It the furor about the separation of church and state? Is it a "culture war" -- the culture war that's been going on for centuries?
What about contraception and the Catholic church? Is the furor about healthcare paying for it, or NOT paying for it? Or maybe it's still about gay stuff -- marriage, adopting kids? Or abortion -- yes, no -- probably it's still about who decides what for whom ...
All I really deeply know is what I inherited from my mother and her mother -- a lot Victorian rules and ideas about love, sex and morality that have globbed together and made me determined NOT to be an obsolescent, old-fashioned woman.
Hey, maybe it's still the age-old to-do about SEX ...
Okay, so, women kiss women, and yes, men kiss men.
The pictures are nice to look at.
No doubt about it, John Cullum kisses Em and Em kisses him back.
I'm posting pretty pictures to look at, to remind me what all this moralizing is probably about.
Has the contraception issue's been shelved? No.
Is healthcare/Obamacare loaded with infringements of the first amendment? Yes? No? Maybe?
Can you follow the attacks -- the up and down headlines -- the he said, she said quotes? Do you wonder, privately just between you and yourself, why this morality business is becoming a bigger and bigger issue?
Is this the real issue -- the issue of who is going to get elected in November? Or is the Number-One moral issue about who you kiss, who you love, who you have sex with, and the hundred repercussions of how all that private business affects you every day?
Everyone has a comment, an opinion --
it's wrong, it's right, gotta stop it, gotta do more, it's sinful, it's freedom, we need laws, don't need laws, it's up to God/Jesus/Jehovah/Allah.
I think we need this furor. It sort of pulls the window shade on the fact that we are not being governed by Congress, governed by men and women whom we elected to govern us, who are using the House of Reps as their political home-sweet-home playpen. This furor -- this SOMETHING that's going on -- is greying down the chaos, and distracting us from the civil war we're in.
Civil war? Yes.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
If I were one of the judges for that "SO YOU THINK YOU CAN DANCE" show that has just finished its eighth season, what would I say about me, EM, a/k/a Emily Frankel.
Yes, she is quite beautiful -- good proportions, not sensational but ...
Yes, when she's dancing I find myself absorbed in watching .... the flow, or is it ... what?
There's nothing spectacular about her extensions, her elevation when she jumps. Her splits, her suppleness, isn't unusual or amazing in anyway. Her pirouettes, her floor work -- in fact I don't remember specific "passe" pirouettes, her fouettés, or turns ala seconde, or her fantastic floor work. She did all that stuff but somehow ...
As a judge, I find it hard to remember any moment, actually, where I was specifically riveted, enthralled, shocked, impressed ...
Her feet are not really "good" or "lovely" dancer's feet. I didn't pay much attention to her feet while she was performing. Yes, her speed -- it was okay, but the feet ... well, her arms and hands and head movements are interesting, but I didn't really judge her technique -- those technical things about a dancer that can take your breath away, when a fantastically gifted dancer is performing.
She's a smooth sort of performer -- big moments -- wow feats just don't emerge -- you just watch her and it's nice -- it's "dance" dancing where the movement just moves, and you find yourself dancing with her.
You like her hair and her face ... is it her eyes, or what, that somehow projects her presence? Yes. She has a strong presence.
No I wouldn't give her an award. My goodness, many of the other dancers on "SO YOU THINK YOU CAN DANCE" are far, far more spectacular. They're doing steps -- incredibly inventive gyrations -- that leave us judges open-mouthed. Today's dancers have been powerfully inspired by Olympic ice skaters, and can do a lot of what skaters do without skates -- they're amazing.
Not Emily Frankel. You just watch her. You're rather surprised when she's finished. You like her. You like what you saw, but you don't know why.
You wouldn't hire her for your show -- she's not really a star-STAR. You wouldn't include her in the best dancers in the movies, (like the "DANCING AT THE MOVIES" clip that I posted) -- or include her on the list of the best dancers who've performed with major ballet companies, or on your list of stunning modern dancers such as Martha Graham. But you'd remember the presence.