Monday 28 May 2012

DIscussion article for 29th of MAy


mODERN LOVE

A Visit, and What Really Happened


HIS e-mail read: “Here for one night. Giants game tomorrow. Buy you a drink?”
I was so stunned, I lost my breath. I hadn’t seen him in 25 years. I thought I had gotten over the need to get over my first love. But 11 words on a screen and I was a nervous 14-year-old again.
I’d fallen for the burly, curly haired anti-romantic who nicknamed me his “old sea hag” in ninth grade. He was the first to take me to a Dylan concert, to bed, to say “I love you.” Then, in my senior year of college, he knocked me up and deserted me for my roommate.
A decade ago, needing closure, I begged him for a long overdue showdown. He said, “I’d rather take out my own appendix with a bottle of Jack and a dull spoon.” I longed to show him I had turned out smart, attractive and blissfully wed. I pictured him apologizing for the hurtful way he left me.
Now that he was here, I panicked. I had recently turned 50, torn two ligaments in my back, was out of shape. I felt too weak to face my ex. Did he really want to buy me a drink? He didn’t even know I hadn’t smoked or drank in 10 years.
“When?” I e-mailed. “Phone me.”
Brushing my hair, I spied gray roots. My nervous energy coalesced into one inane conundrum: If I used my last Clairol Nice ’n Easy Root Touch-Up and dolled up, he would cancel. There should be a moratorium on how much misery your first love inflicts. After 25 years, heartache disappears.
“If you can’t, no sweat,” he added.
I was already sweating. Going out would require walking, preferably in heels — bad for my damaged spine. If he came over, I wouldn’t risk reinjury and could show off my apartment.
“Stop by at 4,” I e-mailed casually, as if I hadn’t been wanting this tête-à-tête since 1985.
No response. He had chickened out. To recover, I didn’t shower. I wasn’t ruining my day for an ex who would probably bail. I felt rejected all over again.
At 3:15, he e-mailed, “Walking over.”
“Come at 4,” I responded. “Jumping in the shower now.”
“Too late. On the street. Unless you shower 25 years off, won’t matter.”
Still a jerk! I laughed, rushing dye onto my roots. I showered, conditioned, blew my darker hair, applied blush, mascara, eyeliner. I slid on black jeans, a Wonderbra, black T-shirt, platform shoes I couldn’t walk in. My phone rang.
“Where the hell are you?” he asked. Typical male: make me wait 25 years then expect me to jump at his command.
I opened the door.
“Did you really take a shower and dress up for me?” he asked.
I nodded.
“You look great,” he said. “I’m a schlep.”
He was. In jeans, a sweatshirt, ratty sneakers. Same handsome face. Thinner. No wrinkles. Still had hair. No gray.
In the old days he would enter my dorm room and undress me without a word. Thankfully, I no longer felt that heat. But I was still drawn to him, eager to uncover the meaner, curlier-haired dynamo I had adored.
He went to the couch. I sat on the ottoman, too near, our knees almost touching. I got us water, then sat across from him.
“How’s your mom?” he asked. “I loved that lady.” Looking at my framed book covers, he added, “Bet your dad’s proud you’ve done so well.”
“He would have preferred grandchildren,” I admitted. “Why wouldn’t you see me 10 years ago?”
“I couldn’t handle rehashing everything. I just wanted you to go away.”
He sounded angry, which fascinated me. In 2000, rather than meet me in person, he reluctantly agreed to a brief e-mail exchange to help with a memoir I was writing. I was still smoking and drinking then. Had my altered state distorted things? Surely I didn’t misremember his affair with my roommate. Or the pathetic winter night I drove to his apartment to find yet another woman in his bed.
“You clung to your side of the story,” he said. “It seemed inaccurate to me.”
What was his side? As he asked more about my mother, who loved him, I flashed to a week before my senior year of college. We were in my pink bedroom in my parents’ house. I was three weeks late.
“Do you want to have it?” he had asked. “We could get married.”
“I can’t.” I didn’t want to recreate my parents’ suburban life. I wanted a career, a big city. I scheduled an abortion a few days later. He insisted on driving me, paid $400, waited with a salami sandwich in case I was hungry. He took me home in his silver Camaro.
“I need some time off,” I’d said.
Soon I was partying all night and fooling around with other men. I was startled to realize that I was the one who had been disloyal and unable to commit, not him. At my most fragile, he stood up for me. Like a recovered memory, I suddenly saw him offering me his hand.
Why was I just seeing this now? I was 50, smoke- and drug-free, happily married, successful in my older skin, with a back injury. Had this changed my mind and memory, or was it seeing him here, smaller and sadder, that moved me to discern something deeper?
“It was like you were telling everyone I was morally bankrupt,” he said.
I USED to flippantly say that if he didn’t like being portrayed as a cad, he shouldn’t have been one. But staring at this familiar man who used to be mine, it became clear: he wasn’t the bad guy I made him out to be.
I had bailed first, then blamed him for breaking up right after the abortion. I couldn’t deal with my confusion head-on, so I focused instead on his infidelity, conveniently forgetting he offered to take care of me and the baby I could have had.
While I partied through graduate school, he and his wife had two children. The year I finally wed and began getting it together, I learned their second child had died in infancy. For one inappropriate moment, my guilt connected the baby I had refused to their girl who died, imagining that my ex’s ghost child was haunting us both.
“I’m sorry about your daughter,” I said now.
“It was 15 years ago. Such a horrible time. I didn’t think we’d survive.”
Did he mean their marriage, or their lives? Hearing him this vulnerable was jolting. It seemed life had beaten him up, and so had I. I suddenly wanted to protect him, hold him, take it all back.
“Do you regret not having children?” he asked.
I had a lot of regrets. He had desperately wanted to be a father while I had chosen to abort his child, feeling only relief and freedom. Twenty years later, when my husband and I struggled with infertility, it felt as if God were saying: “I gave you the power to have a child. You don’t get to decide when.”
I often quipped that I was better off having books than babies. But now I pictured the empty bedroom in my apartment. I thought of the 38-year-old friend I had pushed to freeze her embryos by saying, “Don’t give up on the most miraculous experience a woman can have.” I called my therapist sexist when he said that my childlessness was “a biological tragedy” I had yet to reconcile. What was tragic was how long it took me to feel happy, whole and cared-for enough to want a child. By then it was too late.
“If I’d known my marriage would be this strong and we could afford it,” I said, “I would have tried harder.”
“So you didn’t get everything you wanted,” he said, gently. “I guess nobody does.”
I was lucky to share my life with a sexy, brilliant, creative man who nurtured my work. In retrospect, my ex and I were ridiculously mismatched. But for the six years we were together, he had been only kind to me.
Walking to the door, he caught the framed glamour shot of me on the shelf, squeezed into a tight black dress, taken 10 years and 12 pounds ago.
“You should have seen me then,” I joked, feeling old and wistful.
“You look the same,” he said. “One benefit of not having kids.”
What a double-edged line. Did he mean I looked young, or that trying to have the perfect family had taken too much out of him? “Thanks for coming over,” I said.
“You’re still in my brother’s bar mitzvah album,” he told me. As I hugged my first love goodbye, he whispered, “I was nervous to see you, too.”
Afterward, seeing that it was I who needed to apologize, I e-mailed: “Good to catch up after 25 years. Felt healing. I’m sorry if I hurt you.”
“Likewise,” he replied. “Thoughts swirling. We’ll chat again soon.”
I knew we never would.

Discussion Article for 29th of May


The 35th Birthday of Star Wars? It Died 15 Years Ago

When George Lucas first screened Star Wars — showing an early cut to Steven Spielberg, Brian de Palma and several other old friends who had found their own place in the film world — the special effects were unfinished.
As recounted in Easy Riders, Raging Bulls — Peter Biskind’s wonderfully tawdry history of the Golden Age of cinema, the 1970s — Lucas held the cut together with footage of airplane dogfights pulled from old World War II films. As the lights came up in the San Francisco screening room, the movie was met with nothing but embarrassed silence. According to Biskind, Lucas’ then wife, Marcia, was in tears.
Over Chinese food that night, de Palma pulled no punches. “The crawl at the beginning looks like it was written on a driveway. It goes on forever. It’s gibberish,” he told Lucas. “The first act? Where are we? Who are these fuzzy guys? Who are these guys dressed up like the Tin Man from Oz? What kind of a movie are you making here? You’ve left the audience out. You’ve vaporized the audience.”
De Palma was dead right. And yet, when the movie opened on May 25, 1977, with the special effects and a rousing score pilfered from an old Ronald Reagan movie, he couldn’t have been more wrong.
Stripped down to its story, Star Wars is a pastiche that deserves little more than ridicule. As Carrie Fisher whispered to her co-stars: “You can type this stuff, but you can’t say it.” And Mark Hamill has trouble saying much of anything. But after Lucas put all the pieces together, Star Wars was a revelation. With John Williams’ score tacked onto the front, even the crawl works. And with the special effects in place, you somehow forget that Hamill couldn’t have cut it on daytime television.
Today, we celebrate the 35th anniversary of a movie few will ever see again.
Today, we celebrate the 35th anniversary of the day all those pieces came together. Lucas was in Hawaii, hiding from the box office returns. But back on the mainland, Walter Cronkite was telling America that moviegoers were lined up around the block at theaters across the country. Within three months, Star Warspulled in $100 million. By November, it was the highest-grossing movie of all time.
More than that, the movie shaped the childhood of an entire generation. It’s one thing almost all of us share. And that’s why today is such a depressing day. Today, we celebrate the 35th anniversary of a movie few will ever see again.
In the late ’90s, more than 20 years after Star Wars debuted, Lucas remade the film. A few years later, he tinkered some more. The idea was to improve it, taking advantage of the digital effects developed at Industrial Light & Magic over the previous decade. But he succeeded only in ruining the magic. It’s not just that the movie isn’t what we remember seeing as children. It’s that CGI is still no match for the special effects ILM pioneered in the mid-’70s. It’s not even a match for the special effects Stanley Kubrick pioneered a decade before that.
With Star Wars, the effects were tangible. They were photographs of real stuff. You believed you could touch them. You never believe you can touch the digital Jabba the Hutt who turns up in Star Wars Mark II. Several stormtroopers are seen riding digital images across the sands of Tatooine. When Luke and Obi-Wan arrive at the Mos Eisley space port, they’re suddenly surrounded by a swarm of pixels. The spell is broken.
Our generation complains about the second Star Wars trilogy: Phantom Menace and the rest. We complain about the plot and, inevitably, Jar Jar Binks. But is Jar Jar that much more ridiculous than the man-size dog who pals around with Han Solo? In Phantom Menace, it’s the effects that let us down as much as anything else. Twenty-five years on, they’re just not as good.
The same goes for the bastardized Star Wars. And it’s this movie that we now see. You can find the original version on some DVDs. But not all. It’s not what the world watches.
In the ’70s, without CGI, there were things Lucas couldn’t do. The effects were limited. But that doesn’t matter. Other parts of the movie are limited, too. And there’s no getting around that John Williams’ score was lifted almost note for note from Erich Korngold’s score for King’s Row. But this doesn’t matter either.
Put all those flawed pieces together and it works. Or at least it did.

Discussion Article 29th of May



Sol Campbell warns fans to stay away from Euro 2012


Euro 2012 should not have been awarded to Poland and Ukraine because of entrenched racism and violence, Sol Campbell has told the BBC's Panorama.
The former England captain's advice to fans is to "stay home, watch it on TV... don't even risk it."
Uefa, European football's governing body, said awarding the tournament to the two nations was an opportunity to tackle social challenges like racism.
It said the tournament was a chance for both countries to improve their image.
Panorama spent a month filming at matches in both the joint host nations and witnessed Nazi salutes from the terraces, black players being taunted with monkey chants, rampant anti-Semitism and a vicious assault on a group of Asian students.
'Zero tolerance'
After watching the footage, Mr Campbell said he believes Uefa should not have chosen the countries as hosts of such a prestigious event in the first place.
"I think that they were wrong, because what they should say is that 'if you want this tournament, you sort your problems out. Until we see a massive improvement... you do not deserve these prestigious tournaments in your country.'"
In a statement, Uefa said: "Uefa Euro 2012 brings the spotlight on the host countries and clearly creates an opportunity to address and confront such societal issues.
"Uefa's 'zero tolerance' approach to racism is still valid both on and off the pitch and ultimately the referee has the power to stop or abandon a match should racist incidents occur."
Uefa said it was working with both Poland and Ukraine to ensure the safety of travelling teams and their fans.
But despite these assurances the families of two England players, Theo Walcott and Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain, are reported to be staying away from Euro 2012 for fear of racist attacks.
Uefa said the scenes of racist abuse filmed by the BBC in the last month were at domestic matches and a matter for national football authorities.
But Mr Campbell had this advice for fans thinking of travelling to Euro 2012: "Stay at home, watch it on TV. Don't even risk it… because you could end up coming back in a coffin."
Racist attack
On 14 April at the Metalist stadium in Kharkiv in Ukraine - one of the host cities for Euro 2012 - massed ranks of as many as 2,000 fans in the terraces for a match between two of Ukraine's biggest teams gave the Nazi salute to their team.
Some fans at the match told the BBC that they were saying "Sieg Heil" because Hitler hated "Jews and blacks" and that is how they support their team.
But local police chief Colonel Volodymyr Kovrygin denied that it was a Nazi-inspired salute, saying the fans were "pointing in the direction of opponents as it were, the fans, so it looked like they were pointing with the right hand to the fans, kind of attracting attention to themselves."
At a match two weeks later, scuffles broke out between rival fans and police arrived to calm things down. But they escalated again as Metalist fans began to attack a small group of their own supporters.
They were Indian students studying in Ukraine. They had sat in the family area of the stadium thinking it would be safe.

Panorama: Find out more

BBC Panorama logo
  • Chris Rogers presents Euro 2012: Stadiums of Hate
  • BBC One, Monday, 28 May at 20:30 BST
In the stadium's medical room afterwards, one of the injured students said: "We were supporting the home team. It's horrifying."
British government advice for Euro 2012 fans of Afro-Caribbean or Asian descent is to take extra care in Ukraine because of racially motivated attacks.
Panorama also filmed matches in fellow host-nation Poland, recording a chorus of anti-Semitic chanting and witnessing black football players enduring monkey chants from the terraces.
Nick Lowles from the UK-based anti-racist monitoring group Hope Not Hate was also in Poland monitoring incidents of racism.
He said that based on what he has seen, he was concerned for non-white fans travelling to support England at Euro 2012.
"Increasingly the positive thing about English football are the number of black and Asian fans that have been travelling and supporting England. I am concerned that they will be targeted by racists and fascists and anti-Semites in Poland and in Ukraine."
In Poland, Jonathan Ornstein of the Jewish Cultural Centre, said football hooligans in the country are stuck in the past.
"The stuff going on at the football stadiums is atrocious and it's embarrassing and I think it embarrasses the whole country. I think that most Poles would agree with that," he said.
Panorama's Euro 2012: Stadiums of Hate, BBC One, Monday, 28 May at 20:30 BST and then available in the UK on the BBC iPlayer.
Are you an England fan? What are your thoughts on Sol Campbell's comments? Will you be going to Euro 2012? Send us your views using the form below.