I just saw the new Woody Allen film, "Whatever Works" over the weekend. Allen wrote the film in his heyday, the 1970's, apparently for himself to star in. Any Allen fan will be able to recognize him in Larry David's character, Boris, because in typical Allen fashion, Boris presents to the world a person who has been beaten down by it. Someone who is smart enough to simultaneously recognize that he is a genius but that this life is an exercise in futility. We're all dying, we're all miserable, there is suffering and sadness and daily pain, he reasons, why pretend otherwise?
Unlike a lot of people, I share this philosophy. I mean, sure, I have good times and I enjoy sunshine and ice cream and puppies. But I choose not to fool myself that life is anything other than a long compromise. We agree to accept that we have no control and in return, we might be able to forget that fact for a little while, sometimes, if we're lucky enough to have the money to buy a bottle of vodka. Honestly, I think there are few people who would willingly just give up and elect to die. But at the same time, it's hard not to get beaten down by life. If you're not currently sick or unemployed or lonely or broke, there is always the knowledge that that could change at any moment. It's a lot of pressure, particularly in today's economy.
So, anyway, during the film I noticed, to my annoyance, that the other couples in attendance didn't seem to find Boris' crusty observations funny or even ironic. Isn't THAT ironic? Here we have young, hipster couples who probably volunteer for Habitat for Humanity and Race for the Cure, who obviously are aware of life's inequities, spending money on a Friday night to be entertained by a famously world-weary curmudgeon and they can't even find the humor in it! Instead, every time Boris rendered another one of his zesty observations on modern life- that we read about the atrocities in Darfur in the New York Times over a breakfast of all-natural cage-free eggs, because, well, what else can we do?- the audience just sort of stirred uncomfortably in their seats. I guess that's the point of the film. Whatever works! But still, I find myself annoyed by this and many other things. To wit:
1) This past Sunday's NY Times ran a front page story about how lawmakers are reluctant to ban cell phone use while driving. Then, they profiled an Oklahoma kid who killed a 61-year-old woman by driving through a red light (he didn't see it because he was texting or chatting or doing whatever was more interesting than paying attention to the road) and got off with a MISDEMEANOR. Seriously. He's not only not in jail, he's got a new truck that his grandma helped him buy and a "hands-free" cell phone kit that his concerned mother bought him. Seriously. The article quotes several politicians who claim that it's unrealistic to expect them to not talk all the way home on their two-hour commutes and they're not going to impose the horror of having to wait to make a phone call on anyone else, either. Meanwhile, a murderer is out on the streets, free to chat while driving. I don't care how sorry he is or that he didn't mean to do it. He's a murderer and the law needs to reflect that. But I'm guessing that the politicians are right- people just don't care about anyone else's rights or comfort, as long as they can get theirs.
2) President Obama's approval numbers have dipped pretty low this week. He probably deserves that, though. Afterall, he's been in office- what, a whole seven months or so? That's enough time to undo the economic nightmare that the last president created, isn't it? That's enough time to make peace in the Middle East, right? To win over Republicans, grant gays the right to marry (and call it marriage), lower taxes, create a workable health care plan AND respond to Sarah Palin's scintillating op-ed piece in last week's Washington Post, too. Despite what America thinks, our country is not a reality show and things aren't resolved with a very special two-hour season finale eight weeks after the premiere. There is no aftershow in which to review what went wrong for next season. No, this isn't reality, it's life. Obama is smart enough to realize that 100 percent of the pressure to reduce or eliminate the effects of Bush's mistakes are on him. And if he does not come through with even one or two of his campaign promises, there are those who will portray him as a failure. He probably won't be reelected because in this era of instant gratification and selfish objectives, we are only happy if our needs are met directly. And there are those who are frustrated with his need to be fair- to reach out to both sides of any issue in order to get the full picture to make the best decision. I know we're not used to that after the last eight years, but that truly is what is called reason. Frankly, I hope he doesn't look at approval polls. As history has proven, people are notoriously fickle. We all gave Bush a break after 9-11, even though in retrospect, we shouldn't have. I think the same courtesy should be extended to Obama now. If you're really displeased at the end of four years, by all means, vote for someone else. Seems like there are plenty of out-of-work governors these days who could use a new gig.
3) The people who breathlessly discuss Michael Jackson as though they have personal knowledge of who he was. I really did want to believe that racism had run its course in America, but apparently, a high-school mentality continues to pervade when it comes to MJ. Everyone seems to now say that they were comfortable with him "when he was black" but not when his skin color began changing color. There are those who still claim that he had been "bleaching his skin" in order to become white. It just seems to be a ludicrous suggestion, but beyond that, why would anyone be interested enough to make comments on it? We claim to be such a diverse and welcoming country but in the end, it seems that it's just easier to make fun of people who aren't like us. I would call that prejudice of the worst kind.
4) Cheerleaders. Would you believe that in 2009, in a recession, there are parents who send their daughters to cheerleader camps?? These are girls ranging in ages from 6-18. Some appear to be grown women, who spent upwards of 6 hours a day, prancing around in hot pants and hair ribbons, yelling and kicking. Couldn't we just call this what this is now? A simple route to dating the football team? Do parents really believe that this is the best use of their child's time? Yes, I know some boys participate in cheerleading, but it's with the same objective for them. This simply is an embarrassing, baldly sexist pursuit that ought to be banned, along with beauty pagents. As long as women are making 78 cents on the dollar that a man makes, the sexes are not equal, not even close. And cheerleading doesn't help change the perception that we don't mind making less, as long as you think we're pretty.
5) Is the "social media" craze almost over? Because I'm over it. So, here's a prediction: by this time next year, Facebook, Twitter and all of its ilk will have reached their plateau and we'll all be able to go back to life as usual, calling and e-mailing old friends we'd like to keep in touch with and not calling and e-mailing those we don't.
No comments:
Post a Comment