"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values" by Robert M. Pirsig

Yes!  I read a book.  It was hard.  Really hard.  This novel hooked me in the first few pages but I had to take repeated "brain rests" along the way.  It isn't really a book about zen.  It does have a good bit of motorcycle maintenance in it, but that information is provided as metaphor more than for practicality.  While most people remember the title, it is the subtitle which has the most importance here.  So what is this book about?  After 406 pages all I can say is that I'm not really sure.  It's about a lot of things.  It's about nature, about a road-trip, about a father trying to connect with his son, and with himself and his past.  It's about philosophy and it is about madness.  Pirsig presents this tome as a semi-real version of events surrounding a road-trip he made in the early 1970s.  He frames the narrative as a "Chautauqua", a kind of entertaining learning experience, and internal monologues become lectures to explain and define his theories.  He goes deep into the roots of philosophy, drawing from it the conclusion that life is about "Quality", something we know exists but cannot define.  Using a wealth of knowledge the book had me scrambling to learn more about the early Greeks and modern day theorists on the nature of truth, goodness, and more.  It was very deep reading.  I had to read passages over and over then set the book down to think about what I had just read.  There were tremendously insightful sections and parts which were nearly undecipherable.  Pirsig's observations of the world around him and need to understand the underpinnings of existence could be exhausting.  They did, in fact, drive the brilliant author to an insane asylum in the early 1960s where he received electroshock which effectively wiped some of his memories of the fanatical breakdown he suffered while trying to prove his thesis over that of academia of the 1950s.  While the zealotry he expresses in his "new church of reason" can be hard to take, his reflections also include tremendous insights.  Take this passage, which is possibly more relevant today than when it was written.  He notices a good deal of loneliness in people of the big cities, and says "Technology is blamed for a lot of this loneliness, since the loneliness is certainly associated with the newer technological devices ... but I hope it's been made plain that the real evil isn't the objects of technology but the tendency of technology to isolate people into lonely attitudes of objectivity."  When he talked of "truth" winning out over "good" in the minds of Greek philosophers I couldn't help but wonder what he would think about the United States at this time, when "truth" has taken quite the hit.  It was a hugely engaging and slightly frustrating book, and one I might return to someday, as I may want to start over with an understanding of what it is trying to say.  In the meantime, I think I need to bone up on some basic philosophy to help with the context.

"Won't You Be My Neighbor?"

In typical Monday morning quarterbacking, a good number of folks felt that this documentary should have won this year's Oscar over "Free Solo".  Having not seen any of the other nominees I can't say which documentary film should have won, but I do know that this film was very, very good.  Beyond telling you about the subject, Fred Rogers, and revealing several things I didn't know, there was something to be said for the style of the project, which tried to echo Fred Rogers' personality and beliefs.  In that sense it was a quiet film, one which was gentle and took time.  In addition to the actual footage, some of it behind the scenes, it relied heavily on the comments of people who had worked on "Mister Rogers' Neighborhood" for decades.  It says something that these people not only worked on the show for many years but still had good things to say.  When Fred Rogers talks about the importance of just being still, the camera stays on him and the filmmakers allow the audience, too, to take a moment to just reflect.  Much like the famed children's series, this documentary isn't too splashy and one viewer who watched it with me fell asleep.  Unfortunate as there is a larger issue here -- an America where all of the values Fred Rogers championed have fallen apart.  At one point, where there is an exploration of the rumor about his sexuality, it becomes clear that the modern world simply doesn't seem to have room for a decent guy like this.  And that is kind of tragic.

A Tale of Two Movies

 "Love, Simon" and "Boy Erased" were both released in 2018, both are based on books, and both deal with young men who struggle with their identity as homosexual men.  "Love, Simon" is pure fiction while "Boy Erased" is based on a memoir by Garrard Conley, who was placed in a gay conversion program by his conservative minister father.  Both films are good and tend to strike at the heart-strings.  "Love, Simon" however, is more of a slice of life with a fair amount of humor and day-to-day pathos.  "Boy Erased" is darker and involves rape and suicide.  I liked "Love, Simon" better as I felt like it was intriguing to explore the idea that homosexuality is still an issue in these supposed open times.  The movie rang very true for me in terms of how teens think and act, with complexity in the relationships between the four core friends.  I also didn't mind the lighter tone.  I really don't think everything of value has to be heavy handed.  There was a point in YA lit where every gay character faced abuse or death ("Annie on My Mind" for instance).  "Love, Simon" is far past that time, making the struggle for sexual identity a normal right of passage and not a devastating issue which will destroy one's life.  It looks at the lead character holistically, a young man who doesn't just have a secret, but deals with the fallout of some poor decisions, as well.  "Boy Erased" is compelling, almost entirely due to the unspoken struggles lead character Jared faces, played extremely well by Lucas Hedges.  The script and editing, however, are a bit staccato, and we veer from one scene to another, some of which are flashbacks in no particular order, making it difficult to stay emotionally in tune with the damage being done by the conversion therapy institute.  For those inclined towards liberal sympathies this film will create some outrage but I couldn't help but think a better produced film would have made the points more organically rather than the heavy-handed efforts here.  It should be noted that the people I watched this film with preferred it to "Love, Simon" but that is the beauty of film.  It is a subjective art.  Select one, or both, movies and compare them yourself.

"Girls"

What if ... What if "Sex and the City" was remade for today?  What if it featured the women not in their settled careers of 30 somethings but of the really early years, in their 20s, when jobs were hard to get and even harder to keep?  What if they weren't size 0 fashionistas but real women who focus more on what's going on in their insides than what they are wearing on the outside.  This is "Girls" the Lena Dunham series about a group of young women trying to navigate the world -- work and love -- in the NYC of the modern age.  A clear homage to "Sex and the City" there is plenty of sex and lots (and lots and lots) of focus on Adam Driver's penis.  I enjoyed season one and the "real" of it all but didn't make it too far into season two.  Being a good bit past the daily angst of youth I got a little burned out on Hannah's continuing need to be involved with a man who is clearly not good for her (Mr. Big, anyone?)  There is also a lot of nudity on the part of Ms. Dunham, which began as revolutionary and freeing but ended up feeling gratuitous.  That being said, it's a great show and has a lot to say about women, their roles, their lives.  This is the complicated, messy stuff and Lena Dunham doesn't shy away from making one or more of the characters fairly unlikeable as they swing through the emotional rollercoaster of trying to figure out their path.  A good addition to the new definition of female as Hollywood struggles to figure us out.

"What We Do in the Shadows"

In anticipation of the new FX series, I watched the 2014 New Zealand film by creators Jemaine Clement and Taika Waititi.  Hysterically funny in a dry, kind-of "off" way, the original film focuses on a group of vampire roomates and their familiar being filmed, presumably, by a documentary film crew.  A mockumentary of sorts it induces the mundane into the profane creating humor through dissonance.  Not lacking in blood and gore it is hard to take it seriously given the deadpan line deliveries by characters to the camera in the midst of the carnage.  It struck me as the kind of Monty Python humor which ranges from chuckles to outright guffaws depending on the hour of the night when you are watching it.  The first episode of the TV show keeps closely to the premise and maintains the low-budget look.  Actors are equally committed to their over-the-top droll vampire characters, complete with ridiculous accents and big hair.  It was funny although seemed less-so than the movie.  That may be the difference in format.  Thirty minutes is a significant change from two hours.  I will continue to watch as they find their footing, but I'm likely going to save it for late nights when I'm a little punchy anyway.  If you are looking for something which is a COMPLETE ESCAPE from everything real, go for this. 

"The Village"

NBC has come up with a "This is Us" follow-up pairing.  "The Village" is a hanky-inducing sob-fest about various members of a small apartment building in New York.  SPOILER ALERT  Characters are what you might expect.  There is the mother with the pregnant teen daughter, played by the too-pretty Michaela McManus and the somewhat too old to be playing a teen, Grace Van Dien.  There is the disabled, troubled vet played by able-bodied Warren Christie.  There is a law student who brings his mouthy grandfather home to live with him.  There is a cop who loves a woman who is an undocumented immigrant.  When she is taken by ICE, he takes in the woman's kid.  Lastly, there is the oft-under appreciated Lorraine Toussaint, the social worker who holds it all together for everyone else but is hiding her own health crisis.  It lacks the personal touch of "This is Us" but has potential.  The show walks the line between truly good drama and soap-opera pablum.  Not sure which side it will land on but l am more than happy to watch for now. 

"Hidden Figures"

Finally got to see the movie everyone was talking about ... from two years ago.  Such is my life.  Like most "historical fiction" this film takes huge liberties with, well, the truth, but succeeds anyway given that it has a stellar cast and a good number of "truths" to explore beyond the actual history.  The truth here is that women, black women, black women in the sciences, had a horrendous time finding acceptance in the 20th century.  It wasn't just one battle, it was many ongoing ones.  The men in their lives didn't understand how a woman could work, much less in a field dominated by males.  The female co-workers were often secretarial types resentful of any woman, particularly a black woman, being elevated to a position of power or authority.  Being able to share in the office coffee pot at a time when there were separate water fountains or use a convenient bathroom were symbolic of the tiny wars being waged across America on a daily basis.  Favorites Taraji P. Henson and Octavia Spencer do a tremendously good job walking that impossible line -- being subservient and unoffensive even though their characters knew better than those above them in the work hierarchy.  Janelle Monae, newer to the screen, does a solid job portraying a woman whose is determined to reach for her dream, no matter how much the bar is moved.  Yes, there are a couple of "white saviors" here.  Such is the ugly truth.  When a group is being put down, it takes at least a few of the privileged class to "see" what is happening (or "get woke" in modern parlance) and address it for others to rise up.  Don't let that fool you, however.  These are women with voices.  They may speak quietly but they have a strength of conviction which each of them unfailingly commits to.  Although many of the major events of the film are known history there are still chills and tears.  Worth watching.

Sad

Bunching together a number of reviews for new shows as few are worth an individual mention.  Bottom line:  save the space on your DVR.

"Proven Innocent" is a show about a woman who was convicted for murder, served time, and was then exonerated.  Along the way she became a lawyer and now works for a law firm committed to freeing those who are wrongfully incarcerated.  If the plot seems familiar, it is.  There is little originality here and the show depends on politically tinged, emotional plot-lines which only occasionally hit home.  The actors seem mostly irrelevant with the heavy-hitting morality playing throughout.  For instance, there is Rachel Lefevre in the lead role.  Her talents are wasted.  She plays a whiny, unlikeable character bent on revenge.  Kelsey Grammar is her mustachioed villain and all the sidekicks are fairly forgettable, with the exception of chameleon-like actor Vincent Kartheiser, who's investigator character is just ... weird.

"The Enemy Within" borrows so many plots from recent shows I looked twice to make sure the set wasn't one from another FBI/CIA drama.  Even the actors are re-hashed.  Lead actor Jennifer Carpenter played a federal agent in "Limitless" and co-star Morris Chestnut seems to have patented the law and order guy who has a soft side.  The show could survive all of this if not for a dour, dark production which leaves one more depressed than entertained.  I'm hanging on to see if they find their way but I pretty much doubt it.

"Fam"  Despite a stellar cast this is unfortunately one of those cookie-cutter sitcoms with bad writing, bright lights and overacting.  There isn't a drop of reality here.  You would think networks would have learned by now (MASH, Big Bang Theory, Mom) that good comedy needs to be anchored in something.  One exception -- Odessa Adlon is a breakout star.

"The Fix"  Marcia Clark has had a top-shelf career but clearly regrets her one historic loss -- the prosecution of O.J. Simpson.  This show has a great cast, good writing and strong direction but the over-arching self-flagellation and wishful "re-do" through arch plot development kills what could be a decent show.

    

"Whiskey Cavalier"

A fun, frothy, action/comedy/romance show for the Spring.  This is the show ABC has been trying, and failing, to make for a few years now.  They finally hit gold with the casting, a better timeslot, and catchy, engaging dialog.  Scott Foley plays a great comedic sideman to Lauren Cohan's cranky isolationist.  Sidekicks Ana Ortiz ("Ugly Betty"), Tyler James Willams ("Everybody Hates Chris"), Vir Das and TV veteran Josh Hopkins as an irritating philanderer round out a team which bats the one-liners around like pros.  It's a show worth watching.  Do listen to the back-and-forth, which contain enough jabs to keep you smiling through repeats.

I Am the Night

'Tis the season for mid-season debuts.  "I Am the Night" is a six part miniseries based on the book by Fauna Hodel, called "One Day She'll Darken."  It is a biographical tale of the grand-daughter of Dr. George Hodel, a prime suspect in the Black Dahlia murder.  Fauna, raised by a black woman and told she was biracial, discovers her past and some disturbing mysteries when, as a young woman, she tried to piece together her parentage.  Possibly a child created by incest between Dr. Hodel and his daughter, or a child resulting from the rape of her mother in a mental health hospital, Fauna lived a difficult life, as did her mother, Tamar Hodel.  The novel was a way of addressing her abusive childhood and the unique perception she had on race in America.  The miniseries makes a muddle of it all.  Ignoring the facts it focuses on a fictional reporter, an ex-Korean War soldier who is hooked on drugs and gets beat up pretty much every week.  Additional fictional characters, and events, are used to try to beef up the narrative but fail.  Episodes one through four are simply boring and the over-the-top violence and creepiness introduced in episodes five and six do nothing for the narrative.  It's a shame.  You have great actors -- India Eisley and Chris Pine commit to their roles despite inconsistencies and a lack of script-based motivation, but they do so in a fog of film noir atmosphere which drowns out the possibly provocative conversation about race in the 1960s and sexual abuse by family members.  Written by the husband of Patty Jenkins (the brilliant director of Wonder Woman), and directed by Ms. Jenkins, it is all atmosphere and no meat, simply a meandering tale full of sound with no fury, signifying nothing at all.  Sorry I spent six hours on it.