Sister Wives or Sister Rivals?

Image via Wikipedia

I’ve been watching the new TLC show Sister Wives and I must say, on the surface, things look really great. Who wouldn’t want to have three moms raising twelve kids and sharing responsibilities? But all you have to do is watch the present wives being interviewed while their husband goes “courting” another woman and you know there will be trouble. All of them were raised in polygamous lifestyles so they know the ins and outs of it all, yet when the new wife claims that their husband is her soul mate and another wife says she feels like she’s losing her best friend, one wonders the wisdom of all this. Who’s serving who here? The man claims he gives each wife what she needs, but where is the unique relationship with one spouse that knows you so intimately all the while claiming that he knows three other women just as intimately? I also think that these women are somewhat in stages of denial, not to mention Mr. Brown, to each other and to themselves, but they are so busy they don’t question it. Or do they? The episode on tonight was full of tears and jealousy, something they believe they need to fight to overcome. But I wonder, to what end? To populate the polygamous movement. However, it’s hard not to like these people. they seem genuinely in love with each other. Fascinating.

Unsurprisingly, this guy is in trouble with the authorities in Utah. Why in the world would you go on TV and invite scrutiny if you knew you were doing something illegal?

Related Articles

• Sister Wives Stars Being Investigated For Felony Bigamy [Tv Watch] (jezebel.com)
• Will Bigamy Investigation Affect the Future of TLC’s Sister Wives? (omg.yahoo.com)
• If Utah Can Go After Sister Wives’ Polygamous Marriage, Can The StateTarget ‘Married’ Gays? (queerty.com)
• Polygamist Kody Brown: ‘Sister Wives’ Worth The Risk (huffingtonpost.com)

Advertisement

Between Spock and McCoy

Image via Wikipedia

As a Star Trek lover (all incarnations) this article resonated with me as a good explanation of the balancing act required between reason and emotion. Massimo Pigliucci writes about the Platonic and Humean theories:

Modern neurobiology tells us that both the Platonic and the Humean programs are doomed to failure. As Antonio Damasio put it in a series of three highly philosophically informed books on the science of consciousness (check this one, for instance), a healthy human mind is one that constantly negotiates between the excesses of reason and those of passion. Too much leaning on one side, and one becomes incapable of empathy, possibly embarking on the destructive route to psychopathology. Too much on the other side, and we join the long history of destructive irrationality against which the Enlightenment was a valiant, if flawed, reaction.

While it’s nice to have modern science validating with facts the idea that a sensible human being ought to try to steer a middle course between the Scylla of too much reason and the Charybdis of too much emotion, it was yet another philosopher who had arrived at that conclusion 24 centuries ago: Aristotle. His virtue ethics is based on the insight that we improve our happiness (in the holistic sense of the ancient Greek eudaimonia) by a combination of reflecting about what we do and why, and practicing virtue so that it becomes second nature. Not reason against emotion struggling for primacy inside us, then, but rather a continuous flow aiming at a dynamic balance between the two. (Before anybody even thinks of making the analogy, let me assure you that I do not have any eastern mysticism or new agey crap in mind.)

I think my own struggles are always between, to be colloquial, the head and the heart. Too much head knowledge and I turn into a raging misanthropist. Too much heart reaction and I turn into a blithering empathetic idiot waxing on about “noble savage-ism” and the wonderful-ness of human beings. Bleck. I dislike both. I’m a big fan of the Aristotelian “mean.”Of course, this philosophy assumes a particular form of binary opposition that I don’t necessarily subscribe to, but if we are dealing in simplistic terms, it’ll do.

I think that what bothers me most about those on the extreme edges of either is an inability to admit there can be a balance. Religious fundamentalism says “Do not listen to your intuition. Listen only to our interpretation of scripture.” They dismiss all forms of inner knowledge and experience (except their own) and their measuring stick is an ancient text. Scientific fundamentalism says, “Do not listen to your heart. Listen only to those facts that can be proved” and their measuring stick is a laboratory. If it hasn’t been verified by two or more people it cannot be real or true. For me the path of true wisdom, or Truth, lies somewhere in between. Intuition, heart, metaphysics, the supernatural …. these  are all terms for those things that cannot be quantified or measured or experimented upon.  A healthy dose of head and heart makes a healthy human being. They don’t have to be in opposition.

Related Articles

• Star Trek Re-Watch: “Bread and Circuses” (tor.com)
• Virtue Ethics and the Situationist Challenge (thesituationist.wordpress.com)

“The True Meaning of Pictures”

Today I watched The True Meaning of Pictures: Shelby Lee Addams’ Appalachia, a documentary about the Appalachian people of Kentucky. I found this documentary strangely compelling. I felt a huge kinship with these people, living poorly by our standards, leading simple lives, and making music to amuse themselves. I think I feel such a kinship because my grandfather’s people come from the hills of Tennessee. Grandpa Brown was a man of few words with a wry sense of humor, and who could fish like nobody’s business. He made his own fishing lures and then stuffed the large fishes he caught. One that he stuffed was displayed on the wall in the house where I grew up. My grandfather played the fiddle and my Grandma played the piano. I remember listening to them both playing hymns together and my aunts and uncles sitting around clapping, singing, or dancing.

My grandmother’s people came from a long line of God-fearing preachers of the independent Baptist variety here in Illinois. Many a night we listened to Grandma talk about the farm she grew up on and the chores she had to do. The tale she tells is of seeing my Grandpa for the first time coming over the hill toward their farm looking for work. He had walked and hitched rides to Illinois from Tennessee. He was 19 and she was 17. They were married a year later. My favorite picture of my grandfather is one where he is sitting on the floor of a porch attached to a cabin in the middle of a forest. I believe it’s the actual cabin where he grew up with his mother and father and sisters and brothers. His knees are drawn up and his arms are resting on his bent knees. He’s wearing a hat and staring off into the distance. The lines of outdoor work are heavily etched into his brown, leathery face. I have a great respect for those who can capture true emotions and lives on film and Addams can do that. When Addams interviews people outside of this culture, there are those who express suspicion, stereotypical attitudes, and fear of the subject. It points out to me how much people fear things outside of their own sense of place and familiarity and the patronizing attitudes that comes from such an attitude. And that works for rich and poor alike. I have a huge respect for documentarian filmmakers who can share the experiences they have lived with us. There are those who wish that the stories could have accompanied the pictures and perhaps we would lose some of the stereotypes if we knew those stories.

I think the reason this film resonated so much with me, by listening to their speech patterns and observing their faith, I can so see myself and my family members in them. There are some that want to politicize the subjects. Oh what education could do, they ponder. It becomes like a media zoo when someone goes into the woods or the midwest or into small towns like a modern-day Margaret Mead and “observe the natives.” Oh what shall we do about poor white folk? Look at those strange beliefs! Oh my God they still slaughter their own animals! We should feel sorry for them! Is it exploitative? When you photograph them, put them on display, and walk through such galleries and thank the powers you no longer believe in that you aren’t that poor, it’s easy to make fun of things you don’t know anything about. It’s easy to romanticize poor lives or imagine that they inbreed or other unnatural things. It’s easy to imagine you have just what they need to “fix” them.

And what shall we say about religion in Appalachia? Addams’ explores the serpent handlers of this area, whose practices are based in the last chapter of Mark. They believe in the signs of the Kingdom of God literally; speaking in tongues, handling serpents, and drinking poison. The folk in this area handles rattlesnakes even though it’s illegal in a public area. Churches are considered public areas, so they have services in their homes. They also drink strychnine. Addams captures the stories behind such beliefs and thankfully provides just the stories others are asking of them. I’m glad he did that, because I can’t say I wouldn’t be one of those who made a snap judgment if I just observed them in a book. When you think of all the popular cultural stereotypes, especially in the movies, about people who live in ‘hollers’ and those in the woods, I can only say I’m glad these folks are unaware that we use their family lives as fun fodder for our movie going habits.

All I could say after watching this and reacting with such a gut reaction is, these people could be my people. Oh, no doubt, these are very, very hard lives. They are dirt poor. They live in shacks, and they are often dirty, missing teeth, or sick with some disease. My family would be considered several rungs up the social ladder from such a life, so I count myself among those that stereotype easily. But as I get older, I have learned to empathize with so much that is different from my world. And I thank those people who have shown me love and encouraged me to do just that. I’m glad I watched this film. I encourage you to do so as well.

Mad Men’s Premier

I finally watched the TiVo’d episode of Sunday’s premier of Mad Men on AMC. It is probably one of the most well written shows on television right now and I had absolutely no expectations going into it. I’m not one of those who likes to endlessly pick apart a program like Lost fans do or even The X-Files and I was a fan of The X-Files. I am not a fan of too many convoluted plot lines, not because I don’t want to think but because no show has ever pulled off a satisfying resolution that made sense from all that went before (exception Battlestar Galactica) No, sometimes I just like to watch a little slice of life and remember the good ol days of the Sixties. NOT. I like to watch for a good story, good acting, and a compelling plot.

Don Draper is one of the most compelling characters I’ve seen on television, but the one who really fascinates me is his wife, Betty. June Cleaver she is not although she would fit right into that kaffeeklatch on surface.  What fascinated me this time around at the beginning of Season 4  is that one doesn’t really know Betty Draper. We have no way of knowing what she thinks, what she wants, or if she even thinks about anything at all when she sits and smokes her cigarettes. We cannot get inside her head. She is a character on which all of us housewives can project our feelings. The way Betty Draper treats her children is interesting. Betty comes from privilege, which is telling, and every time one of her children needs something she is dismissive and is often what parents now would call abusive. This is the “be seen and not heard” parent. Betty would be happy if her kids sat in front of the TV all day and left her alone. In a way, she’s almost like a piece of furniture in the Draper household; good to look at and admire and to demonstrate functionality.

On Sunday’s episode, Betty is at a Thanksgiving dinner in her new husband’s home. Her son and daughter are with her and everyone is trying to be nice but the atmosphere is extremely awkward and tense because of the new arrangements. Betty’s daughter Sally has the audacity, when asked, how she likes her food and Sally says that she doesn’t like it at all. Of course Betty is appalled that Sally said anything out loud and forces her to eat her food, which Sally promptly throws up on her plate.  Betty is even more appalled and drags her daughter out of the room by the arm. Obviously she’s not embarrassed to be doing that in public.

Ah, the memories! Betty is certainly not a good parent, but who was in the pre-historic Sixties? Like Sally, there were many awful dinners at our house growing up. Our step-monster (e.g. step-father) would force us to eat the grossest things (we thought) and one time, after being forced to eat all of my portion of disgusting cow’s liver, I threw up all over him. That was a very satisfying experience. Did I get in trouble for that? You bet your ass I did, even though it was his fault. To this day I have never ever touched organ meats again nor have I ever forced my kids to eat anything. I mean what message does that send?

Mad Men is a great show because it doesn’t whitewash the Sixties and it presents people in all their good moments and bad, just like life. Of course, if it were exactly like real life we would have many varieties of women and men in all sizes and shapes, but we don’t and have to start somewhere. For that, we need to watch re-runs of The Sopranos. But Michael Weiner does try. I’ll give him that.  As long as Mad Men makes me think about real life and all its gritty reality, I will continue to watch it.

Everyone’s Talking About “Lost”

I gave up on the TV series Lost three seasons ago because I found it hopelessly convoluted. However some people invested a lot of their time watching it and analyzing it. I know the rudiments of what went on in the plot so I won’t hazard a guess as to what it was all about, but Rev. Jeremy has as good an explanation as I’ve read anywhere about what it all means. Makes sense to me.

Justified

Best new show on television right now:  Justified. Timothy Olyphant doing what he does best. An officer and a gentleman. U. S. Marshall Raylan Givens returns to his hometown in Kentucky and ends up dispensing his kind of calm, reasonable justice on the townsfolk. Never did a guy make a cowboy hat look so good. 🙂

Of Mad Men and Conspiracy Theories

I watch entirely too much television. How do I know this? Because I can’t seem to read enough books that I want to that’s how I know. I have stacks and stacks of books in my place and haven’t read half of them. So, some television shows have to go to make more reading time. It is indeed a hypnotic box that keeps us transfixed in front of it for no good reason. However, that said, I cannot give up good quality TV no matter what beckons me and there are only 24 hours in a day and 7 of those I spend sleeping and 8 working. So what am I watching and what have I given up? Let’s list those I’ve given up first:

Survivor: I’ve watched this show since it started. This is what… the 17th season? Unreal. I mean, how different can each season be? You watch ruthless people win through lying and manipulation and you watch the others lose because they weren’t willing to compromise their principles or friendships for $1,000,000. It’s the same thing over and over. What the losers don’t seem to realize is that it’s just a game and if you don’t play by the rules of the game, you’ll lose. You’d think someone would be learning this by now. The last straw was watching this season’s premier. Every season they seem to want to find the most unlikeable characters they can so people will watch who they LOVE to hate. I was sitting there listening to the latest blowhard talk about how smart he was and how dumb all the women were and how easily manipulated and I said, enough is enough. Here’s one woman who’s not falling for that again. End of story. I haven’t watched it since.

Lost: Like The X-Files, I thought I would watch this to the end; because I like Science Fiction and because I like mysteries. However, the mistake I made in watching the X-Files to the end was assuming that Chris Carter would give us some answers. Instead, I don’t think he knew any of the answers and just strung us along and made things up as he went along. However it was vastly entertaining and each episode pretty much stood on it’s own. Lost however grew tiresome very quickly. After watching two seasons, I wasn’t willing to take this trip any longer. I am convinced J.J. Abrams has no idea where this show is going or where it went in the last couple of seasons. He did an EXCELLENT job on the last Star Trek movie!! However, Lost is no longer on my list of “must see TV.”

The Mentalist: (Tuesday nights at 9 p.m.) I gave this show a whole season because I like the lead character played by Simon Barker. He’s amusing. But I can’t seem to work up any liking for Robin Tunney’s character. The plots aren’t compelling enough; not that they have to feature murders and gore. Mad Men supplies none of that and delivers the goods week after week. It’s just not substantive enough for me.

Shows that I continue to watch:

The Amazing Race: (Sunday nights at 7 p.m.) This is a fun show that uses my favorite game format: a scavenger hunt. The values promoted are worthy; play dirty and it usually comes back to bite you in the end. Take your time and read the clues and you’ll be fine. Rush too quickly and sloppily and something’s going to go awry. Plus you get to learn a little bit of history and see some cities along the way. Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego for grown-ups.

Ghost Hunters: (Wednesday nights at 8 p.m.) Do I know it’s probably fake? Sure. But just the fact that there are no psychics on these hunts, that they have “scientific” equipment and that they are trying to debunk evidence and do many times, is enough to keep me watching. Oh and Jason and Grant and Steve are just the type of guys I’d love to hang out with especially while visiting spooky places. What more fun is there?

Supernatural: (Thursday nights at 8 p.m.) Well there are only two reasons why I watch this show at my age: Jenson Ackles and Jared Padalecki. ’nuff said.

The Closer: (Monday nights at 9 p.m.) I love the whole cast of this show. They work well together. However, Kyra Sedgwick’s character can be annoying sometimes and there are moments that even I want to slap her. The plots are standard police procedural and even though the whole premise was ripped off from the UK’s excellent Prime Suspect series starring Helen Mirren, it’s interesting enough to garner a TiVo slot.

Project Runway: (Thursday nights at 9 p.m.) The chief thing going for this show is to see how people can creatively design clothing and make it out of fabric. Fascinating. I can’t create a paper bag, let alone a dress. Oh and let’s not forget Tim Gunn! “Five minutes people!!”

Dancing With the Stars: (Monday and Tuesday nights at 7 & 8 p.m.) The judging is snarky and inconsistent. The stars only have nominal talent sometimes.  So why do I watch? Because I want to do that. I love dancing and seeing someone blossom into a good dancer is fun and rewarding.  The elimination shows are a complete waste of time however. Just post it on the internet already!

My new husband 🙂

Mad Men: (Sunday nights at 9 p.m.) Probably THE MOST intelligent show on television right now. This last episode should be Emmy material for next year because the underlying themes are so complex and intertwined and the actors so flawless in their delivery that you actually believe Sterling Cooper ad agency exists out there in an alternate time-line somewhere. Brilliant, brilliant is all I can say.

And speaking of conspiracy theories….Sadly, the books I managed to read recently I can count on one hand: The Lost Symbol by Dan Brown is only worth throwing with the other hand. I can only say the ending did not justify the plot or to put it in fictional terms: Did I have to wade through this stupid plot to get to THIS???  Ugh.  Someone let his own positive press over Angels and Demons get to him. Kind of like Book 6 of that other series people are wild about. Mr. Potter or Twilight whose popularity still stuns me as its horribly written and the main character is a stalker let alone a vampire!

On the good side, I read Ruth Rendell’s Adam and Eve and Pinch Me. (I hate it that some books are only available in the UK, like Barbara Erskine’s books. Why?) Anyway, Rendell’s was available, so I picked this up over there and finished it very quickly, which is saying something. Ruth Rendell is always, always a good read. I also did NOT know that Ruth Rendell wrote under the name Barbara Vine, whom I also like. Go figure. Why do people do that? Dean Koontz’s last Odd Thomas book Odd Hours wasn’t as good as some of his others either. I suppose some authors can’t be consistently good. Or maybe it’s just me and my tastes have changed. That’s probably it.  I seem to have less patience with some that are mildly books and more patience with some that makes my brain hurt. Perhaps I get a sense that time is precious and shouldn’t be wasted on such things? Age. Hmmm. Sometimes we have to let go of a few things to make room for others. This is a great time to do some letting go and to hunker down for winter. Gather the acorns, so to speak.