Spontaneous Musings

1. Henry Kissinger Died at 100

My reaction when I heard it on the news this morning - was, oh, finally. I was beginning to think he was going to live forever. (Although, I know people who are still alive and kicking at 109.) Also, to be honest? I kept forgetting he was still alive. Every once in a while - someone would mention he was alive or doing something, and I'd think - wait, still? (Someone on one of the fanboards I was on - actually interned or clerked for him and knew him. Someone posted on Blue Sky - that on Blue Sky everyone was posting celebratory messages about him dying (the proverbial dancing on the grave bit) while on Linked In - all the foreign service/diplomatic employees were posting pictures of themselves with him and how they'd known him.)

I went on Blue Sky, and dear lord, Blue Sky is brutal. I didn't realize how many people truly hated that man. And worse felt the need to vent their hatred towards him. Let's just say - over a thousand posts stating pretty much "ding dong, he'd dead, hurray" ....

This type of venting can't be healthy for the human psyche? Can it?

The man is dead. (Granted I'd probably be dancing if it were the Doofus, so I get it.). But, he was 100 years of age. Hating him now isn't going to change anything or help anyone he hurt.

See? This is why I'm staying away from the news. I have enough people at work I want to smack. I do not need to add to it.

I wonder sometimes if social media or media in general is healthy? All this information fired at us twenty-four seven can't be healthy? Can it?

2. Has anyone seen the film The Blue Beetle - is it worth watching? (It's currently streaming on MAX, hence the question.)

Also did anyone see Killers of the Flower Moon? Is it worth checking out on Apple TV or Disney + when and if it arrives?

3. Barbra Streisand Memoir. The Streisand I keep misspelling. Mainly because I struggle with the i before e rule that has been ingrained in my head. Stupid English Grammar rules.

Anyhow, apparently Elliot Gould and Streisand did not separate or divorce over anything so silly as cheating, no it was their separate interests and lifestyle choices. Gould got into pot, drinking and drugs in the late 1960s and early 70s (this was around the time he did MASH). And was living in Soho, NY with the Bohemians. Barbra was not into drugs - she only did pot once with Peter Sellers and Brit Eckhardt, and spent most of the time giggling. She wasn't enthused, and didn't understand why people needed it to escape. Streisand states she didn't understand the appeal of alcohol, smoking, drugs or any of those things. Streisand was an obsessive compulsive personality not an addictive one. I've noticed a lot of folks fall into two groups - addictive, and obsessive-compulsive. Most people appear to be one or the other, or along the spectrum between them?

Oh Streisand stated something interesting about the Oscars, the year she won. That the winners didn't always make a lot of sense. She said, 2001 wasn't even nominated, and Oliver was the winner. Oliver?

Here were the nominees..
Oliver - won.
Funny Girl – Ray Stark, producer
The Lion in Winter – Martin Poll, producer
Rachel, Rachel – Paul Newman, producer
Romeo and Juliet (Franco Zeferelli's) – John Brabourne and Anthony Havelock-Allan, producers

Consider this was also the year of 2001: a Space Odyssey, Rosemary's Baby, A Lion in Winter, Planet of the Apes, The Thomas Crown Affair, The Odd Couple, Night of the Living Dead, Charly, Bullit, The Boston Strangler,

I long ago stopped taking the Oscars seriously - when Gandhi and Titantic won. Also, when I began to forget who won.

4. A Haunting on the Hill by Elizabeth Hand

So far very similar to most of Hand's works, and Donna Tartt's Secret History for that matter. In that it is about a bunch of artists or a group of thirty-something friends who decide to rent out a house...or visit a place...or do a ritual...and things go wonky.

I'm enjoying it. But that's because Hand likes subtle psychological horror as opposed to full throttle horror. I find psychological horror scarier and more thrilling in books than overtly descriptive horror. Stephen King didn't scare me that much - I'm among the few that wasn't scared by his novel The Shining, the Stanely Kubrick version on the other hand..

Hand's good at suggesting things, and emphasizing creepiness. The downside of Hand, is she likes to write about whiny upper middle artists. But this is true of approximately 85% of the literary published writers out there. My father used to bemoan the fact that none of them knew how to write about anything other than academia or struggling writers with money. They couldn't write about work or what it was like. And after a bit, one got tired of reading about whiny academics.

I used to argue with him about this - but he's not wrong. The contemporary literary canon is unfortunately full of this sort of thing. Philip Roth, Updike, Richard Russo, Hand, etc all like to write about it. The other favorite professions of literary writers and contemporary fiction or contemporary romance writers are fashion editors, magazine editors (although that's not easy now - since magazines are dying out), journalists, publishers, book store owners, chefs, and FBI agents.

Hand at least jumped away from the academics, a little bit, to the artists and theater. Although the main protagonist, Holly, is a college drama professor, who has gotten a grant and a sabbatical to put together her play. And her friends or co-horts, are a sound guy/actor/DJ, a chanteuse who writes and sings her own music, and an older actress. The story is about Holly renting Hill House (yes that Hill House) for two weeks with her friends to work on a play about Witches. Not realizing that Hill House is bewitched itself.

Hand likes witches, and pagan rituals. So this version of the tale swings more in that direction than in the direction of ghosts - which is kind of innovative.