• About the Author
  • Books
  • Vinyl
  • What the critics say about Jeff

Jeff Halperin

Jeff Halperin

Tag Archives: JD Halperin

Morsi Code: Egyptian President’s bile easy to decipher

16 Wednesday Jan 2013

Posted by jdhalperin in Politics

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Anna Karenin, anti-Semitism, Gaza, Israel, JD Halperin, Morsi, Muslim Brotherhood, National Post, Tolstoy

The National Post published an article in today’s paper with three year-old quotes from Mohammad Morsi, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood who was democratically elected to the Presidency of Egypt—as if how he got into power has any bearing on the man himself. During the Egyptian Presidential race, many here and there called Morsi a “moderate,” and many still do. Perhaps seeing how grim the situation could become some ignored all the painfully obvious evidence pointing the other way. Suggesting that the Muslim Brotherhood was really a gang of Islamic fundamentalists there to impose Shariah law was considered not just misinformed, but uncouth. Why add unnecessary negativity to the stirring promise of the Arab Spring?

Here are Morsi’s own words from three years ago: “We must never forget, brothers, to nurse our children and our grandchildren on hatred for them: for Zionists, for Jews.” Notice his subversion of the phrase “never forget,” probably unintentional, but maybe not. He throws in a comrade cadence too. He goes on. The article states Egyptian children must “feed on hatred,” adding, “Who is our enemy? The Zionists. Who occupies our land? The Zionists. Who hates us? The Zionists. Who destroys our land? The Zionists.” Western defenders of Morsi, if such a thing is currently conceivable, will now point to some time he uttered an uplifting humanistic message. Such paltry, pathetic apologies happen all the time. In effect, it allows a politician to whitewash any abominable speech, or even straight up war crimes, by cancelling it out with a cheery platitude. Simple! But it’s impossible to simultaneously believe in peace with your neighbours when you identify them as enemies to be warred upon ceaselessly. Unless you think Morsi was just lying to placate the rabid part of his base (which is admittedly conceivable but very unlikely, and very much reprehensible still), there is no question about his real feelings towards Jews. That such an obvious statement needs to be made points to discouraging gullibility. Hopefully these loathsome comments change that.

But in case there was any ambiguity left, Morsi continued by harking back to traditional anti-Semitic themes, Zionists as “bloodsuckers” who attack Palestinians, and Jews as not the descendants of Abraham and Sarah but of “apes and pigs.” Well, sorry to break the mood but he is half correct. I am reminded of perhaps my favourite Tolstoy humour from Anna Karenin: “Oblonsky was fond of a pleasant joke, and sometimes liked to perplex a simple-minded man by observing that if you’re going to be proud of your ancestry, why stop at Prince Rurik and repudiate your oldest ancestor—the ape?” To say nothing else about him, Morsi is a simple-minded man who apparently doesn’t go for evolution, believing instead that he came literally from Hagar, not an ape. So Jews as descendant of apes, yes, like everybody, but, glatt kosher, Jews are most certainly not the descendants of pigs. Those anti-Israel people who wax philosophical, rightly pointing out how criticizing Israel isn’t necessarily synonymous with anti-Semitism, often forget how frequently, and in what prominent places, it is.

The Obama administration’s reaction was “blistering.” Not only do they “completely reject ” Morsi’s statements, but, in their opinion, “it’s counter to the goals of peace.” How clairvoyant. And yet, as self-evident as the American response seems there isn’t much else that can be done or said for now. The vapid response is unavoidable. America can’t intervene militarily, and calling Morsi out isn’t productive. It may not be currently politically expedient for Morsi to act on his real feelings, but at the very least these unambiguously deplorable statements should eliminate even the most naïve hopes that he is at heart anything but a despicable anti-Semitic warmonger, whatever token peace talk he might have once uttered notwithstanding.

(Sure enough, shortly after completing this article I read the latest follow up: Morsi’s comments were taken out of context. While inevitably the US and Egyptian spokespeople scrambled to diffuse the situation, no comforting other context was offered. In case the claim that his speech was taken from an address in response to “Israeli aggression against Gaza” doesn’t fully assuage you, Morsi assured [the reporters] “of his respect for all monolithic religions, freedom of belief and practicing religions.”

An open letter to OISE concerning beautiful oppressors

06 Thursday Sep 2012

Posted by jdhalperin in Comedy

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Beautiful people make more money, Beauty Bias, JD Halperin, OISE

Dear OISE,

I am writing in hopes you’ll show solidarity towards today’s most unacknowledged and disenfranchised group.

It’s well documented that beautiful (read: Western “beauty”) people are automatically and unwarrantedly assumed to be more talented, intelligent, reliable, and overall more capable. Through no merit of their own, just genetic lottery, studies cite that they amass an extra $200,000 over a lifetime.

While many acknowledge the existence of the beauty bias, few admit it overprivileges the beautiful, so there’s a reluctance to concede the corollary: gross people are an underprivileged group oppressed by beautiful people. I think beautiful people are carefully taught not to recognize the beauty bias, as white males are carefully taught to marginalize all non-white males (McIntosh, Peggy).

While the extent of disenfranchisement and marginalization is hard to quantify and it differs from case to case, anti-gross oppression usually correlates positively with the degree to which the gross are gaunt, hirsute, balding, asymmetrical, squat, albino, peg-legged, pock marked, hunchbacked, beady eyed, and just generally weird looking. Imagine trying to make it as a runway model with explosive acne, or try getting good tips as a bartender while a class-three goitre hangs off your neck. Yet can’t gross people show attitude while walking in a straight line, or successfully pour a beverage into a glass? Comrades, is this a meritocracy?

Please, help show solidarity with gross people around the world and demand from governments that every industry be encouraged to hire a quota of gross people. As well as, of course, recompense the $200,000 taken from them by the beautiful. The proceeds of oppression should be dispersed among the people. All are entitled to this money, so long as they can prove beyond a doubt that they are gross.

GROSS PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD, UNITE!
Works Cited
1. McIntosh, Peggy. “White Privilege and Male Privilege” in Race, Class and Gender, edited by M. Anderson and P. Collins. 1992 New York: Feminist Press.

Toronto’s pathetic book culture

06 Friday Jul 2012

Posted by jdhalperin in Statements

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

dying second hand book stores, Frantic City, JD Halperin, Nabokov, Toronto reading

Our city’s book culture is terminally ill, and there is no chance for its revival. Real book culture isn’t about glossy new $30 hard cover books about a woman contractually obliged to put out in sordid ways she never imagined, it’s about the books that are enriching as they are inexpensive. They generate rapture because they are written beautifully. I made a joke months ago after buying toilet paper and paper towel, “paper is only cheap if there’s literature on it,” but after learning yesterday that Frantic City is closing, perhaps my favourite second-hand book store, this joke now contains a very tragic note. Let’s not mince words: if we ever had a literary culture, it is dying slowly, emitting only a thoroughly ignored whimper.

The hardest thing for an individual to bring himself to do now is spend dozens of hours on a book nobody in their inner-circle is reading or talking about. It will in no way boost their status among friends or peers or society at large, and investing so much time given the esoteric pay off is uncommon, or eccentric. There are active forces against reading real books, great literature: we are inundated with friends telling us “you have to watch this TV series,” or we are glued to our various screens, or we read the lofty magazines urging us to try a series of gastronomic hamburgers.

Books are anathema to the marketplace and our consumer culture, and that will never change, and it’s getting worse. Any advertiser’s worst nightmare is the consumer who can cheaply think and entertain himself for great lengths of time. A copy of Anna Karenin can be purchased for $3, and you can spend incalculable hours (YEARS!) reading and rereading it. But this keeps you away from pop-up ads, away from commercials, away from stores, away from restaurants, away from spending money, and so all these things (their presence increasingly ubiquitous) pushes people away from lengthy reading. You earn funny looks if you tell someone you read this stuff. Perhaps they doubt your intention, high-brow scorn, like you can’t genuinely love literature the way people do Game of Thrones, that you’re putting on airs to appear intelligent.

The post-literate generation needs things fast, and the great tomes take time. “Caress the detail, the divine detail!” Nabokov urges us, but he is dead and nobody listens any more. So what we have is dying second-hand stores, and mainstream book merchants stocking t-shirts, various bookish looking kitsch, board games, and somewhere, if space graciously permits, books.

The decrease in real reading coincides with an increase in public bookish proclamations. The book as symbol. There are tote bags with pictures of books on them, people volunteering a love for books in neon letters all over social media, and there was a respectable hullabaloo when Ford, the philistine Goliath, tried to strip the library of funds. Yes, but people aren’t loud when they read, they are silent. Though the above is well and good, none of it convinces me in-depth reading is broadly taking place.

This is not an argument for reading the Western Canon exclusively. I believe reading should be done widely, according to one’s taste, and that there are only two schools of literature: the talented and the untalented. Ragging on a book because it’s popular is as wildly ignorant as loving a book because it’s in the canon. But for stores to be going out business because they choose to stock great but not in vogue authors’ entire catalogues instead of their number one seller, rather than schlock, is a bad sign, and I am lashing out at the risk of appearing like a snob. (Perhaps I am a snob: suck it.)

Think hard what I’m about to say, or it’ll sound perfectly deranged or offensive. Zizec describes Gandhi as being more violent than Hitler, in that Hitler’s unimaginable atrocity was actually much more within historical context than Gandhi’s unprecedented determination towards non-violence. In this sense, the real revolutionaries aren’t in the streets demanding change with thousands of other people just like them. The biggest act of protest now is to shut yourself off from everyone and read a book in silence without sharing it on social media. This private act is violent!

That my area is sooo hip and cool because of the glossy restaurants and the multitude of watering holes offering extremely local or extremely exotic beer is a sham. Shellacked culture, no rapture. It’s not just condo culture, but the so-called counter culture that’s inane, and I feel let down by it.

Don’t get me wrong: people can indulge in whatever decadent drivel they like, but it stops being benignly amusing when their world, the physical one I share with them, can’t permit for me only a cheap book store that stocks according to taste, not predictable money makers. I want very little, and I can’t have it! At the very least, the current pretence towards a bookish culture during this insoluble literary assault is salt in my wound. I am insulted.

The tomes are entombed. So long, Solon! I am not looking forward to the day, soon approaching, where I have this conversation:

Me: “Hey, do you remember when great books cost a dollar, bought from an actual store?”

Average citizen: “No.”

 

A lap in Mario Kart 64 played, narrated by James Joyce

09 Saturday Jun 2012

Posted by jdhalperin in Comedy

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

James Joyce, JD Halperin, mario 64, nintendo, Ulysses

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Ineluctable modality of Nintendo. Signatures of all things I am here to read: cacophonous car crash, bump, traverse, thumped, reversed. Racing relentless animalistic pilgrims ever heading forward. I bypass evil yellow man, speaking dung in tongues. Imagonnaween. Surrounded by swirling seaside shells, I move onwards. No, hit! How? Star power subterfuge. A surprise from behind. Only to listen harder. Illstarred heresiarch. Ah. The eluctable modality of the audible. Oh, catch up catch up. Nebeneinander nebeneinander. His pace slackened. Victim of discarded fruit. ananaB.

–Wahoo! Wahoo!

Overtake. I’m ahead, not by much. A very short space of time through very short times of space. Onwards. Must I come to know that question mark? Mystery is a theme I am trying to escape.

Peach: (A tempo) Let’s go!

Bowzer: (Stringendo) Rraawwwr!

DEAR  DRIVING  DIRTY

Arr turns. R turns by rote. Angling hopping and hoping. Let me pass a pike’s progress.

Beach level. He rooted in the sand, dabbling, delving, and stopped to listen to the air. Slow now. Careful cavernous cavorting. Engaged! Open hallway. Now, red shell shall put Toad beyond the veil for good. Cadaver. Pugnosed driver. Take him out. Stymied suddenly by bifurcated banana excrescence, again! Divine intervention: substantially consubstantial.
Raised on reason, race on. Moving through the air high spars of a threemaster, homing, upstream, silently moving, a silent ship. Lead. Led. Leading this leg’s end. Legend. To beat, or not to beat?

With what meditations did Peach articulate her succumbing to the constellations power?

Star music! On a stardivarius. Weep. The infinite lattiginous scintillating uncondensed milky way song, nascent enough yet moribund, prophesying 2nd place.

Damn toad I tried to pass him but his heart was going like mad and no I said no I won’t no.

Toronto-Toronto-Toronto, 2012

An interactive game for my readers

17 Thursday May 2012

Posted by jdhalperin in Comedy

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

blogging mistakes, Extinction of typos, hack Toronto writers, JD Halperin, VN is sirin, Writing immunity

Today we live in a generous, enlightened age. Happily, we understand that school boys and girls innately comprehend the highest reaches of literature, science and math—they aren’t simply empty vessels to be filled by caveman exercises like reading from a book. A similar enlightenment extends to adult readers, who are no longer belittled by having their role confined to simply reading. Technology makes readers feel like engaged participants in what they read, or, because reading literary masterpieces should be about more than reading words on paper, the book itself actually comes alive in their hands. Readers of mine can comment on and share my work, but I want more  for my small, noble following. That’s why I’ve decided to create a little treasure hunt in every post from now on. It’s just like a real treasure hunt, only instead of hunting for gold booty you’re looking for shoddy work.

Hidden somewhere in every future post is a “mistake.” It might be a typo, a factual error, bungled research, or perhaps a ghastly howler like failing to join a coordinating conjunction to an independent clause with a comma. It’s a wild game! Anything can happen.

So, read future posts with a fine-toothed comb, and keep a record of all the “errors” you find. Be sure to store your record in a safe place, because one day I’ll ask my readers to report back all the “mistakes” they’ve found. The reader with the longest list gets a special, secret prize! In order to keep the excitement at fever pitch, I won’t disclose the prize now, but I can promise you that it’s either both very expensive and prestigious or very thoughtful.

Also, double points will be awarded to those who go backwards and find errors in already published articles. Having a hunch that I’d hold a contest just like this, I intentionally planted mistakes in my pieces all along. As a tip, when you’re deciding exactly where in my back catalogue to dive in, pieces where I defend the values of things like corporal punishment, eugenics and pop-culture are ripe for error.

In a piece of private fan-mail I once received, one very sharp reader said of my work: “The mistakes and misstatements in it form an uninterrupted series so complete as to seem artistic in reverse, making one wonder if, perhaps, it had not been woven that way on purpose to be turned into something pertinent and coherent when reflected through a looking glass.” I have contacted this astute reader, V Sirine, and awarded him one point, and consoled him that, yes, my blunders are indeed high-art.

So next time you come across a mistake in a blog, anywhere, remember that bloggers are devoted craftsman, like me, and the “mistake” of my peers was surely just planted on the sly in preparation for a similar treasure hunt to take place in the future. Yes, we do all kinds of things for our readers.

Love,
JD

Post-Script: as you likely guessed, there is one mistake in the above piece. Let the hunt begin!

 

JDHalperin.com’s environmental pledge

02 Wednesday May 2012

Posted by jdhalperin in Comedy

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

enviromental blogs, Enviromental satire, fraudulent branding, green movement, Green washing, JD Halperin, toronto enviromentalists

The team here at JDHalperin.com has Green values running through the core of our business practices. We’d like to share with you now a truly uplifting story about how one little blog has the power to heal the world…one post at a time.

As an in-house publication, our office engages in safe eco-practices by using energy-saving light bulbs, forsaking AC in summer, and using a space heater and sweaters during winter. The website’s team is comprised wholly of cyclists who literally live in the office, so no greenhouse gases are emitted during the daily commute to and from work. Regrettably, running a website does require powering a computer, but JDHalperin’s chief mainframe console is a netbook with a 12 inch screen. Our carbon footprint is minimal, and we are serious about giving back to the community*.

If a tree falls in the forest, JDHalperin.com is around to hear it. We are ever sensitive to the depletion of forestry. This blog has never printed one page of paper. In this regard, JD Halperin, the man without whom JDHalperin.com would cease to exist, has an undeniably stellar commitment to the planet, having been rejected by every print publisher he’s ever queried.

In a world where ecological and sociocultural catastrophes have become a tragically common business practice, JDHalperin.com is proud to say we have never been associated with any gulf oil spills, aboriginal displacement, organ harvesting, and we have never tested our products on animals.

That’s why when you read JDHalperin.com, you’re not just reading some worthwhile internet writing, you’re making a statement about your values. You’re telling people who you really are.

And who are you?

You’re an urbane cosmopolitan with a love of nature. Wordsworth in a condo, with your ear both to the street and to the soil. Your park is Algonquin and Trinity Bellwoods. You’re a sensory hedonist with a deeply spiritual side, a glutton for solidarity of causes big and small, far and wide. A slow thinker in life’s fast lane. Loving, reflexively courteous, and innately benevolent. Most importantly, you act now for world peace on planet Earth.

Let everybody know how magnanimous you are by reading and subscribing to JDHalperin.com today. Show everybody you care about the world’s people, plants and animals by liking us on Facebook, Tweeting @ us, or by simply telling a friend.

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, and healing the world begins with a single click. We can do this together.

Thanks for caring. Namaste.

*JDHalperin.com proudly supports the community by offering, free of charge, something to read.

Taking the “remember” out of remembrance day

11 Friday Nov 2011

Posted by jdhalperin in Statements

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

JD Halperin, National Post, Remembrance day

This week, the National Post reported there’s a high school in Ottawa that is forbidding veterans who come to speak to classrooms on remembrance day from bringing any military replica guns with them, something they have done for nineteen years.  Making history “come alive,” as cheesy as it sounds, is hard enough for a teacher, and I can think of no better way than having someone who was there tell stories, gun in hand. If I held the veteran’s rifle and tried to imagine the trenches, I’d feel sheer terror, surely the point of it all. But this year the school changed its policy. “No tanks or guns.”  “There are many students from the school who come from war-torn countries, and when they saw the replica gun, it did upset them.” The article doesn’t say if the committee, made up of school staff, actually received a direct complaint from a student or whether they changed the policy on their own initiative. A history teacher from the school resigned in response–a principled move, if somewhat dramatic.

This story is in line with the times, being as hyper-sensitive as possible to those perceived most vulnerable, though I would bet most schools would strongly criticize this policy. Here, the modern urge to “accommodate” is stronger than the urge to teach history. This is a problem. There are times in my writing where I fear I’m saying something painfully obvious, but this story forces my hand: the teaching of history needs to be the first priority in a history class.

If a student from a “war-torn country” is actually traumatized upon seeing either a replica gun or a real gun that’s disabled, they can leave the class. It’s not exactly the same as seeing the Luftwaffe hover the skies in formation or hearing a nearby bomb explode, but students are only kids and they can be fragile, especially if they have actually escaped war themselves. We need to remember war as vividly as possible to try and ensure it never happens again, but they may need to forget war to go on living a normal life. Fair enough. But this should be done only on a case-by-case basis in the event there’s an actual student with such a severely traumatizing past.

Before anyone is excused, consider that Canadian citizens sacrificed a lot more than a moment’s discomfort, and do still today. This is what the gun in class brings home: it is a gun that could have put a hole in the head of a mother’s child. It should be uncomfortable for everyone. If we forget this, what are we remembering? Over 45,000 Canadians died in WWII alone. Is there another symbol besides the gun that can be brought into class to evoke the horror of war? Short of a replica of “little boy,” no.  Maybe the ubiquitous poppy should be replaced by a gun.

A gun in class does anything but glorify war. What kind of student is urged towards violence after seeing a weapon and hearing all the horror stories first hand from a soldier?  Remembering can’t be a hollow moment of silence, but a meaningful reflection of what people actually did. It should cause revulsion, fear, and wonder that it actually happened. If it’s comfortable, it’s inadequate. It should be horrifying. How can it not be?

Perhaps this symbol of death is even more poignant for being in a classroom, the very last place a gun should ever be. War would be the most fundamentally absurd thing imaginable, if only it could be imagined. I literally can’t imagine hiding behind trenches and shooting at strangers with the understanding that killing them increases my own chance of survival. It’s too absurd.  Seeing and actually holding a realistic gun, gently touching that cold trigger with a curled finger, would bring those points home better than any text book, or even a first hand story told by a brave old man in a uniform.

Lest we forget.

Universities actually threaten freedom of speech

03 Thursday Nov 2011

Posted by jdhalperin in Politics, Statements

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Freedom of Speech, George Jonas, George Orwell, JD Halperin, John Carpay, National Post

I subscribe to the National Post because they publish a handful of writers I admire, namely George Jonas, an excellent writer and thinker of admirable historical sensibility who writes candidly.  He grew up in Hungary under communism, and of all writers I know sceptical of left-wing ideology, I feel he’s got the most cause.  It’s not just an idea for him, though it’s that too. Policies that make a light go off in my head must stir his stomach.

I provide this background because his article yesterday, “Deliver us from the universities,” is guilty of generalizing a bit, and while I’d actually agree with him if I had to make a bet, I’m holding out for more evidence. Essentially: universities were and are the chief threat to freedom of speech.

Jonas cites a study being conducted by civil rights lawyer John Carpay, who created an index that promises to “evaluate the state of free speech at Canadian Universities.” The findings come out in November, but Carpay demonstrated them last week in an apparently convincing sneak peek organized by the Frontier Centre for Public Policy for Calgary’s Chamber of Commerce.  I’m curious and sceptical about the methodology, but my personal experience inclines me towards agreeing with the conclusion.

First Jonas reminds us that in origin, Universities were religious, not liberal. They believed they had to educate students to learn the truths they already possessed.  In the 20th century, “universities incubated both fascism and communism, along with their many sub-versions (pub intended).” In one sentence, Jonas provides some history, a great use of “incubated,” and doesn’t succumb to that brutal reflex where people claim they don’t mean to write the puns they mean to write. “As for the 21st century, with jihadism infesting campuses all over the world, we’re off to a rocky start.”  He denounces Hamas apologists, dubbing them “terrorist chic.” Wicked stuff.

Aside: academics are disproportionately left wing because they have theoretical jobs, and in theory everything works, even communism. Doubting the theoretical on grounds it’s only theoretical undermines the foundation of their life’s work, and so essentially, it undermines their life.  Perhaps the chief virtue in a good intellectual is to resist the impulse to merge the theoretical and the practical, and be always able to separate and distinguish the two.

Back to Jonas’ idea: I read a fantastic book on Orwell a few weeks ago describing all the left-wing hostility aimed at Orwell during the 40s, despite Orwell’s ardent allegiance of the left.  “Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism, as I understand it.”  In spite of Orwell’s devotion to the left, he admirably refused to stop criticizing where he saw problems.  This was before the extent of Stalin’s crimes, the Gulags, were widely known and the left-wing intelligentsia frequently apologized and praised him.  To do so was modish.  Nobody wanted to publish Animal Farm because, spoiler alert!, in the end the animal’s revolution fails.  Orwell wanted socialism to work, but he couldn’t suppress his doubt no matter how much it irritated his comrades.  His allegiance was wholly to the truth, and for this he was ostracised. Jonas understands this dilemna: if Orwell had trouble criticising the Left, what can us mortals do and say?

My goal isn’t to denounce left-wing ideology, just the practice of silencing the other side’s argument on grounds that the verdict is already in. Though most universities have a dominant left-wing ideology in place, I’d be equally opposed to a right-wing one. I hate thinking that succumbs to grotesque oversimplification that obliterates nuance. Indeed, universities have a mandate to instil critical thinking abilities in their students to overcome this unforgivable weakness in mind.  But academic environments are rife with suspicion and hatred for people who think differently.  The chief fault is the inability to believe your ideological opponent is honest and intelligent.

But this difference in thought doesn’t even have to be highly charged political opinion.  In all kinds of classes I’ve heard friends lament that they feel uncomfortable diverging from their professor’s opinion in print for fear he’ll disapprove, and they’ll be graded accordingly.  But a different interpretation of poetry or literature doesn’t arouse the indignation and hostility that political disagreement does.  In all situations, students must not be made to feel uncomfortable voicing and writing their unfettered opinion, supported of course by convincing textual evidence. It’s precisely here, in classrooms, where Jonas’ charge resonates most with me.  Most faculty, and especially students, are smart enough to know they ought to voice in favour of freedom of speech, but insufficiently principled to commit to it in full. Rather, they’re principles are devoted solely to their cause, and there are none left over for the cause of free speech.

Example, a professor with an overt bias (voiced in politically correct terms so as not to get fired) would likely go mostly unchallenged by students who either: want to avoid a scene; don’t want to jeopardize their grade; don’t have the confidence to speak up, don’t want to be class nerd; don’t have a clue what the professor is even talking about; feel total indifference.  Maybe they’re simply hung over.  They’re understandable reasons, and at various moments I have succumbed and overcame all these things myself.  How many professors really say and believe: “my class is only useful if I’m challenged at every step of the way because the only valuable opinions are those which have survived the heaviest scrutiny?”  Even the polite Canadian tendency towards non-confrontation is incompatible with a robust academic environment where ideas become important only after they’ve survived harsh, weighty scrutiny.

I’m eternally grateful to Dalhousie, which I realised was a freakin’ Xanadu after spending a year in that putrid swamp OISE.  I left Dal with my innocence intact under the naive belief that academics want to get at the truth. They’re smart, passionate intellectuals.  Yes, but they’re all too frequently under the false belief that their views embody everything that’s good or desirable, and they tolerate no other view.  I’d like to see the results from this Campus Freedom Index and learn how the study was conducted.

If you’ve managed to sit through all this, bless your heart. Next writings will be light hearted: the “curmudgeon’s fall-fashion style guide” or perhaps, “the Kardashian divorce: I knew she was a skank.”

The hockey interview is a farce that should be discontinued

02 Wednesday Nov 2011

Posted by jdhalperin in Sports

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Ilya Bryzgalov, interviews, JD Halperin, National Post, NHL hockey

Probing. Profound.  Purposeful. These are the last words anybody would use to describe what passes for an interview in the NHL.  It’s totally beyond parody. If the team is losing, the solution is keep plugging away at the fundamentals. If the team is winning, they need to keep plugging away at the fundamentals. If there’s a noteworthy individual accomplishment, it’s because of the team.  If the team is doing well, all the individuals are clicking. It all happens one game at a time.  “What’s the key to your success?” “Our coach designed this secret play, here’s how it works…” What do we expect to be told? As a result, players are asked questions that aren’t really questions with the understanding that after saying something banal, obvious, and wonderfully cliché they’ll be given permission to walk away.  In a Canadian hockey culture that is wary of personality, that celebrates blandness, predictable conformity in media talk is all there is. Except for last week.

After the ridiculous 9-8 game between Philly and Winnipeg, Philly’s goaltender Ilya Bryzgalov could have said he’ll bounce back or it was a weird night for both goalies. But shockingly, he spoke outside the script: “I have zero confidence in myself right now. I’m terrible…I feel like I’m lost in the woods. I am totally lost. I don’t know what’s going on.  I can’t stop the puck.  It’s simple. It’s me.”  That a goalie has no confidence after allowing 9 goals isn’t surprising when you think about it, but the hockey world was stunned to hear an actual candid response.  It was sad, and singularly unique: have you ever felt so bad for a $51 million man?  There are countries looking for that kinda bailout.  I wanted to write on pointless hockey interviews prior to this game, but Bryzgalov’s response made me doubt the premise. Maybe there was a point to the hockey interview? Not if the Flyers have their way.

Bruce Arthur reported in today’s National Post that after Bryzgalov mercifully won a game and joked he had gotten out of the woods thanks to the “iPhone Compass,” the Flyers announced their goalie would only be available after games he started.  Heaven forbid an interview contain honesty or humour.  But this violated the league’s rules regarding media access, so now Philly wants to limit Bryzgalov to three questions, which, as Arthur points out, is the same policy our Prime Minister follows.  Whether this curtailing of interview time is a violation of policy is under investigation. For Harper it’s fine, but it’s important that the goalie is held publicly accountable for his performance.

Before he faces the media again, Bryzgalov will undoubtedly be told not to cause any needless distraction by saying anything worth repeating.  Shut up Ilya!  This doesn’t only make total sense from a hockey perspective, the one that should matter most, but it’s what rightly ensures that player interviews are totally vacuous.  As a fan, I don’t want to put any burden on my team. Radical idea: if the media wants something to write about, write about the hockey.  If a player wants to call out or praise his players in public, there’ll be a hungry audience ready to hear something of substance that’s more meaningful for being spoken voluntarily.  He can even Tweet on his own time and allow sports reporters, who will be following, to report on it then.  For fan appreciation, players can do autograph signings, visit hospitals, deliver presents at Christmas.  But the hockey interview is an illusion that tells the fans absolutely nothing. It’s not a window into the game or into the players’ personalities, and in the rare, rare time it is, hockey culture does all it can to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

Movie trailers are now their own industry…don’t fall for the hype!

01 Tuesday Nov 2011

Posted by jdhalperin in Statements

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

JD Halperin, Macleans, Movie trailers, the avengers, transformers

November’s issue of Maclean’s contains an article “Trailers are out of control,” by Brian D. Johnson, that depicts accurately how in order to generate more buzz, a new industry has been set up where Hollywood trailers are accompanied with its own review.  Interesting, sad, but hardly surprising. Regrettably, the article is not available online yet.

The Hollywood Reporter criticized the trailer for The Avengers in a serious, substantial review.  The trailer! The movie doesn’t come out until next May.  The Avengers isn’t just a predictable action movie starring one hero, but five: Ironman, Thor, Hulk, Captain America, and Samuel L. Jackson (who even if he’s playing himself might be the most bad ass).  The trailer is very unnecessary.  Do they fight for social justice? If five superheroes are needed the world must be in great peril. Expect senseless violence and action.  But unlike the epic trailer for the Transformers sequel, this reviewer bemoans the Avenger’s trailer’s failure to convey “epic drama and conflict as well as great emotional moments.” Sounds like he’s talking about Antigone.  A review of a two minute trailer is absolutely insane. Please, let us either ignore or denounce this aspect of the new hype machine.

The article claims that since trailers are accessed in smart phones and twitter, Google searches went up 50% in the last year.  Itunes has a dedicated category for movie trailers now.  That trailers contain spoilers or are severely misleading is old news, but it is funny that a Michigan woman announced she’s suing the distributor for Drive claiming “there wasn’t enough driving,” and she was misled by “the pulse-pounding preview that made it look like Fast & Furious.”  Is she making a principled stand against an industry that intentionally deceives its customers in order to sell, or is she an idiot? If her lawsuit is successful, she’ll recoup all of her $12.50, minus legal fees. But sometimes great movies do poorly in box office because of bad or misleading commercials. William Goldman said this happened to the Princess Bride, which lacked a target demographic. Bummer.

This phenomenon of dangling tantalizing tidbits in order to entice, however disingenuous, is ubiquitous on Twitter, Facebook, and anywhere where there are links to click or things to buy.  We’re beckoned to click by alluring question marks, various lists of “10 hot things” or the like, or promises of salacious gossip.  To be sure, greatness and crap are advertised the same way, but it’s good to be cognizant of the psychology behind how our attention is being captured.  Perhaps the awareness makes you more immune to being suckered.

Anyway, the main thrust of Johnson’s article is made by invoking legendary New Yorker movie critic Pauline Kael, who, by the ’80s, believed “marketing was eating cinema alive.” Johnson believes that the hype around trailers is evidence of an industry that’s contributing to its own demise, that the art form suffers. Is this true? Is marketing hampering quality movies, like the wave of American films from the ’70s, from being made today?  Would the Godfather be successful if made today, or could it even get made? Hard to know, but I’d like to think I would have had the good taste and discernment to see the movie without having to suffer a review of its trailer.

← Older posts

Twitter

Follow @JDhalperin
Tweet

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 1,343 other subscribers

Essential sites

  • Grateful Dead Chords/Tabs
  • Neil Young Chords/Tabs

My Writing

  • Huffington Post
  • Maclean's
  • Music Writing
  • The Star
  • the Walrus Laughs
  • Toronto Review of Books
  • Toronto Standard
  • World Is One News

Topics

  • Comedy (18)
  • Literature (10)
  • Politics (24)
  • Sports (15)
  • Statements (35)
  • Uncategorized (20)

Blog at WordPress.com.

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Jeff Halperin
    • Join 48 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Jeff Halperin
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar