Friday, May 2, 2014



Two Russians are sitting at table. One is reading aloud an interview that Tom Waits gave, which has been translated recently by a bilingual hack into Russian and printed as part of some collection. The Russian reading loves everything Tom Waits is saying. The Russian listening doesn’t like it. Who is right?

THE ANSWER: They are both wrong.

THE EXPLANATION: Although Tom Waits is a great artist, his answers to the interview questions are more clever than truthful, and a little too pat; the interview sounds like something one would see in a 1970’s film about an auteur. So what the first Russian is so impressed by, Waits’s sharp replies, amounts to little more than a parlor trick. Also, the questionable translation often emphasizes the wrong things. So what’s being read is not the actual interview but its reflection in a funhouse mirror, a reflection which also creates the illusion that something more is behind the words than there is.

The reason the second Russian is wrong is that he doesn’t like anything Tom Waits does, period. So even if he was listening to a Waits masterpiece he still would not like it.

WHERE AM I IN ALL THIS? I’m sitting in the middle trying to explain to these two their folly. But it’s difficult to get across the fine nuances of my argument after too much vodka has been drunk for anyone to stay quiet for the length of time I need to get my point across. All they want to know is the bottom line – whose side am I on? That's not true. They don't care. In fact, they’re not even listening.

THE SOLUTION: The liquor store closes in less than an hour and we’d better go there now if we want to continue enjoying each other’s company. And don’t forget to buy cigarettes. 

Wednesday, November 6, 2013


An Odd Tale

She took the stage like a great solo violinist, striding on long, well-toned legs, her open white smock flowing behind her like a cape. She was high-stung, taut as a bow, holding a pointer to match, long neck, long nose, wavy blond hair that just reached her shoulders, big eyes shaped like teardrops giving her the appearance of constantly being preoccupied with weighty matters for which there were no moral solutions. She had the bearing of one descended from royalty. Her beauty was deep and arresting, but it was not warm. She gave off an impression of someone in complete control who was utterly lost.
She commanded the stage, indicating to the projection on the screen with her pointer.
“We can see in this early footage....I should say we can hear in this footage....he started out as a football announcer, even though he knew nothing about football. Notice the familiar nasal quality to his voice, which was recognizable even then, combined with what sounds like an affectation, can you hear it? It’s as though he’s trying to imitate his idea of what an announcer should sound like....and as if he’s mocking it just a little. No doubt we all recognize that voice. And that’s him, obviously, sitting at a folding table on the sidelines. You can see the women selling sweaters it looks like at other tables. The game going on in the background. This was obviously very early in his career. From football he went on to host a morning show. Then he began inviting women to his studio and forcing them to strip on his radio show, making them perform lewd and lascivious acts on one another, on random individuals, humiliating these women in front of a vast radio audience, women who lacked not only self-respect but intelligence, and consequently were unable to grasp the full ramifications of what they were doing.
“When I opened his head and removed his brain – which turned out to be quite small, I could hold it in the palm of my hand – I discovered that it was made of that sticky translucent pinkish-purple rubber often associated with various children’s toys, such as those octopi that you fling at a wall and watch it tumble down grasping the wall. My son used to have one. But the real discovery was the little frogs made of play dough that I found wedged in the sulci of his brains. They were in an array of bright play dough colors – yellow, red, green, blue, purple, etc. – wedged in the sulci or fissures throughout his brain. The frogs were about the size of one phalange of a pinky finger. But despite being wedged in there, fortunately for us, and for him, the play dough frogs were all perfectly intact; they were not squished or otherwise deformed by the pressure of the rubber as one might expect. For this reason I was able to carefully pluck them out with chopsticks. There was a surprising number of them, as even when I thought I’d removed all of them from the bottom of his brain, after which I turned the brain over and removed all the ones from the top, when I then checked the bottom once more I found still more of them there. I don’t know if I’d missed them the first time around or if new ones had appeared, which I thought would have been strange in that short a time span. We did not know why this was happening but eventually I did manage to pluck out all the frogs and reinsert his brain into his head. Now he’s back to being a very successful radio personality, and he has not exhibited any disturbing symptoms. In laymen’s terms he’s cured, he’s normal.”

She was pretty but plain, and poor; good people but poor, as they say. She had only one dress – gray and formless and made of rough cotton – and she kept to herself, the way gentle, poor girls sometimes do. She was smart but her intelligence wasn’t useful; she was not at all cunning. She had games that she played with herself and she shared them with make-believe friends. She had straight black hair to her neck and an old pair of sandals. And she had a kind heart, a big heart, but she was quiet and did not imagine she was entitled to joy.
            She was afraid of him when he called to her from the mound by the railroad tracks, but now she was in love. The young man was unlike anyone she knew. Although she was not acquainted with too many people, she knew that he was unique. Had she had access to society she would have found him all the more so. He was odd but not on purpose. Everything he did, every glance, every gesture, was electric, explosive, like a small work of art. When he sat he would sit in a ball. He would leap, hop and climb instead of walking; but when he walked he moved like a dancer. Not that he was completely at the mercy of his eccentricities, he could behave conventionally if need be; his bearing suggested he could make small talk with beggars and kings with equal ease. He seemed to have mastered this skill long ago, as a child, perhaps even before – there was nobility to him. But all that stuff bored him now and he had as much interest in being charming as a virtuoso violinist has in teaching the instrument to tone-deaf six-year-olds.
His straight black hair he wore like a helmet. He was dashing and sexy, like a magnificent, mythical bird. And she felt like an ant on the earth. Yet he chose her. He would see her all day, every day, and would paint her in the abandoned old hangar (in fact she did not know what he was painting, he never showed her, but she stood where he told her to stand, stood there many hours at a time in her sandals and coarse cotton dress). The dark, dirty hangar filled with color as soon as he’d enter. But he also brought darkness, from his black eyes and his black leather jacket. She wasn’t afraid of being physically harmed; if he’d wanted to hurt her she’d let him. She was afraid of the door to him closing, of him walking away, of him not coming back. His painting notwithstanding, he was an artist in everything he did; whatever he touched he made beautiful, and this was so far from her world. She knew that what she saw of him was a tiny fragment, that beyond it was a vast, swirling universe she could not understand, a labyrinth, beautiful and frightening, before which she was a speck in the wind. Perhaps he was playing with her. She didn’t know what he wanted from her. But these meetings were all that she had. They became her whole life. She expected that for him they were trifles. But she did not care. As for being with him, being his, she did not dare even to fantasize about such a thing. And when such reveries would scrape at the door of her mind she would chase them away.
The painting was done and he showed it to her. It was a portrait of a girl rendered with rich, brilliant colors, her face luminescent with transportive joy, her glorious smile lighting up the whole hangar. It was clearly supposed to be her, thought the girl, though it looked nothing like her. But the painting’s astonishing beauty and her love for the boy made her smile, made her glow. And at that moment she caught her reflection in a mirror shard on the ground and she suddenly saw that the girl in the painting was her!
She looked at him and saw he was pleased, more than that, he was happy, not smirking like always. He looked open, like a little boy. Her lungs swelled with joy. No, he was truly happy as he looked at her, and for the first time she felt free to be with him. And she knew, she still knew he would probably leave, maybe even quite soon, maybe after one night. She knew he did not love her the way she loved him, she knew they were not nearly equal. But she felt at that moment, unlike ever before, that she now had the right to be with him, the right to accept what he offered – not demand, she did not have the right to do that – but accept. Nobody had the right to demand anything from him. He was not of this world. He was an event, a miracle, he was an ecstatic moment. And now, seeing her portrait, she turned into that girl in the painting, that girl in a colorful dress, filled with infinite joy. He gave her his hand and she took it and they skated like light beams through caverns and forests and white marble ballrooms and clear emerald seas.
            “This is not going to work,” his mother told him. “It’s unacceptable. Her essence is different from ours. She is plain. You are unwell. I need to look at your brain. She is downstairs or somewhere, who knows, she is waiting. I’ll have someone escort her out. She’s from a dull, unremarkable world.”
            He must have come out to see her, to tell her to go, to tell her he’d see her at home, to tell her he needed to speak with his mother. For how long did he say? For an hour? Or maybe a day? It’s not clear if he knew what would happen. He knew and he did not know, she thought later on when she remembered his face in those moments. She saw him through the half-open doorway, he was deep in the grand oaken hall, listening to his mother – she could hear the words echo but couldn’t make out what they were. She could not see his mother, her view blocked by the door. He turned in her direction and he had a vague smile. Was his smile resignation? Or longing? Was it sadness? Or pity? What was clear was that regardless of what, if anything, he truly wanted, or, let’s say, regardless of what he wanted more, he could not resist what was happening to him. She saw he was only a boy and in his smile was inevitability.
            She was taken to the street, passing a man whose pompous, nasally voice seemed familiar. “My time isn’t free,” he was saying. She was taken to the street but she found her way back. She entered the operating theater just as the boy’s mother removed the top of his head and took out his brain.
            “You see,” she showed the girl, undisturbed by her presence, “you see that?”
            The colorful frogs were all smooshed in the crevices of his brain. One could barely tell they had ever been frogs at all. They just looked like squashed colorful patches of play dough.
            “You see,” his mother said, showing the girl his brain, “I can’t save it. It’s all stuck together, I can’t pick out the frogs. I can’t cut them out, I’d be cutting good parts of his brain with the frogs. They’ve meshed into his brain.”
            The girl’s dress was gray once again and she sat on a bench by the wall and she quietly watched knowing she no longer had a right to his world. And she watched, or not so much watched as just sat there, as his mother cut out what little uncontaminated pieces she could of his brain and integrated them into the brain of the radio announcer. Then she took the announcer’s brain, now with parts of her son’s brains attached, and put it into her son’s head.
            The girl stood on the street as the cars pulled away.
The young man, he went on to be very successful. He still had the power of effortless charm and charisma, and rooms of beautiful people gravitated towards him at cocktail parties and at work he elicited great admiration and a good deal of envy from even his most serious colleagues. His mother was pleased, or as pleased as she could be. The announcer, well, nobody missed him.
            The girl made her way through the trees, and down roads in the dusk light. She felt terrible anguish, for a long time it tore her to pieces. But it passed. And she was still poor, with only one dress and one old pair of sandals, but she was no longer embarrassed to smile.

November 2013

Sunday, August 4, 2013

My Internet Dating Profile REDUX

It is not without some vexation that I announce my retirement from the world of internet dating, at least until I can radiate something other than midlife-crisis desperation, or whatever it is I seem to be radiating at these meetings, which appears to be making women react to me as they would to, say, a DMV clerk, who, after a pleasant enough exchange about the nuances of inspection stickers, then asks them if they wouldn't like to teabag him in his cubicle. Whatever the reason for my recent lack of success, I’m off to Siberia (figuratively speaking of course) to chop wood and pull oxcarts and run around with railroad ties and shit. But for posterity and with a tear shed for one or two....closer to one....fond recollections, I publish here my second, latest, and last (at least for a while) internet dating profile:

My self-summary

Do you feel compelled to write in your profile how much you love New York City, how much you love bourbon, how much you love to travel and/or wander around the city discovering great new places, how you want a guy who's really passionate about something, maybe a little geeky but confident, how your favorite movies include two or three of the following: "The Princess Bride," "Ferris Bueller's Day Off," and "This is Spinal Tap," how your job is saving the poor, the children, the planet? You sound lovely but I'm probably not for you. If you think Michael Moore (does anyone even remember who he is?) is anything but a big, fat turd, you should pass. If you find "Schindler's List" to be a valuable film, ditto. If you put down that your favorite book is the last one you've read, I can't help you. If you have lots of tattoos or if you use the phrase "I create" a lot in your profile, you needn't even consider me. Read comic books? Play video games? Love "Doctor Who?" Obsessed with sci-fi and/or whodunit novels? Wear funny/quirky/kitschy hats? God bless you, but you'll hate me. Want drama-free? Not if I really like you. Have a problem with Woody Allen movies because he fucked his daughter? Go tell Oprah. Need to drink cocktails with cucumbers in them? I'm sure they're delicious. Enjoy. I don't mean to sound negative or all anti-something-or-other, but there it is. If you find something attractive behind any of this I'd like to hear from you.

What I’m doing with my life
Catching up.

I’m really good at
Criticizing. Telling stories. Drinking. Kissing. Cooking. Making your mom/dad/grandparents/dogs/kids like me.

Favorite books, movies, shows, music, and food
dostoyevsky, lolita and other nabokov, bukowski, borges, naked lunch, fitzgerald, celine, liked hemingway until i read what he said about dostoyevsky and now i can't take him seriously, kafka, the new yorker, rome, breaking bad, louie, robot chicken, tarkovsky, fellini, pasolini, bergman, bunuel, greenaway, kusturica, jodorovski, woody allen, coen brothers, anderson, solondz, old scorsese (though i really enjoy the departed), almadovar, casavetes, verhoven, lynch (too many to list), gogol bordello, tom waits, nyman, glass, nina simone, vysotsky, bach, miles davis

I spend a lot of time thinking about
Sex. How I appear to others.

On a typical Friday night I am

The most private thing I’m willing to admit
I had sex with your dad.

You should message me if

You'd like to get drunk and go to a museum; for you art goes down better with booze. You laugh easily and sincerely. You find the overabundance of kitsch and "irony" in self-expression irritating. You'd like to go see a play (don't get excited, I write theatrical criticism so I get my tickets for free). You'd like to watch both seasons of Rome with me in one sitting. You think we might like one another sober. Also, you probably should be a little desperate. I don't mean romantically, I mean in general - in life, in this city. Because if you're all happy and well-adjusted and just can't wait to get up every morning and smile and talk to strangers, I'm kind of a hard pill to swallow.

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

New Jersey Man Finds NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg's Soul in a Matchbox at Garage Sale in Passaic.

According to a redacted article in the now defunct Birdseed Gazette of Ho-Ho-Kus, NJ, a number of years ago the future mayor of New York met with a surgeon in order to have an infected cyst removed from an undisclosed location. After an examination the doctor informed Mr. Bloomberg that the cyst was in fact that precious, indefinable, ethereal thing, a mixture of tangible and intangible human qualities that differentiate people from sophisticated calculators and some insects. The doctor conceded however that he did not know why the billionaire’s soul was oozing pus, but suggested that his patient make an effort to keep it clean and use an ointment. The doctor also confessed, after the billionaire pressed him further, that this indefinable thing had actually no practical uses whatsoever, and if anything was only a hindrance to the forward-thinking, pragmatic mind. The financial wizard promptly ordered it removed, which his doctor did, filling in the crater with fat from Mr. Bloomberg’s ass to avoid a scar. What happened to the soul afterwards or how the petrified little black thing wound up in a box of chipped nick-nacks in a Passaic garage nobody knows. But the find has ignited a fever of excitement among Bloomberg fans, who are out in force searching through every dusty attic and musty basement, through every trash bin and every sewer and gutter for the two warts that were the Mayor’s senses of irony and humor.

Friday, February 1, 2013


Too much thinking I do
too much philosophizing
I'm not the man whose poetry
            is his life
I'm not the man whose poetry
            is his poetry
If any genius I have
            it is in my dreams
But I forget them as soon as I
            wake up 


Wednesday, January 23, 2013


About six months ago I reviewed a production of Uncle Vanya
(, which featured Reed Birney in the title role. The show had its problems but I gave Mr. Birney a mostly positive review:

“Also excellent (for the most part), was Reed Birney as Vanya....Mr. Birney captures beautifully Vanya’s sarcasm, cynicism, desperation, and self-loathing. He seemed less believable as someone who’s worked with his hands on a country estate all his life. And his feelings of love and resentment towards Yelena (Maria Dizzia), the professor’s young wife, seem a bit unconvincing (though this last issue could well have been due, at least in part, to Ms. Dizzia’s uninspired performance).”

I remember one problem I had with Mr. Birney was his hands, his fingers specifically. They seemed thin and always pointing outward like delicate fins. They looked brittle, weak, sharp and awkward, the kind of fingers that have never done manual labor and would only be good for handling paper, fine fabrics, or poking you in the eye accidentally. The way he moved his hands and his arms – his gestures abrupt and clumsy – how he moved his neck and his head, all looked like the movements of a frustrated, middle-aged boy (which was appropriate for his character). But they also made him look somewhat effeminate. Not exactly in the way certain gay men look effeminate, he looked more like one of those guys who are "sexually ambiguous," the ones you can’t imagine having sex with anybody, who look like they'd be frightened of any exposed sex organ, male or female. For a while, as I watched the play, I thought that he might indeed be trying to play Vanya as gay. But that didn't quite fit his performance or the other actors' reactions to his character, or frankly how I remember his character as written. Perhaps in part my consternation was due to an uncontious prejudice I had, having grown up not thinking there were gays in Russia, certainly not in the 19th century. Still, if one were to play Vanya as a homosexual it seems to me Uncle Vanya would require some serious reinterpretation, of which I saw no evidence in the production in question. So why was he playing this older Russian man who lives in the country in this unusual way? I asked myself. There seemed to be no rationale behind it. The brilliant conclusion I came up with was that Mr. Birney was in fact one of those men - asexual, maybe leaning towards gay, but trying to play Vanya straight. And I felt that his performance was unduly affected by this, by how he was in real life.

When I saw him in Picnic ( last week I realized I'd been an idiot. There he plays a small-town Kansas heterosexual, a drinker and store owner whose strong hands carry suitcases and probably crates of inventory, and who lusts after young and old females alike. And when I saw him I realized that all that stuff he was doing in Uncle Vanya with his fingers, his elbows, his head, how he spoke, that wasn’t really him, he was acting. And I realized that I'd failed to appreciate just how full of nuance and insight his performance had really been. Mr. Birney was playing exactly what I saw but refused to see - a sexless, effeminate man-boy. His subtle infusion of Vanya with an undertone of ambiguous sexuality beautifully complemented that character’s confusion about who he is, his place in the world and his feelings for Yelena. Mr. Birney’s choices and their execution were in fact sublime. So I apologize for misinterpreting them and take back any reservations I had about his performance.

Wednesday, January 2, 2013


Except for one blatant mistake and maybe one moment of silliness, Django Unchained is a very entertaining film. Christoph Waltz is sublime, every word he says sounds like it just came to him. And Sam Jackson is mesmerizing. The two of them make the movie. Jamie Foxx is very good. And DiCaprio is good too; at moments one almost forgets he’s DiCaprio. The film is a wish-fulfillment fantasy, an American hero movie, a western modeled on westerns that were modeled on westerns; there is no attempt at “realism.” And it works very well. Same is true for the characters, they are archetypes reinvented but they are delightful. On the one hand that’s pretty much all that needs to be said. Tarantino wasn’t trying to create a truthful work of art, he was trying to make entertainment, and he succeeded; Django Unchained is a fun, clever ride.
            On the other hand I do have a few questions: Why can’t Django be a real former field slave, with the bad habits, the nastiness, the brutality? We get symbolic, Hollywood versions of these qualities, but why can’t we see them for real? And I don’t mean make it completely realistic, that would disgust and offend a modern audience beyond dramatic necessity. But isn't there a middle ground, where there is a sense of human reality but where it’s not so real that modern sensibilities would make his character unrelatable? Couldn't he be in love with his wife and fuck a whore, for example? Or be gentle at times and at times a brute without reservations? Couldn't he be human in other words, or is it necessary to make him out of titanium? The studios believe that the general viewing public is too stupid to accept a hero with real flaws and the real characteristics of a former field nigger. And for the most part they're right. But couldn’t someone like Tarantino, who has both the popular and the artsy crowd following him, do something like that? I was hoping he would. He does not.
Also, typical of Tarantino, the movie is sexless. With his previous films this wasn’t an issue (I'm referring to Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown, the other ones I don’t care about; their problems are much bigger than a lack of sexuality). But with a movie about slavery and cowboys it seems sex would be an essential element. And if you’re really making a blacksploitation film you should probably throw at least one scene of rape or lust in there, as an homage if nothing else.    
But the biggest question seems to me this: Is American slavery morally appropriate fodder for light entertainment? The tempting answer is: “Stop nitpicking and don’t be so goddamn uptight!” We know going in more or less what this movie will be like. By agreeing to watch it we enter into an unspoken contract of sorts, which states that we will suspend not only our temporal but also our moral and spiritual disbelief and accept the world on the screen and its laws in order that we may be entertained. Still, I wonder if I would have liked this movie as much if, say, Django was a Jew who escaped a Nazi concentration camp and was now, with his superhuman gunplay, singlehandedly defeating if not the Reich then, let’s say, all the German soldiers stationed at Auschwitz? I’m not sure I would have been able to go along with a premise like that. Having this Jew-Django destroy the Nazis all by himself would rob of their dignity not only the victims of concentration camps, many of whom were strong and capable individuals, but all the people who fought, sacrificed, suffered and died fighting the Germans in WWII. Tarantino made a movie that was something like this, Inglourious Bastards, which, dramatic flaws aside, I found morally reprehensible. In that movie, if I remember correctly, a few American Special Forces troops, with the help of a beautiful blond Jewess theater owner (spoiler!), blow up Hitler and his minions. I suspect Tarantino thought a Jew watching such a thing would enjoy it, this fantasy of Hitler being blown up, as well as of Germans being scalped and beaten to death with baseball bats. But I’m not certain he was correct. For instance, I’m not certain that the girl in the concentration camp (a real person) – who had to keep shitting out and swallowing the diamond earrings her mother gave her, before her mother was stripped and gassed along with millions of others – I’m not certain this girl would find much satisfaction in Tarantino’s ridiculous fantasy. Nor am I certain that American soldiers who fought in WWII, or British or Russian soldiers or the French resistance, or anyone who participated on the side of the Allies, would find very amusing the idea that all that was needed to kill Hitler was a handful of well-trained soldiers and a good plan. I doubt I'd be amused in their place.
And so it is with Django. By making him a successful superhero it trivializes the realities of slavery. It trivializes the suffering of enslaved human beings, the tragedy of the strong and proud who were broken, the helplessness of blacks in the south and the hopelessness of their situation, the insurmountable obstacles between them and anything resembling freedom. It also trivializes whatever sacrifices or acts of bravery individual slaves might have committed. Watching this film I couldn’t help but try and imagine the reality of a black man, strong of body and spirit, intelligent, brave, who is a slave on a Mississippi plantation. What is he supposed to do? If he runs he’ll get caught. If he fights, he’ll get tortured or killed. What can he do against two overseers? Or three? Or one with a gun or a dog? What can he do when all the public and private forces of that state and of all the states surrounding it are against him? Just the question of “Why doesn’t he do something?” presupposes that slavery is some sort of choice. That being born a slave and raised like a slave surrounded by slaves one can somehow, with a little guidance, transcend that mentality and emerge unscathed. This is similar to saying that one can come through torture undamaged, which this movie does say by the way, and which is equally flippant. True, Tarantino goes out of his way to put in verbal explanations for why we should believe what we are seeing, trying to convince us through bits of dialogue here and there why certain incredible things about Django and the world of the film are in fact dramatically sound. But the spectacle we are watching is undeniable and all the little speeches feel like expedient excuses made so that we don’t lose our suspension of disbelief and continue enjoying the show.
So where do we draw the line as to what is or is not appropriate to fictionalize? Is it a question of how much time has passed since the events at issue? Will there ever be a time when it is no longer laughably stupid and disgusting to portray Lincoln as a vampire hunter? Kathryn Bigelow evidently thinks there’s nothing wrong with telling us that torture was instrumental in extracting information that led to Bin Laden, even though it’s pretty much an established fact that it was not. Spielberg makes a movie prostituting the Holocaust, in which the tragedy of the event is obscured by style, sentimentality, and clever but superficial direction. To me it seems the question is for the filmmaker’s conscience to answer. I see nothing wrong with reinventing history – nobody knows what really happened anyway – as long as your creation is truthful (or at least if your intention is to create something truthful). And I’m not talking about getting some facts right or having accurate costumes or being faithful to the book you’re adapting. I’m talking about artistic truth. Are you creating something more profound than the historical facts around which you are weaving your creation? (This is why it’s almost impossible to make a good fictional movie about the Holocaust – there’s very little one can say artistically that will carry more weight than the subject matter.) The question is this: Is the raw material, whether it be historical or another piece of fiction, essential for you to express some vital and deeply personal truth?
With Django the answer is no. However, whereas Zero Dark Thirty and Schindler’s List are entertainments disguised as serious films, Django does not pretend. It comes out and says: This is blacksploitation reinvented, enjoy! But then what is a socially and artistically responsible individual supposed to do? My personal attitude about this sort of thing is similar to the attitude I have about giving money to bums. If I feel like giving money to a bum, I do, and if I don’t, I don’t. And if I don’t give and happen to feel guilty about it a few steps down the street, maybe I’ll walk back and pay him. Or maybe not. It seems disingenuous to deny yourself a good rape scene or a revenge-murder-torture scene if that’s what you feel like watching; it is just a movie after all, isn’t it? With Django, while its artistic and moral shortcomings do bother me on an intellectual level, I was not turned off by the film as I watched it. And when it comes out on Netflix I will probably watch it again. Still, it would be nice if not so many filmmakers were so completely proud of making such frivolous films.    

Sunday, October 21, 2012

CouldaShouldaWoulda: The Last Six Years

Woke up this morning and realized I've been in New York six years. Six years! I could have finished medical school in that time, or law school, or business school, or any school, to where now I would have had some marketable skills and a real fucking job. I could have started as an intern somewhere, a publishing house, a production house, anywhere, and now been making money in a field I was interested in. I could have written 3 novels in six years, or 6 screenplays, or 24 short stories, or I could have read 30 books. I could have had a steady job, saved money, and done something with it, gone somewhere, bought something, a camera, some lights, and made films. I could have learned photography or editing. I could have had a child. I could have gotten a black belt in jiu jitsu, or at least a brown, and been teaching now. I could have ridden a hundred miles into the Catskill mountains on my bicycle. I could have learned French or Italian or Spanish, or fucking Japanese! I could have been studying acting all this time; I loved the acting classes I took in LA and have always wanted to take some more. Who knows, I might have even been good, maybe acting on stage. I could have learned to play the guitar. I could have been drawing, maybe even painting; I have a talent for drawing I just never developed it, but that's what I could have been doing. I could have done many things. Instead I drank, jerked off, watched movies and too much TV, ate too much, shat too often, slept too late, got fatter, more frightened, more lazy, more desperate and bitter and passive. I might as well have been in prison, probably would have gotten more done. Before, it was funny and charming, a ne'er-do-well drunk who didn't care, smart, funny, even talented, wasting his life - what a laugh! It ain't funny no more. Or let's say it's not funny as often or in the same way. But all of this, everything, could have been forgiven if only I had truly lived those six years. If I had given myself up to experiences and really felt and interacted with the world. If I'd been present, as they say, and appreciated the things I had, the people I knew, appreciated myself, my life, my abilities. In other words, if I'd lived a spiritual life this whole time, none of that other stuff would matter. But I didn't. I was seldom present and I appreciated very little, felt very little. I was mostly obsessed with myself, how I felt, what I wanted, what I did not have, all that bullshit; for all my talk about depth and spirituality at bottom I really am a very superficial person. I do want to create something beautiful but mostly to satisfy my own vanity; I am not a man obsessed. Six years and all I did was fantasize about the future, how in the future everything would be different, how in it I would be different, creative, productive, alive, and also rich and in love with a beautiful fancy young girl who was in love with me. That was how I spent the last six years and there is nothing to indicate that the future will be any different. I was given so much early on that it seemed vulgar to run the race at full speed when my opponents were midgets. And the fear, oh the fear, worse than death - What if I run in earnest and lose!?! But now I am way far behind. Is it too late? Is it too late? In Vegas the odds wouldn't be good. Win? He won't even finish the race! But there's hope, always hope, like a clown, makeup running from tears, missing teeth, rotting gums, making faces. His hands smell like shit. Making faces: There's always hope. Things will change. You will change. The angels will come and remake you into a full, healthy man. Heh-heh-heh. Fuck you clown! I say but I don't really mean it. I believe him, his foul-smelling breath, his sour pores and gray stubble, black fingernails peeking from holes in his gloves, what a musty cliche. Have a drink, you'll feel better, tomorrow's another day, says the clown. It's raining today anyway, good reason to drink. You're alone, have the day to yourself. Look how much you have written! That's some meaningful shit. Now reward yourself with a drink. It's 4 o'clock, the day's almost over, have a drink. You're hungover and you know what that means - you won't get nothing done, dick around, time will pass, you'll start drinking at 9 and regret that you started so late. Remember how you like to drink in the daytime? In two hours it will get dark. Have a... Alright, shut up clown! I say, you fucking miserable pathetic sad clown. I will go get some beer, start my new life on Sunday.

Friday, October 12, 2012

MY INTERNET DATING PROFILE (for want of fresh ideas)

My self-summary
I'm a whaler. I whale. I love whaling. A day without whaling is like a day without sunshine. I notice on this site everyone writes about how much they LOVE New York: "I've lived here all my life and I love it," "I moved here 5 years ago and I love it," blah blah blah. Personally, I'm kind of sick of this place. First off, there are almost no whales here. Second, the place has turned from a living breathing city into a mall for geriatric millionaires. I don't mean to sound negative but screw this place, I'm leaving... in like a year or so. So if you want to meet me don't dally.

What I’m doing with my life

I’m really good at
Whaling god damn it!!!

The first things people usually notice about me
My "kill the whales" tattoo, it's on my face! (profile photos taken prior to tattooing)

Favorite books, movies, shows, music, and food
Anything about whaling, killing whales, beached whales, dead whales. Anything that portrays dolphins in a negative light. Also, Dostoyevsky, Lolita and other Nabokov, Bukowski, Borges, Naked Lunch, Fitzgerald, Celine, Hemingway, Kafka, the New Yorker, Rome, Breaking Bad, Louie, Robot Chicken, Tarkovsky, Filini, Pasolini, Bergman, Bunuel, Greenaway, Kusturica, Jodorovski, Woody Allen, Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, Solondz, old Scorsese, though T really enjoy The Departed, Almadovar, Casavetes, Verhoven, Lynch, (too many to list), Gogol Bordello, Tom Waits, Nyman, Glass, Nina Simone, Vysotsky, Bach, Miles Davis

I have never read Moby Dick and I never will, so don't ask.

The six things I could never do without
What do you think...? Besides that: alcohol, movies, family and friends, talking, jiu jitsu, a creative outlet (writing, ok! it's writing. I write god damn it! Mostly about... well, you know).

I spend a lot of time thinking about

On a typical Friday night I am
Whaling. Drinking and whaling. Reminiscing about whaling with a friend while drinking. Watching a movie about whaling and drinking. Drinking and playing poker with whalers. Or drinking and... ok, so I like to drink, almost as much as I like whaling.

The most private thing I’m willing to admit
During sex I'm thinking about whaling.
(also, I'm really 41)

I’m looking for
Girls who like guys
Ages 24–46
Near me
For new friends, long-term dating, short-term dating, casual sex

You should message me if
You love whaling; you hate whales and despise Michael Moore (not because you're a Christian Conservative nut job but because he's a lying, selfish, manipulative turd without a shred of integrity). You are a broad individual who knows what breadth means, and you drink, and don't mind me smoking, and know how to laugh, and when. You appreciate my filtration process. You were amused.

Monday, September 3, 2012

SHUT THE FUCK UP AND SIT THERE: Audience Etiquette for Hipsters and Intellectuals.

One expects talking and howling and other inappropriate outbursts during certain movies, which are mostly attended by a particular contingent – young stupid punk kids who got no respect for nothin’. Fortunately these delinquents seldom attend plays or art films, lacking as they do the constitution and refinement to appreciate the higher arts. No, the audience for plays and art films is made up of mostly hipsters and intellectuals. They read the NY Times and the New Yorker, go to museums and art galleries, the ballet, vote Democrat, are often vegetarians, own bicycles... anyway, you know the ones. One would imagine that having been brought up in a genteel environment, having had the benefits of higher education and having an interest in the humanities, that these people would know how to behave as audience members, especially the older ones, having grown more wise and restrained over the years, etc. Unfortunately, they don’t.

I was watching a play. It was a matinee so the audience was mostly older. The house was tiny, the size of a living room, and there was no barrier between us and the action; we were right there. The play was excellent. Yet at least three people left in the middle of the performance. One was seated next to the door so her departure, though noticeable mostly because of the noise, was not outrageously disruptive. Then there was more noise at the door. This was either another cunt leaving or the first cunt coming back in. Irritating but not unbearable. But then this couple sitting basically on what was the stage, to where if they stood up they would actually be in the performance space, got up and left. These were people in their 60’s, obviously educated, middle class or better, attending plays in the City. Plus, the man had a press kit with him. He was a critic! Yet they felt it was ok to get up in the middle of a 90 minute show, walk through nearly the entire performance space while the actors were working, and exit. And it wasn’t like the actors were defecating on stage or raping children, they were in fact acting quite beautifully in a beautiful show. I would be mortified to do this, to walk out as these people had done. Nothing short of extreme diarrhea or some other life-threatening emergency could get me to do something like that. But these people seem to think that if they feel like doing it, it’s ok to do it. Well fuckers it’s not! It’s not ok, you bald fucking liver-spotted assholes! It’s not. Your fucking job as an audience member is to sit there and shut the fuck up. Period. So sit there and be quiet for 90 minutes. Don’t open your candies, don’t eat your crackers, don’t play with your fucking cell phone, don’t whisper to your goddamned date! Do you think you can do that?! (And now I’m speaking to you and your wife in particular you old shitbag critic who walks out in the middle of a performance, just in case by some miracle you happen to stumble across this article!) Because if you can’t do that, don’t come to the show! Nobody wants you there. Nobody cares if you show up. If you get squished by a bus on the way over nobody is going to miss you! Just don’t disrupt the fucking play you useless dipshits! (The play, by the way, was Tender Napalm. My review is right here:

In my 20’s I used to go to a lot of art films but finally I couldn’t take the audience anymore and stopped. At every single one of these things there was some cunt who felt he or she (mostly he) absolutely needed everyone else in the audience to know that he got the joke, that he got the irony of whatever happened. “Haha-hehe,” would be the noise he would make to let all of us know just how fucking clever he is. What a clever asshole you are, laughing in the middle of a serious, emotional scene, because you caught the director’s ironic nuance! Bully for you motherfucker! You fucking worthless idiot! Did that scene MAKE you laugh? Or did you laugh because you thought it was intended to be funny, you fucking turd!?! And one would think someone watching Bergman or Tarkovsky would know better, would, if not be too busy communing with the film to comment on it, at least have the good manners to show respect. After all, it takes a fine sensibility to appreciate Tarkovsky and Bergman. But no! These fuckers just need to be heard, “HAHAHA!” Shut your face you used-up douche, nobody cares - we all got the joke! We all know the fucking references the director is making! We’ve all read Dostoyevsky and Camus. Hey, professor, we don’t need to hear your explanation to your stupid-hat-wearing nineteen-year-old nitwit vegan basket case girlfriend of what the director was trying to say in that scene. You have nothing to teach us. Nothing! Except that you’re a jerkoff and a buffoon. And the thing is, half the time these people don’t actually understand what the fuck they’re laughing at. I remember watching Rocco and His Brothers, arguably Visconti’s best film. There was a shot of the mother screaming after learning of the death of one of her sons. It’s such a helpless old-woman scream, so pathetic, so raw and undignified that in a way I guess you could say it was funny to see someone so pathetic screaming so helplessly – that is if that someone wasn’t a mother who’d just lost her son. The scene was very uncomfortable and intentionally so. But these pinheads in the audience laughed. Maybe some laughed because the emotion of the moment was too much for them – hipsters and intellectuals are notorious for being terrified of emotion – and rather than invest themselves in it they chose to chuckle it away. But I know that a good deal of the laughers were thinking that this shot was supposed to be funny in some bizarre ironic way, that Visconti was being melodramatic. Because these clowns not only don’t know how to comport themselves in a movie theater but also have no souls and can’t see anything beyond “irony” and melodrama. Ironically, they don’t in fact notice real irony; to them irony is synonymous with kitsch, nothing more. These are the same people who value cleverness over thoughtfulness.

These people need to be stopped. I’ve been trying to do my part: During a screening of a documentary about Paradjanov, I frightened a bespectacled intellectual in his fifties picking chips from a crackling plastic bag by quietly suggesting that he  “...go and crunch-a-munch those fucking things somewhere else.” He didn’t look at me but stuffed the bag into the pocket of his tweed jacket, then left. I told a girl giggling and yakking it up with her boyfriend during Funny Games to shut her mouth (I hated that movie so much I was hoping her boyfriend would do something so I could give them both a beating and then have an excuse to leave the theater). During Moonrise Kingdom there were some kids giggling behind me, a few seats to my left. They mostly did it during legitimately funny moments, which I would never begrudge them (I am not a Nazi!). But then they would laugh at more and more things which were not funny and this was becoming irritating. But every time, just as it would get bad enough for me to say something, their giggling would subside. The other thing was, my admonishing them would cause a rise of adrenaline within me, creating feelings and thoughts which would hinder my enjoyment of the film. So my dilemma was, is their giggling bad enough to warrant me igniting those feelings? And would the aftermath of a confrontation be more detrimental to my enjoyment than their giggling? (You see what bullshit your giggling put me through you little idiots!) Finally, I couldn’t take it anymore. I turned around and tried to get their attention without disturbing other audience members. But the three of them were too busy having fun, they didn’t notice; they were teenagers, two guys and a girl or two girls and a guy, I couldn’t tell. So I crumpled up a napkin and threw it at them. It bounced off a girl’s forehead (this hadn’t been my intention but I’m not an accurate thrower). The girl looked over at me, startled and perhaps a little frightened. I put my index finger to my lips and went “Shshsh.” They never laughed inappropriately again after that.

These are not heroic deeds and there were opportunities I missed to correct people which I regret. My point is, if you hear one of these assholes, put them in their place. And if you see someone else admonishing them, support that person. These fuckers are not in their goddamned living rooms watching Netflix. They are members of an audience. And as audience members they have a responsibility to....well, I think I’ve made my point.   

Monday, July 16, 2012


The Destiny of Names

Name your daughter Margot and she will eventually go insane. (In Russian the same is true for the name Valeria.)

Name your boy Sergei, if you are Russian, and he will grow up to be a contemplative, artsy-type with a beard.

Sophie will wear hats and have a hidden, mysterious, sexuality.

Phyllis (god forbid!) will have low self-esteem, numerous sex partners, and will turn 45 immediately after her 19th year.

Jason will have a fighting spirit and treat his women like Jason treated Medea.

French names for Upper West Side children will create vegetarian pains-in-the-asses.

Last names given as first names (Connor, Taylor, Tyler, Bradley, etc.) ensure participation in college sports.

Naming children after fruits, vegetables, or meteorological events will lead to confusion and adoption of unearned convictions, idealistic beliefs and philosophies, and ultimately to profound hypocrisy (these people also never leave good tips and are generally very stingy).

Putting a number after a child’s name (in America), like blah blah the third or blah blah the forth, regardless of income bracket, will result in an adult completely lacking imagination.

And a Seth, even if he doesn’t grow up into a full-on pedophile, will be at least a little bit sleazy.    

Monday, July 2, 2012


Here’s my theory, and I haven’t bothered to look it up but I’m sure it’s true, or at least there’s truth to it: The reason children are generally happier than adults, or, let’s say, the reason they’re more excited about life, is because they have more of whatever chemical it is in the brain that makes people happy. And the reason for this, I believe, is evolutionary. If children, who are completely powerless, didn’t have that happy chemical, they’d either be sitting around all catatonic or killing themselves, depressed at how unfairly life is treating them. Instead, an abundance of that chemical makes kids believe that there’s something out there for them, something wonderful, magical, beautiful, and they get on to looking for it, taking their beatings in stride.

I was in Queens this morning, next to a Baluchi’s restaurant, and it smelled like a garbage dump, sour milk, discarded foodstuffs, basically two or three-day-old kitchen refuse fermenting in summer heat. It was disgusting. Yet I had a flashback, and not an unpleasant one. It wasn’t a solid memory, my brain kind-of filled in the images, but it was a recollection of being behind a building where the garbage was, of playing there as a child. The building was old red brick and might have been my kindergarten or my school; this was in Russia and I was between 4 and 8. I remember being in that place, with that sour garbage smell, those dented, rusted green metal containers. And I recall having a sense of wonder, not about the garbage specifically, more about the big green metal containers and the dark spaces between them, about the place itself, which was sort-of hidden behind the building; nobody went there. Not to say that I was fascinated with this place in particular. But I do recall feeling a fullness within myself when I was there, like I was on to something, like there was something here, behind that building, a secret, a mystery, a treasure, something wonderful, maybe even sinister, but important, essential. I wasn’t bothered at all by the smell, in fact it added to the significance of the place and to my elation (perhaps the smell was like an obstacle I felt I had to overcome to be there – the stench of death as I crawled over the bodies of fallen comrades to get to that machinegun nest – that type of thing).

It’s that chemical, or whatever it is, in the brain that sets us up as children to believe that a garbage dump may hold some hidden treasure. And we go through life looking for it, picking through trash, trying to bring back a time when it wasn’t disgusting.

Saturday, June 16, 2012

David Denby is Full of Shit

Additional proof, if additional proof were needed, that David Denby (one of the two main film critics for the New Yorker), is a fucking idiot:

"I have fervently loved only one film from Ridley Scott's irrepressible output - 'Thelma & Louise' (1991)..."

That is a quote from the June 18, 2012 issue. He then goes on to lump "Alien" and "Blade Runner" together with "Gladiator," "American Gangster" and "Black Hawk Down."

We're not talking about high art here but anyone with any sense will tell you that "Alien" and "Blade Runner" are on a different cinematic plane than any of his other films (my friend would argue that "The Duelist" belongs on this list as well and while I don't quite agree I won't argue, "The Duelist" is a real film).

Whatever one's personal tastes regarding "Alien" and "Blade Runner," these are good, solid films, in which everything works, full, textured worlds are created, everything is thoughtfully worked out, and there's no cheating. "Gladiator" and "Black Hawk Down," on the other hand, are stupid, unwatchable disasters, and to lump them in with anything even competently put together is an indication of a profound lack sense, understanding and taste.

Saturday, June 2, 2012



The defendant’s attorney was in his fifties, a nice guy, friendly, relaxed. He wasn’t one of these self-important power-hungry little men who are curt with underlings and for whom everything must be just so, lest they lose concentration or their psychological edge. There was one such attorney I knew who would run around the conference table before the other side arrived, lowering every chair except his own, so that when everyone sat down he would appear to be the tallest one in the room. This guy wasn’t like that. Lawyering was his job, it wasn’t what defined him as a person. His client had been accused of some sordid business, I didn’t know what exactly, but it was sordid enough to where the court allowed for his accuser, the plaintiff, to be referred to as Jane Doe.


“Was Miss Doe a good worker?” asked the plaintiff’s attorney.
     “Yes, she was fine.”
     “She helped set up the booth?”
     “Yes, she did.”
     “She helped carry beverage containers and equipment?”
     “Did she seem lazy? Was she slacking off?”
     “No. Not that I noticed.”
     “Did she ever complain?”
     “Not to me.”
     The witness was the event supervisor; she’d managed to climb pretty high with a bachelor’s in event planning from a fifth-tier school. Her blond hair was pulled back, tied with a scrunchy. She wasn’t particularly unattractive, just not attractive, overweight, not Wal-Mart overweight, more like Costco overweight, had a house in Jersey, family values, two kids – her husband was home with the baby – Oh, the baby! The baby does this and the baby does that. He’s amazing. He shits and he eats and he cries and he sleeps. I think he’s going to be a lawyer – this is small-talk she’s making with the defendant and his counsel during a break - Yeah, I think a lawyer. Either that or Wall Street. One of the two.
She had disdain for the young models she supervised. She was condescending and impatient with them, and she had a habit of putting her palm up when she wanted to stop them from speaking. The models were those girls you see at the beach, at malls, at conventions, in matching t-shirts – sexy but not too sexy - promoting some new beverage that’s supposed to make you healthier and more attractive. This woman organized such events. Mr. Fly – this is the defendant – wasn’t only her direct superior, he was a friend. She had great respect for him, as a person, as an executive, as a family man. He had two kids, a ten and a thirteen-year-old. Once he told one of the models that his older one was a “bitch.” And so what? Lots of thirteen-year-olds are bitches.
The witness’s manner indicated an irritation with these proceedings. Some twenty-one-year-old twit makes a ludicrous accusation against this decent, accomplished pillar of the community, putting him and his family through hell, etc. - an example of a frivolous lawsuit if there ever was one - and now she (Susan, that’s what I’m going to call this woman, Susan), now Susan has to schlep 2 hours to the city all the way from South Jersey to answer questions designed to smear this good man’s good name.
“You believe you know Mr. Fly pretty well?” asked the plaintiff’s attorney, a good-looking young man in his thirties, but still a pup by trial lawyer standards.
Mr. Fly’s attorney objected, “Asking a lay witness to speculate.”
“You may answer,” instructed the plaintiff’s lawyer.
“Yes, I think so,” answered Susan.
“Did Mr. Fly strike you as a man who would cheat on his wife?”
“Absolutely not.”
“What makes you say that?”
“He just doesn’t. I remember a conversation we had, where he told me he couldn’t understand why men would ever do that kind of thing, cheat on their wives I mean. He said he would never be able to put his children through that.”
“And you believed him when he told you that he never had intercourse with the plaintiff?”
“Absolutely,” she replied with a vengeance.
“Would it change your opinion,” continued the plaintiff’s attorney, “if I told you that his semen was found on Ms. Doe’s, on the plaintiff’s, panties?”
“Objection! Assumes facts…!”
“Have you seen the forensics report counselor…?”
There was some blah blah blah between the attorneys. Then the court reporter reread the question.
After hearing the word semen and panties, Susan’s face changed dramatically. Gone was the expression of irritation and condescension, of stupid confidence. She looked a bit lost now, her eyes a bit wider. Somehow, her face had softened; now she was even attractive.
Everyone waited for her answer.
Susan: “I… I guess so.”


Mr. Fly had very small hands, thick and small. He shook mine when he came in, my hand that is, shook the reporter’s, shook the opposing counsel’s. We were all civil, civilized people, in a luxurious office on the fifty-seventh floor of an East Side high-rise overlooking the river. We could see the U. N., the Queensborough Bridge, Roosevelt Island, with the gutted lunatic asylum out on the tip there. Apparently, Mr. Fly insisted on coming to all the depositions; he had a legal right to do this.
Mr. Fly must have been in his fifties. He wore a smart black suit and black-rimmed eyeglasses, his salt and pepper hair in a crew cut, very middle-class 1950’s, both his hair and his glasses. Physically, he looked like two pears stuck one on top of the other, a tiny little one for his head and the big fat one for his torso, with two matchstick legs stuck into the bottom - like something a third-grader might make in arts and crafts. During testimony Mr. Fly took notes, just as if he were at a business meeting.
“Do you recall where you went to eat, Ms. Chai?” plaintiff’s counsel asked the next witness, she was one of the models.
“It’s Chai.”
“My name, my legal name, is Chai, just Chai. You don’t have to say Miss, it’s just Chai.”
“Alright Miss… Sorry, heh-heh, Chai. Alright, Chai, do you recall where you went to eat?”
“It was a Thai restaurant. I think it was called Thai Tanic. Mr. Fly told us he’d been to Asia many times, Thailand and… some other places… He said Thai Tanic had very authentic Thai food. He was taking us there, he told us, because he wanted us to try real authentic Thai food.”
“Did anything inappropriate happen at the restaurant?”
“What do you… I don’t understand the question?”
“Did Mr. Fly do or say anything at the restaurant, at Thai Tanic, that you found to be inappropriate?”
“I don’t know… inappropriate… They were passing around a picture of me, where my skirt was kind of high up, like a little too high, and he made some comment like… I don’t remember exactly but like - Oh, that’s hot - or something like that.”
“And you found that inappropriate?”
“Well, I mean, I donno. I mean, I guess, yeah, it was kind of creepy.”
“Anything else?”
“When I mentioned that my father went to Thailand a lot for R&R, when he was in Vietnam, Mr. Fly said something that… I don’t know…”
“What did he say, Chai?”
“He said… Mr. Fly said that my father must have had a good time… Because back then there were a lot of servicemen going to Thailand on vacation, like on R&R I mean, and there were a lot of girls there… you know, a lot of prostitutes…”
“So, did you understand Mr. Fly to imply that your father had had a good time with prostitutes when he was in Thailand?”
“And by that did you understand Mr. Fly to imply that your father was having sex with prostitutes when he was in Thailand?”
“Objection! Leading.”
“You may answer.”
“Then what happened?”
Then people started leaving, Chai explained, until it was only her, Mr. Fly and Jane Doe (the plaintiff), to whom Mr. Fly alternately referred to playfully as El, because earlier in the day she had gotten stuck in the hotel EL-evator, and Newbie, because this was her second day on the job. By then the three of them had finished two bottles of red wine. Then Mr. Fly ordered a bottle of plum wine, which he wanted the girls to try. After, they went to the hotel bar, where Jane Doe had two vodka tonics and Chai had the same, while Mr. Fly had several scotch rocks. They all went up in the elevator together. Chai got off at her floor. Jane went up with Mr. Fly to his room.
“Was Jane in any way flirting with Mr. Fly?”
“No, not at all.”
“Did she appear in any way to be interested in Mr. Fly sexually?”
“Not at all,” answered Chai.


Jane Doe’s headshot was on the table. She was a comely, young, twenty-one-year-old blond.
“Did your daughter tell you why she went up to Mr. Fly’s room?” Mr. Fly’s attorney asked Jane Doe’s mother. She was the next witness.
“He told her he wanted her to do more shows and was going to book some flights for her on his computer. His computer was in his room,” answered Mrs. Doe.
Mrs. Doe was a big, thick, working-class Polish-Catholic from Long Island. She was angry, uneducated, and spoke with what was almost a Southey accent, which made her seem vulgar and stupid.
“What happened once they got to his room?” began Mr. Fly’s attorney but cut himself short, “Actually, strike that. First, let me ask you some background questions about your daughter Mrs. Doe. Does your daughter currently live with you and your husband?”
“Has she always lived with you?”
“Except for the two years she was at college.”
“Do you charge her rent?”
“Rent? No, I don’t charge her rent, she’s my daughter.”
“And does her boyfriend live with you too?”
“He lives in my house.”
“Does he have his own bedroom?”
“So, they share a bedroom, your daughter and her boyfriend? Is that right?”
“But they’re not married?”
“Do they sleep together?”
“They live in the same room. What they do there is their business.”
“You’ve never asked her?”
“Objection! Counselor…”
Mr. Fly’s attorney changed the subject: “Your daughter is an actress, is that right?”
According to her mother, Jane Doe has always wanted to be an actress. From the time she was a little girl she took dancing lessons, singing lessons, acting lessons. She performed in every school and church play. She appeared in a number of movies and TV shows, mostly as an extra, but she did have a SAG card. This particular job, with the beverage company, she learned about through an ad in Backstage. In the ad the company asked for a headshot, along with an essay, where the applicant was to invent a superhero that they would like to be and describe the powers that they would have. Jane wrote that her superpowers would be the ability to stop global warming. She got an audition, which she was instructed to attend as her superhero, in costume. “What did I get myself into!” she joked to her mother. But she made the costume, sewed it herself, and went to the audition. There she was asked to perform a number of improvisations. The job wasn’t simply standing around looking sexy, she was told, they were looking for real performers, who were outgoing and friendly; they needed girls who could get the public excited about their beverage. When she was done they gave her the job on the spot. She was very excited. She told her mother she liked the company and the people, the frequent travel, and she felt the job could lead to other interesting opportunities.
“What did your daughter tell you happened when she and Mr. Fly got to his room on the night in question?” asked Mr. Fly’s lawyer.
“He started booking flights for her, on his laptop.”
“Then what happened.”
“Then he raped her.”
“Could you explain your answer?”
“Then he was on top of her, on the bed, raping her.”
“How did he get on top of her? Did he force her down onto the bed?”
“No. She woke up and he was on top of her.”
“She woke up…” followed up Mr. Fly’s lawyer, “did she go to sleep at some point?”
“No. I don’t know. He was booking her flights. The next thing she knew he was… she woke up from him being on top of her, raping her.”
“So at some point she went to sleep?”
“She didn’t go to sleep?”
“Let me understand this: They were at his computer, booking flights, and then he was on top of her?”
“How did he get on top of her?”
“I don’t know. All I know is that she woke up because he was on top of her, raping her.”
“But how could she wake up if she didn’t go to sleep?”
“I don’t understand your question.”
“When was the last time you spoke with your daughter that night?”
“She texted me from the bathroom at the bar.”
“What did she text you?”
“I couldn’t understand it, it was all garbled. It didn’t make any sense.”
“Do you think she was drunk when she texted you?”
“My daughter doesn’t get that drunk.”
“So what do you think the reason was for the text being garbled?”
“I think she was drugged.”
“You think Mr. Fly drugged her?”
“Yes. I think Mr. Fly drugged her. Then he took her to his room and raped her.”
“Do you think it was premeditated?”
“I don’t understand your question.”
“Do you think he planned it ahead of time?”
“I don’t know, ask him.”
“Do you think Mr. Fly is an evil man?”
“I wouldn’t use that word.”
“What word would you use? What do you think of Mr. Fly?”
“I think he’s a dirtbag.”
“And you’d like to get revenge on him, wouldn’t you?”
“I want justice.”
“And what would justice be, in your mind?”
“I can’t answer that. Only God can answer that.”
“Would it be taking him for all he’s worth, would that be justice?”
“It would be a start.”
“You want to ruin his life, don’t you?”
“Yes. The same way he ruined my daughter’s.”
“And you want to get his money?”
“No, I don’t want his money.”
“But your daughter wants his money, doesn’t she?”
“I don’t know. You’ll have to ask her.”
“She didn’t say something to you to the effect that she doesn’t want him just going to jail, but that she wants him, when he comes out, to have nothing? Did she not say that?”
“She might have.”
“And do you agree with that? Do you think his life and his family’s life, his children’s lives, should be ruined?”
“Yes, I do. You reap what you sow. What comes around, goes around.”
“During the last break, in the lobby, your husband said to my client ‘I hope you rot in Hell.’ Do you agree with that?”
“I can’t answer that.”
“Do you think my client should rot in Hell?”
“That’s not for me to decide.”
“Tell me, do you believe your daughter is in any way responsible for what happened to her?”
“In any way responsible? I don’t know what that means?”
“You don’t know what responsible means?”
“Do I think she’s responsible for him raping her? No.”
We took a break.
“This is great,” Mr. Fly’s attorney was saying, more to his client but really to all of us, the court reporter and myself, after Mrs. Doe and her daughter’s attorney left the room.
“Juries hate people like her,” he continued, he seemed a bit flustered, “I can’t wait to show this to the jury, they’re going to hate her. She’s orchestrating this whole thing you know, this whole lawsuit. It’s all her doing.”
Mr. Fly was unperturbed, just as he’d been the whole day, just as he’d been in the lobby, passing by Jane Doe’s father on his way to the men’s room, when her father told him to rot in Hell.


The post coital facts that everyone seemed to be able to agree on were: Immediately after the incident Jane made a hysterical call to 911. The police came to the hotel and questioned Mr. Fly. Susan, the event coordinator, got wind of the situation and rushed downstairs. When she asked Mr. Fly what had happened, Mr. Fly told her that not only did he not have sex with Jane Doe but that he never even touched her. He also told Susan that he wanted to be the one to tell the president of the company about this. He never did however. And after the president found out and confronted Mr. Fly, Mr. Fly immediately resigned. Jane, for her part, went with the police to the station and submitted to a rape examination, as well as to a blood alcohol test, which showed that her blood alcohol level was just over the legal limit for driving. After leaving the police station she took the Amtrak home. The first time she called her mother after the incident was from the train. According to her mother, Jane was very upset on the phone and although she did not explain exactly what had happened, her mother got the idea.


Mr. Fly’s attorney chose not to continue questioning Mrs. Doe after the break. Nor did he choose to question the other two witnesses, Jane’s father and Jane’s boyfriend, both of whom had been subpoenaed and were waiting.
     The deposition was over. The Does and their attorney left. We remained, packing up. Mr. Fly’s lawyer was in a hurry to catch his train. He was no longer in good spirits, the way he had been that morning when I’d first met him.
     “They’ve got no case,” he was saying, putting away his papers. “They’re claiming he gave her a date-rape drug? Are they crazy? One look at this man you can tell that that’s crazy. They want to drag him through the mud, that’s all they want to do. Do you know they subpoenaed 17 of Mr. Fly’s neighbors? You know they wanted to subpoena his kids?! They just want to drag him through the mud, ruin his life and take all his money, that’s all. It’s revenge, plain and simple. And it’s all the mother, she’s the one behind this whole thing.”
     “So what really happened that night?” asked the court reporter.
     “She came up to Mr. Fly’s room,” began his lawyer, “They were booking her flights. She was drunk, the room had two beds, she passed out on one of the beds. Then nobody knows what happened, Mr. Fly doesn’t know what happened…”
     “I don’t know what happened,” said Mr. Fly.
     “Mr. Fly has a history of sleeping disorders, sleepwalking, etc.” his lawyer explained, “and he has no memory of what happened…”
“I don’t know what happened,” confirmed Mr. Fly.
“He could have been reaching over her to get something from the end table and that’s when she woke up,” hypothesized the attorney, “That’s the thing, nobody knows. Nobody knows. Ok, I have to run, catch my train. Thank you for all your help…”
“Thank you,” said Mr. Fly, shaking hands with the reporter, then extending his hand to me.
I shook it.
I made $500 that day. It was just past 6 o’clock, warm and sunny, and I had a play to see that evening, something about a man who follows his principals and as a result gets bludgeoned to death and burned by an angry mob.   

Sunday, May 27, 2012

Death and the Billionaire, notes from a day at the office

I hate being poor and working for assholes (when you’re poor, you’re always working for assholes). I’m sitting here with $27 in the bank, listening to $300 an hour lawyers arguing about paint jobs on 400 foot yachts. Who owns a 400 foot yacht? Larry Ellison, that’s who. Started with nothing, now he has his own navy. He doesn’t care about parking tickets, cable bills, ATM fees, and he doesn’t have some fucker telling him what to do. He doesn’t even have to wipe his own ass if he doesn’t want to, he can have someone do it for him. Or he can walk around shit-stained, who’s going to complain?! He can have slaves, he can have people killed or elected, he can do whatever he wants. In fact, the only thing that equalizes him with ordinary people is death. In this sense death is almost a relief – the race is over and guess what? Nobody won! But time is such a relative concept. It’s moving faster for me now that I’ve passed 40. But for Ellison it must be flying: Not only is he older and busy with his yachts and his business, but there’s just no way he can enjoy all of his money before he dies. So he’s got to be in a hurry.

A few months ago the lottery was up to like $600 million and I bought a ticket. And I imagined winning. And I imagined how much it would upset me if I had to die with so much money. As things stand now, death seems a part of life, something inevitable that nothing can help. But if I had $300 million I think death would really piss me off. How can I be so lucky, so rich, and still die!? It would be unfair. But I did not win and I still work for assholes, and the idea of death seems quite fair.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012


I used to go to old-man bars. And often in these bars there would be some asshole who at some point would say something like this:

“I’ve been married for 20 years and I’m proud to say that I have never been unfaithful.”

Then some other assholes would congratulate him on this accomplishment.

Now (assuming of course that he’s telling the truth), what is there really to be proud of? If this guy never wanted to cheat on his wife and didn’t, where’s the accomplishment? How is it an accomplishment to not do something you don’t want to do? Or is not wanting the accomplishment in itself? Then every one of us who doesn't want to eat vomit, for example, should congratulate ourselves for not eating it, as in: “Thank god I’m not one of those people who’s compelled to eat vomit, I’m really proud of myself for this.” On the other hand, if he wanted to cheat on his wife but managed to stop himself, that’s not something to be too proud of either. I imagine this man, after his encounter with the woman he wanted to but did not fuck, coming home to his wife and being honest with her:

“Honey, let me tell you, this girl was something. She was gorgeous. Gorgeous isn’t even the word; she was mesmerizing. And hot! I mean really hot, you could feel the heat coming off her from yards away. And her body… her body… Jesus…! wow… Wow! Tight, young… you wanna know how young? Ok, now this girl had some nice sized tits, I’m talkin’ at least D-cups, right? You understand what I’m sayin’? She was at least a D-cup. But she was so young that her tits, even though she was at least a D-cup, her tits, they were perky, all by themselves. I know what you’re gonna say – implants! Right? Lemme tell you babe, these were no fucking implants. These tits were as natural as… as natural as… I donno what, but believe me, they were all-fucking-natural. I am telling you, this girl was perfect. Full, pouty lips, baby-doll eyes, legs… my god, I have never seen legs like that… They were like right out of the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue. Ass like an apricot, I could see the dimples through her dress, she had on this silk dress. I gotta be honest with you honey… and I’m only telling you this because I believe honesty is the most important part of a relationship… I mean, we both believe that, right...? Anyways, I gotta tell ya, if I wasn’t married to you, with the kids and the house and your fucking mother in that fucking nursing home that I… that we pay for, I’d fucking jump in her car and let her take me wherever she wanted. I wouldn’t think twice. I’m telling you, if I could have a week with her, just one week, I wouldn’t care what happened to me after that. I could die, I could go to prison for the rest of my life, it wouldn’t matter. I could become deaf, dumb and blind, rolling around in the fucking gutter, it would still be worth it. But I didn’t do anything. And honey, let me tell you, she was clocking me boy… oh yeah, she was clockin’ me. Let me tell you…” whispering, “…my cock got so hard I had to cover my crotch with my lunch pail. I mean, the thing was leaping out of my shorts like it had a will of its own. It was like I had a rocket in my pants aimed at that ass and the countdown was on, 3-2-1 and blast off! But I didn’t do a thing. And I wanted to… God how I wanted to…! But I didn’t. Because I have all this… and I didn’t want to jeopardize it.”

“Thank you sweetheart,” his wife tells him, “That makes me feel really special.”

“Don’t mention it,” he says, cracking open a beer.

Honesty in a relationship is another bit of mythology. If your partner tells you they want you to be honest, what they’re really saying is, they want you to lie better. Most men are more inclined to confess an infidelity than tell their woman that she looks fat in a dress. In my opinion such confessions are usually selfish. You cheated, you feel guilty – too fucking bad, live with it. Don’t go ruining other people’s lives just because you feel like unburdening yourself. I’m not encouraging people to cheat or to lie to the people they love. And if you can live a happy life without doing this then more power to you, you are truly blessed. As for the rest – just grow up! Even though it may not seem like it, people are individuals. And as close as two individuals might feel to one another they are nevertheless very different, with different needs and different rhythms.

Say you meet your ideal man. He’s a perfect match for you in every way… except one. This man has a fetish: he likes to shit on women's faces. He doesn’t need to do this all the time. He can enjoy “normal” sex fine; he enjoys it with you. But his fetish turns him on more than anything else in the world and once in a while he needs to indulge. Now, let's say, for the sake of this hypothetical, that you don't like your face being shat on. Let's say in fact that you can’t imagine anything more disgusting. So, what to do? Should you leave him, this soul mate of yours, this love of your life? Should you forbid him from enjoying the thing that gives him the greatest pleasure? Should you convince him to get a lobotomy? Or should you just let him shit on your face? Or, do you give him the freedom to find someone with whom he can have this experience on occasion, and just make sure he conceals it well enough from you so that you never even suspect?

In all fairness that example might be overreaching. A person with such an extreme fetish, an argument can be made persuasively, would be a very particular kind of person. This type of fetish would be an inseparable part of who that person is, and to be in love with a person like that one would have to be interested in scat, at least to some extent. Fine. Say he has a fetish for enemas, and you find them repulsive. Or let's forget about the ass altogether. Let's say he likes for you to dress up like a Nazi, stick his head in the oven and beat him with a salami. You acquiesce because you love him and want to please him. But when you do it you don't have the conviction he needs to get off. You seem reluctant, unfocused, like you're humoring him, which ruins it. You try to do it more like he wants but find that you simply cannot. Or say it's not even a fetish. Say you are white and he's always wanted to fuck a black girl, or a black guy for that matter, or a midget, whatever. He fantasizes about this, he can't help himself. Or maybe he falls in lust with someone at a party or on vacation and a moment happens. The point is, there will always be something he wants or she wants that you can not provide. If that desire is weak and passing, that's one thing. But what if it's not?       

There are needs that we have which will never bend to our wills. We can try to deny ourselves these, and that’s certainly one way to be; relationships are about compromise, they require effort, sacrifices, etc. But sometimes that just doesn’t work. In this movie “Knocked Up” the wife of Paul Rudd’s character thinks he’s cheating on her. So she tracks him to a strange house, where she discovers him in the basement playing fantasy baseball with a bunch of his nerdy guy friends. She kicks him out of their home over this, angry that he is doing something he likes without her. Of course later she takes him back.  But what if she had walked in on him fucking a sheep? Or the fat Jonah Hill? Would she still have taken him back? It's hard to imagine Paul Rudd playing a leading character with those kinds of secrets. But people do have such secrets and more often than we’d like to think. Chances are that whatever man a woman is with at the moment, she has in her memory a cock or a tongue or a caress or a glance from another man that drove and/or still drives her crazy. And as much as she loves and adores the one she is with, and as faithful as she might be to him, that other guy is still in her mind. Or maybe he’s across the street, across the hall, across the table? And so what if he is?! 

Forget yourself for a moment and let those you love be happy however they wish, however they need to be. Forget what the fortunate say; the lucky are not your friends and in relationships they don't have much wisdom. And forget what the prudes and the impotent say, they are like a gang of blind people trying to make a sighted person feel guilty for enjoying visual beauty. To these people I say, Fuck you; fuck you and the horse you rode in on! You don’t need sex? You don’t need porn or hookers or ugly drunk chicks in bars at last call? Then go back to your happy homes, go back to your basements and train sets. But do not make judgments about things you can’t feel and cannot understand.