Reviews: Magritte, Tiajuana, Icons

Okay, how long did I say these slippers had a chance of lasting? Beso chewed the balls off them last night. He was playing with a ball and I had my slippers right next to me on the floor by the couch. Because I don't put shoes or slippers on the couch, because I was not raised in a barn. So he was running around and I was knitting a baby blanket for a friend and then suddenly he bounces in so happy happy happy that I know something is WRONG. Well somehow he had done it.

So, the beloved and I have gone to a few shows. The Magritte show at LACMA was beautifully arranged by John Baldessari, you walked on a carpet of clouds (how surreal!) but the Magrittes were you know, pretty Magritte-y and not very interesting. The work around the Magrittes by contemporary artists was actually very interesting. It was good to see some of Doug Hubler's Crocodile Tears series and some dynamic work by Vija Celmins, who is also having a major retro at the Hammer, which I haven't seen yet. But it wasn't really the best show I've seen and was rather disappointing. Though it will not be disappointing to the museum because it is one of those block buster shows that everyone takes their children to see. "Look honey the APPLE is a BIG as the ROOM!."

In contrast a more modest show at the Santa Monica Museum of Art does not disappoint. "Strange New World: Art and Design from Tijuana" was lively and engaging. It had some of the funniest video art I'd seen in a while. And there were some damn good paintings. SM Museum

At the Getty (Yes, we've been going going going in search of an art fix) there is a show of Icons from the Holy Monastery of Saint Catherine underneath Mount Sinai. The Monastery is the continuous monastery going and they had a lot of icons that need restoration. So the Getty conservators stepped in and did a damn good job restoring things but then they took them to California and put them on display here. I assume the icons are eventually going back, since the Getty seems to be returning things these days. Anyway I figured that I would never get my ass over to the Sinai peninsula to see these in situ, and I'd probably be struck down by angry monks if I did, so off to the Getty we went. So as Fellini and Bunuel have ever been fond of pointing out, there is something surreal about priests in their robes. But really nothing is more surreal than having 50 Eastern Orthodox Priests on a pilgrimage to the Getty Center in their medieval-man robes and large crosses and long, long, long beards. And like medieval-man, they haven't really discovered deodorant so they are au natural. But like people everywhere, you could tell who the cool monks were. They could occasionally make jokes. There is a tension, however, in the display of objects shown both as objects and as objects of veneration. These are religious artifacts that have been in continuous use for 1000 years and as such are wonderful examples of medieval art. And so there is tension between the use and purpose of the object when taken out of it's context and placed in a secular modern one. It's rather embarrassing to see people kneel and pray in an art museum. Especially the Getty that temple to Mammon.

Anyway the monks made a good visual along with the art. There was a portal of full length portraits of Moses and Aaron, dark curly hair on one, long white beard on the other, one was holding a tablet and the other a scroll. I thought the white haired bearded one was Moses -- even though he was holding the scroll, but on reading the text I found out he was Aaron! Moses was the cute dude with the curly dark hair holding the tablets. Upon finding this out I then stood around and watched people approach and then would ask them, which one is Moses? And everyone pointed to old white beard. So poor Moses has over the centuries been slowly becoming less cute in the popular imagination. Cause I'm telling you two thousand years ago, he was the hunk. Speaking of which, there is an icon of St. Catherine (or 97 icons of Catherine, the monastery is named after her) where she is gazing coyly at the viewer, seductively leaning against her wheel. Which I thought was what she was martyred on , but apparently she was going to be put to death on the wheel and her touch broke it, so she was beheaded instead and angels whisked her away to Mount Sinai and the monastery started. Who knew?

Signs: Ye Coach House Curry

So in last weekend's New York Times Magazine they interview Dr. Andrew Von Eschenbach the current FDA commissioner. He is asked about his predecessor, Lester Crawford, who resigned in scandal because he and his wife owned stock in FDA regulated companies. That is he was in a position to grant FDA approval to drugs for companies that he owned a financial interest. Um, this is obviously ILLEGAL and UNETHICAL, and Dr. Crawford is being sentenced next week. Asked about this, the new FDA head says: "It's very sad that these circumstances have occurred and that he and his family are facing this."

Now, I know that outrage is just useless in this administration, but wouldn't you want the new head of the FDA to say something against illegally profiting from companies that you are supposed to be policing? Like gee wow, I feel bad for his lack of judgment, but you obviously can't have the fox GUARDING the chickens. And I have set up my finances in a blind trust administered by so and so with the stipulation that all drug companies will not be assets in the blind trust. Dr. Von Eschenbach also said about his opinion as a cancer doctor about regulating nicotine as a drug he said "As cancer doctors, we have looked at the consequences of tobacco, of which nicotine is a component, but in which there are many other components." Well, gee, where do I start? First he didn't answer the question. And you can be against regulating tobacco and nicotine and also be against cancer. But he really sounds like he started out being one of those RJR shills - paid to obfuscate the fact that cigarette smoking and tobacco cause cancer. He may have looked at the consequences of tobacco, emphysema, cancer; but he seems mildly amused by them.

This administration's ability to find and promote complete amoral greedy people gives crony capitalism a new name. KBR not doing enough for Cheney's portfolio - let's have a fraudulent war!

Remoras

It is winter and the wood floors are cold and so in a post-holiday fit of consumerism (the terrorists, they have not won!) I bought a pair of slippers. Allegedly the whole wait-until-January thing is all about getting things on sale. But ahem, these were too fabulous to be on sale, and of course, they were really too silly for anyone to actually buy, so they should have been on sale. But they weren't. And I bought them and took them home and ripped open the package and put them on my tootsies.

Well the peebs like them too. They just latched on to those little puffs and sucked on them, one on each side as I walked around. Latched on just like remoras. So I started to shake one foot and then the other. And they started to get real mouthy all over my slippers and feet. So I started running, which made them follow me. What a great game! She put fuzzy chew toys on her feet! Weeeee! So I'm taking bets on how long they last.

Another Outrage

So apparently my two fans were complaining about my using my blog to test work media. Oh well. One of my fans suggested a romantic weekend getaway for my birthday. So I decided to look up some hotel costs. The Hotel Del Coronado for example starts at 540 a night, so it's making the dog motel built by the husband of a notorious con-woman and murderer in Palm Springs where we got bug bites look pretty good. But the thing that really startled me was this notation on the hotel room reservation: Bedding On Request.

I'm sorry, but for 540 bucks a night I EXPECT Bedding as the default.

Will it Nuke?

I uploaded this video at myspace.revvervideos and the sound didn't work, so I'm testing it here.