It is hardly news that soccer has evolved from being a working class sport to becoming a multi-billion business. Football players are not only sport stars but also marketing assets. Back in 2013, Herbalife signed a 5-year advertising deal with Cristiano Ronaldo. Even though Ronaldo was hired to promote the sports nutrition range of the US company, the benefits of the deal spilled over to meal replacement, which remains Herbalife's core business. The company saw a dramatic increase in its meal replacement sales in 2013 and 2014 and is expected to continue to benefit from Ronaldo's presence both in the final of the Champions League and in the World Cup.
Herbalife Internacional Portugal SA was the category leader in both 2013 and 2014. The company is a long-time leader in meal replacement in Portugal and recently saw its value share increase further. The boost in Herbalife's sales came from an increase in the number of resellers and from promotional activity featuring local soccer star Cristiano Ronaldo.
As of 2013, 10% of the Portuguese population was obese. This is a high rate, even if it remains below the European average. More worryingly, the Portuguese health advantage disappears if we consider children only: 30% of the population below the age of 11 is overweight. This is bad news for the Serviço Nacional de Saúde (the Portuguese public health service) but means a growing potential market for meal replacement products. In addition, the Portuguese population is the sixth most aged in the world, which means an attractive market for convalescence meal replacement products, which is yet to be explored.
Discover the latest market trends and uncover sources of future market growth for the Meal Replacement industry in Portugal with research from Euromonitor's team of in-country analysts.
If you're in the Meal Replacement industry in Portugal, our research will save you time and money while empowering you to make informed, profitable decisions.
What is the market size of Meal Replacement in Portugal?


text:
Very unpopular opinions.
Page 52 of 63 First ... 2424344454647484950515253545556575859606162 ... Last
Thread: Very unpopular opinions.
ppslytherin1994
The Simpsons have always had a good share of both good and bad episodes. There was never a period when The Simpsons could do no wrong and the show churned out but nothing great episodes with no stinkers whatsoever and then BAM it suddenly sucked. Okay yeah there was, except the show had a long period where it was extremely mediocre before it got amazing and then became mediocre again after the golden age of the show that was seasons 10-12.
But seriously, I think the seasons of the show have always been been a mixed bag to me. For every "Deep Space Homer" "Much Apu About Nothing" or "Homer's Enemy" in the "classic" era of the show, there was you're "The City of New York vs. Homer Simpson," "Homer Goes to College" or "Cape Fear." For all the classics that the Mike Scully era had like "Behind the Laughter," "Trilogy of Error" "Missionary Impossible," or "Homer vs. Dignity," there were some awfully mediocre episodes and just plain stinkers as well like "Bart the Mother," "The Computer Wore Menace Shoes" and "New Kids on the Blecch."
My point is, the Simpsons has always been kind of a mixed bag for me especially in the "classic era." Some episodes are complete hits and some are complete misses. But, I still love the show and the good has always outweighed the bad when it comes to the actual quality of the episodes of the show.
Last edited by ppslytherin1994; 01-21-2018 at 09:27 AM.
Grappling with Local Oaf
Actually, now that you bring it up, I do have a potentially very unpopular opinion regarding "Homer vs. Dignity". I guess it depends on how the perception of that one's changed over the years, and whether it's also looked upon a bit more favourably along with the rest of the Scully era now, but it never bothered me as much as it did other people. I get why it did, but I always saw it a little differently.
Specifically, the infamous "panda rape" scene. Without wanting to be too coarse or graphic, I never interpreted that scene as Homer actually being...well, penetrated by the panda. I always presumed the male panda simply humped the suit, resulting in a...situation that was still gross, but not as dark as many interpreted it to be. As such, I thought it worked in terms of having Homer truly hit rock bottom in the way he was being treated by Mr Burns, and sacrificing his dignity in order to make extra money. Still arguably a step too far, and I get why people don't like it, but I don't think it was meant to be quite as dark as it came across to a lot of people.
I don't think it's a great scene or episode by any stretch of the imagination, and it invites a darker interpretation. I never saw them pushing the envelope that far, though. Post-revival Family Guy definitely would, but ultimately, I think even Scully Simpsons wouldn't.
A little less Generic than before.
by: BlueRibbonCommittee
Pubic Hair Fan
The Simpsons are still a great series, the best in history, IMO.
when they are over, a part of me will be sad, but well ... We have 29 seasons to see!
And the ones that remain!
Long live The Simpsons!
Whyyoubig
Always late to the party
BACK TO WINNIPEG!
I have an unpopular opinion to share. The animation of season 1 isn't that bad for me, or rather it doesn't negatively affect my enjoyment of the season, in fact it's sometimes amusing to watch.
Favorite/least favorite by season (not counting clip shows)
Season 1: Life on the Fast Lane/Some Enchanted Evening Season 2: Bart the Daredevil/Old Money Season 3: Bart the Lover/Dog of Death Season 4: Last Exit to Springfield/Marge in Chains Season 5: Cape Feare/Bart Gets an Elephant Season 6: Homer the Great/Fear of Flying Season 7: Mother Simpson/Homerpalooza Season 8: You Only Move Twice/Simpsoncalifragilisticexpiala(D'oh)cious Season 9: The City of New York Vs Homer Simpson/Lisa the Skeptic Season 10: Lisa Gets an A/Homer Simpson in: Kidney Trouble Season 11: Behind the Laughter/It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Marge Season 12: Trilogy of Error/Homer Vs Dignity Season 13: I Am Furious (Yellow)/The Frying Game Season 14: Moe Baby Blues/Barting Over Season 15: Simple Simpson/Bart-Mangled Banner Season 16: Don't Fear the Roofer/On a Clear Day I Can't See My Sister Season 17: The Seemingly Never-Ending Story/Bonfire of the Manatees Season 18: 24 Minutes/The Boys of Bummer Season 19: Eternal Moonshine of the Simpson Mind/That 90's Show Season 20: Gone Maggie Gone/In the Name of the Grandfather Season 21: The Bob Next Door/The Greatest Story Ever D'ohed Season 22: Angry Dad: The Movie/Elementary School Musical Season 23: Holidays of Future Passed/Lisa Goes Gaga Season 24: I haven't seen this season Season 25: Brick Like Me/Days of Future Future Season 26: Simpsorama/The Musk Who Fell to Earth Season 27: Halloween of Horror/Every Man's Dream Season 28: 22 For 30/Kamp Krustier Season 29: Gone Boy/The Old Blue Mayor She Ain't What She Used to Be Season 30: TBD when 11 episodes have aired/TBD when 11 episodes have aired
by: Welcome to Moe's
Financial Panther
Tie me up anytime
I think that's a pretty popular opinion, actually. People call the season 1 animation "charming."
Favorite and least favorite by season
1. Krusty Gets Busted There's No Disgrace Like Home 2. Bart Gets an F Dead Putting Society 3. Homer at the Bat Like Father, Like Clown 4. Brother From the Same Planet Krusty Gets Kancelled 5. Cape Feare Lady Bouvier's Lover 6. Homer Badman Another Simpsons Clip Show 7. King-Size Homer Lisa the Iconoclast 8. Homer's Enemy El Viaje Misterioso de Nuestro Jomer 9. Bart Carny The Trouble With Trillions 10. Thirty Minutes Over Tokyo Homer Simpson in: "Kidney Trouble" 11. Guess Who's Coming to Criticize Dinner? Hello Gutter, Hello Fadder 12. HOMЯ Tennis the Menace 13. Tales From the Public Domain She of Little Faith 14. The Dad Who Knew Too Little Helter Shelter 15. I, Annoyed Grunt)-bot Bart-Mangled Banner 16. A Star is Torn On a Clear Day I Can't See My Sister 17. My Fair Laddy Bonfire of the Manatees 18. The Haw-Hawed Couple You Kent Always Say What You Want 19. Funeral for a Fiend All About Lisa 20. Gone Maggie Gone The Good, the Sad and the Drugly 21. The Bob Next Door The Color Yellow 22. Donnie Fatso Love is a Many Strangled Thing 23. The Falcon and the D'ohman A Totally Fun Thing That Bart Will Never Do Again 24. Hardly Kirk-ing Moonshine River 25. The War of Art What to Expect When Bart's Expecting 26. Sky Police Let's Go Fly a Coot 27. Halloween of Horror Lisa With an 'S' 28. There Will Be Buds Moho House 29. Springfield Splendor Throw Grampa From the Dane
by: Seven of Five, Welcome to Moe's
GaryPotato12
My unpopular opinion is that Holidays of Future Passed is overrated. This episode was as good as Future Drama and only slightly better than Bart to the Future. Some of the jokes felt way to futuristic, like it was set in Futurama times. And Maggie's silence in the episode was not funny, it was way more funny in Lisa's Wedding, one of my favourite episodes. It's not a bad episode, it's just not good either. It's "meh".
Last edited by GaryPotato12; 07-14-2018 at 07:45 PM.
simpnuts
I'm Bart, who are you? by The No Homers Club
bboynexus
Pin Pal
There is exceptional thematic substance and character work in Holidays of Future Passed though. More so, I dare say, than every other episode post season 10. It's not particularly funny, but that doesn't stop it from being the greatest episode of the last 20 years. It would have been a worthy series finale.
by: Patches O'houlihan
Venomrabbit
100% dumbass
The Mists of History
Hey count me in with the crowd that likes season 1's style, it's particularly expressive.
Though I might like 2's or 3/4's better. 2 is a bit more tidied up and... a lot of season 3/4, especially 3, comes off as cuter. Also love the use of colours and stuff, like in Like Father Like Clown, especially the gloomy moments.
I'm not sure if I can say whether or not Future-Passed was objectively good or not, but I really didn't care much for it. Granted unlike any future ep other than Lisa's Wedding and Barthood it at least seemed to be trying. So credit where it's due, it's still probably a personal 3rd best.
by: GaryPotato12, Welcome to Moe's
Welcome to Moe's
Birthplace of the Flaming Moe
As mentioned previously, I also love the first season and it's animation, I think my unpopular opinion could possibly be that season one is one of the best seasons. For different reasons than the usual reasons for favourite within the established seasons but the writing and episodes is so good, even if it was in it's early stages the way they introduced characters in each episode and covered all angles was really good.
'"Uh, Hugh Jass! D'oh, somebody check the men's room for a Hugh Jass"
no thoughts head empty
stillwhater
Originally Posted by Financial Panther
the animation from s1-s5ish is a lot more lively then anything that came after it so yea.
Russiano
As for me, the animation isn't an issue. What is though is how whole characters are erased sometimes in order to produce a joke. The humour in the last seasons seems mostly forced due to that (I suppose it's been said a lot). I also don't like new Marge as she is shown in the S29EP6 or S20EP12. I was surprised at Ned drawing out apologies from Homer in S26EP21 (which was accurate in logical sense but it ruined Flanders' holier than thou attitude. IMHO it'd be funnier if Ned proceeded reacting like everything was fine and Homer eventually snapped because of how patient Ned was, then tried to hurt him hard until crossing the line and realising his mistake — like old Homer was most likely to do). There are many episodes where characters were changed the same way, but I'm generally upset with Marge and Ned as they have had been the calmest and most tolerant people (in their own ways) what made their rare anger or dumb decisions unique. It's my personal point of view, anyway. I still can watch last seasons and find them amusing, except Lisa Goes Gaga episode. That made me cringe a lot for some reason.
Are you talking about people violating their characterization for the sake of a joke? That doesn't bother me much. If their character changes for an entire episode for no real reason, that would be a problem, but for a joke that only lasts a few seconds, I'm fine with it. For example, Lisa's "Who needs college, mom? We're trillionaires! Let's buy dune buggies!" is pretty funny to me because Lisa rarely acts like that, and it doesn't bother me because I think part of the joke is that that isn't her character.
by: Brad Lascelle, Mícheál
Mícheál
Professional Teleporter
I agree with @Financial Panther .
It can be made to be quite funny to have a character say something outside of what they usually are, because it's so unexpected, it can come across as a funny line.
"I may or may not die young. I haven't decided yet."
by: Beggs
TheDuffBlimp
Plot holes do not exist.
ataeaf
"Pretension" by Calvin Klein
At this point, the consensus seems to be that Season 13 is where the show truly went downhill.
ah (as in apple)-tuh-eef
Where do you see that consensus?
There's no way that's the consensus. On the contrary, season 13 saw a gradual upswing in quality that peaked during season 15 and 16.
by: Brad Lascelle
CousinMerl
so lame
Spittle County
I gotta say that I find '22 For 30' to be a fairly mediocre episode. It gets quite a bit of praise for being one of season 28's best but I just can't see the greatness so to me it's not more than an okay episode at best; it was kinda dull and the conflict between Bart & Homer felt tacked on & the only thing I really cared for was the parts with Fat Tony and the mob (which were the highlights).
Last edited by CousinMerl; 09-01-2018 at 05:50 AM.
BlueRibbonCommittee
Deep Frier of Shirts
For example, Lisa's "Who needs college, mom? We're trillionaires! Let's buy dune buggies!" is pretty funny to me because Lisa rarely acts like that, and it doesn't bother me because I think part of the joke is that that isn't her character.
I always thought it was the fact that Lisa is still a little kid on the inside (especially at that point in the series) plus she probably thinks that college is the next step toward being rich, but if they are rich, who cares?
In "Don't Fear the Roofer", I'm honestly bothered more by the bartender's explanation of how he can't see Ray than the Stephen Hawking bit. The latter isn't supposed to make sense at all, but the former seemed a bit more grounded but still doesn't make sense. If he couldn't see Ray to the point of not even believing he existed, who ordered those nachos?
Wile E. the Brain
Have Brain, Will Travel
I don't like 22 for 30 neither. Too much exagerated and pretty unfunny to me, except some gags, from Milhouse especially. And yeah, one of those episodes where the conflict and the fights between Bart and Homer take a disturbing way to me.
Junior Camper
I'd love to see Bart beat the shit out of Homer one time and completely retire the strangling "joke" once and for all. God knows he deserves it. I'm watching the Hockey episode right now and just want someone to slap the Hell out of him, because frankly it's been a long time coming.
I'm not necessarily for retiring the strangling joke; I really don't have a problem with it as long as it isn't treated seriously. When it is, it becomes more uncomfortable. But if they did retire it, I don't think Bart beating up Homer is the right way to go about it at all. They should have a good relationship. There was a fairly recent episode where Homer said "You know boy, I don't think I can strangle you anymore." If they wanted to end it with that, it would've been a lot better than a Bart vs. Homer bloodbath.
GlitterCat
If you want to see a cartoon family beat the crap out of each other go watch family Guy.
Pokemon Moon Friend Code 5473-2104-2310
Looking for shiny, legendary, and mythical. Got shiny Sandshrew (Alola)
Have various starters, zorua, can breed many pokemon.
Current egg move hatching: Tyrunt with fire fang
Mikesuper26
I am by no means a fan of the strangling gag. At best it is simply an aspect of the show that I really don't enjoy and just find it to be genuinely unfunny. At its worst, like when Bart is actually hurt by Homer's actions and thus it becomes more realistic and abusive, it is cruel and uncomfortable to watch. I am all for Homer getting his comeuppance, I just feel as though it shouldn't come from Bart. It wouldn't really make sense for a ten year old to fight his much larger father and be able to give him a taste of his own medicine. In my opinion, it would be nice for an adult in the series to occasionally defend Bart from both his father and any other individual intending to do harm to the boy. That, of course, would require an adult to actually like Bart though. There really aren't many good influences in Bart's life aside from his mother and Flanders, which is a shame because some kindness and compassion towards Bart would likely greatly improve his attitude and behavior, and maybe Homer would not even feel the need to strangle his son if this were true (despite the fact that Bart's offenses resulting in getting strangled are often minuscule at best.)
Originally Posted by Mikesuper26
Here's the thing, Homer doesn't strangle Bart because he misbehaves. Considering what Homer does to Flander regularly, he clearly doesn't give a shit about right and wrong, or being a decent member of society. Given how often Homer tells his kids that they ruined his life, and how bitter he is about having a family, and how he clearly loves Lisa more, the whole strangling issue takes on a far darker tone.
But the show doesn't take this seriously. When Homer and Marge have marriage crisis #643? They all but cover themselves in ashes and weep about how pure and good their love is. When Homer abuses his kid? Oh, it's just a comedy, stop taking it so seriously!
When I say I want Bart to beat the crap out of Homer, I'm not entirely joking. I want the characters to feel like real people. I want this whacky modern era to go die in a hole so there can be real emotion to the show again and real characterization which carries over from episode to episode. Because at the moment it feels like they hide behind comedy to excuse the characters being irredeemable monsters who no longer resemble their original forms.
Originally Posted by GlitterCat
Family Guy made fun of Michael J. Fox having Parkinsons Disease. I don't care about a single thing they do. They defaulted on the right to attempt anything but gutter humour at that point.
Last edited by Commodus; 09-02-2018 at 08:27 AM.
Originally Posted by Commodus
I agree with you regarding Homer strangling Bart. In the early seasons, Bart would misbehave, and Homer would be so incensed in the heat of the moment that he would strangle Bart as a crime of passion. That was the supposed humor was in the gag. Now, more often then not, Bart makes a harmless joke or in some cases does nothing at all, and then he gets strangled. Or, in some cases, Homer premeditates the strangling, such as in "Exit Through the Kwik-E-Mart" where Homer strangles Bart in his sleep. I don't think parodying child abuse is funny...and Homer does even worse to Bart besides just strangling him.
My point in the above post was simply that it wouldn't make sense for a ten year old to beat up his far older and bigger father. In some futuristic episodes such as "Mr. Lisa's Opus," older Bart does fight back against his father, which is refreshing to see honestly. But as for the current timeline of the show, I just don't feel as though it would be in Bart's character to fight back against his father simply because he isn't strong enough to do it, thus making it unrealistic. That is why I wish someone else would give Homer a taste of his own medicine (and I don't count "Love is Many a Strangled Thing" to be Homer learning his lesson.)
Originally Posted by Diversity Pumpkin
When you get over the initial canonical issues
The Simpsons has never really been about building a canon. If you insist on having some sort of canonized version of events, then it would make just as much sense to say that episodes that do not follow canon take place as Elseworlds or What If stories.
Interestingly, the one canonical thing that The Simpsons has maintained in every episode is the age of all of their characters, yet, people want this to change. Personally, I think when it comes to entertainment people would be a lot happier if they just stuck with their own "head canon" version of events.
I like the characters sticking with their present ages. The occasional future episode is fine, but aging the characters would just be too weird. I don't think I'd like it.
Originally Posted by Wile E. the Brain
Now when I think of it the conflict/fight they had got pretty unpleasant on top of feeling forced so yeah, not a fan (though I wouldn't say it was a bad episode as it never did get really awful and had it's share of good moments).
I think it's time for the strangling gag to go. There hasn't been a single time I laughed at it since "A Tale of Two Springfields" (does that count as Bart beating up Homer?) and even looking back it's a bit uncomfortable to see.
by: Mikesuper26
Quick Navigation Simpsons General Discussion Go Top
cyberizm.org

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
HelloFresh's IT hiring activity remains flat in June 2022
Germany-based company HelloFresh's IT hiring remained flat in June 2022 when compared with the previous month, according to GlobalData's Job Analytics database.
The company's overall hiring activity declined by 7% in June 2022 when compared with May 2022.
IT jobs claimed a 9.29% share in the company's total hiring activity in June 2022, and recorded a 0.57% growth over the last three-month average share.
Software and Web Developers, Programmers, and Testers tops HelloFresh IT hiring in June 2022
Out of the total IT job titles posted by HelloFresh, Software and Web Developers, Programmers, and Testers emerged as the leading occupation, recording a share of 34.29% in June 2022, and a 33.33% drop over May 2022, while Computer and Information Analysts claimed a share of 31.43% in June 2022, and registered growth of 175%. Database and Network Administrators and Architects held a share of 20% in June 2022, a 16.67% rise from May 2022.
North America drives IT hiring at HelloFresh
North America emerged as the leading region in the global consumer IT hiring activity in June 2022 with a 60% share, which marked a 10.53% rise over the previous month.
Europe stood next with 37.14%, registering an 18.18% month-on-month growth. Asia-Pacific was the third leading region with a 2.86% share and a 75% drop over May 2022.
The US commanded a leading presence in the region's consumer industry IT hiring activity with a 57.14% share in June 2022, a 5.26% growth over May 2022. Germany featured next with a 25.71% share, up 12.5% over the previous month. France recorded an 8.57% share, an increase of 200% compared with May 2022.
Entry Level jobs lead HelloFresh IT hiring activity in June 2022
Entry Level jobs held a share of 51.43%, down by 5.26% from May 2022. Junior Level positions with a 48.57% share, a growth of 13.33% compared with the previous month.
United Kingdom (UK) Small Domestic Appliances Market to 2025
Duty-Free Retailing Market Size, Consumer and Retail Trends, Competitive Landscape and Forecast, 2021-2025
Global Duty Free Retailing, 2017-2022: Market & Category Expenditure and Forecasts, Trends, and Competitive Landscape
Asia-Pacific (APAC) Duty-Free Retailing Market Size, Sector Analysis, Consumer and Retail Trends, Competitive Landscape and Forecast, 2021-2025
North and South America Duty-Free Retailing Market Size, Sector Analysis, Consumer and Retail Trends, Competitive Landscape and Forecast, 2021-2025


Gawad Kalinga founder Tony Meloto and French social entrepreneur Fabien Courteille were the guest speakers for Gawad Kalinga on Social Entrepreneurship: Addressing Poverty forum held here in Toronto on April 24th 2017. The forum was organized by Gawad Kalinga Canada, a Canadian registered charity. Click here to see the gallery of photos of the event (photos courtesy of Rene Sevilla).


text:
Q: Adjunction: Why does modding out by a polynomial "add" the zero of the polynomial. Suppose we have a ring R and we form a polynomial ring in R, R[x].  In class my professor has explained that forming the quotient ring of R with some polynomial f(x), is like adding the zero of that polynomial to the ring.  What is really going on in the background with this intuition?

A: Not sure if this is what you're after, but take a simple example: say $R={\Bbb Z}$ and $f(x)=x^2-2$, and let $\alpha=\sqrt2$ be one of its roots.  In $R[\sqrt2]$ we can simplify by using the fact that $\alpha^2=2$, say
$$(1+2\alpha)(3+4\alpha)=3+10\alpha+8\alpha^2=19+10\alpha\ .$$
In $R[x]/\langle f(x)\rangle$ we simplify by removing multiples of $f(x)$, for example,
$$\eqalign{(1+2x)(3+4x)
  &=3+10x+8x^2\cr
  &=19+10x+8(x^2-2)\cr
  &\equiv19+10x\pmod{f(x)}\ .\cr}$$
Hope this sheds some light on why these two processes are essentially the same.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Robert L. Archie, Jr. concentrates his practice in the areas of municipal finance, real estate and corporate law for non-profit corporations. He is a member of the National and Pennsylvania Associations of Bond Lawyers and a former chair of the Real Estate and Commercial Law sections of the National Bar Association. A member of the Business Law Section of the American Bar Association and the Pennsylvania Bar Association, Mr. Archie is a past chair of the Tax-Exempt Finance Committee of the Business Law Section of the Philadelphia Bar Association and is a former member of the Section's exempt executive committee.
Mr. Archie represents cities, political subdivisions, school districts, municipal authorities and underwriters in connection with the issuance of variable and fixed-rate tax-exempt bonds and notes. He counsels clients who are providing goods and services to cities, political subdivisions and agencies, in their responses to request for proposals. In addition, his clients include non-profit corporations and limited partnerships engaged in the development and construction of housing facilities for persons of low- and moderate-income. The development projects he has been involved in range from housing cooperatives, condominiums, churches, supermarkets, charter schools, strip shopping malls, hospitals, convention centers and multifamily high-rise developments for the elderly. He has also acted as local and special counsel to lenders providing construction and permanent loans for development in the City of Philadelphia and surrounding counties.
A 1970 graduate of Howard University School of Law and Lincoln University, Mr. Archie has served as an adjunct professor at Temple University School of Law and was a board member of the Pennsylvania Intergovernmental Cooperation Authority, which provides financial assistance to cities of the first class in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. He serves on the board of Lincoln University.
Representation of one of the nation's largest public housing authorities which develops and provides low to moderate income housing to more than 78,000 people in Philadelphia, providing assistance in complex public and private financing transactions needed by the authority for its developments. Recent transactions include the $170 million 550-home Tasker neighborhood development, the $74 million, 247-home Martin Luther King development and the $24 million overhaul of the Suffolk Manor Senior Home.
Bond counsel to Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development for a $19.75 million multifamily housing project.
Bond counsel to Philadelphia Municipal Authority for $97.5 million Juvenile Justice Center.
Representation of Philadelphia Housing Authority in sale of 150 affordable housing units in the City of Philadelphia.
Representation of a community development corporation in the acquisition and development of a five-acre tract of land adjacent to Temple University.
Bond counsel to Community Development Corporation in the acquisition and development of 465-bed student housing facility for off-campus housing at Temple University.
Representation of three large religious organizations in the acquisition and construction of their facilities in the City of Philadelphia and their Community Development Corporations.
Served as authority counsel to a public housing authority with respect to its acquisition of a 218-unit affordable housing complex. The project was modernized and substantially rehabilitated into a 161-unit housing complex using a variety of financing techniques.
Served as underwriter's counsel for a syndicate of investment banking firms that sold $150.86 million in neighborhood transformation bonds.
Bond Counsel for a $62.7 million transaction which refunded the outstanding debt of a long term care facility.
Borrowers counsel to a nonprofit hospital, advising the CFO, board and president on in its multimillion dollar restructuring , refinancing and financing of its expansion and major capital projects.


Take the colors of Provence with you wherever you go with this cute coin purse! This white and blue Provence coin purse is beautifully crafted by Tissus Toselli of the same cotton fabric as their table linens. It is is quilted and bordered with blue binding and matching zipper. Measures 5" long.
100% cotton with polyester fill. Made in France.


text:
PARRY, HUGH (Cefni; 1826 - 1895), Baptist minister, poet, littérateur, and theologian
Name: Hugh Parry
Pseudonym: Cefni
Date of death: 1895
Spouse: Mary Ann Parry (née Harding)
Parent: Ellinor Parry
Parent: Owen Parry
Occupation: Baptist minister, poet, littérateur, and theologian
Area of activity: Literature and Writing; Poetry; Religion
Author: Benjamin George Owens
Born 20 September 1826, in the parish of Cerrig-ceinwen, Anglesey, son of Owen and Ellinor Parry, Tyddyn Sawdwr, Llangefni. He was originally a member of the Congregational churches at Llangefni and Rhos-y-meirch, and was ordained minister at Bagillt 26 December 1848, but seceded to the Baptists at Llangefni 6 October 1850 and held pastorates at Rhos-y-bol (January-May 1851) Dowlais (May 1851-5), Bangor (1855-7), Brymbo and Moss (1857-60), Tal-y-bont, Cardiganshire (1860-4), London (Tottenham Court Road) (1864-7), and Cardiff (1867-70). He emigrated to America in 1870 and spent the greater part of his time there in the pastorate of Dodgeville (Wisconsin) (1885-95), but he returned several times to Wales and was pastor at Holywell in 1884-5. He died at Llangefni, 18 May 1895, and was buried at Rhos-y-meirch. He married (in 1847 or during his pastorate at Rhos-y-bol) Mary Ann Harding of Caernarvon. He was successful in the pryddest competition at the national eisteddfod at Swansea, 1863, and published articles and poetry of a high standard in the Welsh and American periodical press.
Benjamin George Owens
Y Geninen, 1896, 32-7 g.;
Frimston, Ebenezer Sef Hanes Eglwys Fedyddiedig Llangefni, o'i chychwyniad yn 1779 hyd 1897 (118 mlynedd), yn nghyda hanes ei gweinidogion, a'i chymanfaoedd, 109-12 (portrait);
Hanes y Bedyddwyr yn Nghymru, iv, 106;
The Baptist Union of Wales Handbook and Diary, 1896.
Owens, B. G., (1959). PARRY, HUGH (Cefni; 1826 - 1895), Baptist minister, poet, littérateur, and theologian. Dictionary of Welsh Biography. Retrieved 18 Jan 2020, from https://biography.wales/article/s-PARR-HUG-1826


text:
Q: Posting raw image data as multipart/form-data in curl I am trying to post an image with cURL in PHP using multipart/form-data header since API that I am sending to is expecting image to be sent as multi-part form.
I don't have problems talking to the API with other requests; only posting an image is an issue.
I am using this form on client side:
<form action="http://myServerURL" method="POST" enctype="multipart/form-data">
    <input type="file" name="file" />
    <input type="Submit">
</form>

and this is the server I am posting to (here I am trying to post this data forward to an API):
$ch = curl_init($url);
curl_setopt ($ch, CURLOPT_POST, 1);
curl_setopt ($ch, CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS, $imgRawData); // <-- raw data here hm?
curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_FOLLOWLOCATION, 1);
curl_setopt ($ch, CURLOPT_COOKIEFILE, $cookieJar);
curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_HEADER, 1);
curl_setopt($ch, CURLINFO_HEADER_OUT, 1); <-- using this as I wanted to check if HTTPHEADER is set
curl_setopt($ch, CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER, array('Content-Type: multipart/form-data')); <-- setting content-type header?
curl_setopt( $ch, CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER, 1);

// i get response from the server
$response = curl_exec( $ch );

// with this I can check what kind of content type the last request had?
$requestContentType = curl_getinfo($ch,CURLINFO_CONTENT_TYPE);
echo "
request Content Type was:".$requestContentType."
";

curl_close($ch);

echo "
SERVER POST IMAGE RESPONSE:
";
echo $response;

With the code below I am able to see my request headers:
curl_setopt($ch, CURLOPT_HEADER, 1);
curl_setopt($ch, CURLINFO_HEADER_OUT, true);

var_dump(curl_getinfo($ch));

The content-type in request-headers is shown correctly now. But it seems the image is not send correctly as API would expect. Unfortunately I don't have access to the API...
Any help appreciated, thank you

A: As of PHP 5.6 @$filePath will not work in CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS without CURLOPT_SAFE_UPLOAD being set and it is completely removed in PHP 7. You will need to use a CurlFile object, RFC here.
$fields = [
    'name' => new \CurlFile($filePath, 'image/png', 'filename.png')
];
curl_setopt($resource, CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS, $fields);

A: In case anyone had the same problem: check this as @PravinS suggested. I used the exact same code as shown there and it worked for me perfectly.
This is the relevant part of the server code that helped:
if (isset($_POST['btnUpload']))
{
$url = "URL_PATH of upload.php"; // e.g. http://localhost/myuploader/upload.php // request URL
$filename = $_FILES['file']['name'];
$filedata = $_FILES['file']['tmp_name'];
$filesize = $_FILES['file']['size'];
if ($filedata != '')
{
    $headers = array("Content-Type:multipart/form-data"); // cURL headers for file uploading
    $postfields = array("filedata" => "@$filedata", "filename" => $filename);
    $ch = curl_init();
    $options = array(
        CURLOPT_URL => $url,
        CURLOPT_HEADER => true,
        CURLOPT_POST => 1,
        CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER => $headers,
        CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS => $postfields,
        CURLOPT_INFILESIZE => $filesize,
        CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER => true
    ); // cURL options
    curl_setopt_array($ch, $options);
    curl_exec($ch);
    if(!curl_errno($ch))
    {
        $info = curl_getinfo($ch);
        if ($info['http_code'] == 200)
            $errmsg = "File uploaded successfully";
    }
    else
    {
        $errmsg = curl_error($ch);
    }
    curl_close($ch);
}
else
{
    $errmsg = "Please select the file";
}
}

html form should look something like:
<form action="uploadpost.php" method="post" name="frmUpload" enctype="multipart/form-data">

  Upload
  :
  <input name="file" type="file" id="file"/>

  <input name="btnUpload" type="submit" value="Upload" />

A: CURL OPERATION BETWEEN SERVER TO SERVER WITHOUT HTML FORM IN PHP USING MULTIPART/FORM-DATA
// files to upload
$filename = "https://example.s3.amazonaws.com/0.jpg";

// URL to upload to (Destination server)
$url = "https://otherserver/image";

AND
    $curl = curl_init();

    curl_setopt_array($curl, array(
        CURLOPT_URL => $url,
        CURLOPT_RETURNTRANSFER => 1,
        CURLOPT_MAXREDIRS => 10,
        CURLOPT_TIMEOUT => 30,
        //CURLOPT_HTTP_VERSION => CURL_HTTP_VERSION_1_1,
        CURLOPT_CUSTOMREQUEST => "POST",
        CURLOPT_POST => 1,
        CURLOPT_POSTFIELDS => file_get_contents($filename),
        CURLOPT_HTTPHEADER => array(
            //"Authorization: Bearer $TOKEN",
            "Content-Type: multipart/form-data",
            "Content-Length: " . strlen(file_get_contents($filename)),
            "API-Key: abcdefghi" //Optional if required
        ),
    ));

   $response = curl_exec($curl);

    $info = curl_getinfo($curl);
//echo "code: ${info['http_code']}";

//print_r($info['request_header']);

    var_dump($response);
    $err = curl_error($curl);

    echo "error";
    var_dump($err);
    curl_close($curl);


text:
The women's 5000 metres at the 2018 IAAF World U20 Championships was held at Ratina Stadium on 10 July.

Records

Results

References

5000 metres
Long distance running at the World Athletics U20 Championships

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Facebook's Portal and Portal+ Devices for Video Call Goes on Sale
By Moupiya Dutta
Rahul Bhagat
Meta Takes Down Network Targeting Ukrainians With Fake News
FB Limits Access to Russian State-controlled Media in Ukraine
Tamanna Farooque Arzo
Zuckerberg Shows Bot Building Virtual Worlds With Voice Command
Moupiya Dutta
She finds it interesting to learn and analyze society. she keeps herself updated, emphasizing technology, social media, and science. She loves to pen down her thoughts, interested in music, art, and exploration around the globe.
An immersive and engaging video chat experience introduced by Facebook "that make it easier to stay connected." The company announced that the Portal and Portal+ speaker, which Facebook first revealed last month, are available just in time for the holiday shopping season.
Users can choose between a 10-inch 1280 x 800 display or a 15-inch 1920 x 1080 display, both with as little intelligent hardware visible as possible, to give the feeling of being in the same room with their loved ones. The screens are designed to provide users with an immersive and engaging video chat experience without all the distractions.
Meta has ...
The main selling point for Portal is artificial intelligence-powered features like Smart Camera, which automatically zooms in on and frames video calls to make sure all the people in a room are in the same shot. Smart Volume modulates microphone intensity so that everyone in the room can be heard at a reasonable volume.
The devices allow users to make hands-free voice calls by saying "Hey Portal" and stating who they would like to call. Portal also has Amazon Alexa built-in, so users can ask a question, set a timer, add items to their shopping list, control their smart home, and more.
Consumers can purchase Portal for $199 and Portal+ for $349 from store.facebook.com/portal, Amazon.com, BestBuy.com, and Amazon Books and Best Buy stores in the U.S., Facebook said on Wednesday. While Facebook hopes that users will surely find these useful early critics of the device cite Facebook's poor record on privacy among the chief reasons they refuse to purchase a Portal.
Moto E13 is Launching in India on February 8 for Rs 10,000
Facebook Reels Goes Global With New Money-Making Tools for Creators
Meta has launched its TikTok-rival short-video-making app Facebook Reels for iOS and Android to more than 150 countries across the globe. To help creators e...
Whistleblower Accuses Meta Over Climate Change and Covid Mis-Info
The nonprofit organization that represents Facebook whistleblower Frances Haugen has filed two new complaints against Meta (formerly Facebook), accusing the so...
Meta's Social VR Platform Horizon Hits 300K Users
Meta's social virtual reality (VR) platform Horizon has reached 300,000 monthly users, a growth of 10 times since its roll-out in early December. According ...


text:
news, national
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian has joined other state leaders in endorsing a plan for the Murray-Darling river system, despite calls from within her own government to ditch the long-standing agreement. NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro said earlier in the week the plan was "untenable for NSW" and not making major changes represented a missed opportunity to deliver certainty and transparency for drought-hit communities. However, Ms Berejiklian told reporters in Cairns on Friday - after all basin states reaffirmed their commitment to the plan - working more closely with other states would positively impact on struggling rural communities in her state. "What was signed this morning was a commitment in relation to freeing up infrastructure dollars to put back into those communities that are currently suffering," she said. "If we can do a better job in increasing water storage and capacity that is going to help our communities into the future." But she said all states needed to "pull their weight" in regard to the river system. "The objective of the plan is not in question - it's how we deal with the plan given the current stresses on NSW and other parts of the basin that are covered." South Australian Premier Steve Marshall said there had been a "coming together" at the Council of Australian Governments meeting on the importance of the plan. "We need to be working together at this difficult time so that we can implement that plan but do it in a way which is going to be respectful for communities all along the Murray-Darling Basin," he said. The leaders agreed to fast-track infrastructure for improving water availability. As well, they signed onto a joint response to the Productivity Commission's five-year assessment of the plan and endorsed a new Inspector-General of Murray-Darling Basin Water Resources. Australian Associated Press
https://nnimgt-a.akamaihd.net/transform/v1/crop/frm/silverstone-feed-data/7d474b18-4727-4ec8-8c0f-53024e294c10.jpg/r0_74_800_526_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg
August 9 2019 - 3:00PM
Premiers recommit to Murray-Darling plan
Paul Osborne
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian joined other state leaders in endorsing the Murray-Darling river plan
NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian has joined other state leaders in endorsing a plan for the Murray-Darling river system, despite calls from within her own government to ditch the long-standing agreement.
NSW Deputy Premier John Barilaro said earlier in the week the plan was "untenable for NSW" and not making major changes represented a missed opportunity to deliver certainty and transparency for drought-hit communities.
However, Ms Berejiklian told reporters in Cairns on Friday - after all basin states reaffirmed their commitment to the plan - working more closely with other states would positively impact on struggling rural communities in her state.
"What was signed this morning was a commitment in relation to freeing up infrastructure dollars to put back into those communities that are currently suffering," she said.
"If we can do a better job in increasing water storage and capacity that is going to help our communities into the future."
But she said all states needed to "pull their weight" in regard to the river system.
"The objective of the plan is not in question - it's how we deal with the plan given the current stresses on NSW and other parts of the basin that are covered."
South Australian Premier Steve Marshall said there had been a "coming together" at the Council of Australian Governments meeting on the importance of the plan.
"We need to be working together at this difficult time so that we can implement that plan but do it in a way which is going to be respectful for communities all along the Murray-Darling Basin," he said.
The leaders agreed to fast-track infrastructure for improving water availability.
As well, they signed onto a joint response to the Productivity Commission's five-year assessment of the plan and endorsed a new Inspector-General of Murray-Darling Basin Water Resources.


Square Enix Forums > Games > Tomb Raider Series > Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light > Lara Croft and the Guardian of Light General Discussion > is this an official game?
View Full Version : is this an official game?
Is the guardian of light thingy the official new game?
To me it doesnt look very.... IT. you know? i expected great graphics,story,multiplayer ect.
So is this just an arcade or an official game i have to buy for £30?
This is not a Tomb Raider game. It's an arcade game with Lara Croft that will be available for download only. The purpose of this game is to keep fans busy while CD is working on the pillar release of Tomb Raider game.
It's an official Lara Croft game but not a Tomb Raider game if that kind of makes sence.
It is indeed official, its just for poos' and giggles.


text:
March to the Polls to Honor First-Time Voters Ahead of Midterm Elections
Nicole Cardos | October 11, 2018 7:10 pm
UPDATE: Paris Schutz reports live from March to the Polls 2018.
Women's March Chicago is throwing another event Saturday. Called March to the Polls 2018, it will honor first-time voters.
"The purpose is to start the midterm elections in Illinois the best way we possibly can, by celebrating first-time voters and making sure they're all eligible to get registered and cast a ballot in the upcoming election cycle," said Rudy Garrett, a board member with Women's March Chicago and the co-deputy director of Chicago Votes.
To help with that effort, the march will feature a Voter Village, opening at 9 a.m. at the intersection of Congress Parkway and Columbus Drive. It will have more than 50 booths from "progressive organizations, political candidates, businesses" to help answer any questions from first-time voters, according to the event's press release.
Saturday's event will also include a rally with Chicago-area activists and artists.
A map of Saturday's March to the Polls. Click to enlarge.
Starting at 12:30 p.m., participants will march along Jackson Street to Federal Plaza. First-time voters and others who wish to cast their ballots can proceed on to two early voting sites: Cook County Early Voting Site at 69 W. Washington St., and City of Chicago Early Voting Site at 174 W. Washington St.
Garrett said she sees the event as part of a long-lasting effort to include more women in political office, and to increase voter turnout.
"You see this movement growing nationwide, and it's only getting bigger," she said. "It's a culmination of the last two marches with one primary goal: making sure every single voice is heard at the ballot box."
March to the Polls 2018
When: Saturday, Oct. 13
Where: Participants can enter Grant Park at the intersection of Congress Parkway and Columbus Drive to access the Voter Village, starting at 9 a.m. The rally begins at 10 a.m. The march starts at 12:30 p.m., heading down Jackson Street and ending at Federal Plaza. Participants may then proceed to two early voting sites, open until 5 p.m.
Who: Those who identify as women and their loved ones. Women's March Chicago is hosting the event, and Chicago Votes is co-hosting the First Time Voter Experience: Parade to the Polls.
2018 Voters' Guide to the General Election
Women's March Chicago Planning October March, Rally
Chicago Women's March to the Polls Draws Estimated Crowd of 300K
Rudy Garrett
PBS Highlighting Women With Summer of Programming
Report: Patients Misdiagnosed in Catholic Hospitals to Get Contraception
Despite Illinois Law, Not All Courthouses Provide Lactation Rooms
Report Reveals Stark Racial Disparities in Maternal Deaths in Chicago
Chicago to Offer Free Home Nursing Services to Families with Newborns


Images from The Train Ride project. The start and end.
One of the starting images from my project The Train Ride, starting in Boston, MA ending in Santa Monica, CA.
All images photographed with Leica M2 and a 21mm f4 lens using Tri-X developed in D76.
I am currently trying to put together a slideshow with these old images i shot when going across the USA.
© 2019 Analogue Artefacts All Rights Reserved.


Beto Perez, Zumba creator, knows how to party!
Friday was an unforgettable evening in Jacksonville at the Zumba Master Class with Beto Perez. I really didn't know what to expect, except that my good friends Johanna and Gonçalo Santinho invited us to take photos at the event. Gonçalo warned me that this guy is a rock star. The hall filled with over 350 Zumba instructors from across the region, all eager to see, learn, and experience Beto's program. The place was filled with energy and enthusiasm for 2 hours as Beto lead the dancers through a series of moves, gyrations, and fun. It's always totally exciting for me to photograph excellence in motion. Trying to capture the essence of the dance and the friendship and devotion of the instructors was a big challenge.
Dorian held an off camera softbox on a folded up lightstand, and I had a flash on camera. I'm sure Beto was getting tired of us having a light in his face all night! Before the event we tried to circulate around to get shots of participants. It was so obvious that this group was not only fit but ready to do some serious partying! After the workshop we took pictures of those who wanted to pose with Beto. I could tell that Beto loves his fans and what he does. The depth of his smile is genuine.
My favorite shot of the evening was after the workshop when Beto was posing with his fans. He went to the corner to change out of his shirt which was soaked from his performance. A small crowd started screaming. He put on a hoodie and began to zip it up, turned to me with a big smile, pointing to his body. I got off two shots. He laughed and I showed him on the back of the camera, "got it" I told him. I made posters of this and another image from his performance.
For those of you who attended and looking for your photo please contact Johanna, Christine, or Ananda at Zumba in Jax for the link.


HUNTSVILLE – The Sam Houston State softball team exploded for seven runs in the second inning to clinch a berth in the Southland Conference Tournament with an 8-0 victory over Abilene Christian in five innings at Bearkat Softball Complex Saturday.
The Bearkats (23-19 overall, 14-4 in SLC) will be part of the tournament's eight-team field, which will be held May 7-11 in Natchitoches, Louisiana, after sweeping the Wildcats (9-26, 2-16).
Senior ace Lindsey McLeod (14-7) continued her dominance in the circle. She stretched her scoreless innings streak to 25 with five more coming Saturday as Sam Houston extended its winning streak to seven straight games. She gave up one hit and finished with eight strikeouts.
Sophomore Brooke Malia led Sam Houston State at the plate by blasting a pair of home runs. She broke the game open in the second with a three-run blast to left and she launched a solo shot, her eighth of the season, to center to put the run rule into effect.
The Bearkats jumped on ACU in the second inning. Junior Megan McDonald had an RBI single, and junior Tiffany Thompson drove in two more runs with a double to center field to make it 4-0. The first run of the inning came courtesy of two Wildcat errors and a single by sophomore Sheridan Fisher.
The Bearkats hit the road for the next eight contests before finishing the regular season with a three-game series against Stephen F. Austin in Huntsville. Sam Houston travels to Texas A&M-Corpus Christi next weekend. The Bearkats will battle the Islanders in a doubleheader Friday beginning at 1 p.m. and conclude the series Saturday at 11 a.m.


text:
Carl Davidson
Lessons from the Collapse of the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist)
First Published: Forward, No. 4, January 1985.
More than three years have passed since the breakup and disintegration of the Communist Party (Marxist-Leninist) (CPML) – one of the largest and more promising organizations that united a core of revolutionaries from the upheavals of the 1960s.
At its peak the CPML had nearly a thousand active members and several thousand sympathizers. At one point, about half of its ranks came from working class origins, while the other half came from the intelligentsia and other middle strata. About one-third were from the various minority nationalities; half were men, half women.
It was a young, militant and active organization. Most members were under 35 and directly involved in mass struggle – in the trade unions, minority communities, student groups, women's organizations and other forms of political action. The CPML also included a small but important core of veterans from the communist movement of the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s. They provided invaluable guidance.
The CPML went through a process of organizational development. It started with the October League (OL), which itself was constituted initially by a merger of two local circles of less than 50 people. But at the CPML's peak, it had functioning districts in about 30 cities, with the districts ranging in size from a dozen to more than 100 members.
The party's press was relatively well developed. At its peak, The Call newspaper had a weekly circulation of 12,000 – although most were single-copy sales and not regular subscribers. Liberator Press published several books and dozens of pamphlets – some selling in the tens of thousands. There was a theoretical journal with 1,500 readers.
For a new group, the CPML's basic units were also well positioned. Most units or cells were factory based and situated in basic and light industries. Growing numbers of cadres were being elected to union positions in their locals. CPML members held posts in the Black United Front and in the United League of Mississippi, in the National Lawyer's Guild and the U.S.-China Peoples Friendship Association, and in groups the CPML had set up, like the National Fight-back Organization and the Communist Youth Organization.
While more achievements can be pointed out, this brief accounting already underlines one key question: What happened? In the short period of about a year, all this was blown away. Many of those involved denounced what they had been doing and dropped out of political life. Why?
There are no simple or commonly agreed upon answers to these questions. What follows is not meant to be a complete history or even a thorough sum-up. Instead, it is a statement of some of the main lessons and conclusions that I have drawn and would summarize as follows:
• The CPML was destroyed by revisionism, particularly of a rightist, social democratic variety. An anti-party clique representing this viewpoint formed in the leadership and worked to disintegrate the organization. Some did so by staying inside to the end, others by resigning and intriguing from without. In the end, these misleaders all openly denounced Marxism-Leninism and called for the CPML's liquidation.
•	The CPML was also destroyed because its leadership made some serious mistakes that were not adequately corrected. These included both flip-flops in political line and poor methods of leadership, especially in failing to practice the mass line. The leadership often made immature and onesided assessments of conditions in the country. At times it tried rashly to "seize the leadership" of mass struggles through various campaigns. When these get-rich-quick schemes failed, they would be replaced without adequate sum-ups or self-criticisms.
•	One of the main conditions setting the stage for the CPML's liquidation was the persistence of a mainly left deviation in its program and political line. The "anti-left campaign" meant to rectify this deviation, however, was itself overblown, subjective and idealistic. In fact, it served to shield the right and hamstring the genuine left.
•	One critical destabilizing factor was the CPML's social and historical makeup. Its leadership was young and inexperienced. The core came out of the student and youth rebellions of the 1960s, a fact giving the intelligentsia and petty bourgeoisie a preponderance of influence. Activists from this stratum are prone to rapid shifts from one extreme to another and historically have been the main recruiting ground for both the left social democrats and ultraleft formations. The fact that a number of those who were the most doctrinaire "leftists" in the CPML quickly transformed into social democratic activists is a case in point.
The founding congress of the CPML was a basically positive event. By that time, the organization had drawn clear lines of demarcation with the revisionists on the main points of principle and strategy. Also, dozens of local circles had been united into a single organization set up along Leninist lines. While not complete, it was a definite step forward in the process of party building.
Nonetheless, the CPML started off with serious problems. The founding congress itself was, in part, the culmination of an ill-conceived ideological battle – called the anti-Nicolaus campaign – that skewed the organization's political analysis in the direction of ultraleftism. (Nicolaus had been a CPML leader.) While the debate often took obscure and abstract forms, several key questions stood out.
The first was over the nature and number of advanced workers in the U.S. in the 1970s. The position that won out was that there were "tens of thousands" of advanced workers "standing on our doorstep" waiting to be recruited to the CPML. This was a gross exaggeration, but it was genuinely believed and served as a rationale for a great emphasis on propaganda work.
The second was over the nature of the enemy camp. Was liberalism collapsing and the conservative right on the rise? The position that won out said no. Liberalism was viewed as the most dangerous trend.
The third was over the nature of alliances with reformists. For the most part, these alliances were to be disallowed, and the most militant reformists were to be made the "target of the main blow" in our agitation.
These mistaken assessments of conditions in the country and within the mass movements obviously had an impact on the founding documents of the CPML – its Program and Political Report. While generally correct, a careful reading will show that in every section there are also erroneous positions, policies and assessments of conditions – all in the direction of ultraleftism. Here are some examples:
•On the trade unions: All trade union officials, without regard to their level or position, are labeled as "agents of imperialism" and, together with the revisionists, the "target of the main blow."
•	On the woman question: Feminism is presented only as "serving the interests of imperialism," and all feminists are attacked, without regard for the conditions or without making distinctions among them.
•	On the national question: The middle and backward forces within the oppressed nationality united fronts are lumped together as "bourgeois elements" who "promote reforms" rather than "fight national oppression."
•	On political parties and trends: The strength of the CPUSA revisionists is repeatedly overstated while the social democrats are mostly ignored as irrelevant. Also, the CPML is represented as the only party that is not a defender of capitalism, ignoring actual or potential third parties, oppressed nationality parties or a labor party.
•	On socialism: The Program asserts that "under communism, the abolition of classes makes possible the enormous development of the productive forces and the production of abundant social wealth." Actually the converse is correct: the development of the productive forces is needed in order to abolish classes.
There were a number of events in the first year of the CPML's life that served to minimize the negative impact of these views. One was the apparent success of a number of mass activities and the fact that many activists did join us in spite of our weaknesses. Another factor was our liaison work. The CPML established relations with dozens of parties in other countries, including the Communist Party of China. In the main, this work was positive and served to educate our members in internationalism. To a certain extent, however, it also served to give us an overblown conception of ourselves, leading us to think that we had achieved more than we actually had. As for other Marxist-Leninist groups in the U.S., we believed that with persistent liaison work, we would be able to unite with most of them in a single organization. The Revolutionary Communist Party (RCP) at this time went through a major split, which we viewed as very positive. Even though the Revolutionary Workers Headquarters (RWH) (the split-off from the RCP) initially expressed hostility toward us, we believed that it was temporary and could be overcome.
The split in the RCP had another meaning for us. It meant, for the first time, we were now the largest multinational Marxist-Leninist organization in the country. Previously, we had been a minority in the Marxist-Leninist trend. Now we believed that if a majority of the Marxist-Leninists had not already joined with us, they would do so very soon.
It was also apparent as this first year progressed that we had many problems to overcome. Neither the mass work nor our party building efforts were growing fast enough for us. We gained only 12% in the first year, when we had hoped for much more. The Fightback work and trade union work were not taking off. In many areas our cadres had become isolated and confused.
Rectification effort
The leadership attempted to deal with this through what we called the "Three Evils Campaign" – combating subjectivism, sectarianism and bureaucracy. The main thrust of this rectification was to "get in tune with the actual conditions" and to base our policies on realistic assessments rather than proceeding from abstract principles or dogma. For the first time, we began describing our current conditions as those of an "ebb" in the class struggle rather than an "upsurge." This meant adjustments were in order.
The three evils campaign was taken up with a lot of enthusiasm by the rank and file. Many dedicated activists had experienced firsthand the frustration and isolation stemming from the errors of the "anti-rightism" fight against Nicolaus. They had been aiming their main blows at center and even left-center forces in their areas of mass work. The trade union units particularly summed up their mistakes and called for new policies and tactics. The same was true in nationalities work. Under the previous policy, for instance, our cadres in the Black United Front in Brooklyn had the line of aiming their main blow at "reformist preachers" like Rev. Herbert Daughtry, when he was clearly a progressive force to be united with and developed.
In sum-up after sum-up, then, CPML members were concluding that the main errors they had been making were connected to a left deviation. In the spring of 1979, the Central Committee met and discussed the issue. I presented a paper on the ideological roots of right errors in reformism and left errors in anarchism. Looking at our practice, I argued that our erroneous policies in mass work had been mainly ultraleft while our mistakes in organizational work were mainly rightist.
Another paper was presented by the Southern regional organizer. She argued that our main errors since the founding congress were ultraleft and correcting them was the main task at hand. At the same time, she upheld the program as basically correct and warned about a growing right danger. Three or four other views on various aspects of the issue were also put forward at this meeting.
One claimed that the issue of "right" or "left" errors being the main danger was a diversion. This was from a Black Central Committee member from the South, who argued that the real main danger was white chauvinism and that other problems were secondary.
This comrade's viewpoint was combined with the fact that considerable struggle and tension were developing among the rank and file along nationality lines in several districts. There had been some instances of blatant white chauvinist errors and a strong response to it. There had also been some nationalist errors.
One key problem was weaknesses within the central leadership. The Puerto Rican Commission and Chicano Commission, for instance, were weak, politically unclear and poorly led. The Standing Committee did little to deal with the problem decisively and at one point was accused of "benign neglect" – a term that had been applied to the Nixon Administration.
Nationalities conference
The response of the leadership to these criticisms was to organize a party-wide conference on nationalities work. The aim was to air the criticisms, struggle over their meaning and, hopefully, unite on a firmer, clear basis. The conference was held toward the end of 1979, and, while I did not personally attend, the reports of almost everyone immediately after the conference who had attended were enthusiastic. Later, however, a number of attendees would reverse their verdicts.
The main lessons of the conference were summed up at its close in a speech by Mike Klonsky, CPML chairman. The text was printed soon afterwards in a special issue of Class Struggle on the national question.
This was seen as the best issue of our theoretical journal and the only one where we sold almost every copy. Klonsky's speech mainly dealt with the method of inner party struggle. He also traced the history of errors in the U.S. left around the national question and made a good effort at applying the substance of Mao Zedong's "On the Correct Handling of Contradictions Among The People" to our problems. Moreover, he stressed the link that existed between the "three evils" – sectarianism, subjectivism and bureaucracy – and mistakes on the national question.
He did not, however, deal with some of the basic differences that had arisen. Which was the main source of our problems – a "left" deviation in the basic line or white chauvinism?
I argued at the Central Committee meeting and later that our main problem was the left deviation and that it affected everything, including the national question. This was not to say that there were not right errors or that errors around chauvinism did not have an independent thrust and basis of their own. At various times, the CPML made both rightist errors and straight-up chauvinist errors on the national question.
I argued that this was initially evident in our work within the Black United Front in New York. We were following a policy of aiming our main blow at the middle forces – a classic error in the direction of "left" opportunism, not rightism, even though its impact was certainly white chauvinist in practice. But to argue that the main problem here was white chauvinism, I concluded, was to fail to get at the roots of why we were making these kinds of mistakes.
Other comrades came at the problem from a different angle. Harry Haywood and a Black Central Committee member from the South, for example, focused on the question of nationalism. They agreed that ultraleftism was the main error to be corrected and that white chauvinism generally took priority over nationalism in errors in that area. But they also held to the "Leninist division of labor." They saw that part of their responsibility to minority cadre was to deal with nationalism among the minority party members, and they did so.
"Crisis in Marxism"?
Another important feature of the spring 1979 Central Committee meeting that would have big implications later was a long report by Dan Burstein, editor of The Call. He had just returned from China, Kampuchea and some international meetings with several other Marxist-Leninist parties.
His report, in the form of a discussion paper, presented us with the "crisis in Marxism" thesis that placed us at what he called a "crossroads" in history. He was deeply affected personally, I believe, by his experiences in China and Kampuchea. Crimes committed under the cover of ultraleft policies in those countries, he argued, had given us "an unprecedentedly enormous task" of proving that "socialism is the way of the future, even in the eyes of militant workers and progressive people."
With these problems now on the table, the Central Committee called for a second congress. It set a period for discussion and debate, while warning against a tendency for liquidating organizational tasks.
A debate immediately broke out within the Standing Committee over what would be the scope of the pre-congress discussion. Burstein called for virtually unlimited debate, focusing on "calling into question" the validity of concepts of the dictatorship of the proletariat, armed struggle and the need for a Leninist party. Others, particularly Klonsky and myself, opposed this position. We said the discussion should mainly be aimed at summing up our experience and correcting our errors, on the basis of practice and in a step-by-step fashion. The "big questions" could be discussed as part of our theoretical work after the congress, but to do so in the pre-congress debate was diversionary and would hurt the rectification of ultraleftism.
Burstein at first agreed to this restriction, but later changed his mind and insisted on carrying out his polemic. He won over half the Standing Committee, thus splitting the top leadership and promoting a rightist faction. Other CPML leaders soon began taking sides on the regional and local levels. In short order, there were several factions – the right, the left and the center. The "center" faction had two wings; one defended the left and attacked the right, while the other defended the right and attacked the left – thus becoming known as the "left center" and "right center" respectively.
The key problem at this point was the fact that many rank and file members viewed these disputes as "abstract battles between intellectuals." Since they did not see an immediate connection between the debate and their problems in the mass work, they tended to be neutral or sympathetic to Burstein simply because he was opposed to the incumbents. The genuine left, moreover, for the most part, failed in giving direct political guidance in a number of important local struggles.
The reasons for this were complex. In some cases, rightists in charge of districts actually blocked leaders from the center from contacting the units directly. In other cases, the left blocked itself by being bureaucratic – a certain struggle was not their area of responsibility, so if it was being misled, then it was not their problem. But none of this was insurmountable, and in that sense the real problem was the left's weaknesses in taking initiative and organizing support for correct views and methods throughout the party, even if it meant bypassing normal procedures.
In general, the emergence of two lines within the leadership of a Marxist-Leninist organization need not be seen as a crisis or even viewed negatively. It can be an opportunity for an organization to practice democracy, sum up its work and unite the entire organization on a higher level.
But this was not to be the case with the CPML.
There were a number of important reasons. One group of them can be summed up as weakness in the leadership and its practices – both in the immediate struggle and over the previous period from the time of the founding congress. First, there were serious abrogations of inner party democracy. Prior to the Nicolaus campaign, for instance, the OL's internal journal was a rank and file forum for debate and sum-ups. But after Nicolaus' expulsion, the journal consisted almost entirely of top-down reports and articles from Standing Committee members. When differences did emerge in the districts, unorthodox views were usually quickly labeled as "revisionist," since every idea had to be either "proletarian" or "bourgeois." For newer cadres or those lacking in self-confidence, this atmosphere effectively stifled inner party democracy.
The lack of democracy also meant weaknesses in the leadership's practice of the mass line. When problems arose, a style of commandism and a practice of shifting blame to the ranks often emerged. While the leading core at the center worked very hard and made many personal sacrifices, they also fell into bureaucratism. In many cases, they became divorced from contact with the masses, spending what free time they had together in a manner that promoted cliquishness.
This self-isolation of the leadership in the center also meant serious shortcomings in its ability to organize the struggle and to rely on the ranks in summing up experience. The struggle became one-sidedly a "battle of ideas" between leading figures, which was viewed by the ranks as an arrogant disregard for their opinions.
The developing right wing took full advantage of these weaknesses. They elevated past errors and styles of work over the actual political substance of the issues at stake. Attempts by the genuine left to criticize erroneous ideas in the debate were immediately labeled as "undemocratic" and "attacks on the rank and file" or "refusing to break with the old ways." In addition, key figures in the leadership were subjected to slander campaigns concerning their personal honesty and morality. Once the charges were made, they were often retracted, but the damage had been done, often in the classic style of police agents.
Thus the genuine left core in the leadership was put on the defensive and made the target of the main blow. This weakness was compounded, moreover, by the inability of the left to unite among itself and to organize a left trend throughout the party. Some of this was inevitable due to conditions. But it was also a result of abdication on the part of some, especially the chairman, and mistaken tactics on the part of others, including myself.
These difficulties were to be heightened by a development that shook the organization from top to bottom – the resignation of Dan Burstein. After unsuccessfully trying to express the views of the right in a paper that would be acceptable for the congress debate, he decided to go all the way with a conclusion he had been wrestling with for some time privately: the real source of the CPML's problems was Marxism-Leninism. He announced that he now believed this and left the organization.
This placed his defenders remaining in the CPML in an awkward position. On one hand, they claimed Burstein wasn't really rejecting Leninism. On the other, they were now faced with his admission that he was doing just that. As a result, several more Central Committee members, including the vice chairman, also resigned. This happened at an emergency conference organized by the center faction, which, in turn, abolished the entire Central Committee and took over the remnants of the central office.
The CPML thus approached its second congress in a severely weakened condition. The chairman of the party had resigned his post while remaining a participant in the left faction. He had been immobilized, partly by choice and partly by difficult circumstances. A slander campaign had put him "on trial" for certain "crimes," later shown to be gross distortions. He was also threatened, both openly and covertly, with physical violence.
But whatever can be said for Klonsky's role, it was not decisive in what was to follow. In many ways, the die had already been cast. Many of us were relatively certain of the outcome of the impending events. Nonetheless we felt compelled to play out our parts to the finish, for the sake of future party building efforts as well as for our own sense of our personal integrity.
A key development was the stand taken by a Central Committee member from California. Previously he had presented himself as a voice of "the center." In private discussions with the left, he assured us that he held to the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism and opposed the Burstein line. He argued, however, that it was necessary to move as close to Burstein's position as possible if a majority of the party was to be united and saved.
But this member faced a crucial choice once the leaders of the right resigned. Either he could denounce them and unite with the left, or he could take up their position himself.
He chose the latter course and at the congress became the main spokesman for the right. He dropped all his former hedges and arrived at the first day of the congress with a new document where he embraced all Burstein's main points – abandonment of the Leninist party, rejection of the proletarian dictatorship, etc. It was a classic case of conciliation with rightism leading one to become a rightist oneself.
Second Congress
By the opening of the second congress, the CPML was reduced to less than 400 members, a loss of nearly two-thirds. Of these, only 22% were minorities, a decline from 33%. (Of the minorities, 66% were Afro-American, 12% Chicano, 14% Puerto Rican and 2% others.) The proportion of men to women was still 50-50, but the percentage of those from the working class had declined. Liquidationism was clearly virulent and at an advanced stage.
Dozens of resolutions, reports, papers and amendments had been put forward for consideration by the congress delegates. Most dealt with the problem of ultraleftism in one form or another, and, if the effort had been made, a systematic rectification of our past errors could have been distilled from these writings. But the right insisted on dealing with the "big questions," and most of these documents were set aside or adopted with little or no discussion. The main events, then, were relatively straightforward. There was a series of panels where the right, left and center put forward their views. The main issues boiled down to two – first, what was the cause of our problems and how could we correct them; second, where did we stand on the fundamentals of Marxism?
In the end, the key debate turned on only one issue: would we unite on the Leninist theory of the state, explicitly advocating the proletarian dictatorship as our strategic goal in the transition to communism. The left faction asked me to draft our position, which I did reluctantly. I wrote a summary of the theory as clear and concise as possible, knowing that it would split the organization. But since the issue had been forced, meaning that the question of the dictatorship of the proletariat was about to be voted up or down, the left caucus at the congress decided to stand firmer than ever. The dictatorship of the proletariat and other basic tenets of Marxism-Leninism, we insisted, were neither "models" nor abstract "dogmas." Rather, they represented the summed-up experience of our class in over 100 countries in 100 years. We would improve it, add to it, look critically at it, and further develop it. But we would never reject or abandon it, especially as a result of the waverings and whinings of the petty bourgeoisie's despair and the instability of a handful of intellectuals.
In short, if we did not draw the line here, then we had no right to call ourselves communists. However left our rhetoric, we would be nothing but common liberals.
At one point, the right, using a number of intermediaries, approached me with a "compromise." They would support my resolution, including the wording of all analysis of the state, if I would do one thing: just eliminate four words – "dictatorship of the proletariat."
The left rejected the compromise, remembering Lenin's adage that if you want to stop people from vacillating, then you must not vacillate yourself. After some parliamentary maneuvering, however, a delegate from the center faction put forward a counter proposal. It stated that the congress should set aside all sections of the party program except those dealing with the dictatorship of the proletariat. He argued that it was the right's task to prove these sections false. Until then, they should stand. The left and center united on this resolution and defeated the right.
But it meant little in the end. In one of the meetings of the left faction at the congress, the Southern regional organizer asked us, "What is the worst that can happen?" I answered that a victory for the right and a split would be the biggest disaster. "No," she replied, "the worst would be a standoff, where they win some and we win some, but no one wins or loses decisively. That will prolong and aggravate the disintegration and despair. It would be better to have a clean split, where we are either a clear minority or majority. At least then we would be intact and in a position to move forward."
She was proved correct on this point.
It was becoming clearer and clearer that no matter what happened at the congress, that petty bourgeois and semi-anarchist methods of organization were widely accepted. In part, this was due to earlier abuses of democratic centralism. But to leave it at that would be wrong. It was also due, in large part, to the vacillation of many of the cadre who, for various reasons, were rejecting a Leninist party. But with nothing to take its place, it meant that further disintegration lay ahead of us.
The congress closed by selecting its new Central Committee, which met briefly at the end of the gathering. It was quickly decided to put ongoing responsibility in Chicago, site of the much-scaled-down national office, into the hands of a comrade from the Afro-American Commission, and a Chicago comrade, who spoke for the left-center and right-center forces respectively. To be blunt, the mess was dumped in their laps so everyone could leave as quickly as possible. One straw that center forces, both left and right, clung to throughout this period was the hope that "the merger" would arrive in time to save the day. This was the plan for uniting organizationally with the Revolutionary Workers Headquarters. Apart from uniting more Marxist-Leninists into a single organization, this prospect was seen as one which could double our size and give us a firmer footing in some trade unions.
It was a plan supported by everyone, including myself at the time, as the only basis for optimism. The only hesitation came from some minority comrades, who were concerned about two issues. First, since RWH was practically all white and had a dubious past record on the national question, would this help or hinder their work? Second, if we merged with the RWH, would it hinder our ability to merge with the League of Revolutionary Struggle?
Both turned out to be moot points. The merger was an illusion which the left should have exposed but did not. The fact was that the closer we united with the RWH, the quicker was the pace of our own liquidation. It should not have been surprising. The outline of the RWH's theory for liquidationism was put to us quite sharply during a leadership-to-leadership liaison meeting prior to the congress. One RWH leader, speaking for the RWH, told us not to be so "worried about liquidationism." They had, he said, faced the problem "and even gone over to the other side." "It's not such a bad place to be," he explained. "The way we describe it is that we exist on three levels of federation. The national organization is a federation of districts, the districts are a federation of the local branches, and each branch is a federation of individual activists."
The great irony is that, in one sense, the CPML-RWH merger was a big success. Members of both groups embraced this viewpoint and have put it into practice. The result is that neither exists any longer except as an amorphous and shrinking group of people who have each other's phone numbers.
Could things have turned out differently for the CPML? I believe the organization would have gone through a crisis of one sort or another even if its leadership had made fewer mistakes. This is because of the impact of external factors – the repudiation of the cultural revolution in China, and the rightward shift of the U.S. bourgeoisie, including its impact on the petty bourgeoisie.
But the damage did not have to be as severe as it was. If the genuine left in the leadership had acted differently, I believe an organized core of several hundred activists could have weathered the storm and gone on to rectify its errors and unite with others in building a party. In this regard, a key mistake was "upholding party unity at all costs" – it would have been necessary at an earlier point to call for a clean break, a split away from social democracy and revisionism.
There is little disagreement among Marxist-Leninists that the liquidation of the CPML was a serious setback for the communist movement in the U.S. This brief account tries to point to some of the lessons and errors to be avoided. One remaining question, however, is what should those people who consider themselves pro-party do now?
The fact is that their numbers are dwindling. Thousands who were members of Marxist-Leninist organizations in the 1970s and early 1980s no longer consider themselves part of the communist movement. And growing numbers of these are no longer active even in the various mass movements – they have simply "burned out" and retreated into private life.
Fighting liquidationism
One prescription for fighting this bitter fruit of liquidationism was put forward at the close of the congress by a delegate representing the left center. "Stay active, stay together and stay red" – that was the slogan his district united around as a way to move ahead. The organization was held up as a district where the CPML-RWH merger had already been accomplished. What had actually happened, however, was that a local circle had formed in opposition to what remained of both the CPML and RWH. After continuing some positive work for a year or more, it is now practically disintegrated.
I believe there is some truth in the "three mainstays" slogan. At least implicitly, they go against the tendency of some ex-Marxist-Leninists to join up with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) or to have the RWH's "three levels of federation" suck them deeper into the swamp. But there are some problems with vagueness.
• "Staying Red." Here the problem is the necessity of combining a firm class stand on the fundamentals of Marxism-Leninism with a scientific method in the further application of Marxism-Leninism to the actual conditions in our country. When faced with the tendency toward revisionism and social democracy, we must not waver on upholding the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism. This theoretical work represents the summed-up experience of our class. It should be modified, further developed and changed only through new discoveries based on the summation of new revolutionary experience or a deeper knowledge of the past.
At the same time we must recognize that much theoretical work remains to be done. I would stress three areas: (1) an immediate tactical program and a deeper strategic program that would take as their starting points an analysis of classes and current conditions in the U.S.; (2) further elaboration on how class struggle and national struggle are interconnected and separate; and (3) an elucidation of the internal laws of development of the Soviet Union and the Soviet-bloc countries.
•"Staying Together." Obviously, it is better to be organized than unorganized. For many of the people we are talking about, even joining a study group or discussion circle would be a step forward. But there are also different types of organizations, such as those based on federationism or on democratic centralism.
"Staying together" should mean using democratic centralism to combat and reverse the "three levels of federation." In certain cities, where no Marxist-Leninist collective or district exists, teams of activists and study groups should unite to form one. However, their aim should not be to remain a local circle. As Leninists, their responsibility is to link up with all pro-party forces, especially nationwide organizations.
Today this means linking up with and joining the League of Revolutionary Struggle (M-L) (LRS). As the only group of our trend that survived the liquidationist barrage, the LRS deserves the support of all those who still want to see Marxist-Leninists unite in a single party. This nationwide organization of revolutionaries has not only survived, it has continued to develop a generally correct line, internal structure and methods of leadership.
Communists need not have complete unity on every aspect of political line and program in order to be in the same Marxist-Leninist organization. Instead, they need to uphold a common program on which there is general agreement. On certain points, naturally, there will be majority and minority positions, which can be debated, discussed and resolved internally in due time and with good methods.
The LRS recently concluded its Second Congress. In the pre-congress period, there was wide and thorough discussion. At the congress sessions themselves, minority and majority positions were presented. In certain cases, the minority won over a majority and achieved a higher level of unity. This shows a healthy practice of democratic centralism.
The LRS also has a foothold among working class and oppressed nationality activists, which was gained over ten years of struggle and is now growing. It has a revolutionary press suitable for regular agitation and propaganda work. It has the means to sum up work and to practice the mass line collectively. Communists know they cannot last long without these things.
•"Staying Active." Politically inactive people rarely remain or become communists. If they are cynical about the past and burned out, then inactivity will gradually deepen their cynicism and drift into liberalism. So encouraging and finding opportunities for former comrades to become active again, on whatever level, is quite necessary. They may never become active communists again. But they can use their skills in the mass struggle, and they can become a network of sympathizers that helps and assists a communist organization and its press. And in time, some will be won back to communism and the party.
But there is another lesson about the role of political activity. Most of those active now are from a new generation of people and struggles. The history of revolution shows that successful parties are mainly comprised of young people, the new and dynamic element in their class and in society. Of course, the door must stay open to those of the previous generation. They have much to offer in terms of experience and leadership. But the main source of strength in our efforts to establish a party will be found among the new and rising generation of fighters. They are our first priority for the future.
Carl Davidson was the editor of Class Struggle, CPML's theoretical journal, and a member of the Standing Committee of the CPML. He is currently a contributing editor to UNITY newspaper, and on the editorial board of Forward.


text:
About VMF
VMF Special Projects
Map Gallery Tours
10-Day Event Calendar Artists Lineup Mt Pleasant Street Party Free Music Lineup The Park Show Daily Mural Tours Volunteer Vendor Applications
Our Sponsors Become a Sponsor
About Our Team Indigenous Programs FAQ Contact
Murals Map Gallery Tours 2019 Festival 10-Day Event Calendar Artists Lineup Mt Pleasant Street Party Free Music Lineup The Park Show Daily Mural Tours Volunteer Vendor Applications Sponsors Our Sponsors Become a Sponsor About VMF About Our Team Indigenous Programs FAQ Contact VMF Special Projects News Blog Instagram Facebook
2018 Guest Curators: Roxanne Charles
For 2018, we have begun to invite guest curators to share in the process of artist selection and mentorship. Through the expansion of our curation team we can further enhance our process of building a diverse roster of. talented local and international artists for the festival. This year we received over 700 artist submissions during our public call. Roxanne Charles, joins our Lead Curator Drew Young and our cohort of guest curators Scott Sueme and Pennylane Shen for the 2018 season.
What excites you about curating for VMF?
I am very excited to work with the Vancouver Mural Festival. Curation for me has always been an opportunity to explore space, help raise awareness of social issues, and help amplify voices which have somehow been ignored or even suppressed. Curating outdoors in urban spaces for a large festival like the Vancouver Mural Festival is completely new to me. I am excited to explore the space, the buildings, businesses, walls, and look at how we can alter these spaces and activate them in a way which can benefit the community at large.
What are the challenges of curating for a public art festival like VMF?
For me I think some of the challenges are the amount of work and preparation that goes into a Festival like this, with securing the walls. It is not like a gallery space that one is familiar with, it is a city space with a lot of complex layers and the turn around time can be quite limited from the time the walls have been secured and the art works go up. This may not have be a challenge for others but in terms of the way I work, space and understanding the historical and current use of a site is very important to me, so I like to be present and on the ground to explore the space. This gives me an opportunity to connect to the space and experience it.
What is your background in the arts? OR What prepared you for this role?
I graduated from Kwantlen Polytechnic University in 2016 and I'm currently completing my MFA at Simon Fraser University. I have always had a love for art, however, I began curating when I recognized the need for dialogue around a lot of issues surrounding the environment, indigenous rights, food security, systemic violence and sovereignty. I never really viewed myself as a curator, however, I saw a need for dialogue and recognized how art was able to facilitate that in creative ways. So I started bringing together artists and art works to have conversations with one another around some difficult subject matter. From there I have had incredible opportunities to curate some fantastic shows which is what ultimately led me to this opportunity to co-curate the Vancouver Mural Festival. Curating the Vancouver Mural Festival is never something that I thought I would be doing and I'm very excited to be recognized as a curator and asked to participate this year.
What is really inspiring you right now to do your work?
A lot of the work I am doing right now is response work in that it responds to the world around me and tries to navigate the space through ceremony. As a weaver, I look at the history of weaving and the traditional knowledge that I hold in relation to a spiritual realm and how spiritual objects speak to not only the physical world around us but possibility and spiritual aspects of our future. What is fuelling and driving my work right now is the urgency of environmental issues around wild salmon, lumber exploitation, urbanization, the expansion of the tar sands and how they are all directly impacting our way of life and ultimately creating a global crisis. For me there are a mixture of things inspiring me in relation to my perceptions of the emotional, mental, spiritual, and physical realms of the world around me.
What has been a highlight of your career so far?
I feel like I am just at the beginning of my career right now and one of the most exciting things I am participating in right now would be this opportunity to co-curate the Vancouver Mural festival but also to have my work included in a show at the Vancouver Art Gallery in June called How We Carry The Land. It is truly an honour to have me work recognize and included in such valuable conversations.
What is the process you go through when curating an exhibition?
When curating an exhibition there's usually a conversation that I want to engage the general public in. And I look for creative ways to do that and look for various artists who are able to have those conversations speak through their work and through their various mediums. Also looking at how those artists and those works can have conversations with each other and speak to a diverse and large audience. My hope is that then the audience can witness and filter the exhibition and carry on the conversation outside of the space.
Space is very important to my work as well, so it has been interesting to come into a cityscape such as Mount Pleasant and try to navigate the space, buildings and find fits for the artist as well as conversations that might be and take place in the space. Given the short turnaround of when we start to look at the walls and bring our vision to life the task of curating the space has been harder than any other show that I've had the opportunity to curate.
Do you have any advice for someone who would want to get into your line of work?
For anyone that is interested in being an artist or a curator, I would say just follow your passion and be committed to have conversations through art about what you are most passionate about. Although I formally studied at various institutions for art, I never had the dream of being an artist or a curator, it was more about making the work to have a dialogue with people and have a conversation about issues that I care deeply about.
Often it's been a lot about the process rather than the final product and about relationships and the relationships built through those processes. About how art and process can bring out numerous conversations in a way which seeks to strengthen our understandings and relationships to one another and our environment. I feel that my success as an artist and as a curator has come out of my commitment to those conversations rather than trying to attain the role of an artist or curator. Most of my work has come through word-of-mouth and I believe that is because of the passion I put into the work I do.
Hych'ka
Roxanne Charles
David Vertesi June 11, 2018
VMF Festival Artists Announced
New for 2018: Guest Curators: Introducing Pennylane Shen
hello@vanmuralfest.com
Email —
Wall Donation
Maps & Tours
Info for Artists
Vendor ApplicationsBecome a Sponsor
Header Image Partners Media Partners Sponsors Community Supporters Corporate Supporters Newsletter


text:
The Mindy Project: Hulu Releases Season Five Trailer
by Cindy McLennan, September 27, 2016
Below, watch The Mindy Project TV show's official season five trailer. The fifth season premieres on Hulu, Tuesday, October 4, 2016. When FOX cancelled the sitcom after three seasons in 2015, the streaming platform picked it up for season four, and renewed it for a fifth season, back in May.
The Mindy Project stars: Mindy Kaling, Ed Weeks, Ike Barinholtz, Beth Grant, Xosha Roquemore, and Fortune Feimster. Chris Messina, who was a series regular in the first four seasons will return in season five as a recurring guest star.
Watch The Mindy Project's official season five trailer, from Hulu.
What do you think? Are you a fan of The Mindy Project TV series. Do you plan to stream the fifth season on Hulu.
More about: Hulu TV shows: canceled or renewed?, The Mindy Project, The Mindy Project: canceled or renewed?
The Mindy Project: Season Seven? Mindy Kaling Is Open to a Revival But…
The Mindy Project: Sixth and Final Season Trailer Released by Hulu
The Mindy Project: Reese Witherspoon to Guest on the Final Season
The Mindy Project: Former Star Returning for Final Season of Hulu Comedy
The Mindy Project: Sixth & Final Season Gets a Premiere Date from Hulu
The Mindy Project: Mindy Kaling Talks About Ending the Hulu TV Show
The Mindy Project: Sixth & Final Season Renewal for Hulu Series
The Mindy Project: Hulu Previews the Season 5B Debut
The Mindy Project: Casey Wilson (Happy Endings) to Guest in Season Five
The Mindy Project: Bryan Greenberg & Rebecca Rittenhouse to Guest in Season Five
The Mindy Project: Season Five Coming to Hulu in October
The Mindy Project: Will Chris Messina be in Season Five?
The Mindy Project: Seth Meyers Returning as Different Character
The Mindy Project: Hulu Teases Season Four Return
The Mindy Project: Hulu Series Returns in April
The Mindy Project: Cancelled; No Season Four on FOX But…