, every camera motion is packed with some major import – either to convey the eerie mood or advance the mysterious plot along. Some things nagged at me the first time I watched it, so I decided to watch and be offended a second time. Upon second viewing, I decided it was an interesting 80’s twist on film noire, but something still nagged at me.

I watched it yet a 3rd time and – behold! - It struck me – this movie is a black comedy. Several of the scenes most wrought with irony are in fact, wrought with hilarity if you know where it’s coming from. Mind you – most people would never mine comedy from a psychosexual murder mystery; this is the darkest of dark humor. There are times when somebody is pulling your leg and you know it. Sometimes you fall for the gag. You find out you’ve been “punked” a while after you’ve overreacted in some way. This movie served murder on wry, and it took me three viewings to get it. Watch Lynch’s other masterpieces, particularly “Twin Peaks” and “Mulholland Drive”. You will find the same qualities at work. Lynch is a philosopher-dreamer, and humor isn’t always the angle. I really think “Mulholland” has another angle completely. His movies are like a picture by M.C. Escher – they challenge all your perceptions. But “Blue Velvet” made me cogitate dammit. Come to think of it, Alfred Hitchcock was a bit of a thinking prankster. “The Trouble with Harry” was more comedy than mystery. Lynch will probably never assume the station of Hitchcock, but his “Blue Velvet” is still a wonder some 20 years later.

The Human Zoo

People at the Airport

Many people like to go to the zoo -- check out the giraffes and the aardvarks. I do too, both as an animal lover and an amateur naturalist. But no animal is more utterly fascinating than the human animal. And you can watch these creatures at the airport, the mall or anywhere. How interesting are we?

Well, we're one of the most recently evolved mammal species (the most recent depending on certain criteria) maybe 2-4 million years in age. We branch into four racial groups, at the very least, and probably more than that based on various morphological traits. We're sexually dimorphic -- males and females are quite a bit different in body fat, height, weight, voice, hair distribution and even behavior. Advanced humans add an overlay of clothing, grooming and accessories to complete the secondary sexual differences. It's interesting that up to the appearance of humans, mammal species had very crude family clans be they matriarchal or patriarchal. Only when humans emerged did sociobiology and technology really take off. There are no social insects writing symphonies or building space stations -- and certainly no chimps doing it. Humans have spoken language and a civilization that was born in ancient Summaria and has spread slowly across the globe, both Eastward and Westward in a few thousand years. Our languages and cultures add as much variety as anything mentioned thus far.

So what is the future of this naked ape? Will we resemble Vulcans or other creatures of sci-fi stories in centuries to come? Some unfortunates already look Vulcan, but you have a feeling that's not the wave of the future. No, evolution is probably through with the major physiology changes. If you trace primates from the lowly lemur, through monkeys and apes, up to humans, it's remarkable how little has changed in the basic physical concept. Opposing thumb. Dexterity. Intelligence. That last one is where evolution will work its future wonders. The soft tissue of the brain, that organ that has given us space stations and symphonies will be infinitely enhanced -- Natural Selection (if you prefer random theories) has already established the dominance of brains over brutality.

Now consider the finch, Darwin's bird of choice. If nature wants to change anything however minor in the bird's appearance it is a slow, labored process. Be it shape of beak or color of feather, the bird must have a permanent change to its DNA and have the advantage be "selected on" by other birds. A human need only go to Foley's and buy a new outfit. A woman changes her color of lipstick -- to the extent that she's changed her sexual desirability, she's effected a relevant mutation. No DNA changes required. If you combine brains, dexterity and artistic license, humans have an infinite arsenal of changes of the 5-minute variety. And so, I sit at the airport and watch the people go by. There goes a woman with facial tattoos and pink hair. I'd really like an explanation of that latest mutation. The human zoo is fascinating. :-)

Fonda Jane

Just Jane

I watched the Leslie Stahl interview with Jane Fonda last night on "60 Minutes". I've always admired Jane Fonda for her fortitude and, I think, bravery. Some of that bravery was misput -- she should never have been photographed commiserating with the North Vietnamese in 1972. She has amply admitted as much, saying it was a tremendous lapse of judgment. For her sincere and heartfelt apology, a Viet Vet spat in her face at a book signing earlier this year.

For people who see a war as immoral or unwise, it is sometimes difficult to register that note without seeming to oppose the troops fighting the war. It is possible to be in love with America, but not with the actions of its elected officials. Many of the Vietnam soldiers were draftees from lower income families; likewise the U.S. forces now in Iraq are primarily low-income inductees, seeing the military as a step toward stable income and higher education. They may be motivated more by economics than patriotic fervor. Antiwar protestors do a service to young men by enlightening them and making clear what the choice really is. Is that seditious? It could discourage men from joining up, and discourage soldiers from reenlisting. In the great give and take of politics and life, it's perfectly fair. Young men are not attack dogs and they are not machines -- they are humans with minds after all. They deserve both sides of the issue.

Jane Fonda is an "enigma wrapped in a riddle". She recently converted to Christianity, but is about to go on a tour to protest the war in Iraq. Old habits die hard. :-) Iraq is facing all manner of problems - insurgency, damaged infrastructure, a fledgling government that is still trying to hash out a Constitution for a religiously divided hodgepodge. Problem is, America is now the keystone that keeps Iraq from erupting into a civil war. Hard for us to make a retreat without leaving a wake of Sunni revenge killings and taliban-style theocracy. With due respect to Jane, our best action would have been to leave "bad enough" alone in Iraq. But her objection to the original intrusion is well understood.

Front-and-center for the 2008 Platform will be - how to clean up Bush's mess. I'm reminded of a neighbor's Collie that would bite you if you stopped petting her. Forewarned is fine, but sometimes you are in such trouble if you rush in to a situation like that. The best ideas from our very best are seriously lacking. Donald Rumsfeld gave us "War Lite". He pretty well proved that the concept doesn't work. Bush gave us "punishment by proxy". We were attacked by Wahabi Arabs, so he went after Iraq. I have to say, maybe we should pull up a chair with Jane Fonda. Her ideas might be good -- and they couldn't be much worse.