Truth

Erich said:
"But I do think that, when one bothers to examine the connotation as well as the denotation of "racist", saying "even a true statement can be racist" passes silently over a huge social and scientific problem that, however conveniently buried out of sight for now, will probably not stay buried for much longer."

Am I mistaken in suggesting that there is a preassumption here: that science has something to tell us that will be problematic? Specifically that, were a non-culturally biased IQ test developed, thoroughly tested by a multicultural battery of scientists and then applied...that blacks (or group X) would test lower. Shouldn't such a comment be formulated as: "IF there is an innate difference, THEN we have a huge social and scientific problem..." etc
IF there is no innate difference, THEN we have no scientific problem, but indeed a social one--dealing with those who have used the politics of racial inferiority for centuries to deny a people their due. But either way, wasn't that missing, Erich?
#
Personally, if such a gap exists, the more we know about it the better. I don't believe that knowledge is ever a really bad thing, and lies eventually trip you up.

Juno (2008)

Juno (2008)

A wonderful movie about a teenaged girl who finds herself pregnant, and decides to give the baby up for adoption. It feels honest, heartfelt, has the same natural rhythms of late adolescence found in “Superbad” last year, and is a hoot. And having jus adopted a child, I can promise you that the emotions felt very, very real. Beautifully written and performed, well directed and I just realized that J.K. Simmons, who plays the father of the girl (and J.Jona Jameson, and Schllinger on “Oz”) is turning into one of my favorite character actors. A delicate performance by Ellen Page (“Hard Candy”) is the cherry on top. Loved it. An “A-”
##
Only a few more days, and the horrid crush I’ve been under for the last months will begin to slow down. Gawd, can’t hardly wait…
##
Fun listening to the political pundits right now. So many of them are enjoying the apparent melt-down of Hillary’s campaign I almost feel sorry for her. But I don’t, because she should have been ready for a dogfight from the very beginning. Now we get to see what she’s made of. One pundit did the Wicked Witch voice: “I’m melting…I’m melting…” and cracked me up.

Trust me: I’d never think of any politician as the Second Coming of anything. And I’d never dream of factoring race into my vote unless I saw no other differences between the candidates: never dreamed of voting for Jesse Jackson or Sharpton. Obama interests me because he seems congruent. He seems to be pretty much what he presents himself as. I have two connections to people who know him, and they assure me that we see is what we get. I like what I see. I’m having a good time. During the debate last night, Ron Paul sounded like the Republicans’ Joe Lieberman. Pretty amusing.
##
And did anyone else hear Huckabee quoting the Declaration of Independence, and forget the “All men are created equal” part? He jumped straight to the “inalienable rights” part. Frankly, I consider that a lovely little Freudian Slip, and am now watching him more closely. Something doesn’t smell right. Of course, maybe that’s just the carpet. Buster, have you been in my office..?
(Buster’s my cat.)

Obama and Edwards sittin' in a tree...

by the way...anyone else having fun watching Edwards jockying for Vice President..?
##Erich said:

“On the specific issue of racial groups and whether they have genetically-based variations in "quality": at this point, I'm aggressively agnostic on that. Meaning, if somebody is blowing hard for the position "of course racial groups are genetically superior or inferior", I'll tend to want to deflate them, whereas if somebody is going for the more "progressive" attitude of "of course any such claim is hateful, racist, and scientifically untrue," I'll ... do what I'm doing here.”

Erich, I’ve tried to make it clear that a racist statement isn’t necessarily a hateful one—it’s just a statement that differentiates on the basis of genetics. If some people take the position “if you make a racist comment, that makes you a terrible person” that is understandable in terms of the way human beings act. It is not the context of this blog. Scientifically untrue? I’d say unproven. And consider that, so far as I can see, the assumption has been through all human history that “we” are better than “they.” The amazing thing is the amount of evidence amassed suggesting this ain’t true.

And yes, at some point the science will be RELATIVELY undeniable on these points. Not completely, though. I suspect there will always be intelligent debate on both sides. Interesting to me that such a high percentage of those who believe in differential value between racial groups are white males. If they’re right, is it that women and non-whites are less honest? How exactly do we interpret that?
##
Hillary’s campaign has to be boggled right now. The pundits were just saying on television that they had a perfect playbook to defeat the Republicans—but don’t know how to deal with Obama.

Here’s a way this could well play out: Obama gets the Democratic nomination. The attacks begin. Responsible Republican representatives and surrogates attack on the basis of inexperience and voting record. And then there will be the insane broad-side from talk radio and irresponsible surrogates making appeals to racism and cultural fear, as well as spreading the “Obama attended a Madrassa” lie. The racism I believe to be more prevalent on the Right than the Left comes crawling out from under its rock, and moderates and Independants are appalled. In a knee-jerk response (“This isn’t America!”) they either stay home, throw their votes to an inelectable candidate, or support the Democratic ticket. Republicans are crushed.

It is interesting that Hillary pulls the “gender card” all the time. She can afford to do it, because if she loses every male vote, but got all the female votes, she would still win.

I remember when Clinton was called the “first black President” because some folks felt he was the first president who really saw us as a people. This was never MY opinion, but I grasped what they were saying. His apology for slavery was mocked by white Conservatives, but I got it, and felt it, and was moved.

Hillary has been counting on black support, which went to her out of fondness for Bill, I think, and residual “Great White Father” programming that made it difficult for blacks to believe that one of their own could go all the way to the White House…without being assassinated. But death isn’t the worst thing that can happen. It’s just a thing. And better to die while moving in the direction of your dreams. Blacks are beginning to believe.

As I’ve said before, what you see in Obama is what black people are separate from the legacy of slavery. (No, I’m not saying all black people would be as smart or articulate as Obama—he’s way above the curve for any human group). But his self-confidence and belief in himself comes from knowing who he is in a way almost all whites do…and almost no blacks do.

Folks have often wondered how I can believe in Nothing (which is very different from having no beliefs!), and think that no absolute truth is communicable or perceivable by the human mind…and still engage fully with life, still care, still love life as fully as I do. The answer is that one part of me is engaged with the “Game” and the other part of me lives in the Nothing. It’s all good.

But what I think people miss is the REASON I became this way. It was because I had nothing to lean on that took me “all the way down.” The lack of father gave me no Paternal role model. The intellectual/emotional isolation made it difficult to even talk about anything of any importance with my peers (I was a strange duck indeed). The lack of cultural images meant that the very country that controlled virtually every aspect of my external success considered me sub-human, or at the very least, an oddity. Can’t count the number of times white Conservatives have said the “you’re not like Them. You’re like Us” routine with me. Inviting me to lose all protective coloration and be the trick monkey at their little Salons. I can’t begin to count the percentage of my life I’ve spent being “the only one.” For instance, in my entire career of almost thirty years, not one single time have I ever been in a room at a convention with another working black male SF writer. Can any of you even grasp how lonely that feels? Can you?

Without anything at all to lean on the outside (or so I perceived) I was forced to turn inward, try to find some bit of foundation, some solid ground to stand on, to provide me with leverage. But the deeper I went, the less I found, until I unraveled the whole thing and got the joke.

And there, curiously, there was great calm. To actually make contact with the ocean that births all things is an extraordinary experience. To be able to back up and see how religions, philosophies and political movements arise from it is even more fun.

To watch the way people try desperately to find something solid to cling to, and the metaphorical and literal wars they fight over their bits of flotsam and jetsome….wow. What a party.

Constantly, people (always white people) try to tell me that if I hadn’t had the specific pressures, I wouldn’t be who I am…and they mean this in a positive way. While there’s some truth to it, I also think there’s some hidden racism, an unspoken “see, Steve? If you can do it, why can’t the rest of them?”

I resent that, deeply. But the reason I bring all of this up is that had I had anything to “stand on” as a younger man, I could have applied all of that time and energy to building other things in my life, and been perfectly happy. Yes, I absolutely think I would have made more money, been fitter, and been overall an emotionally healthier human being.

In other words, Obama has a big chunk of the exact, precise puzzle-pieces I’m missing, and have had to “wire around” in order to function as a human being. Both of us were raised without our fathers. But he knows where he comes from in a cultural and genetic sense.

COUNTLESS times I’ve heard whites talk about how important their geneology is to them. How much strength they’ve gained from knowing their names, and ancestors, and countries of origin. Languages. Religions. Visiting their home-lands. Eitehr I can take the position that they’re all full of shit, or I can say that yes, there is something precious there. That we tell stories of our ancestors BECAUSE IT WORKS to create stronger, smarter, better functioning children. And during my entire formative period, during all of my public school education, I heard of nothing except how exquisitely wonderful white people were.

Sorry. That does damage. My emotional flesh will never heal from some of those wounds. Deprive an animal vitamins in its formative years, and it will be a stunted beast no matter how you feed them later.

In all likelihood, there is nothing I can do to heal the emotional bones broken back then. But…I can build up the muscle around them. And I can be certain to give my son and daughter the very things I missed. And I can create images to nurture others as I was not nurtured.

And I can remember that this is all just a game. It’s not real. And that if I decide to play it, I must play all-out even if I started the game with less Monopoly Money than the other players. Even if they collaborate to cheat me. Hell—they’re nice folks. They don’t even realize that the rules were constructed to screw me over.

I play, and I care, because I choose to. No other reason.

But do you grasp the gigantic amount of energy it took to create the structure that keeps me alive and functioning? Take that energy, and free it up, and let me invest it in my writing. Let me write books and movies without having to worry about the image systems. Let me have role models who are more successful than I am, so that I can extract their belief systems, mental syntax, and use of physiology. Let me…

Aww, shit. What’s the use? Life is just what it is.

But I say this because I know that if I had seen an Obama as a kid, my life would have been better. So long as he doesn’t self-destruct, he doesn’t even have to win. What he represents to me is the promise of America. And I think that some of the enthusiasm for him is exactly that. He looks like America—and he’s the only male candidate who does. Every single one of the others looks like the mixture that has come before. Hillary would represent greater change—if it didn’t feel so much like she was riding on Bill’s coat-tails. She is the Clinton Machine, and everyone knows it.

There is such an interesting thing going on here. Obama will appeal to some actual racists: he allows them to assert: “see? Blacks can make it if they just get over themselves…” or “see? I’m not bigoted! I just understand that MOST blacks don’t have what it takes…”

And some liberal Americans in general who, if all the candidates are close together in quality, might vote for an Obama out of guilt, or even curiosity. And black voters who see a symbol to inspire their children. Tananarive’s parents are from the Civil Rights generation, warriors both. And his candidacy gives them hope that what they fought for might actually be happening, at last.

And millions of Americans who look at him and see someone with a level of passion they miss in their own lives, and miss in public discourse.

They’re seeing something. And he’s going to be a little hard to attack because of his race, which will lead some to think that a black man has an advantage. Hah! To me, that’s like chopping off a runner’s right foot, but then giving him the inside lane on the track. The other runners will notice the inside lane bit, but they conveniently forget the severed foot.

What do I think about Obama? I guess I’m in his corner officially. I don’t see any reason to hate the guy, or consider him incompetent to hold office. He is WAY smarter than most of the people I’ve seen running, and has the ability to synthesize information like crazy. This, by the way, is what kept me from ever considering Bush very smart (although I don’t think he’s stupid, either.) I’ve never heard him take fact A and B and come up with new thought C. Smart people do this all the time, and Obama is smart. I think he can compensate for the apparent lack of experience.

And the Republicans, having thrown their weight behind an administration many Americans consider to be a disaster, cannot promote themselves as agents of change. So what it will boil down to is that if you like the direction America is going in…vote Republican. Otherwise, you have to find another horse.

What an interesting, interesting period in history this is. I’m grateful to have lived long enough to see it. Regardless of what happens next, this has been a hell of a ride.

Social definitions of racism

The discussion about the meaning of the term “racist” has been interesting. I can feel that when most of you guys use the term, it pretty much means “dishonest negative comments about other ethnic groups.” I understand that definition, but considering that almost everyone thinks their own opinions are correct, it isn’t particularly useful: the defense to saying anything negative is “it’s true.” So what’s going on is that you have opposing forces. For the sake of convenience, let’s talk about white and black, although this stuff goes for sexism, cultural elitism, and perceptions of and by Asians as well.

In my mind, this is what happened: there is a natural human tendency to say “my group is the best.” And another to blame the victim after we mug him (“he was stupid to wear that watch in this neighborhood”) or rape her (“she asked for it.”)

Slavery was an economic institution (using human beings as machinery) that had serious off-the-books advantages (the creation of a permanent underclass makes possible a permanent aristocracy. White women in the 18th Century weren’t supposed to be lusty sexual animals…but black women were available. Lower-class whites had someone who was even lower).

Because America considers itself a Christian nation, and the core of Christianity is “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” and slavery was considered valuable not just financially but socially, there was a need to justify the economic necessity. So far as I can see from my own research, the most common justification was “blacks are natural slaves.”

Post-slavery, the most FORMAL barriers against blacks dropped, replaced by a gigantic number of relatively informal institutions designed to keep them in their lower status. In addition (and this is what I think the worst side-effect of slavery was) the belief systems designed to justify slavery outlived the institution.

Now you have an interesting situation: millions of people clearly labeled inferior denied the rooting necessary to build a culture, surrounded 10-to-1 by the “Other” who clings to a belief in their inferiority, and have total control of the mechanisms that create education, health care, employment opportunities, housing opportunities, etc.

Life and death. Now, over the years, one click at a time, things get better (although I would take the position that there was never a moment in which there was an advantage even minutely equivilent to the disadvantages. Without that, the chances of “catching up” as a group would be pretty slim. Blacks would have to be SUPERIOR to whites to do so, given the situation.)

Now, then. Through the entire time, blacks have had to hear X percentage of white people making negative comments in every single medium, and in every situation. And they were always supposed to grin and bear it. And some of the comments were pretty pervasively vicious. And we knew very well from our exclusion in media (or the way we were treated when we were present in such media) what White audiences thought of us.

Now…came the 60’s, and the national media was filled with images of black civil rights marchers set upon by dogs, and black civil rights leaders shot dead. A huge backlash of white guilt (“this isn’t the country I love!”) rolled in.

And with it, a push of “political correctness” from what I call the Left. Remember that I think that the Right tends to be more hierarchical, the Left more egalitarian. Both extremes are diseased. But whereas before the set-point assumption was black inferiority (“but we should be nice to them”) the set-point now was black equality. We became very very careful about what we said.

Now…I hate to put it this way, but 100% of the people I have heard complain about “political correctness” are members of the groups that exploited or oppressed. In other words, men complain about “political correctness” dealing with sexism. Whites complain about “political correctness” dealing with blacks. Straights complain about “political correctness” dealing with gays. Christians about “political correctness” dealing with non-Christian minorities, and so on. Never heard the opposite.

What does this imply to me? We LOVE being able to rank others. It is a natural human behavior, and when we find ourselves limited in our self-serving expression, we get ticked off. No one complains that they aren’t allowed to say NICE things about other people.

And saying (for instance) “blacks have greater natural ability at sports” would, in a culture that gave equal weight to body, mind, and spirit, be equivilient to saying “whites are smarter.” But we DON’T give equal weight. Check the obesity stats. So when someone disingenuously says that “well, what’s wrong with saying whites are smarter? I also say that blacks are more athletic” they know, without admitting that they know, that they have just said “whites have more of the most desirable human characteristics.” And it ticks me off when people (in my mind) pretend not to understand what they’ve just said.

Of course, that could be deconstructed further: “according to tests created, administered, and interpreted by group X, group Y is on the average inferior.” Can one understand why a member of group Y would get sick of hearing this?

So when social things shift, and blacks found themselves with enough social, legal, and political power, they enjoyed using it. And whites who sympathized with us cooperated. And to a degree, the entire culture decided that certain kinds of speech would not be used.

It that a hinderance to rapid flow of information and social discourse? To a degree, yes, any inhibition of honest opinion is such a hinderance. And that is regrettable. But since we will NEVER come to what all agree to be a perfect balance of censorship and self-expression on this issue, on which side should we err?

I suggest to you that in the vast majority of cases, the only ones who believe we should err on the side of freedom of expression are those who feel they would benefit from it. And in the vast majority of cases, that would be men on issues of sexism, straights on issues of homophobia, whites on issues of race.

That natural human need to “rank” is strong. When I’m around black folks, and they start talking about the Natural Superiority of black athletes (or whatever) I have to sigh and get ready for odd looks. And when I’m around white friends and they ask “what’s wrong with telling the truth…” I could get all existential and say that there is no ultimate truth perceivable by human beings, just opinions with varying levels of support.

That’s how we got to the point where the word “racist” which denotatively means to ascribe negative characteristics on the basis of genetics, has connotatively come to mean a bad and dishonest person. Unfortunate, but just the pendulum swinging back the other way after 400 years of whites being able to say any damned thing they wanted, and have full social support for it.

I’m sure the straight-jacket pinches a bit. But it is an utterly insignificant fraction of the “pinch” my side felt, folks.
Unless there was a Cosmic Judge prepared to come down and set things straight, all we have is fallible human logic and emotion. We’re doing the best we can, and sometimes we do it clumsily. And when America is browner, and brown-skinned people outnumber whites, and the language begins to be shaped by racist comments that go back the other way, with the legal, political, economic and social power to back it up…we’ll see if whites can be as sanguine about the insults as they seem to expect blacks to be. Is it fair? HELL, NO! But is it MORE fair than it used to be? I would say absolutely yes.

Is it Racist if it's true?

Just because it’s easy, I grabbed Wikipedia’s definition of “racism,” which is pretty close to the definition I groove to: “Racism has many definitions, the most common and widely accepted being the belief that humans are divided into more than one race, with members of some races being intrinsically superior or inferior to members of other races.”
Is it Racist if it’s True?

Note that that definition doesn’t have anything to do with whether the belief is ACCURATE or not. Of course, if you believe something, you think it’s accurate. And because we’ve been conditioned to believe that “racism” is bad, there is a bit of cognitive dissonance when we harbor a negative attitude toward a particular ethnic or racial group.

It is a plea for bigotry. “Blacks just aren’t as smart” “Mexicans are lazy” “white people are evil” “Asians are sneaky.” Whatever.

I’m not going to let people off that hook. If you have a global, negative opinion of a group, that’s your business. If it’s true, it might be important to broadcast said opinion. But if your opinion is self-serving (it puts you and your group above the other) and self-labeled (based on observations and measurements devised and administered by your group) and ESPECIALLY if it excuses or justifies present or past violence or oppression of that “other” group, I’m going to be rather skeptical. There is absolutely nothing more common than members of group “A” saying they’re better than members of group “B.”

That said, it is a bit unfortunate that the connotative definition of “racist” or “racism” has to do with the accuracy or honesty of the perception. Personally, a person can think the average black is less intelligent, but if that person is a gentleman I would consider them “racist” but not necessarily what I call a “bigot.” That would depend on whether they evaluate each person separately, as best they can.

I can’t look at something that is damned near universal (us-themism) and consider people who feel or think that way to be “below average” in ethics or morality. Pretty much by definition, they ARE the average. Rather, I’d say that someone who ACTS on such beliefs (spreading lies they know to be lies, instigating violence, etc.) to be BELOW average, and those who (and yes, this is self-serving as hell) think the way I do about this to be ABOVE average in this regard.

Almost every person I’ve met who had “racist” beliefs was given the foundation for those beliefs in childhood. I’ve met far fewer people who STARTED by thinking people were pretty much equal, and down the road somewhere became bigots. That one’s a rarity to me. I’m sure it happens, though.
##
Oh...and on the question of an Obama candidacy and black sexual images in film...both questions spring from the same core, one of unconscious negative assumptions and associations regarding blackness. I think that Obama, like Will Smith and Oprah, has transcended race as few human beings ever manage to. In one sense, were he white, he'd be a shoe-in. In another sense, the fact that he's half-Kenyan is a fantastic visual metaphor for the possibility of America, and for genuine change. I think that people are 80% reacting to him DESPITE his race. But one thing I've seen over the course of my life is that if you manage to struggle to excellence despite the obstacles, even bigots seem to understand you have done something extraordinary, and give you a certain respect. It's odd, but seems to be true.
##
So...I would have bet that the movie thing would happen first. And I'm still betting that way. My guess is that 2008 is the year. We'll see.

Obama

Barack Obama: These are the Iowa numbers for Obama
57% ages 17-29
42% of voters 30-44
27% of voters 45-64
18% of voters 65 and older.

Remember when I said that when 80% of white males born before 1950 are dead, the race issue would take care of itself? There you go. Perfect example of what I meant.
##
I was asked what I meant by saying I thought the country has moved too far to the Right. I guess I could leave it with saying that the White House, both Houses of Congress, and the Supreme Court all seemed to be on the same side of matters. I don’t think that’s healthy at all—but I wouldn’t mind seeing the Dems have the same advantage for, say, four years. I don’t know (personally) anyone Left or Right, who doesn’t believe in a strong America. In fact, everyone I know agrees with Afghanistan. Lotsa disagreement about Iraq—and most of the anti-Iraq was on the Left. I think that trickle-down economics make sense if you have a strongly hierarchical view of humanity: something I think can be found more on the Right. I personally think that the idea of tax breaks for the wealthiest in a time of war is utter insanity. But that’s just me. Universal Health Care? It’s almost certainly coming, unless someone can point out broad statistical reasons it doesn’t work. You know: infant mortality rate, life expectancy, patient satisfaction, wait time, iatrogenic disease rates, percentage of GNP invested in research and medical infrastructure. Stuff like that. The question I have is: how do you set up a two-tier system like you have with education, police and so forth: a public commons, and a private network for those who can afford it.

The evangelicals? Well...yeah, it disturbs me when people who don't believe in Evolution have a say over public policy. And it disturbs me that the Right doesn't call 'em on it, presumably because the votes are needed.

The immigration problem? I haven’t heard that much difference on Right and Left, although by my own definitions, the Left should be weaker on this issue. (You guys know my answer: fine employers. Give green cards to illegals who turn their employers in. Illegals are not deported: they are given an ankle bracelet with a capacitor and a cellular pickup which, over 90 days, will get increasingly uncomfortable if it picks up a U.S. area code. Let them pay their own way to the border.)

I also REALLY hated the arrogance I saw in the Bush white house the first five years. It felt to me that the “If you’re not with us, you’re against us” attitude is completely natural for those under stress, but not what is needed with the current threat—that of Islamic Jihadism. What is necessary to deal with this is more of a “female” approach: building broad coalitions, and not thinking that having the biggest hammer in the world is going to help us when the television goes on the fritz. Do we really need a defense budget larger than all other countries in the world COMBINED? Really? I don’t. And I think that that kind of thinking is exactly what Eisenhower was warning us about.

So…maybe I’m lumping together the Right, the Republicans, and Bush. Maybe those things should be separated out some. I confess ignorance about many of these things. But I will say that what I really want is the middle ground. I’d be perfectly happy to see things swing (a bit) from Right to Left, alternating every eight years. That would work.
##
And I guess my sense of Hillary: if she wins, and wins reelection, we would have had a Bush or Clinton in the White House for THIRTY SIX YEARS. Eight years of George Bush as VP. Eight years of Bill Clinton. Eight Years of Bush Jr. Another eight years of Clinton? If you like the direction the country’s going right now, please do. If you don’t, you know what to do.

Iowa

Well, it starts today. I'm not behind a candidate, really. I just want the country to swing back left a bit. My very real feeling is that we went too far Right. I'd love to be complaining a couple of years from now that we've gone too far Left. Any of the three top Democrats would be all right with me, for now. I wish I could figure Hillary out, but the only thing I'm SURE of is that we're not seeing her real face. No way she has publicly expressed her private feelings about Bill, and they have to loom large. But she could be anything under that...including a fantastic potential president. Or not. Edwards impresses me at times, but I haven't looked as deeply into him as I should. Obama has continued to impress me. He strikes me as the smartest candidate I've seen in years. And he is insanely self-possessed. His recent surge in Iowa suggests that his campaign approach has been sound. Would I trust him to hit the ground running? Yes, because he is smart enough to surround himself with people even smarter than he is. But today, I just want to sit back and watch the fireworks. I can't WAIT to stop paying attention to politics for a while. Not my area of expertise at all, at all, at all. Yuck. It would chew me up and spit me out in six months. But the people who can stomach it? Hat's off. I mean, SOMEBODY'S got to do it, right?

Another round with Rocky

If you want a good peek at how creative process works, take a gander at ROCKY BALBOA, which I just saw again on DVD. It’s almost a textbook example of how to take the pains and trials of life and use it as fodder. If you research Stallone’s life even a little bit, you’ll notice stuff having to do with his age, his relationships, his career, his attitudes toward success and failure…it’s all over the place. I’ve rarely seen a movie where the filmmaker wore his heart more on his sleeve. He was obviously desperate for redemption after Rocky IV and V. And he seems to have done it. My guess is that if the new Rambo does well, he’ll do more of them. Fine. But let Rocky sleep.
##
It’s interesting how the discussion of race in film, and especially sexuality, causes a real blip. Television is often mentioned as a place where black men can have sex (gee! TV is made by the same town that makes the movies. Whatever is going on ain’t the sole problem of Hollywood, trust me.) My guess is that it DOES drop the ratings, but I have no way of crunching those numbers. What I CAN say about television is that there was no DRAMATIC hour-long series that was ever successful (lasted more than two seasons) with a non-white LEAD (the person whose name comes first in the title) until Avery Brooks in Deep Space Nine. It had been tried multiple times. Finally stuck there. Let’s see now…at 10% of the population, you’d think that blacks might be, what, 5% of the leads in successful dramas? Otherwise, you’re certainly suggesting an inhibitory mechanism of some kind. Either Hollywood won’t make ‘em, America won’t watch ‘em, or blacks just can’t act well enough to carry a show. There may be a fourth answer, but I don’t know what it is.

I’m obsessed with starting any analysis from the position of “it’s all roughly equal.” So I go with the Universal Disconnect theory.
##
Mike Frank and I were talking at Larry Niven’s New Years party, and he asked whether it was racist to make a negative comment about a group if the comment was true. I said “yep.” By definition, a comment ascribing value based upon race is a racist comment. Doesn’t make it wrong. Doesn’t make the speaker a bad person (necessarily). But it is most certainly racist. I know people who have such attitudes about major racial and ethnic and religious groups…and who are still good people. But yeah, racist.
##
New Years Goals are here. I’m still in crush mode on SHADOW VALLEY, so I haven’t put a huge amount of thought into it. I will. I know I want to spend more time with my family (especially Nicki), to read more, and to write the third “Lion’s Blood” book, as well as rehabilitate my career in Hollywood. I want to take my martial arts training to the next level…but first I have to clearly define for myself exactly what that means. But once I have my goals, I’ll need to be able to visualize their end point, to be certain that my values, beliefs, and positive/negative emotional charges all align to support it. That’s the “Time Line” approach to goal setting taught by Tad James. Good stuff.
##
And the rope jumping is really fun. Because it relates to so many qualities of fitness at the same time, I can look at it as another window into my overall body/mind. And right now, what it shows is that I’m under serious stress, and need to chill a bit. Hard when you’re under a deadline. But…what the heck. I knew the job was dangerous when I took it.

Sweeney Todd (2007)

I think I have to call Tim Burton’s latest film both a triumph and a glorious disappointment. Love me some Sweeny Todd. The story of a 19th Century barber named Benjamen Barker, arrested on false charges and sent to an Australian prison colony by a lecherous judge…a barber who returns to wreck bloody vengeance…is one of the jewels of American musical theater. I saw it performed by Angela Lansbury and George Hearn twenty years ago, and more recently saw it on Broadway in a de-constructionist staging that was so psychologically devastating that it haunted me for weeks.

The Johnny Depp version just wasn’t haunting. Oh, the story is there, and most of the songs, but it felt to me that Burton made some errors that are affecting his box office. One, the “Ballad of Sweeney Todd”, the choral piece that intros and xtros the action, is missing. Without it, the events cannot be placed in context. It is harder to see the morality tale hidden within the Grand Guinol: “to seek revenge may lead to hell, but everyone does it, though seldom as well as Sweeny…”

Angela Lansbury used to say that she performed the entire play just to be able to slam the door at the end. There was, in her final moments onstage, a sense of the longing of the insane Mrs. Lovett for the equally mad Sweeney, a desire to reach out across the damage and find an impossible happiness. That completion is also missing. A director’s choice, but a less than optimal one.

The movie is also missing some of the play’s humor, and that is no good at all. A piece this dark NEEDS the perspective only humor can provide, and without the “God That’s Good!” refrain as Mrs. Lovett serves meat pies to her suddenly burgeoning business, there is a lack of sense of community, the collaboration of the neighborhood, and the city itself, in the ghastly events.

And lastly, the blood. Too much of it, and too in your face. We’re drawn too deeply into Sweeney’s Madness, and this is the only place where Johnny Depp’s lack of formal voice training hurts. Without the lower registers, on an emotional level we are floating along, just above the actual emotional roots that help us to connect to the horror as effectively as we might. The occasional bursts of realistic violence make us cringe rather than laugh uncomfortably. I have zero problem with onscreen violence, done right. I don’t think Burton made the most of this opportunity.

That said, the movie is performed beautifully, sung adequately (more than adequately in many cases—really, the singing is fine), photographed with something approaching genius, and cast…well, in some ways its hard to imagine it being done better.

It’s wonderful, but it just isn’t magical. It just isn’t classic, and it could have been. I give it a “B” with a certain pain…I really wanted to give “Sweeney Todd” an “A”. And I can’t.

The Unit

At a holiday party over the weekend, I met a guy who works on the CBS show The Unit. Conversations got around to the odd situation with the lead casting, and the black soldier (Demore Barnes) suddenly killed off just after screwing a white woman…
Interesting. The word is that he got killed because the company needed to save forty thousand dollars a week on his salary. Wretchedly, they didn’t inform him until he read the script. There are definitely some things about this that make me feel uneasy…

1) The whole Regina Taylor/ Dennis Haysbert casting thing. The show clearly wants to sex things up. Every other actor was lean and sensual…except the leads, who were dumpy. Haysbert slimmed down over last summer break, and Regina Taylor has…a bit. But it was rather grotesquely obvious who the sexy and unsexy people were on that show. And the original casting was by David Mamet. He was getting what he wanted. My guess? That unconscious aversion thing.
2) The Unit guy I met mentioned an “unwritten law” at CBS against interracial relationships. A woman was cast on one show, and the producers were trying to get a certain guest star to play her character’s boyfriend. He finally signed on…and they realized that they’d cast the woman white. He was black. She was fired, but got paid anyway.
3) Having “Hector” spending the weekend with a white woman was, in my mind, a signal that he was about to die. Anchoring pain to inappropriate behaviors is an old, old dramatic technique. Probably as old as mankind.
4) The CBS guy talked about the fact that the writers on the Unit aren’t comfortable writing Black characters making love to each other. They can imagine a black man making love to a Latina (which happened with Haysbert. She died), but not to a black woman.

Man, that is weird. I never anticipated that it would get to be more common and acceptable for black people to have sex with non-blacks than with people their own skin color. I think it’s that sociobiological thing: “we’d rather they didn’t breed at all, but if they must, at least make light-skinned babies.”

I’ve seen studies on rape patterns among conquered people, and there is definitely a primal urge to breed your foes out of existence.
##
The CBS guy affirmed that, as individuals the writers and producers consider themselves enlightened and socially Liberal. And that their behavior in these arenas is BETTER than white Americans in general across the country. But that the result is the same.
##
Got into an interesting discussion with a black Conservative recently, where the subject of torture came up. He couldn’t, literally couldn’t stay on the question of whether torture was efficient. He strenuously and assertively kept trying to turn it into the question of whether it was necessary or moral to torture in order to win, and discussing how dire our current situation is. When I pointed out that that was a different discussion, he went a little bonko on me. Disturbing, really. Not sure what I was looking at there.
##
Happy New Year! Who has their goals for 2008 ready?

Mary Poppins

Jason got "Mary Poppins" just before Christmas, and has watched it a dozen times (in between bouts on his SmartCycle, definitely his favorite toy). Great movie. A few observations
1) the author of the original books didn't want there to be any hint of romance between Mary Poppins and Burt. Nonetheless, a few delicious hints remain, and I like to imagine that they shared one blissful night in the clouds...
2) The whole class-consciousness thing gives me a tweak. "Diamond in the rough...your blood is blue..." I guess I'm not amused by assumptions that one person is better than another by birth. But you know, I"m sure there are aspects of social stability that can't be achieved without such traditions. The British empire worked for a long time...
3) They wrote like 30 songs for Poppins, and about 15 of them were used. I love the movie, but it feels overlong to me, like they could have cut 15 minutes without effort.
4) I loved the original Dick Van Dyke show, but Dick left the show thinking that his movie career was going to soar. If you've seen Poppins you have the chance to hear what is broadly considered the worst English accent ever attempted by an American actor. Van Dyke, completely un-trained as a dancer, acquits himself superbly. Sort of a shame his movie dreams never really jelled.

AVP (2007)

Don't see it. In a strange mood, I went to see Alien Versus Predator Two. Oh, I have reasons--I didn't want to see anything really good, because T wasn't with me. But this movie just demeans both franchises unforgivably. No one with any connection to this mess had any idea why the original films worked. I mean, "Alien" was just "It, the Terror From Beyond Space" crossed with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and unleashed upon unsuspecting audiences. The characters were realistic, the situation ghastly. "Predator" had Arnold and a team of serious bad-asses, completely realized before you even glimpsed a monster. CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT. Otherwise you have decent monster suits, and a bunch of shaky-cam. And there are scenes of a pregnant woman being mouth-raped that were just disgusting. I don't need this. Stay away. An "F+"
##
Charlie Wilson's War. The story of a Texas congressman who single-handedly funneled vasts amounts of arms to Afghani rebels is irresistible. Loved it. Tom Hanks and Julia Roberts are great fun playing against type, but Phillip Seymour Hoffman as a CIA case worker steals the show. Solid "B"
##
"The Great Debaters." Underwritten "true" story of a small black college that developed a winning debate squad and challenged white teams in the Jim Crow era. directed competently by Denzel Washington (who also stars) and co-starring Forest Whitaker as the father of one of the debaters, the acting is fine, but the story feels...just a hair flat. The debaters should have been forced to defend positions they didn't agree with. Oddly, though, one critic ranted about how all the white characters were villainous. This is absolute crap. Most of the SOUTHERN white characters are, but the college deans are not just polite, but fair-minded and articulate. Many dozens of perfectly polite and nice folks. Some people are just too sensitive. A "B" that could have been an "A"
##
Warning! Sambo Alert!
##
Yes, there is a brief but nicely done (and placed) love scene. Not with Denzel, however, who doesn't get so much as a kiss. But it was nice to see.

On Yoga

In terms of jumping rope and yoga in the same day…when I said yoga, I specifically meant Hatha, the yoga of postures. The eight arms of yoga also admit meditation, breathing, service and other categories to the “Union of the divine” category.

All well and good. But the holding of static postures with very specific attentions and muscle locks and breathing patterns has an effect on the body unlike anything else. And while one can take breathing and attention and make almost anything a ‘yoga” I’m specifically looking at its ability to improve health in some ways that are unnervingly like rejuvenation. “Fitness” activities (how many reps, how much, how long) aren’t health activities except almost by accident. I have to be careful to avoid the lure of exercises that make me “sizzle” or give me a good “pump” but don’t actually help my body recover from another day’s work. The body grows and changes while resting, rather than while working. And the ego will try to head towards the “sizzle.” Yoga is a lot quieter than that. Often, you can’t even feel the effects. Just…your body feels great. Then you stop, and the fitness stays the same, but aches and pains accumulate, and one day you have the same complaints common to others your age and…oops! Time to head back to yoga again…
##
But aside from that, here’s a fast and dirty explanation (one of man, no doubt) for how yoga works as a spiritual discipline. Hatha, that is.

1) Learn proper breathing technique.
2) Learn basic postures, which align, stretch, and stress.
3) Take the postures to the limit that can be reached WITHOUT disrupting breathing.
4) Practice these breathing patterns for sixty seconds, five times a day, at every hour divisible by 3 (Five Minute Miracle).
5) When you are in high-stress situations, remember to breathe. After a couple of years or ordinary practice, this will begin to become habitual.
6) Live your life in balance (body, mind, spirit).
7) As you encounter stresses trying to live up to your goal, you will start to switch into resourceful breathing states, allowing you to access more of your skills.
8) As you resolve problems on one level of your life, you automatically ‘rise up” and encounter new problems on the next level.
9) If you maintain breathing practice, focus, and living in balance, you start marching “up” Maslow’s Hierarchy toward more integrated, stress-less, peaceful living.
10) My belief is that human beings are designed to evolve. Remove the blockages, resolve the fear, and keep moving…and the spiritual questions and challenges will automatically present themselves. You need not be a part of an organized faith at all…but if you are you are likely to improve your capacity to see through dogma to the underlying truths.

RESET button

Today is a yoga day. As a rule, on yoga days I try to think of nothing but yoga (in terms of physical development stuff) but I’m hankering to try a little jump rope in combination.

I’ve been grimly amused at the increased perceived difficulty in jumping rope now as opposed to…say, twenty-five years ago. It feels as if there is some core timing that is “off” now. I mean, every jump is a complete expression of the entire body, a little plyometric pulse running through you from toes to neck. Everything has to go in sequence, and a mistake trips you up pretty damned fast. Feedback is excellent. But man, I’m jumping at about 150 per minute (with lotsa tripping) and the minimum threshold for the effect I’m looking for is found at about 220 jpm. Going to take work.
#
While I’m at that, I have a copy of Scott Sonnon’s newest, called RESET. Rapid Energy Sports Enhancement Technique. It promises to reduce recovery time drastically, by incorporating a variety of postural, breathing, and vibrational effects.

It feels to me that Scott is synthesizing his original Russian training into something quite remarkable. This is advanced stuff, and he says it will take 2-4 months to integrate it so that you breathe/move this way all the time. I’m going to give it a shot, that’s for certain. Another of those interesting doorways…but all of them are ultimately about seeing clearly, deciding quickly and well, moving toward your goal with elegance. When you find a physical metaphor for this stuff, it communicates with your nervous system rather sweetly. Worth a look.
##
I was asked to phrase my observation about black (and Asian) men in film as succinctly as possible. This is my best shot:

The premise is that
1) males of group A prefer not to see males of groups B or C engage in sexual behavior.
2) This can be measured in the box-office success of non-white actors. They will not have sex as often as their white counterparts, and when they do it will negatively impact box office.
3) This is most clearly seen by looking at % of films with sexual content that earn above 100 million dollars. Films with white leads and sexual content earning above 100 million: about 23%. Films with non-white leads with sexual content earning above 100 million: zero percent.
4) That this emotional disconnect can be considered the "Invisible Hand" of the marketplace revealing unconscious racial attitudes. That the "visible hand" is revealed in differential incomes, incarceration rates, life expectancies and more.
###
I don't know if I can phrase it more precisely than this. Any thoughts?

What was the favorite thing you gave this year?

I never felt completely nurtured by any religious or spiritual community I’ve been a part of…but then, I never felt excluded or empty, either. Just usually…somewhere in-between. Feeling that the priest or minister or shaman or whatever would be much more interesting one-on-one than he or she was preaching to the masses. But then, I guess that’s a lot like a banquet: hopefully everyone is fed, but it’s not like individualizing the meals. I have a lot of respect for the profession, but have grasped for quite a long time that it was likely I’d never find a particular path that would work for me. Just something odd in my head and heart, I guess.

But while sitting and listening to the sermon at church doesn’t do it for me, watching the rest of the congregation does. Because my assumption is that it isn’t perfectly “working” for anyone. That everyone in that church is there partially for the service, and partially for the community of like-minded people, partially to support those who need what a church can offer, or to keep the social aspects of the church strong: in the black community, there have just been too many times when the church was the only functioning organism. Christmas brings out the best of church-folks, I think.

Didn’t go to church this year, but was at First African Methodist Episcopal a few weeks back. Didn’t attend the service, I was with the Sunday School class, supervising Jason and offering what help I could. And you know? I liked it. I liked sitting back and watching the Sunday school teachers work, and listening to their stories and games. I thought to myself that there were many stories I heard at that age that were good teaching tales, that gave a young mind perspective on kindness, and sacrifice, and cruelty, and generosity. Good stuff, all around.

And for the last few weeks I could FEEL Jason struggling to be a better kid. Christmas did that. “He knows when you are sleeping.” The Santa Claus routine is brilliant. The entire world seems to change for a month or so, and everyone’s focus is a little different. And if far too much of it is on the commercial aspects, that’s not a surprise: we live in a commercial culture. Just the way it works. But I watched him carefully, and yeah, most of it is shiny stuff, just junk, but his behavior…he really was more considerate, and tried to be a “big boy” as much as he could, and I can’t see how any of that hurts him. Concentrating him on giving to others, going to homeless shelters to make contributions…we’ll fine-tune what Santa wants over the next years. And his ability to absorb the stories in Church will grow more sophisticated as well. And somewhere between Jesus and Mr. Claus, I think we’re gonna be all right. Heck, even if it’s just the fun, that’s darned near enough.
##
My favorite gift I gave? Jason's SmartCycle. Video game, exercise, and educational toy in one. He played with it more than all his other toys and stuff combined. Fisher-Price has a winner!

MERRY CHRISTMAS, EVERYONE!

I'm just doing the Christmas thing at home, so no time right now. Just wanted to thank all of you for being my sounding board over the last few years...and hope that you will all find ways to celebrate another year of life and love.

Steve

Waiting for Sweeny

Frank made a comment about being Sicilian, and the odd rumors that float through his community about being “connected.” All right, Frank, here’s my guess, based totally on observation. The following, for the sake of clarity, is simplified, and reflects my point of view, not some particular anthropological view.

IF you divided humanity into three basic racial groups (the “primary colors” argument) consisting of White, Asian, and Black, then I would estimate that the amount of cultural bigotry existing WITHIN these groups is about half that experienced BETWEEN groups.

In other words, Sicilians and Englishmen and Germans may snipe at each other, but will snipe HARDER at an Asian or Black. Japanese, Koreans and Chinese will say bad things about each other, but in general would rather their children marry an Asian than a white or Black. Nigerians, Zulus and Jamaicans have nothing in common…except in comparison to a Swede or Japanese. And while Africans often feel they have little in common with Black Americans, they seem to me to have a little more than they do with White Americans.

Broad strokes here, but it’s important. I notice Jews having greater empathy for Black experience, on average than white Christians. But the difference between Jews and other whites isn’t much important except to other white people. So…in other words, if there are two Californians in the room, they’ll snipe at each other about the part of the state they came from…until an Oregonian enters the room, at which point the Californians will Gang up…until an East Coaster enters the room, at which point the West Coasters will gang up…until a Canadian enters the room…

You get it? So, if you’ve experienced within-group prejudice, you have a good clue. Just multiply it to get an average experience of Out-group prejudice.
And the greater the visual distinction, the greater the effect.
##
On the radio yesterday, a woman was speaking of a book (“Prude” perhaps?) encouraging girls not to have sex until they are above the age of 16. It was interesting to listen to the callers. Men almost always thought she was an alarmist. Kids are ready for sex, etc. The female callers agreed with her, wanted to buy a copy of the book, etc.

Her point was that society, especially advertising, is sexualizing little girls. That girls that age don’t fully enjoy sex, and often do it to try to get closer to their boyfriends, hallucinating that it “means” the same thing to males that it does to females. Much in the way that when a guy comes, he often hallucinates that the woman felt the same thing. I mean, wow! Wasn’t that great (he said). Are you done (she replied).

Anyway, it was so interesting how oblivious the guys seemed to what was going on. Men, of course, want access to as much sex as possible, regardless of the cost. The women were thinking of their daughters, and their own past relationships. Folks weren’t listening to each other. So sad.

##
Fasting today. Usually this is a “cheat day” but Nicki is out of town, in Las Vegas with friends. Be back Saturday. I feel a little bloated: jeeze, is everything food over Xmas? So I’m fasting today, so I can avoid bursting my jeans. So hard with all the foodage around.
##
Can’t wait to see “Sweeny Todd.” Love that play, and have seen two different versions of it, each unique and challenging. The word is that Burton knocked it out of the park, that even Depp’s (relatively) weak singing is compensated for by the quality of his acting. This is gonna be wicked.

Future Sex

I got asked some interesting questions about future sexuality, and what if the love scene was gay? Hah! I’m not going to be thrilled about seeing a black man in a homosexual relationship unless I’m not seeing that any more often than I see white actors in homosexual relationships, relative to their representation in heterosexual relationships.

There it is. You don’t think I didn’t notice Will Smith’s kissing scene with Kevin James in “Hitch” being front and center in the advertising? Jesus, he’s smart (I thought to myself). In order to do a romantic comedy, the black guy has to also be helping the white guy get laid AND diminish his perceived masculinity by kissing another man. Then it’s safe for white audiences. I think Smith’s brilliant: he’s figured this game out at a level no one else ever has.

But having a futuristic situation where you have a black man with a wife AND a husband? Interesting. But not until I’ve seen one with a girlfriend (note: you don’t get love scenes between husbands and wives very often.) doing the boy-meets, boy-loses, boy-gets routine with at least a PG-13 love scene. This character arc is as common as drinking water: unless you're not white.

Oh, and “The Great Debaters”? Unless that love scene is with Denzel, no I won’t count it. If Felix Leiter got laid instead of Bond, think the audience might be a little pissed? Just another way of distracting from the Big Problem. Here I am, asking for something that white audiences get 24/7, 365 days a year, and I can’t get it ONCE. It’s like I say: notice that women never drive cars in movies? And people say, “well, there was one driving a motorcycle!” “She was a PASSENGER in a car!” “well, I saw a movie once, and NO ONE drove a car in it…” “what about if there was a movie that took place in the future, and the cars were computerized. Would that count..?”


All irrelevant. But funny.
##
People mention Colin Powell, and how many people wanted to vote for him. You can’t say that without also looking at the volume of death threats he received: the secret service lady I spoke to said that they’d never seen anything like it. So if you don’t factor that in, isn’t that just a bit disingenuous? Saying someone “can’t be President” isn’t contradicted if large chunks of White America would vote for him, but there’s also a real, serious, no-b.s. chance that thousands of other white Americans would like to kill him. Same is true for Obama, but I’d still back him. If he doesn’t get the nomination, it’s been a good run. If he gets it, runs a good campaign and loses, he’s still made history. If he runs, and wins, and makes it to the Oval Office and does a good job—fantastic. The images systems controlling American minds would shift with incredible speed. If he gets elected and one of these whackos hurts him…well, that would shift America as well. And I think, in an ultimately positive way. I don’t want to put anything out into the ether that isn’t already there, but as long as he has presented himself as pretty much the guy he is (and my indicators say that’s true) Obama is most interesting to me: like me, he never believed Iraq had WMDs or that Saddam had intentions to vastly expand. Maybe we were both right based on an accident or coincidence…but maybe not. And I’d have a hard time voting for someone I thought dumber than me.

But can he make it? Not if Denzel or Will Smith can’t get laid, no. That’s my position, and I’m sticking to it. “But what if someone ELSE in Denzel’s movie…” “what if he’s married, with kids, so it’s obvious that at SOME point he had sex…” “What if he meets a really hot chick, and the movie ends before he speaks to her, but in your heart you KNOW they’re gonna do it later…”
“What if it’s G-rated, and they kiss, but you know that in an R-rated movie they WOULD have…” “What if it’s an SF movie, and no one has sex anymore, but there are these Orgasmatrons, and they both hook up…” “What if there’s a transvestite but (chuckle!) Will doesn’t realize it—and neither does the audience (guffaw) until morning!”j “What if…what if…”

I’ve heard them all. None of them apply. Sex just isn’t that complicated. Unless, apparently, it’s revealing unconscious prejudices on the part of millions of supposedly enlightened Americans. Then it’s oh-so complicated. The creative meetings where they try to figure out how to avoid it THIS TIME must be hysterical. Or the way that, unconsciously, them sex scenes get re-written out of existence if the film was originally for a white star (say, Sylvester Stallone for “Beverly Hills Cop”) when a black star is cast (Eddie Murphy). No, no, no. No escape. Resistance is futile.
I'm afraid Obama is toast.

More on Yoga

More on Yoga

I thought I’d make a list of the reasons I think so highly of yoga, and a few more observations:

1) It is primarily a “health” activity, not a “fitness” activity. Fitness generally relates to how many times you can do X within Y period of time. That’s nice, and probably necessary.
2) Yoga deals with how your organ systems and skeletal structure work. Tai Chi or Chi Gung do the same, but it’s my opinion that the average yoga teacher is better at producing the desired results. It’s easier to correct a static posture than a dynamic motion. And by the time you get into visualizations and kinesthetic awareness in Chi Gung, well…its easy to slide into fantasy.
3) If you follow the breath, it is possible to adjust any posture to the level safe and effective for you. Just go to the root of the posture, modify, and find a place where YOUR breath is challenged.
4) Forget about that 17-year old gymnast on the next mat. It is a perfect non-competitive activity, good to squelch your ego. But there is competition for those who really, really want it. Subjective measurement, of course, like figure skating or gymnastics or dance.
5) A high level of fitness can be established, although individual muscle groups are not developed in a Body Building sense, and the pulling muscles aren’t worked as hard as the pushing ones.
6) Yoga can provide a safe environment for the exploration of meditation. There are different “tones” that you will “hear” and feel in your body when you master certain positions. They may be represented by sensations, sounds, whatever. Collect these impressions and bring them into your meditations. They will teach you things about yourself. If you follow your breathing, and only your breathing, you have a good chance of finding one of these “tones” in every class. Just one second or so where everything was working unusually well.
7) Yoga is a perfect adjunct to sports and other “fitness” activities. Most are extracted from hunting (track and field), fighting (martial arts), or mating (dance) activities. Their intent is to enhance individual or genetic survival, or to express the deep Self. Hatha Yoga is designed to quiet the mind so that you can se what lies below the surface. It can be combined with religious beliefs, spiritual perspectives, or “merely” used as biofeedback to find tension and release it.
8) Yoga can be practiced by any age or fitness level. A teacher who doesn’t know how to adapt a pose to all you to succeed is a poor teacher. As long as you follow the breathing, it is virtually impossible to hurt yourself. As fitness progresses, the poses become more intense to force you to pay attention.
9) The IDEA concept (Instinctive Designation of Energy and Attention) is perfectly expressed in Yoga. There is a custom-amount of focus and release in any given pose. No two are alike. As you go deeper, you will find that the energy curve of excellence for any given pose will start matching the needs of other life activities: arguments, late-night diaper changes, freeway traffic. You’ll notice that different bits of emotional terrain are easier to navigate.
10) But you MUST follow the breath to get this. That’s your doorway in.
11) On Yoga days, I'm JUST a yogi. No MA, no kettlebells, I try not to even think of those things. I try to see the world through the eyes of one seeking union with the divine. I like alternating between "yin" and "yang" aspects of my personality. The truth of "me" is found in the space between.
12) Yoga seems more suited to increasing a woman's femininity than a man's masculinity. Yes, there are Rodney Yees and the like. But the average woman in a yoga class seems to express her secondary sexual characteristics more than the average man. Not much competition, really. I've often said that if I moved to a new city, and had no female acquaintences, what I'd do is go to yoga classes. Love those yummy yoga bodies! But as a guy...I'd add a bit of weight lifting, if I were you. Male yoga bodies tend to be a little...frail-looking.
13) Yoga puts back what time takes away. And so efficiently and subtly that if you've been doing hatha yoga regularly for, say, a year, and then stop for a couple of months, you'll likely feel all manner of odd aches and pains. You might even conclude that yoga is somehow bad for you, that you never felt this stuff before...the truth is that age inflicts one with Sensory Motor Amnesia, as well as a slight "anesthetic glove" effect where you literally can't feel what's wrong. From time to time your back will give you enough pain to pierce the "glove" and what do we do? Take pain-killers. That's like shutting off the fire alarm rather than putting out the fire. Yoga actually puts you in touch with what's going on.
14) Yoga will seduce you into missing yoga sessions. Since you generally don't feel a "pump" like you do in the gym, once you're feeling kinda froggy, the temptation is to forget the foundational work and leap for the big muscles or blazing energy pathways. The foundation erodes, aches and pains return, range of motion is limited, we throw our backs out in the bath-tub. Yoga is best as a preventative rather than a curative.
15) If you can get to a yoga class a minimum of, say, once a month, you can create your own program, say 30 minutes three times a week. Use the class to deepen your understanding of the methodology, and refine postures. Even fifteen minutes three times a week can bear big benifits. Say...10 reps of sun salutations? You'll feel it, trust me.
16) Working your abs separately would be smart. Flat abs are fun to have, and relatively simple, if not at all easy. The best ab device on the market is that five dollar "roller wheel" thingie. Try doing sets of 10, 25, or 50. If that's easy from your knees, do 'em from your toes. Killer, and a great warm-up
17) Most importantly, remember: it doesn't take a lot of time. It DOES take consistency, and a commitment to being 1% better every week.

Thoughts on Yoga

Lynn—thanks for getting the brother some action in your screenplay. But remember: I never said people don’t make and release such movies. I said that white folks won’t turn out to them in numbers sufficient to cross the 100-million mark. Big difference in implication.
##
Regarding Yoga. I’ve done yoga on and off my whole life, starting with Richard Hittleman on television when I was about five. There are some opinions I’d like to express, in no particular order:
1) Yoga is the most advanced body-mind science available to the general public. Having been around six thousand years, they’ve gotten the bugs out.
2) The secret to Yoga is the breathing. Find a smooth, even breath (it can be intense, like Ujai breathing) and keep it through the entire session. NEVER break the “thread” of the breath. If you find your breath struggling, it means one thing: you are going too deeply into the posture. Regardless of what the teacher says, NEVER allow your breathing to interrupt. You can slow it, or speed it, but never hold it. Period.
3) If you have no other standard, find a female teacher over fifty who is in gnarly shape.
4) Yoga only seems to be about stretching. It is about focus, and unifying mind and body through breath. The first problem most people encounter is flexibility. There are other challenges: strength, balance, endurance, coordination.
5) Flexibility is more in the mind than the body. You literally have forgotten how to tell your body to relax.
6) A good pose is intense enough to require total attention, but not too tense to allow smooth breathing.
7) If you’re very athletic and confident: try Ashtanga. If you don’t have any idea how to judge a teacher, try Bikram. Both are real yoga systems that will get you there. The most conservative yoga system is Iyengar. Basic, powerful, smart. Hard to go wrong.
8) Avoid yoga classes taught by 19 year old aerobics instructors. Unless she’s a genius, she’s mistaking fitness-flexibility with the body-mind link. Come back and see her in twenty years.