text:
The Schlemiel and Allen Ginsberg's IGNU
Unlike Uncle Walt (Walt Whitman), Allen Ginsberg's poetry isn't all pathos (although it does have a great deal of that). To be sure, there is a comic element in his poetry that many people often overlook. Poems like "Howl" or "Kaddish" are very serious poems, but they do have comic elements in this or that part. In fact, most of Ginsburg's poems are peppered with comedy.
One poem which recently caught my eye was a poem entitled IGNU, which can be found in his Kaddish collection. It is, without a doubt, a comic poem. In this rare audio clip of Allen reciting the poem in 1973 – in a tribute to Kerouac at Salem State College – Ginsberg explains that the word IGNU was a word invented by Jack Kerouac around 1948 or 1949.
Ginsburg goes on to explain the meaning of the term by way of mysticism and comedy. An IGNU stands for a "Gnostic ignoramus….a great bullshit artist." After stating this, he qualifies that by saying that an IGNU is not someone who suffers in the mystical "cloud of unknowing." Rather, an IGNU is someone like "Harpo Marx" or the "Three Stooges."
Immediately after he notes these comedic examples of the IGNU, he begins his poem (written in New York in 1958):
On top of that if you know me I pronounce you an ignu
Ignu knows nothing of the world
What I find so interesting about this is that comedy, in this instance, displaces mysticism. To be sure, the Ignu sounds like a schlemiel: he knows "nothing of the world." But he is not a mystic so much as a comical figure. More importantly, the first words of Ginsberg's poem indicate that if you know "me," that is the voice of the poem (or Allen Ginsberg), you become a fool. He calls you an ignu and, so to speaks, shares Ignu-ness with the other. One becomes an Ignu by hanging out with Ignus which is exactly what we see with Harpo Marx or with The Three Stooges. Everything they touch, everything a schlemiel touches, becomes comical.
And, for Ginsburg, the comical is the angelic. As we see in the following lines:
Ignu has knowledge of the angel indeed ignu is angel in comical form
W.C. Fields Harpo Marx ignus Whitman an Ignu.
The punch line is that not just comedic figures but even Whitman, the poet of pathos and America, is pronounced an Ignu.
In his pronunciations of Ignu, Allen's poem mixes mysticism, American culture, and comedy from beginning to the very end. I'll cite a few different lines to illustrate:
The ignu may be queer though like not kind ignu blows arch-angels for the strange thrill
Ignu lives only once and eternally knows it
He sleeps in everybody's bed everyone's lonesome for ignu ignu
Knew solitiude early
He listens to jazz as if he were a negro afflicted with jewish melancholy
And white divinity
Ignu's a natural you can see it when he pays for cabfare
Abstracted
Pulling off the money from an impossible saintly roll
The Ignu, like the schlemiel, is a saintly and comic character and he "sought you out." He's the "seeker of God and God breaks down the world for him every ten years." He "sees lightning flash in empty daylight when the sky is blue." The Ignu's comedy, like the comedy of the schlemiel, is existential:
A comedy of personal being his grubby divinity.
And like many a schlemiel, such as many an Aleichem character, he is bound to experience juxtaposed the mystical. Like the schlemiel, the Ignu has a foot in this world and another world.
Knowledge born of stamps words coins pricks jails seasons sweet ambition laughing gas
History with a gold halo photographs of the sea painting a
Celestial din in the bright window
One eye in a black cloud
Ginsburg ends the poem with a meditation on two diamonds that are in the Ignu's hands (one diamond is "Poetry" and the other diamond is "Charity"). Defying logic, he argues that these diamonds "prove" two things. Both, I would argue, disclose our relation to the schlemiel: 1) "we have dreamed" and 2) "the long sword of intelligence over which I constantly stumble like my pants at the age of six – embarrassed."
The last line evinces the schlemiel who is a dreamer and spreads dreams and who always seems to be caught up in his youth, unable to advance. And, much like the man-child we see in Robert Walser's poetry, he stumbles.
Allen's Ignu evinces, for him, some kind of new man that emerges into a new era. He is a tainted holy fool of sorts; a "comedy of personal being" informs his "grubby divinity." This dirty, comic, bum Ignu finds himself stumbling though America and he pronounces you, because you happen to know him, a fellow Ignu. But, with all his stumbling and embarrassment, I think its safe to say that he's a melancholy comic. His revelations are all fragmented, he is between worlds, and, as the poem seems to show, he is caught up in an endless, comic repetition.
But he is not alone. He reads his poems to you. And rather than cry, Ginsberg prompts us to laugh and join him in his community of Ignus: an ironic community of the mystically inclined. Perhaps one can call this a community of the question since, ultimately, Ginsberg, like all those who listen to him, is in search of some kind of truth.
Allen Ginsburg, Harpo Marx, Ignu, Jack Kerouac, schlemiel, Walt Whitman 2 Comments
Harold Ramis: Comedy and Jewishness, American Style
After I learned of Harold Ramis's death, I spent some time on youtube going through clips of his work. One of the most interesting things I stumbled upon was a talk he gave on Groundhog Day. Ramis begins and ends his reflection on the film with a Jewish joke.
At the outset, he recalls a telephone call from one of the producers on the day of the film's premier in California. He told Ramis that there are picketers at the film's opening in Santa Monica. In shock, Ramis asks what they are protesting and the producer tells him: "They aren't protesting. They are Hasidic Jews walking around with signs saying are you living the same day over and over again!" While he cracks the joke, he has a big smirk on his face.
Following this, Ramis points out how a number of groups identified with the film: Buddhists, people in the Yoga community, Christians, and psychologists. He notes that everyone obviously "projected" something on to the film. However, he adds that "as a Jew, I kept thinking that people finding so much in this movie" and finding something new in it – every time – has much in common with the reading of the Torah:
The Torah is read every year, start at the same place, in the same day…every Jew reads the same form the same day, in the same cycle. The Torah doesn't change, but every year we read it we change. And every time we read it we read something different. So, the movie doesn't change.
The punch line is that he denies the comparison after making it and then plays with it: "I'm not comparing Groundhog Day to the Torah; it's more entertaining. And the Bible was not a good movie…John Huston's movie." But the take away is that "there is something in it that can help people to reconsider where they are in life and to question their habitual behaviors."
This analogy – and the joke that conveys it – is telling. It suggests that Ramis sees the film and the Torah as something that can help us to recognize our mortality and prompt us to change who we are. And we do this by way of reflecting on the story that we see which he suggests has a timeless element to it. What lives on and changes – besides ourselves – is the interpretation of the story. But the point is to make the interpretation.
Reflecting on this, I thought about how, in many ways, Ramis's films were, for me, like the Torah. I used to watch them over and over again. I was especially fascinated with the juxtaposition of Bill Murray (John) to Harold Ramis (Russell Zisky) in Stripes.
Zisky plays the humble and intelligent American Jew while John plays the ironic and bold American rebel. Zisky and John are both schlemiels. And this is brought to bear on us by way of the fact that they come from a different America than the soldiers they join. They are urban and intellectual; they are ironic and this gives them a vantage point. However, as the film goes on they learn to overcome whatever distance separated them from the others in the platoon. But this distance, though seemingly large, isn't big.
The first scene of the film shows us this fact. Zisky is an educated man who is teaching "Basic English" to Immigrants. We can see that the job is meaningful to him, but it is not allowing him to tap into his full potential.
John is also stumped. Both of them are friends who want, as the Jewish-American writer Bernard Malamud put it, a "new life." To be sure, Malamud joined Sholem Aleichem, Mendel Mocher Sforim, and other Yiddish writers whose schlemiels all yearned for a "new life." The question, in all of their novels and stories, was whether such a life was possible or what that new life meant. Moreover, would any of these schlemiels change, fundamentally? Or would they remain schlemiels, still, after the transformation?
When Zisky introduces himself to the platoon in Stripes, he comes across as a pacifist and his words fall flat. None of the other Americans in the room, even John Candy in front of him, can understand or identify with what he is saying or his pledge that he will put himself on the line when they are in danger.
In contrast to Zisky, the American-Jew, is John. His talk is that of a ironic, self-important-cool-populist. The majority of the platoon laughs and smiles when he talks. Everyone can identify with him. He ends with an homage to the leader of the platoon. But the leader sees this all as a lot of talk and, as the film goes out to show, he does all he can do to break John down and make him into a soldier rather than a populist comedian.
As the opening clip shows, the American-Jew and the cool, ironic American are completely different. They are regarded differently by the platoon. That changes over time. But the initial moment gave me a lot to reflect on as a Jew growing up in small town America. My father and mother were both natives of New York City. They were oddballs in my small town. My parents had more in common with Zisky than I did.
For this reason, looking back I can understand why I liked this film so much. I tried to be more like John than Zisky. But in the end, I saw that Zisky was also accepted. But to be accepted, he had to prove that he could put himself on the line for other people in the platoon. And John also had to change. But that change was something that came from the leader of the platoon. The basis for this had to do with making John more humble and respectful.
As a recent Village Voice article points out, this feat of making the American more humble was not realized in films like stripes, however. It was realized in Groundhog Day. According to the author of the article, Ramis established himself by making Slob vs. Snob comedies. While the theme had its power and reflected life in the 80s, it still gave the "white American" slob too much power. The author suggests that this is displaced in Groundhog Day because Bill Murray plays a character who is radically different from characters like John in Stripes. Ramis and Murray, according to the author, figured out that Murray – of Stripes and Ghostbusters – is the "asshole of the age":
At some point, Ramis and Murray and whoever else seem to have figured out that the Bill Murray of Stripes and Ghostbusters (both co-written by and co-starring Ramis) is the asshole of his age, a self-entitled boomer horndog interested in no perspective other than his own, engaged with no aspect of culture he hasn't decided he already favors.
For this reason, they created a new Murray character in Stripes who, the author points out, now plays a "snob" rather than a "slob." The effect of this transformation, is that "he is rightly seen as a privileged dickhead instead of some hypocrisy-exposing hero of the people." The new lesson, he claims, is that Murray learns that there is more to the world than himself; the world is something you share with others.
I found this article to be interesting since it reads Groundhog Day, as Ramis suggests, by way of a different time. It points out that the film has not changed, but we have. Nonetheless, I wonder how Ramis rather than Murray fits into this reading. Did his character change? And what does this all have to do with Jewishness? And, in all of this, what happened to the schlemiel?
The other day, I blogged on Ramis and pointed out how, in Knocked Up, he played the Jewish father to Seth Rogen. As I noted, the scene I refer to is the scene of tradition and the idea that the son and father encounter is very Jewish. The father is happy to have grandchildren. He is happy to see the future embodied in a grandson. The encounter, so to speak, shows us Zisky years later. Unlike Bill Murray, he hasn't gone through a fundamental transformation. Ramis, in doing this, shows us that though the Jew may age, his or her humility and priorities remain the same. Zisky isn't the "asshole of the age." He just wants to help.
I'd like to end this blog post with a clip from the film Walk Hard where Ramis plays a Hasidic Rabbi who, in this scene, visits, Dewey, the main character, in prison. Dewey is a parody of the American rock star who rises to fame, but ends up in hard times. In an ironic twist, he speaks to him in Yiddish and Dewey replies in kind.
Here's the rough translation:
Rabbi: Lean closer, I want to talk to you in mother tongue for the guards should not understand what I'm saying.
Dewey: You must be able to do something. I am not yet 21 years old. My whole life is waiting for me.
Rabbi: I think we need to do a retreat.
Dewey: How can we do that?
Rabbi: You must go to a rehab
I recently noted that Woody Allen, in Take the Money and Run, briefly plays a Hasidic Rabbi. But that scene emerges out of a joke: it is a "side effect" of a drug he is asked to take in prison. Here, however, we find something different. This Rabbi is a wise man who looks to help Dewey to live "a new life" the kind of life that he can live if he goes through rehab, that is, a transformation.
The twist, I think, is that the Rabbi initiates the change; he helps Dewey to change his old habits. He helps him to look at himself differently and gives him hope. For me, this is the keynote that Ramis hit at in his talk on Groundhog Day. It articulates what he thinks of the Torah and what he thought of his greatest film. The idea is not simply (or only) that the white American guy realizes that he is an asshole and he can share the world with others, as the author of the Village Voice article suggests; it's also that the this realization or rather transformative thought is scripted by a Jewish filmmaker and screenwriter named Harold Ramis. He brought his Jewish wisdom to his films and, hopefully, this blog post steps in the direction of better understanding how this was so. To be sure, Ramis's own words – which I brought out above – suggest that we do so.
After all, the movie may not change, but we do. But the other side of this is that the movie, if read closely, can also prompt us to see who we are and to change our lives. Herein lies the wisdom of a good script and a close reading, something Jews have, for centuries, been familiar. What Ramis has done is to make this structure popular; he has created an offshoot of Jewishness. And he has done it in an American style.
Bill Murray, comedy, Groundhog Day, Harold Ramis, Jewishness, schlemiel, Seth Rogen, Stripes Leave a comment
American Jewish Thought Looney Tunes Modern(ist) Landscape (1950)
jewish philosophy place
I finally decided to include something on postwar American synagogue architecture, using Susan G. Solomon's Louis I. Kahn's Jewish Architecture as a platform with which to juxtapose the philosophical-theological thought of Abraham Joshua Heschel and Joseph Soloveitchik. With the recent death of Sid Caesar, I decided to throw youtube clips of him and Bugs Bunny in order to represent the comedic impulse of popular Jewish culture.
My American Jewish Studies interest in Sid Casesar and Bugs Bunny has nothing to do with historical sociology, with the assimilation of this trickster figure, "the Jew" as canny outsider, the schlemiel and the troublemaker in tension with the indigenous WASP mores represented by, let's say Elmer Fudd. What interests me is not the social position of Sid or Bugs, but rather the rough and ribald humor and low popular culture.
While "theologians" like Heschel and Soloveitchik speak in more elevated patois, supernatural and…
The Schlemiel-as-Criminal? On Woody Allen's "Take the Money and Run"
While someone like Jean Genet – in books like The Miracle of the Rose or The Thief's Journal – makes the criminal into a highly masculine larger than life (even priestly) man, Woody Allen's "directorial debut," Take the Money and Run (1969), presents us with a parody of the masculine criminal and the hard-boiled crime thriller. It is chock full of schlemiel comedy and presents us with something of the anti-thesis of violence and masculinity.
Merv Griffin, in this interview (:57) jokingly calls Allen a "sex symbol" but Allen wittily responds: "But the question is what I am a sexual symbol of…" And even goes so far as to comically describe himself – as a child – as a "young budding pervert." In other words, he was a "sexual schlemiel." (See my recent post on Harold Ramis on this topic.)
Take the Money and Run is a parody of the life of a schlemiel-criminal who also happens to be a sexual schlemiel by the name of Virgil Starkwell. There are several exceptional comedy skits in the film. One celebrated scene has Virgil volunteer to take an experimental vaccine at the prison. The punchline is that the vaccine has a "side-effect": it turns him into a rabbi.
And in the most popular scene in the film, he slips the teller a note telling them that he has a "gub" and that they better hand the money over. His bad handwriting (he couldn't clearly write "gun") is discussed by the bank workers and before he can get the money and run he has to get a few signatures at the bank. After all, it's the procedure. This schlemiel displacement renders the crime and the criminal ridiculous.
Throughout the film, his Jewish parents, who wear Groucho Marx glasses and nose, discuss what happened to him showing us that he is a disappointment to his kvetching Jewish parents.
Louise Lasner plays Kay Lewis in the film and through her we learn that she was duped by Virgil Starkwell. Toward the end of the film, we learn that she thought he was a schlemiel, but, to her chagrin, she learned that he was a criminal. But that's the irony of the film. He isn't really a criminal; he's a schlemiel: "Everybody thought he was such a schlemiel but it turns out that he's a criminal…"
http://www.tcm.com/mediaroom/video/224552/Take-the-Money-and-Run-Movie-Clip-Schlemiel.html
In the final scene, we see Virgil in an interview carving his soap gun. He asks if it's raining outside. For if it is, his gun will turn into bubbles again. This ending marks Virgil as the schlemiel-criminal. Nobody is duped. A schlemiel can't be a real criminal; he's too innocent, charming, and effeminate for that.
Jean Genet, schlemiel, Sexual Schlemiel, Take the Money and Run, Woody Allen Leave a comment
Wit and an Odd Kind of Charm, or Groucho Plus Harpo: Harold Ramis and The Schlemiel
I grew up watching – and loving – many Harold Ramis films. I recorded them on my VCR from this or that HBO showing or bought the video tapes. Watching them, I felt as if he was hitting on something deep about being an American in the 80s and 90s. And because I was pre-pubescent when I first saw his films, I felt as if the odd romances in films like Stripes, Ghosbusters, or Caddyshack taught me about what kinds of love, friendship, or kindness worked or didn't work. But, in the end, what I learned about love by way of Chevy Chase, Bill Murray, or Ramis himself was that it was a comical affair. If it worked, it worked in an odd way.
All of his best characters are clumsy, charming, and witty. For someone who – like millions of Americans – learned about the "birds and the bees" from TV and film, rather than his parents, they gave me an image of the kind of American male I could be: a comic male who was at once awkward, bold, and witty.
These characters, to be sure, bear aspects of the schlemiel. Like Woody Allen, they are what David Biale – in his book Eros and the Jews – would call "sexual schlemiels." However, they are different: they are more charming and popular than Allen's characters. To be sure, Allen's schlemiels are appealing to a more sophisticated audience while Ramis's appeal to a more common and simple element. In many ways, he has done more than many comedy writers in the 1980s and 90s to popularize the sexual schlemiel for a different generation (not a baby boomer generation that was more acclimated to the likes of Woody Allen and Phillip Roth).
I recently found an interesting quote by Ramis which explains the schlemiel he was looking for and the schlemiel he found in the mirror. His comic-self-image drew on the Marx Brothers but it was translated into a different comedy, one for a different time:
In my heart, I felt I was a combination of Groucho and Harpo Marx, of Groucho using his wit as a weapon against the upper classes, and of Harpo's antic charm and the fact that he was oddly sexy — he grabs women, pulls their skirts off, and gets away with it.
As this admission suggests, Ramis saw himself in terms of both Marx Brothers. He saw the wit of Groucho as a manifestation of the popular-will to battle against the elites ("upper classes"). The other side of Harold Ramis was his desire to be "oddly sexy." Taken together, we have a sexual schlemiel and a schlemiel that challenges the elites. And this is not just how Ramis painted his characters; this is how he saw himself as a comic and as a human being.
In other words, he saw himself as a living schlemiel whose actions had a social effect that could appeal to the people and perhaps even change society. His characterization of himself has an interesting resonance with Hannah Arendt's characterization of Charlie Chaplin (in her essay "The Jew as Pariah") whose charm and wit appealed to immigrants and, in her words, challenged the status quo.
Harold's wit and charm will be missed. The legacy he left for us can be felt in this scene where he comforts Seth Rogen in Knocked Up. Unlike the WASP mother, Ramis plays a character who is happy to have a grandchild. His affirmation is an affirmation of life and this, as anyone who has seen the film knows, inspires Rogen to become a father. However, the twist is that Rogen goes from being a schlemiel to being a dad. And the only thing that remains of the schlemiel is kindness.
But that's not the take-away. Ramis goes against the grain in this piece because – in explaining what is worse than having a child – he tells us something that we should be keen to; namely, that it's worse to have a parent with alzheimers than to have a child out of wedlock.
In other words, the worst thing that can happen to us is that someone we love should forget who we are.
What Ramis has done through his charming and witty characters is to create a memory that is at once personal and American: the memory of all his schlemiels evinces both. And even though these schlemiels may be born, so to speak, out of wedlock, they are redeemed by the reader. This is a lesson Sholem Aleichem taught to his readers in his last novel, Motl: The Cantor's Son.
In that novel an orphan-schlemiel – who is absent minded and who doesn't understand death or suffering because he is distracted by life – lives on in the memory of the reading public.
Like the reading public's memory of Motl, Ramis's schlemiels live on in the memory of those who enjoyed and laughed at his charming and witty characters.
Thanks for reminding us of how dear the schlemiel is and how its legacy should be carried on! You will be missed by millions of people who enjoyed your films; many, like me, who looked to them for a kind of "parental guidance" about sexuality that I couldn't find in my home.
Seth Rogen gets his parental guidance in this clip from Ramis, a schlemiel and a father of a schlemiel, whose advice gives Rogen hope.
For Ramis, the key ingredient of being a schlemiel is to be witty and "oddly sexual" but also to be a father and make your own father happy. In other words, to give the parents "nachas" (Joy in Yiddish and Hebrew) is Ramis's last Jewish word to Seth Rogen. It also the last word on the schlemiel.
As the schlemiel and son of a schlemiel, his job is to remember the schlemiel father through being a father…and raising a son….which, after all, emerges out of an accident: over someone getting "knocked up." Ramis's encouragement of Rogen teaches us that Something good can come out of something accidental and potentially bad; and that, for Ramos, is the ultimate meaning of comedy. It is Ramis's message to Seth Rogen and the next generation of schlemiels. It is his "parental guidance."
Caddyshack, Chevy Chase, Harold Ramis, schlemiel, Stripes Leave a comment
The Other (American) Side of Failure: A Few Words on Delmore Schwartz
Delmore Schwartz's fiction and poetry – which has its fair share of schlemiels and schlemiel moments – has been of great interest to Schlemiel Theory. His schlemiels offer a nuanced reading of this character which differs in many ways from its European cousins. Indeed, what I find in Schwartz's schlemiel is an American variety of this character which, unlike many of its counterparts, has a more explicit struggle with failure and success.
Schlemiel Theory was recently cited by Zachary Braiterman's Jewish Philosophy Place in a blogpost on Delmore Schwartz. It is entitled "Delmore Schwartz (Monstrous Children & Dreary Children)." Braiterman notes that I, "better than most," understand that Schwartz's characters "are schlemiel figures. Oddballs and failures, they don't belong to the world." Braiterman adds, however, that what "so many of Schwartz's admirers trend to neglect is his characters are mean, and if they are not mean to themselves, then they are hapless, surrounded by bitter people who are mean to each other."
What I find so compelling about Braiterman's claim is the fact that he brings a much neglected element to schlemiel theory: anger. To be sure, the schlemiels we see in classical Yiddish or Jewish American literature such as Mendel Mocher Sforim's Benjamin III, I.L. Peretz's Bontshe Shvayg, Sholem Aleichem's Motl, or I.B. Singer's Gimpel don't seem to have any aspect of meanness. They are all kind, yet worldless characters. Do we see something fundamentally different with Schwartz's characters? After all, they are, as Braiterman argues, "mean."
Braiterman argues that the reason why they are so mean has to do with the fact that there is a gap between their "ambitious self-regard" and their "actual mediocre talents" :
Schwartz's characters are not just mean because of the depression and "not just because of the native Protestant anti-Semitism, but because these people, the characters who fill Schwartz's short stories, really are impossible people, human beings whose ambitious self-regard streaks light years beyond their actual mediocre talents.
They are "impossible people" because their hopes don't match with reality. To be sure, the bifurcation between reality and the dreams of this or that character is a major part of what makes a schlemiel a schlemiel (say Aleichem's Motl or Sofer's Benjamin III). They are luftmensches (they "live on air"). But they are not mean.
Schwartz's characters are.
I think something else is at work and that is the American experience. Failure in America, for educated people like Schwartz and later Bernard Malamud, is much different from failure in Eastern Europe. And this is something that Schwartz and Malamud understand better than a writer like I.B. Singer (who Irving Howe and the Partisan Review also published). To be sure, the meanness that leaks through Schwartz's schlemiels has to do with failure, American style.
What makes Schwartz (of Malamud) such great writers is the fact that they are able to translate the experience of high American hopes and great American failures into various schlemiel characters. And, yes, there is something mean about this because, in the end, failure in America is mean. Schwartz, to be sure, had a hard time balancing out hope and skepticism in the face of his failures. He couldn't do what Aleichem did. But is that a fault?
The worldlessness of his characters, his schlemiels, brings out a different use of the character. It brings out the darker side of the schlemiel, the side that Yiddish writers didn't want to see. This may have to do with the fact that they saw it too much. Schwartz's America is different. It isn't the Pale of Settelment. And unlike his brothers in Eastern Europe, he had many more opportunities. For this reason, his experience of failure was fundamentally different.
In mid to early 20th century America, a different schlemiel was called for. Hence the schlemiels we see coming out of Bellow and Malamud all grapple with hope and failure. However, Moses Herzog or Henry Levin don't experience failure in the same intense way as Schwartz's schlemiels. Nonetheless, one will notice that failure is always haunting them in ways that are different from the missed encounters we see with failure in the novels or stories of the Yiddish writers. While many schlemiels are blind to it, these characters (and their authors) are not.
Jewish American writers are not just on the "other side of the pond," they are also on the "other side of failure." I thank Zachary Braiterman (and his Jewish Philosophy Place) for reminding me that Schwartz's bitterness was, in many ways, a thread that finds its way through so many American schlemiels.
America, Bernard Malamud, Delmore Schwartz, schlemiel, Zachary Braiterman Leave a comment
(Not) Beyond Good and Evil: Will Herberg on Utopianism, Cynicism, and the Jewish Ethic
Will Herberg is a Jewish-American Theologian who is most noted for his book, published in 1955, Protestant, Catholic, Jew: An Essay in American Religious Sociology. His characterizations of American religious pluralism may be a little dated, but it is still discussed by scholars today. But his first book, Judaism and Modern Man: An Interpretation of Jewish Religion, is lesser known and certainly deserves more attention than it has already received. At first, I thought the book was rehearsing many of the ideas we find in the work of Julius Guttman and Leo Strauss on what makes Judaism…Jewish (in contrast to being Greek, Mythological, etc). To be sure, although he doesn't cite Guttman, Rosenzweig, Buber, and Strauss (which is a major drawback), we can hear many resonances. I am interested in how he reinterprets their theological readings of Judaism.
But what interests me most is how his readings may or may not pertain to the schlemiel's pursuit of goodness. To be sure, one of Herberg's major focuses in his book is what he calls the "Jewish ethic." What I find so interesting about his reading is the fact that he provides Ruth Wisse's reading of the schlemiel (made in the early 70s) with a theological reflection. In her reading of the schlemiel she claims that the schlemiel can only exist in a world that is neither fully optimistic (or utopian) nor fully skeptical (or cynical). The schlemiel's Jewishness, in her estimation, has to do with creating a tension between hope and skepticism. This idea is what Herberg associates with a Jewish ethic. Unlike Nietzsche's call to go "beyond good and evil," this ethic looks to preserve good and evil yet in a way that underscores the tenuous and complicated nature of good and evil in our society. This, as a matter of course, says to Nietzsche: not so fast. And this not so fast, so to speak, is at the core of the Jewish ethic and it seems to be at the core of what Ruth Wisse is getting at in her interpretation of the traditional schlemiel character. The only difference, as I hope to show, is that Herberg's theology is utterly serious and his discourse is far from comic; whereas the schlemiel works by way of comedy and indirection. Both are reflections on Jewishness, but one is secular while the other is religious.
In a section entitled, "The Divine Imperative: The Absolute and the Relative," Herberg looks into the meaning of Jewish ethics vis-à-vis the relation of the absolute to the relative. Does Judaism have absolutes? Can they be known and acted upon?
Writing for a Jewish-American audience, and recognizing the degree of influence of Christian ideas on the Jewish mind, Herberg begins the section with a discussion of the relationship of love to law. For Herberg, law and justice are the "foundation of social existence"(106). And love comes in to the picture by way of pointing out that the law must be kept but in a merciful manner. He calls the appeal to mercy within the law as the "transcendence of law in love." Jews must go "beyond the letter of the law" not by rejecting it but by applying in the right manner.
Herberg rejects the antinomian claim that the law should be rejected in the name of love:
No responsible thinker will venture to foresee human conditions within history in which faith will be so perfectly realized in love that law can be dispensed with and all action take rise in spontaneous freedom. (107)
But immediately following this, he redefines the "transcendence of law in love" in terms of an existential imperative:
The transcendence of law in love is the divine imperative that confronts every man in his relations with his fellow men but it is an imperative that only the most sentimental utopianism can identify with the realities of social life at any stage of history. (107)
As we can see from this quote, Herberg inserts a critique of utopianism in his definition of the "transcendence of law in love." He does this because he can see that utopianism, in its zeal, has an antinomian spirit. To this end, he critiques not just utopianism but also its evil twin, cynicism. For Herberg, all action is "contaminated." But this is no reason for total cynicism:
Activity of men in history, even in the pursuit of best ends, carries with it not only the promotion but also the violation of the highest imperatives of moral life. (109)
No one is pure: "Even the saint in his humility, does he not exalt himself in the pride of his humility?"(109). These thoughts may give rise to cynicism which Herberg defines as such:
Cynicism denies that ideal imperatives, since they are impossible of actual enactment in life, can have any meaning or relevance to human existence. (110)
In response to this, he calls for a "realistic ethic" which must "know how to relate the ideal to reality without deceiving itself as to the actual distance between them. It must know how to choose from among the evils without obliterating the distinction between good and evil"(110).
After making this claim, Herberg resorts to a kind of quasi-Kantian regulative ideal:
The absolute imperatives calling to perfection acquire their potency precisely through the fact that they transcend every actuality of existence. They are regulative, not constitutive, principles of moral life; they cannot themselves be embodied in action but they operate as the dynamic power within it. (110)
And these regulative ideals serve "as principles of criticism of existing conditions. And they serve, next, as principles of guidance in the struggle for better conditions"(110).
Although this sounds quite familiar – vis-à-vis a kind of Marxist critique – however, Herberg draws the line when he says that we have to be very careful with our interpretation and application of these "principles." And, in the process, challenges the "utopian" view which invests too much in its critiques and aspirations. The Jewish ethic is more skeptical than the utopian view but it is not cynical. One must act, but how?
Herberg argues that the Jewish ethic gets deeply involved with the "relativities" of life. And it does so with a view to action based on quasi-principles. Nonetheless, they "constitute transcendent principles of aspiration, criticism, and judgment"(112). In other words, criticism and judgment are always on the horizon as is aspiration for getting it write (even in the face of possible failure).
However, at the very end of the chapter Herberg decides that it is more important to end with the existential note than the pragmatic one (which is not to say that he rejects pragmatism but that he is most interested in the "aspirational" aspect of the Jewish ethic).
He notes that at the core of all of this reflection on right, ethical action is a paradox and an existential dilemma and the only solution is a call to God for help:
The resolution of the heart-rending, existence shattering conflict between what we know we ought to do and that which in fact we do do is possible only on the religious level, on the level of repentance, grace, and forgiveness. At this point, ethics transcends itself and returns to its religious source and origin. (113)
Herberg ends with a prayer from the Jewish prayer book which basically points out that, at the end of the day, we should hold no certainties about how good we are:
Not because of our righteous acts do we lay our supplications before thee but because of thine abundant mercies. What are we? What is our life? What is our piety? What is our righteousness?
In the end, Herberg thinks that the preservation of the tension between the utopian and the cynic will bring Jews to another form of humility and sense of limitation that is religious. On the other hand, the schlemiel also brings us to a similar sense of limitation, to the dilemma itself. However, it brings us there by way of bitter-sweet comedy.
One can go on and will go on dealing with moral relativities, one will walk toward the good. The Jewish sensibility, the moral sensibility, knows it must go on and perhaps, as Beckett says, fail better. But, still, it must go on and sketch out the limits of utopia and cynicism. The ethic is, without a doubt, (not) beyond good and evil.
Buber, schlemiel, Will Herberg Leave a comment
Happy (First) Birthday Schlemiel Theory!
Today is a special day for Schlemiel Theory! One year ago today, I started this blog as a part of an academic project (and to some extent, a personal project). The goal of my project was to provide an important academic and public resource for the study of the Jewish comic character otherwise known as the schlemiel. Moreover, this project would serve as the basis for articles on the character and my book on the schlemiel, which is a work-in-progress.
As of today, I can happily say that this blog has accomplished all of these goals. It has reached a wide audience and many of my blog entries have been widely circulated and cited. In the last year, schlemiel theory has received over 22,000 views/unique hits and has nearly 2000 followers who receive my blog entries on their email every week. Most importantly, schlemiel theory has become the best academic resource on the schlemiel on the web.
I have blogged on a variety of topics ranging from the schlemiel as prophet and the schlemiel and the messianic to Sholem Aleichem's schlemiels and Slavoj Zizek's reading of kyncism and cynicism. And the work I have done on the schlemiel touches on such scholars, writers, poets, and comedians as: Walter Benjamin, Gershom Scholem, Irving Howe, Emmanuel Levinas, Leo Strauss, Leo Shestov, Hannah Arendt, Ernst Bloch, Sidra DeKoven Ezrahi, Robert Walser, I.B. Singer, Bernard Malamud, Philip Roth, Gary Shteyngart, Andy Kaufmann, Jerry Lewis, Woody Allen, Howard Stern, Louis CK, Larry David, and Seth Rogen (amongst many others).
In the age of social networking, this blog, because of all its unique hits, will come up first when people research the schlemiel in general or this or that schlemiel in particular (Seth Rogen, Woody Allen, etc). It is the portal to the schlemiel and its unique brand of comedy. More importantly, my work preserves the work of such scholars as Ruth Wisse and Sanford Pinsker – the only scholars to have ever dedicated books to the schlemiel – and carries on the tradition of schlemiel theory for a new age.
I want to thank everyone for your support and encouragement. And I look forward to writing more and more on the schlemiel. To be sure, given all the burgeoning expansion of schlemiels today and the fact that so many have yet to receive their due, this blog has its work cut out for it.
I'll see you all at the circus!
Birthday, Blog, Menachem Feuer, schlemiel, Schlemiel Theory Leave a comment
Hail Caesar the Popular-Mystic-Comic – A Few Thoughts on Sid Caesar
On February 12, 2014, we lost one of the greatest comedians in the Jewish-American tradition: Sid Caesar. On Twitter, his long time friend and colleague, Carl Reiner wrote:
"We've lost the greatest, monologist, pantomimic, sketch comedian TV has ever known! Word GENIUS is oft misused but not so here. HAIL CAESAR"
Although I am from an entirely different generation – my parents and grandparents grew up with and watched Sid Caesar on TV, I didn't – I grew up hearing his name mentioned from time to time by my relatives and their friends. I can understand, after watching so much footage and hearing so much praise of him, why Carl Reiner would say this. But, still, my understanding is not the same.
For a person like myself, who hasn't grown up with Caesar, I am in a different position. And as a person who identifies with and situates himself within the history of Jewish-American comedy, I am very interested in what makes Caesar's comedy "Jewish" or unique. After all, Reiner says in his Tweet that Caesar was the "greatest monologist, pantomimic, sketch comedian TV has ever known." But as a schlemiel theorist what I want to know is whether or how any of what he performs relates to, adds on to, or revises the schlemiel tradition.
I obviously won't be able to answer this question in one blog entry or even two. It will take me time to really work through these questions. However, what I can say is that what strikes me about his comedy sketches is the fact that in his parodies of this or that figure he deeply engages the audience. And, in drawing them in, he, like a mystic, opens up a new space where one's ways of thinking are, as it were, born for the first time. The awkwardness this creates makes for something revelatory and it does so by way of exposing the audience to a person who wants desperately to relate to them.
One piece I am really interested in –because I am an academic – is a piece on "Professor Von Fossil," the absent-minded archeologist from Austria. He is introduced by none other than Carl Reiner.
Reiner is dressed up formally and takes on the serious tone of journalist who is looking to learn and share something with the audience. Right off the bat, the professor – who looks like a hobo – breaks with the norm by way of his greeting: he shakes Reiner's hand twice, looks him straight in the eye, and says, with what appears to be great sincerity, that he is so happy to actually meet someone. In other words: he is truly grateful to make an appeal to the other. This solicits some laughter in the audience when he coldly turns and says "that's enough." The reaction is odd because on the one hand he draws the audience in – by way of his friendly and happy demeanor – yet, on the other hand, he pushes them away.
When asked about the pyramids and their "architecture," Caesar begins his answer in an academic way with the head down thinking and gestures. But the answer doesn't seem to be coming. But then he breaks the rules by saying "look at the pyramids" – gesturing to the audience – repeatedly. This breaks the ice. The audience laughs because this is breaking with the role of professor. He is playing with language, gesture, and social mores. He is foregrounding language; and this is comical.
He then goes off on a tangent about animals building things, and goes way off topic and even changes accents and speaks more in a person-to-person manner about animals and their ways. This also foregrounds the medium.
Following this, he talks about a hole that was found in Persia. But this is "a hole within a hole within a hole." This, to my mind, alludes to the emptiness of his comic gestures which dig holes in this or that discourse, which, in a mystical-comical manner, he plunges his audience. (As in a comic trance…)
This goes to the next level when he mimes out what a translator had communicated to him regarding the writing on the walls around the big hole. Drawing his finger back and forth and using a dialect that seems middle eastern, Caesar takes us through an absurd translation (replete with a gaze, gestures, and odd tones). The effect is mystical and fresh as it goes beyond the limit: where after all will this go? We don't know when the translation-slash-movement will end. It has an animated character that goes against all academic decorum.
But then he gets to translation into English, which is the punch line: "No handball playing against the wall."
In other words, we were duped. He is not talking about some ancient artifact; he seems to be talking about something contemporary. This punch line evokes the greatest laughter. The joke is on academia, really. For after Reiner asks him a very academic question, Caesar mocks him on the side as if his academic question is…too academic.
This appeals to the audience which now sees the Professor as a jokester and a simpleton. He's not really a stuffy academic. The last three jokes – especially his book with the matriarchs in Cincinatti – also show us that he is really not so academic as a hobo of sorts.
And the last line of the routine contrasts with the first: instead of embracing him he tells Reiner to "get out of here." But the audience knows he can't be serious; after all, the professor doesn't mean anything he says.
He is the everyman; the simpleton. His anger really isn't anger and his seriousness is really not serious. That's what makes him so funny.
And that's what makes him a Caesar of sorts. The schlemiel teaches not to take ourselves so seriously; but, while in Europe the schlemiel is a luftmensch, in a tele-visual America, in a country guided by entertainment, he can be a leader. Herein lies the secret of popular, comic, mysticism….
Thank you, Sid, for sharing it…
America, Carl Reiner, schlemiel, Sid Caesar Leave a comment
Nomadic Joy and Terror at Robert Walser's Circus
Robert Walser's fictional child-character, Fritz Kocher begins many of his "essays" with a serious reflection. But as the essay goes on Kocher drifts into different zones of joy and terror that dissipate the original intent of his essays. Indeed, his drifting shows us that he often has little to no interest in the things that pre-occupy society. He would rather bind himself to things that spark his imagination. After all, as I pointed out in another blog entry on Walser's Fritz Kocher's Essays, Kocher sees himself as an "artist." And although he is not quite sure what this means, what he does demonstrate to the reader are the ways (as opposed to a portrait) of an artist, so to speak, as a young man. These ways are the ways of an individual who passes in and out of affective states and imaginings. But what makes this passing significant, for Walser, is that before the child-artist passes in and out of these states s/he begins with a state(ment) of solidity and intent that is sanctioned by society.
In an essay entitled "Careers," Kocher begins with the statement of serious intent regarding the meaning and purpose of finding a career. As we learn, the goal of it all is to go from being a child to being an adult:
Anyone who wants to live an upstanding life in this world needs a career. You can't just work your way along. Work has to have a particular character and a goal it is aiming toward. To reach that goal, you choose a profession. This happens when a person leaves school, at which point that person is an adult. (21)
Although Kocher begins his essay with this serious tone and statement of intention, he ends on an entirely different note. He goes through many professions and argues that he simply can't choose them and worries about the professions his parents would choose. In other words, he's not sure how he wants to or whether he wants to have a career. He entertains living as an artist or musician in a big city, but, ultimately, he'd rather be nomadic; he'd rather join the circus:
Well there's one other thing I have in my soul: It would be great to join the circus. A famous tightrope walker, sparkles on my back, the stars above me, an abyss on either side, and just a slender, delicate path before me. (22)
But, after pondering this, he thinks that he would rather be a clown: "I do feel I have some talent for joking around"(22). (I touched on this point in my blog on the essay on friendship.) However, he fears that his parents would be "hurt" if he were to become a clown. For this reason, he states, out of a kind of sadness: "I'm not worried about finding a career. There are so many of them"(22).
Kocher's drifting toward this affective state, although differed, resurfaces in his essay on "The Fair." In that essay, he begins by saying that the fair is "useful" and serves the purpose of gathering farmers and the community together. However, as the essay goes on he drifts into the space of joy and terror.
He finds himself in these states – which I would call, like Georges Bataille, useless – when he reflects on the puppets. But before he has this reflection, he is already adrift. He describes his experience of the carousel:
I let myself be carried up and down, and down and up. You ride the most beautiful sleighs of silver and gold, the starts in the sky dance around you, the world revolves with you. (32)
When he arrives at the "Kasperli puppet show," his desire is already nomadic. He notes that he laughs at "every blow" of this or that puppet. However, this turns into horror: "Death leaps out incredibly fast and strikes victims down with marvelous accuracy. They are pretty violently executed"(32). The puppets executed are "generals, doctors, soldiers, and policemen" – in other words, they are the "useful" members of society.
Meanwhile, the puppet clown killer, Kasperl, gets "away with a light beating." He is a sadistic kind of clown/puppet. What he likes about him is how "his face never changes."
But he doesn't focus on it too much; he drifts elsewhere to see the Freak Show. He sees a "snake lady" who stands as still as a "photograph."
Taken all together, his drifting in and out of reality has the flavor of virtual reality. And all of this, ultimately, is wasteful and suggests that society is not of primary interest to him so much as affective states that he would like to see and even participate in. His childhood, as he sees, will keep him from a useful career and he prefers this. In other words, his end point differs radically from his starting point. He leaves his original intentions for the circus and this leads him into a world where teleology has no place. But, ultimately, in the end, he acts as if nothing has changed and he has kept to his original purpose. This, perhaps, is the trick: to be able to start and end on a point while, in essence, drifting everywhere between point a and b. This, it seems, is the drift-work of Kocher's essay and the way of the artist who ends up in the circus.
Circus, Fritz Kocher, Robert Walser, schlemiel Leave a comment
After seeing #JonahHill's You People, I can say, with full confidence, that he is a putz. He truly threw American… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 40 minutes ago
The Other Side of the Sexual Revolution: Sex, Violence, and History in Michel Houellebecq's "The Elementary Particles"


How was your experience with Touro DM?
What tips would you provide a friend before taking Touro DM?
What are you taking Touro DM for?
How well did Touro DM work for you?
How likely would you be to recommend Touro DM to a friend?
Touro DM consists of multiple generic medications. The generic medications are listed below.


Kabul, Feb 2 (IANS) Afghan presidential candidate Abdullah Abdullah, who lost to President Hamid Karzai in 2009 presidential elections, Sunday warned that he would not accept forgery and fabricated result of the coming election scheduled for April 5.
"We want the coming elections to be a fair and transparent one. We do not accept the result of a fabricated and unfair election," Abdullah warned in a public gathering on the first day of the election campaign.
Campaign for Afghanistan's third presidential elections formally commenced Sunday amid tight security as the Taliban had threatened to disrupt the polling process, reported Xinhua.
At least eleven candidates have registered as contestants in the race.
Abdullah, who emerged as a potential candidate in the last election, had accused Karzai of forgery in the previous election, warning that the upcoming elections should be fair and transparent, otherwise the result "won't be acceptable".
Announcing his programmes, Abdullah promised to create more jobs, revive economy and work for maintaining peace and security.
He said he would develop friendly relations with neighbouring countries and the international community if elected as the president.
Abdullah said Afghanistan needs lasting support of the international community and inking bilateral security agreement with the US would pave the way for continuation of support to the country.


text:
Home / News / A Guide to How Oxygen Fuels an Athlete's Muscles - By Elle Peters
A Guide to How Oxygen Fuels an Athlete's Muscles - By Elle Peters June 17, 2019
2 Chainz Samples $10,000 Air In A Can February 25, 2019
The difference between air and oxygen. Which is right for you? February 25, 2019
translation missing: en.blogs.article.tags_title
Elle Peters
A Guide to How Oxygen Fuels an Athlete's Muscles - By Elle Peters
0 comments / Posted on Jun 17, 2019 by Vitality Air
Listen up athletes and fitness buffs, oxygen is one of the building blocks of muscle fuel and it's crucial to muscle performance. Vitality Air has already touched on the major benefits of pure oxygen on athletic performance and muscle recovery in an earlier article. Simply put, muscles become fatigued easily and it takes them longer to recuperate without a steady supply of oxygen. However, if you want to know how it affects muscles on a cellular level, this article is for you.
Breathe in, breathe out
We've learned in early biology classes that the process of breathing in and out is called respiration. What it does is take in oxygen and expel carbon dioxide. Knowing this is important for athletes because respiration is directly responsible for the production of energy in the body. This process is called metabolism of which there are two types: aerobic and anaerobic.
In aerobic metabolism, the oxygen that passes through tiny air sacs, called alveoli, is then carried into the bloodstream where it will reach the muscles. Oxygen is necessary for burning carbohydrates, fats, and proteins that turn it into energy in the form of adenosine triphosphate (ATP). Meanwhile, Very Well Fit details that sugars can still be broken down into energy without oxygen through anaerobic metabolism. However, this only uses glucose and glycogen, leaving out fats and proteins, which are more sustainable sources of energy.
In comparison, a single glucose molecule yields 3 ATP anaerobically while it can yield 39 ATP in the presence of oxygen. What this means is that oxygen is required for long-lasting energy sources for the muscles. While you exercise, your muscles naturally use up energy more rapidly. This is why your breathing rate shoots up — so your lungs can pull in more oxygen and deliver it to where it's needed.
But when the supply doesn't match the demand — meaning you run out of oxygen to turn food into energy — your body produces lactic acid instead. Some of the symptoms of lactic acid build-up are cramps and muscle fatigue. This impacts performance and results in an athlete giving up due to lack of energy.
Anaerobic metabolism typically kicks in with sports that require sudden bursts of energy, like sprinting. However, if your sport requires stamina, such as running, swimming, or basketball, you would need a steady supply of oxygen in order to fill up your tank. This is why several endurance athletes have started to incorporate oxygen-based treatments into their routine, like water polo player Ashleigh Johnson and basketball superstar LeBron James. Both are fans of oxygen therapy, with USA Today reporting that the NBA star even sleeps in a hyperbaric chamber, to help his muscles recover faster and improve his performance
This particular treatment that James uses provides pure oxygen with increased pressure. Compared to canned oxygen, a single hour-long session may cost anywhere from $60 to $225 in Canada. But considering that LeBron James is currently the highest-paid basketball player in the world with endorsement deals with a slew of major brands, paying a couple of hundred dollars to improve his game is not going to be an issue. Aside from replenishing oxygen supply, oxygen therapy is said to reduce inflammation, minimize muscle soreness and help repair scar tissue. It means that oxygen is not only responsible for increasing energy levels, but also speeding up the recovery process following intense workouts.
Proper breathing technique
Of course, you can't stay in an oxygen chamber forever. What you need to do is refine your breathing technique so that it comes from the diaphragm. Yoga teacher Dana Santas pointed out that shallow breathing causes tension in the chest, neck, and upper back muscles. This constricts the body and leads to an inefficient breathing pattern.
To practice diaphragmatic breathing, take a seat with one hand on your stomach and one hand on your chest. Inhale deeply through your nose and feel your stomach rising up while your chest remains still. Exhale and feel your belly lower. Practice this technique at least 15 minutes a day and apply it to your future workouts.
For the exclusive use of vitalityair.com
By Elle Peters
Tags : Elle Peters

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Monroe edges Lake Stevens for state softball berth (video)
The Bearcats win 4-3 in a 4A loser-out game and eliminate the Vikings for the 3rd year in a row.
by Cameron Van Til
Friday, May 18, 2018 11:37pm
SportsHigh school sportsLake Stevens High SchoolMonroe High SchoolSoftball
EVERETT — After taking down the Wesco 4A co-champions for the second time in four days, the Monroe softball team is headed back to state.
And once again, Lake Stevens is on the outside looking in after a crushing end to a dominant season.
Fourth-seeded Monroe earned its second consecutive state berth and continued its postseason mastery of the Vikings with a 4-3 win over top-seeded Lake Stevens in the loser-out Class 4A Northwest District tournament second-place game Friday evening at Phil Johnson Ballfields.
"I'm just so proud of these kids," Bearcats coach Ashley Tuiasosopo said. "(Lake Stevens) is a great team and we knew that we'd have to bring our 'A' game. We brought it Tuesday, and then tonight we just pulled every ounce of energy we had to gut it out."
With the tying run on third and the winning run on second, Monroe pitcher McKenzie Schulz entered in relief and induced a game-ending groundout to third baseman Hannah Hvitved.
Monroe beat Lake Stevens 4-3 to earn its second consecutive state berth. pic.twitter.com/FHsdXDRUxs
— Cameron Van Til (@CameronVanTil) May 19, 2018
Monroe (18-6) finished four games behind Wesco 4A co-champions Lake Stevens and Jackson in the league standings, losing twice to the Vikings in the regular season by a total of three runs.
But the Bearcats had their way with Lake Stevens in the district tournament, beating the Vikings 7-1 in Tuesday's semifinal and once again in Friday's winner-to-state elimination contest.
It was deja vu for Lake Stevens (19-3), which entered the district tournament with only one loss for the second straight year. Both times, the Vikings suffered a season-ending defeat to Monroe in the second-place game.
The Bearcats have ended Lake Stevens' season three years in a row.
"I wish Wesco could take more than two teams, because honestly we've probably got three to four teams that deserve a chance in Spokane," Tuiasosopo said. "I wish we all could go, because it's unfortunate that one of us gets left out."
With the game tied 1-1 in the top of the fourth inning, Monroe's Elise Allen lined a two-out single off the center-field fence and advanced to second base on an error, putting runners on second and third.
Freshman pinch hitter Abi Dill then grounded a two-run single up the middle to give the Bearcats a 3-1 lead.
Monroe freshman pinch hitter Abi Dill broke a 1-1 tie with a two-run single in the fourth inning. pic.twitter.com/5WAL7UZsrI
Lake Stevens senior Summer Scales pulled a solo home run over the left-field fence in the fifth inning to make it a one-run game, but Monroe added an insurance run in the top of the seventh to make it 4-2.
The Vikings put together a two-out rally in the bottom of the seventh, cutting the deficit to 4-3 on a Sydney Haynes run-scoring single. Both runners then advanced on an error, putting the tying run on third base and the winning run on second.
Monroe senior pitcher McKenzie Schulz, a University of Washington signee who missed much of the season with an undisclosed injury, then entered in relief and induced a game-ending groundout to third baseman Hannah Hvitved.
Bearcats senior Sarah Reeves yielded two earned runs and seven hits in 6 2/3 innings pitched.
Lake Stevens senior Sara Johnson tossed a complete game, allowing three earned runs and 10 hits.
Snohomish blanks E-W for 3A district championship
Saturday's prep scores, links to recaps


text:
The Mythology Structure - Part 1
(SPOILERS: Star Wars)
I've discussed three act structure frequently in this blog. I find it incredibly useful, and it's the language of the industry so if you want to work in Hollywood you better learn it. But there's another approach to structure I find equally useful: The Mythology Structure.
The mythology structure is based on the work of Joseph Cambell who identified an archetypal myth that seemed to cross cultures and times. I was introduced to the concept through the book "The Writer's Journey" by Christopher Vogler who put Cambell's ideas into a practical methodology for writers. If you like what I say here, I highly recommend the book.
There are other books and classes that cover the structure in their own way, some good, some less so. I'm going to describe the concepts I find most useful and describe how I apply them in screenwriting, using Vogler's book as my jumping off point. Because the discussion is long, I'm going to break it up into several posts. I'll use Star Wars (written by George Lucas) as an example film. Other films that clearly follow the mythology structure are The Matrix and Wizard of Oz.
I liked mythology structure because it's a character based way to approach plot. In fact, the structure is also called "the hero's journey." It is really a structure based on character arc.
The mythology structure is a little different than three act structure. It's more flexible, for one. Some of the stages can be left out or done out of order or repeated, for example. Also, the journey the hero goes on does not always have to be physical. It can often be a journey of the mind. For example, in a romantic comedy this might be an emotional journey. The stages are often more metaphorical than literal. It's important not to feel constrained by the mythology structure.
With all of that in mind, I'll start with the stages of the hero's journey that generally fall within Act I of a screenplay.
Inciting Incident – Something happens that sets the story in motion. In Star Wars it's Luke seeing the hologram of Leia.
Call to Adventure – The hero is asked to undertake the journey. In Star Wars Obi Wan tells Luke he should come with him to Alderaan to return R2D2. In a romantic comedy it might be the main character meeting the love interest.
Refusing the Call – The hero's initial reaction is often to refuse the adventure. In Star Wars, Luke tells Obi Wan he can't leave – there's too much to do on the farm. This beat of reluctance can show us what's influencing the character not to change. Often screenwriters will leave this stage out of their initial story development (and sometimes this stage is left out of the final movie). I always at least consider what impact having the character refuse the initial call to adventure will have on my stories.
Acceptance of the Call – If the hero has resisted, something happens which changes the situation. In Star Wars this is Luke discovering that his aunt and uncle have been murdered by Storm Troopers. The hero can't avoid it anymore… he is going to have to go on this adventure.
Entering the Special World – I think the special world concept is the most important idea of the mythology structure. The hero is going to enter an environment that is unfamiliar. It can be an actual location, an emotional state, or an ideological situation. Whatever it is, it is going to change the character. In Star Wars the special world is the adventure of outer space. Luke enters it when he goes to Mos Eisley, which is a sort of outpost of outer space adventure on Tatooine. In a romantic comedy it might be when the loner embarks on a relationship. Identifying the special world in your script is crucial to understanding the adventure your hero is going on.
Meeting the Mentor – The hero meets someone who teaches him about the special world. This stage often shifts position. In Star Wars it comes before the call to adventure when Luke meets Obi Wan (the mentor who teaches him about the Force and the politics of the galaxy). It can also come after the acceptance of the call or even after entering the special world. In a romantic comedy, a mentor might be a best friend who is wiser in the ways of love than our hero.
Next post I'll cover the stages of the journey that usually fall in Act II.
Posted by Doug Eboch at 3:30 PM 1 comment:
Labels: Mythology, structure
Structural Breakdown of "The Terminator"
(Spoilers: The Terminator)
In anticipation of the upcoming sequel, here's a breakdown of the three act structure of the first Terminator movie, written by James Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd.
Main Character: This is a little bit tricky. On the one hand, Kyle Reese is introduced first, he has a strong goal, and he is the more physically active character through much of the movie. However it is really Sarah who has the biggest problem and ultimately it is her decisions that drive the story forward. Furthermore our hope and fear is centered around Sarah's survival. This makes her the main character.
Catalyst: When the Terminator kills the first Sarah Connor. This is the moment when the danger to our hero is crystalized for the audience, though Sarah doesn't yet know about it. This sets up...
The Main Tension: Will Sarah survive the Terminator?
Act I Break: When Sarah learns of the second killing and then spots Reese following her. She now realizes the danger she's in and begins looking for a way out - initially by seeking shelter in a night club and calling the police. (Very quickly she discovers that Reese is not the one she has to be afraid of.)
Midpoint: When Sarah and Reese escape the attack in the police station. This is a crucial moment because it is when Sarah finally decides to trust Reese. She went along with him earlier, but she didn't really have any other good options then. It is here where she becomes convinced he's telling the truth... and that he's the only one who can help her. This is demonstrated when she's hiding under the desk, hears his voice and identifies herself to him.
Act II Break: When the Terminator locates them at the hotel. Arguably you could point to the earlier moment when Sarah gives her "mother" her location because that is when the Terminator gets the information he needs to track them. But there is some time where the threat does not seem imminent - in fact we get the big love scene after this point. It still seems possible Sarah and Reese can avoid detection until the Terminator actually arrives.
Twist/Epiphany: This one is tough. It has to do with Sarah taking charge of the action. I would put it at the moment when Kyle collapses and she yells at him: "on your feet, soldier!" You could also make a strong case for the moment he dies.
Resolution: Sarah destroys the Terminator with the compactor. The main tension is resolved - our character has succeeded.
So what makes this movie such a standout in the action genre that 25 years later a third sequel is coming out and a show based on it aired last season? I think it's the strong dramatic components at its core. Sarah's goal is as primal as it gets - survival. And her obstacles are huge - the villain is called a Terminator and certainly lives up to its name. She's facing a nearly indestructible killing machine.
And perhaps most important, Sarah is someone we care about. Don't under value the scenes in the beginning of the movie where we see her at work as a poor put-upon waitress and at home with her roommate and pet. Sarah's a sweet person, one who isn't having much luck right now. She even gets stood up for a date.
The visual effects were stunning in their day and Arnold is certainly iconic, but it is our identification with Sarah and the threat to her life that makes the movie a classic in the action genre that still thrills today.
Labels: film analysis, structure
Unpredictability
(SPOILERS: No Country for Old Men, Spider-Man, The Sixth Sense, Casablanca)
I have to admit, this is a big concept that I'm still wrestling with. It's obviously unsatisfying in a movie when you can figure out what's going to happen before it happens.
But on the other hand don't we actually know how most movies are going to end when we walk into the theater? In an action movie we know the good guy will win and the bad guy will lose. In a romantic comedy we know the movie stars will end up together. Does anybody really think the Green Goblin will beat Spider-Man when they buy their ticket?
And the truth is, we want it that way. How many people would enjoy a movie where the Green Goblin DOES beat Spider-Man? A few, I'm sure, but not many.
So here are some thoughts on the unpredictability paradox.
First of all, let's acknowledge that there are a few movies where the ending is actually a surprise (Usual Suspects, The Sixth Sense). That's great when it grows organically out of the concept of the movie. But anyone who's witnessed M. Night Shyamalan's attempts to repeat the surprise element of The Sixth Sense knows that trying to force that kind of ending on a story is usually a recipe for disaster. And of course many of the greatest movies of all time end with the good guy winning and the lovers together so obviously surprise does not equate to quality.
Let's also acknowledge, though, that not all good movies have happy endings. However I would suggest those that don't aren't always that unpredictable either. Take No Country for Old Men. Is it really a surprise that Josh Brolin's character doesn't get away with the money? How many movies have we seen where someone stumbles across mob or drug dealer money, tries to take it, and ends up dead? It's actually the expected ending for a parable about greed and hubris that would sound familiar to Aristotle.
So how does the poor screenwriter deliver the ending the audience wants without being predictable?
The most common technique is to make the audience wonder HOW the hero is going to succeed (as opposed to WHETHER they are going to succeed). Typically at the end of Act Two you want the audience to be subconsciously thinking something like, "I know Spider-Man's going to beat the Green Goblin but I sure can't figure out how!"
You do this by putting your hero in an apparent no-win situation and then having him or her figure out an unexpected but plausible way out (and no deus ex machinas allowed!*) The more you can make it seem like all is lost, the more the audience will be on the edge of their seat – even if they know in their hearts that the hero will ultimately win.
In a romance story this is typically the moment where the love interest commits to the rival suitor or tells the hero that it's finally over between them for good. In a horror movie it's where the hero is trapped and defenseless with the monster closing in. In a movie that's going to end badly for the main character, such as the prototypical gangster movie, the opposite happens: their success seems assured at the end of Act Two.
Somehow this is the most common – and often most satisfying – way for stories to work for the audience.
Another way to build unpredictability is to create a question in the audience's mind around something besides success or failure. Spider-Man builds unpredictability through the sub-plot: will Peter Parker get the girl? And the ending in that regard is ultimately unhappy – yet we leave the theater satisfied because Spider-Man still beat the Green Goblin.
In every mystery the question isn't "will the detective solve the crime," it's "what's the solution to the crime?" Can you imagine the outrage of an audience who went to a mystery movie and didn't learn whodunit?
That's actually how Usual Suspects and Sixth Sense work. In Usual Suspects we see in the very beginning that Kaiser Sose will kill the hero, Dean Keaton – what we don't know is who Kaiser Sose is. In The Sixth Sense the surprise isn't the outcome of the main tension – can Dr. Crowe help Cole deal with the ghosts – it's that Crowe himself is a ghost.
Now let's consider Casablanca. I've heard it said that if Rick and Ilsa ended up together that movie would have long ago been forgotten. Perhaps, though there's so much other good stuff in there I find that a little hard to believe. So, is the ending truly unpredictable?
First of all, there is a robust genre of romantic tragedy where the lovers don't end up together – Romeo and Juliet anyone? So it's not actually that much of a surprise.
Secondly, if you look at the structure of the movie, it's really about Rick's redemption. And on that score the movie has a happy ending. The most important thing in the movie is that Rick does the right thing, not whether Ilsa gets on the plane. Would Casablanca be a classic if Rick had sold the letters of transit and let Ilsa's husband be captured by the Germans (regardless of whether Rick and Ilsa ended up together)?
Of course a lot of the time when a movie feels predictable it's not so much knowing the ultimate outcome that's frustrating us, it's that we can see each plot point leading up to it coming a mile away. I believe this is one of the key elements of the art of writing: controlling when the audience gets information.
You have to give them enough information that twists don't seem capricious but not so much that they can figure the twists out ahead of time. You can't underestimate or talk down to your audience but at the same time you have to make sure they can follow the story. It's a balancing act for which there are no rules… just your talent.
One final topic that maybe deserves its own post: the difference between ambiguity and confusion.
Ambiguity in a movie is not bad. It can give your story moral complexity and a desirable unpredictability. Confusion, on the other hand, is bad. That's when the audience can't figure out what's going on. You'll lose them quickly that way.
In The Sixth Sense it's ambiguous through much of the movie whether the ghosts need help or whether they are simply evil souls trapped on Earth. That ambiguity provides some delicious suspense when Cole first tries out Dr. Crowe's plan for him to help the ghosts. Remember the scene when Cole goes into the blanket fort? Terrifying. We have no idea how that's going to come out. Yet there's never a point in the movie where we feel lost or have difficulty following the plot. We never once get confused.
Unpredictability, ambiguity, confusion. Difficult concepts to master, if anyone ever really can. But crucial things to think about if you want to be a good writer.
*Deus ex Machina is an old Aristotelian concept that describes a story where the main character doesn't solve his own problem. It literally means "God in the Machine" because some bad Greek plays would have Zeus lowered in a basket at the climax to set everything right. We've known for thousands of years that that's unsatisfying!


text:
Q: Ellipse - Mouse collision detection I'm trying to figure out how to tell if the mouse is over an ellipse on an HTML5 Canvas. I need to be more precise than a bounding-box check.
Sorry this is such a vague question. I'm completely stumped.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
So far I have this:
// This is a pretend object. m.x and m.y will have the position of the mouse.
var m = {
    x:245,
    y:341,
    onEnter: function(){}
};

m.onEnter = function () {
    console.log('The mouse entered the ellipse!');
};

// The important parts of my ellipse object
var e = {
    width:100,
    height:50,
    x:132,
    y:143
};

// This is already working - I use a bounding-box first to increase performance.
if (m.x >= e.x - (e.width/2) && m.x <= e.x + (e.width/2) && m.y >= e.y - (e.height/2) && m.y <= e.y + (e.height/2)) {

    if (/* I havn't got the slightest idea what to put here. */) {
        m.onEnter();
    }

}

A: @pvg's duplicate answer is ok, but that duplicate answer should point out how the variables they use are calculated:
// Given cx,cy,a,b defining an ellipse
function isInEllipse(mouseX,mouseY){
    var dx=mouseX-cx;
    var dy=mouseY-cy;
    return ((dx*dx)/(a*a)+(dy*dy)/(b*b)<=1);
}

Here's example code and a Demo:

var canvas=document.getElementById("canvas");
var ctx=canvas.getContext("2d");
var cw=canvas.width;
var ch=canvas.height;
function reOffset(){
  var BB=canvas.getBoundingClientRect();
  offsetX=BB.left;
  offsetY=BB.top;
}
var offsetX,offsetY;
reOffset();
window.onscroll=function(e){ reOffset(); }
window.onresize=function(e){ reOffset(); }

var PI=Math.PI;
var PI2=PI*2;
var cx=cw/2;
var cy=ch/2;
var a=120;
var b=80;
var points=getPointsOnEllipse(cx,cy,a,b);

$("#canvas").mousemove(function(e){handleMouseMove(e);});

drawEllipse(points);

function dot(x,y,color){
  ctx.beginPath();
  ctx.arc(x,y,3,0,PI2);
  ctx.closePath();
  ctx.fillStyle=color;
  ctx.fill();
}

function isInEllipse(x,y){
  var dx=x-cx;
  var dy=y-cy;
  return ((dx*dx)/(a*a)+(dy*dy)/(b*b)<=1);
}

function drawEllipse(points){
  ctx.beginPath();
  ctx.moveTo(points[0].x,points[0].y);
  for(var j=0;j<points.length;j++){
    ctx.lineTo(points[j].x,points[j].y);
  }
  ctx.closePath();
  ctx.lineWidth=1;
  ctx.strokeStyle='forestgreen';
  ctx.stroke();
}

function getPointsOnEllipse(cx,cy,a,b){
  var startAngle=-PI/2;
  var lastX=cx-(a*Math.cos(startAngle));
  var lastY=cy+(b*Math.sin(startAngle));
  var points=[];
  for(var i=0;i<1000;i++){
    var angle=startAngle+PI2/1000*i;
    var x=cx-(a*Math.cos(angle));
    var y=cy+(b*Math.sin(angle));
    var dx=x-lastX;
    var dy=y-lastY;
    var length=parseInt(Math.sqrt(dx*dx+dy*dy));
    var eAngle=(Math.atan2(dy,dx)+PI2)%PI2;
    if(length>0){
      points.push({x:x,y:y,angle:eAngle});
      lastX=x;
      lastY=y;
    }
  }
  return(points);
}

function handleMouseMove(e){
  // tell the browser we're handling this event
  e.preventDefault();
  e.stopPropagation();

  mouseX=parseInt(e.clientX-offsetX);
  mouseY=parseInt(e.clientY-offsetY);

  var hit=isInEllipse(mouseX,mouseY);
  var color=(hit)?'red':'green';
  dot(mouseX,mouseY,color);

}
body{ background-color: ivory; }
#canvas{border:1px solid red; }

Move mouse in & out of ellipse.
Red mouse dots are inside ellipse, Green outside.

<canvas id="canvas" width=300 height=300></canvas>

A: The 2DRenderingContext has a method to detect whether a point is in a path or not:
CanvasRenderingContext2D.isPointInPath()

You can use that with every kind of path, independently of the geometric form. One drawback: it can only used while drawing, so you have to redraw the scene in your mouseevent. This might be unwanted for static scenes, but if you have an animation, this shouldn't be a problem.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/CanvasRenderingContext2D/isPointInPath

A: Apologies for vague initial answer, that will need improvement, but to get the ball rolling...
Given that an ellipse is a curve on a plane that surrounds two focal points (F1 & F2) defined such that the sum of the distances to the two focal points is constant for every point on the curve.
That is, for any point P on the ellipse the two distances F1P + F2P is a constant. This constant is (obviously & helpfully) equal to length of the longer (major) axis A of said ellipse.
Therefore, for this problem, I suspect that the important parts of your ellipse are not width, height, x, y but rather its two foci F1 and F2 (the 2 points equidistant from the ellipse centre that define it) and the length of the major axis.
Then... for any given mouse click point M it follows that provided the sum of the 2 distances F1M + F2M < A then your mouse click point is within the ellipse.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------- */
/*             The Speech Signal Processing Toolkit (SPTK)           */
/*             developed by SPTK Working Group                       */
/*             http://sp-tk.sourceforge.net/                         */
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------- */
/*                                                                   */
/*  Copyright (c) 1984-2007  Tokyo Institute of Technology           */
/*                           Interdisciplinary Graduate School of    */
/*                           Science and Engineering                 */
/*                                                                   */
/*                1996-2015  Nagoya Institute of Technology          */
/*                           Department of Computer Science          */
/*                                                                   */
/* All rights reserved.                                              */
/*                                                                   */
/* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or        */
/* without modification, are permitted provided that the following   */
/* conditions are met:                                               */
/*                                                                   */
/* - Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright  */
/*   notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.   */
/* - Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above         */
/*   copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following     */
/*   disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided */
/*   with the distribution.                                          */
/* - Neither the name of the SPTK working group nor the names of its */
/*   contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived */
/*   from this software without specific prior written permission.   */
/*                                                                   */
/* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND            */
/* CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,       */
/* INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF          */
/* MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE          */
/* DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS */
/* BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL,          */
/* EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED   */
/* TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,     */
/* DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON */
/* ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY,   */
/* OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY    */
/* OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE           */
/* POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.                                       */
/* ----------------------------------------------------------------- */

/************************************************************************
*                                                                       *
*    Group Delay of Digital Filter                                      *
*                                                                       *
*                                       1988.8   T.Kobayashi            *
*                                       1996.1   N.Isshiki modified     *
*                                                                       *
*       usage:                                                          *
*               grpdelay [ options ] [ infile ] > stdout                *
*       options:                                                        *
*               -l l    :  FFT size power of 2      [256]               *
*               -m m    :  order of filter          [l-1]               *
*               -a      :  ARMA filter              [FALSE]             *
*       infile:                                                         *
*               stdin for default                                       *
*               input is asumed to be float                             *
*       Note that double precision FFT is used.                         *
************************************************************************/

static char *rcs_id = "$Id: grpdelay.c,v 1.28 2015/12/14 01:14:15 uratec Exp $";

/* Standard C Libraries */
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

#ifdef HAVE_STRING_H
#include <string.h>
#else
#include <strings.h>
#ifndef HAVE_STRRCHR
#define strrchr rindex
#endif
#endif

#if defined(WIN32)
#include "SPTK.h"
#else
#include <SPTK.h>
#endif

/*Default Values */
#define SIZE 256
#define AMRA 0

/* Command Name  */
char *cmnd;

void usage(int status)
{
   fprintf(stderr, "\n");
   fprintf(stderr, " %s - group delay of digital filter\n", cmnd);
   fprintf(stderr, "\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "  usage:\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       %s [ options ] [ infile ] > stdout\n", cmnd);
   fprintf(stderr, "  options:\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       -l l  : FFT size power of 2 [%d]\n", SIZE);
   fprintf(stderr, "       -m m  : order of filter     [l-1]\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       -a    : ARMA filter         [FALSE]\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       -h    : print this message\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "  infile:\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       data sequence (%s)       [stdin]\n", FORMAT);
   fprintf(stderr, "  stdout:\n");
   fprintf(stderr, "       group delay (%s)\n", FORMAT);
#ifdef PACKAGE_VERSION
   fprintf(stderr, "\n");
   fprintf(stderr, " SPTK: version %s\n", PACKAGE_VERSION);
   fprintf(stderr, " CVS Info: %s", rcs_id);
#endif
   fprintf(stderr, "\n");
   exit(status);
}

int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
   FILE *fp;
   char *s, *infile = NULL, c;
   int size = SIZE, nd = -1, is_arma = AMRA;
   double *x, *d;

   if ((cmnd = strrchr(argv[0], '/')) == NULL)
      cmnd = argv[0];
   else
      cmnd++;

   while (--argc) {
      if (*(s = *++argv) == '-') {
         c = *++s;
         if ((c != 'a') && (*++s == '\0')) {
            s = *++argv;
            --argc;
         }
         switch (c) {
         case 'm':
            nd = atoi(s) + 1;
            break;
         case 'l':
            size = atoi(s);
            break;
         case 'a':
            is_arma = 1;
            break;
         case 'h':
            usage(0);
         default:
            fprintf(stderr, "%s : Invalid option '%c'!\n", cmnd, c);
            break;
         }
      } else
         infile = s;
   }

   if (nd == -1)
      nd = size;
   if (nd > size) {
      fprintf(stderr,
              "%s : Order of sequence %d should be less than the FFT size %d!\n",
              cmnd, nd, size);
      return (1);
   }

   if (infile) {
      fp = getfp(infile, "rb");
   } else
      fp = stdin;

   x = dgetmem(2 * size);
   d = x + size;
   while (!feof(fp)) {
      fillz(x, size, sizeof(*x));
      if (freadf(x, sizeof(*x), nd, fp) != nd)
         break;
      grpdelay(x, d, size, is_arma);
      fwritef(d, sizeof(*x), size / 2 + 1, stdout);
   }

   return 0;
}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


The Spin-Column Protein Folding Screen Kit is an easy-to-use and effective tool for optimization of protein folding conditions. The screen kit includes reagents and 10 different protein folding spin-columns (Column #1 to Column #10). The 10 different columns represent the 10 most promising folding conditions. Following is a list of publications using the protein folding columns.
Kuznetsova VE et al, Genome-wide Analysis of Substrate Specificities of the Escherichia coli Haloacid Dehalogenase-like Phosphatase Family, J. Biol. Chem. VOL. 281, NO. 47, pp. 36149–36161 (2006).
Cha J et al, Characterization of the β-Lactam Antibiotic Sensor Domain of the MecR1 Signal Sensor/Transducer Protein from Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Biochemistry, 46 (26), pp 7822–7831 (2007).
Hao X et al, Overexpression and Purif ication of Membrane Transport Protein with Native Functions, Chinese J. Bioch. Mol. Biol. 23:12, 1051-1058 (2007).
Thomas J et al, Acyl Carrier Protein Phosphodiesterase (AcpH) of Escherichia coli Is a Non-Canonical Member of the HD Phosphatase/Phosphodiesterase Family Biochemistry, 46, 129-136 (2007).
Cha J et al, Lysine N-Decarboxylation in the BlaR1 Protein from Staphylococcus Aureus at the Root of Its Function As an Antibiotic Sensor J. Am. Chem. Soc., 129 (13), pp 3834–3835 (2007).
Kuznetsova E. Activity-based functional annotation of unknown proteins: HAD-like hydrolases, University of Toronto, Graduate thesis, (2009).
Miller PS. Kinetic and Structural Studies on the First Three Enzymes in Bacillus Anthracis Isoprenoid Biosynthesis, ProQuest LLC, Ann Arber, P133 (2009).
Duk-Hee K et al, Novel dual-binding function of a poly (C)-binding protein 3, transcriptional factor which binds the double-strand and single-stranded DNA sequence, Gene, 501 (1), p.33-38, (2012).
Copeland DL. Production of Recombinant Carp Leptin And its Effects on Lipid Metabolism in the Common Carp (Cyprinus Carpio), Thesis, The University of Akron (2012).
Kang DH. Novel function of the poly(c)-binding protein α-CP2 as a transcriptional activator that binds to single-stranded DNA sequences, International Journal of Molecular Medicine, Vol 32 (5): 1187-1194 (2013).
Lee DS et al, Differential regulation of mouse and human Mu opioid receptor gene depends on the single stranded DNA structure of its promoter and α-complex protein 1. Biomedical Reports (2017).


Streamlines and aggregates the repayment process.
Offers a wealth of information, including tips on how to repay loans faster.
Provides information specifically for private-loan borrowers.
Tells you if you qualify for the government's Income-Based Repayment and Pay as You Earn programs.
Mediates disputes involving federal education loans.
Motivates users to reduce debt and increase savings by offering prizes (like $25,000 to put toward student loans).
Connects indebted students with stipend-paying volunteer opportunities.


Cooking a special meal for someone is the ultimate way to show how much you care. In our Romantic Dinners collection, you'll learn how to create a fancy dinner, from cocktails through dessert, just for the two of you. Classically trained Chef Addie Gundry teaches you how to express your affection through many recipes, including French and Italian selections that will make your loved one swoon. For the finale, you'll dazzle your date with a choice of decadent desserts. Chef Addie will walk you step-by-step through each part of the meal, from setting the scene and decorating the table to preparing each delicious dish. Whether you want to make a great first impression or celebrate a lifetime of love, you'll find the recipes for successful dinners à deux in this collection.
Anyone looking to know their way around the kitchen needs to get all the basics down pat before they start trying to tackle the more advanced recipes. In our Skills 101 collection, you'll learn how to master the rudimentary skills that are essential for everyday cooking. Chef Addie Gundry takes you step-by-step through various cooking techniques in classes such as Knife Skills and Introduction to Sauces. Addie will walk you through everything from choosing the correct kitchen tools and ingredients you need to stock your kitchen to how to properly handle and care for your kitchen tools and a few of her favorite recipes to practice your new-found skills! Whether you're new to the kitchen or you're looking to finesse your technique, you'll love learning how classically trained chef, Addie Gundry, navigates her way through the kitchen.


text:
Helge Sigvard Andersson, född
10 februari 1923 i Genarps församling, död 21 december 1997 i Malmö, var lokalhistoriker och författare till en stor mängd artiklar och böcker om Malmö med omnejd. Han var en självlärd och omvittnat mycket kunnig hembygdsforskare.

Helge Andersson föddes i Genarp men växte upp i Husie i Malmö. Fadern var banvakt och familjen bodde i banvaktsstugan vid Hohögs station på Malmö-Genarps järnväg. Som vuxen arbetade Helge Andersson sedan under drygt fyra decennier på deltid som folkbokföringsassistent i Husie församling.

1944 publicerade Skånska Dagbladet en artikel av Helge Andersson om Bödkaregården, en gammal gård intill föräldrahemmet i Hohög. Den blev den första i en mycket lång rad lokalhistoriska artiklar i tidningar, tidskrifter och årsböcker, totalt flera tusen. Artiklarna uppmärksammades av Ingemar Ingers på Landsmålsarkivet i Lund och ledde till att han engagerades för att förteckna ortnamn i lantmäterihandlingar för Malmöhus och Kristianstads län, liksom i jordeböcker och bouppteckningar.

På 1940- och 1950-talen intervjuade han äldre Husie- och Genarpsbor och upptecknade dialekter, sägner och folkminnen. Han ägnade sig också åt omfattande arkivforskning i Lund, Malmö, Köpenhamn och Tyskland. Han blev 1949 medlem i Malmö fornminnesförening. Med början 1954 skrev han regelbundet artiklar i föreningens årsböcker, främst om Husie socken och Södra Sallerups socken. Han blev invald i styrelsen 1972 och var 1978-1982 dess sekreterare. Helge Andersson tilldelades 1995 Skånska Dagbladets kulturpris "för framstående forskning inom skånsk kulturhistoria".

Förutom alla artiklar i tidningar och årsböcker skrev eller medverkade Helge Andersson i ett antal böcker:
 monografier om kyrkorna i Genarp, Glostorp, Husie, Lockarp, Svedala, Södra Sallerup och Västra Klagstorp
 Sägner och historier från Genarp (1954)
 Husie och Södra Sallerups församlingar (1954)
 Bara härad i slutet av 1700-talet (1958, översättning från latin till svenska av Jonas Frostensson Swananders Dissertatio gradualis de territorio Bara, 1796)
 Kommunhistoriken Bara kommun (1980, redaktör och huvudförfattare)
2019 beslöt Malmö stad att i framtiden skulle en gata eller plats i Husie uppkallas efter Helge Andersson.

Källor
 Andersson, Helge (1961). "Excerperingen av lantmäterihandlingar". Sydsvenska ortnamnssällskapets årsskrift 1961: sid. 55-58
 Bager, Elsebeth (1997). "Helge Andersson : 1923-1997". Elbogen 1997 (65): sid. 6-7
 Hallberg, Göran (1998). "Helge Andersson 1923-1997". Sydsvenska ortnamnssällskapets årsskrift 1998: sid. 5-6
 Johansson, Jan (11 augusti 1995). "'Kunskap om miljö ger en levande bygd'". Skånska Dagbladet
 "Ständigt lika nyfiken : femtio års forskning ger Helge Andersson SkD:s kulturpris 1995". Skånska Dagbladet. 22 juni 1995

Svenska fackboksförfattare
Män
Födda 1923
Avlidna 1997
Personer från Genarps socken

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


The Lyell Law Firm is located in Nashville, TN. John Lyell is recognized as an AV® rated attorney by Martindale Hubbell. We provide legal representation to businesses, organizations and individuals before the legislative and executive branches of the state of Tennessee. Members of the firm are well recognized in legislative advocacy (lobbying), government relations and administrative law.
Representation by the Lyell Law Firm affords each of our clients the legal concept known as attorney-client privilege. The privilege only applies when an attorney or employee of a law firm represents you. Attorney-client privilege maintains communication between the firm and our client as confidential.


text:
>British Buses - The Golden Years
British Buses - The Golden Years
The golden years of Britain's buses were in the 1950s and 1960s. The service was excellent, and the drivers and conductors had real pride in their work. Buses had style, individuality and, most of all, character,...
The golden years of Britain's buses were in the 1950s and 1960s. The service was excellent, and the drivers and conductors had real pride in their work. Buses had style, individuality and, most of all, character, whether they were in the familiar red of London's Buses, or the many and varied colours of fleets around the country. This release celebrates those golden years with archive film that has been digitally mastered for the best picture quality.
Colour Col & B/W
Label Simply Media
Documentary Yes
Documentary By 'A Transport Hog'. Clip of European Coaches from the 50s
Other Extras 'A Transport Hog'. Clip of European Coaches from the 50s
Sound Format Dolby Stereo
Concorde'S Homecoming - November 26Th 2003
Concorde'S Homecoming - November...
Morris Minor - Celebrating 50 Golden Years
Tall Ships - Sailing the Windjammers
A detailed study of some of the...
Farewell to the Routemaster
London's favourite bus for over...
British Transport Film Collection The - Vol.1 - On and Off the Rails
Following the nationalisation of...
Somersets Lost Railway
The Steam Era - Blackmore Vale and the Bluebell (1987)
Documentary tracing the development of...
The Steam Era - Steaming Back to Marylebone (1987)
David Coleman narrates the story of...