inTraffik.com article

A new "What I'm Listening To" list of mine is now up on inTraffik.com. Go check it out if you're interested.

LA Times Book Festival: Sunday Part 4

Overview 4

(Note: I took above photo just to remind myself of this specific retail booth.)



I did buy some books. For personal pleasure, I bought Ernest Freeberg’s book called “Democracy’s Prisoner: Eugene V. Debs, the Great War, and the Right to Dissent.” I also bought William Cohan’s book called “House of Cards: A Tale of Hubris and Wretched Excess on Wall Street.” I probably could have gotten these books cheaper on Amazon.com; but at the Festival of Books I was able to get the authors to sign them. It isn’t like it is some big thing to get an author to sign your book (unless it is Stephen King or someone on that level), but I just enjoy having a signed book none the less. As a gift, I bought William J. Kelly’s book called “Smogtown: The Lung-Burning History of Pollution in Los Angeles.” I saw all three authors in various panel discussions. There was an additional book I bought where I didn’t see the author on a panel. I bought a cooking book, which I also plan to give away as a gift. Interestingly, one of the books I bought had a cash discount, while another was 20% off. I do believe I’ve always had to pay full price for books at the Festival of Books. (Economy issues perhaps.)

Final thoughts regarding the two day weekend. As mentioned in previous blogs on this topic, I do believe that this year’s event was slimmed down both in number of retail booths, name recognition of panelists and number of attendees. Honest truth; however, I loved it all – especially the great weather. I heard a married couple mention that they always make sure that they leave the weekend around the LA Times Festival of Books open, devoid of vacations and such. I always attempt to make sure my calendar is also clear for this weekend.

Sunday, Panel 3

The third and final panel I attended was at 3:00 p.m. It was titled “Michael J. Fox in conversation with Mary McNamara.” The moderator was Mary McNamara. The panelist was Michael J. Fox.

Stolen bios are:

Mary McNamara. McNamara has worked for the Los Angeles Times for 19 years, writing extensively about the inner workings of Hollywood. She lives in Los Angeles with her husband and three children. “Oscar Season” is McNamara’s debut novel.

Michael J. Fox. Fox’s acting successes include “Back to the Future” and his award-winning role in “Spin City.” He launched the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. Fox is the author of the bestseller “Lucky Man” and the newly published “Always Looking Up: The Adventures of an Incurable Optimist.”

Fox stated that acting is fun to do. He can’t do it as often, because of logistical issues versus creative ones. He no longer has certain tools available to him. He still does occasional acting. For example, the current story arch on Rescue Me. For Spin City, his last season was difficult. He’d have to use a pen to help prevent his hands from shaking – distract his brain. He said that knowing what he now knows, he could probably have continued on Spin City for a couple more seasons.

He mentioned that by nature he is an optimist. He even has the gene for it. His fight with Parkinson’s forces him to deal with uncertainty. He never knows how his body will react to the medication. He must be grateful for the moment. He stated that his optimism has lead him to understand that he doesn’t have any choice regarding Parkinson’s, but he does have other choices that he can make.

He had the first symptoms of Parkinson’s in 1990. He was diagnosed in 1991. It took him a couple years to accept it. He told no one. As the disease progressed, he no longer could hide it so he had to make an announcement before rumors started.

He also talked about how he sat down with Katie Couric in 2006. Rush Limbaugh had attacked him for faking the extent of his disease. He mentioned that there was a moment where Couric reached over to help him with his tie. He first thought it might be considered condescending, but then remembered that Couric’s father has Parkinson’s and that Couric was showing empathy.

My Comments: I wasn’t sure what to expect from this panel. I will say it was very moving. I grew up loving Michael J. Fox via Family Ties and Back to the Future. My interest in economics actually started via Family Ties. (Who says television isn’t good for you? I wonder if I would have such an interest in economics if it wasn’t for Family Ties.) I never really watched Spin City, but that doesn’t mean I still didn’t love Michael J. Fox. It was awesome seeing him. It was obvious throughout the interview that the disease is impacting him.

During the first few minutes in the interview, someone jumped up and screamed, “Is there a doctor in the house?” At first, I thought it was a protester, but it wasn’t. A woman needed medical attention. The interview stopped for awhile, but the woman started feeling better and asked the interview to continue. The medics did come for the woman. She probably fainted or some other exhaustive reaction.

Fox seems like a very approachable person. He was more than willing to sign stuff for a fan in the auditorium as well as accepted a fan’s write-up on him.

There was a sign outside the signing area that mentioned that Fox would only sign books for the first 60 individuals who got there and that these individuals needed to have a ticket from the panel discussion. This is an attempt to make sure that people who actually go to a panel can also get a book signed by the larger stars of the event. I say an attempt, because I don’t think it actually works that way. I remember for Julie Andrews, hearing someone get on a cell phone after the event and asking if the other person was in line, because the panel had ended. Here’s what I think people do. They get a ticket and then they don’t go to the event. I think they just camp out in front of the signing booth. I think a slight revision is needed where tickets are marked off in some fashion upon entrance to the auditorium – perhaps with a random stamp – for those who are considering getting a book signed. This way, it prevents people from camping out and also prevents other strategies such as getting two tickets and one person seeing the discussion while having a friend outside waiting in line. (This might not work either, as it might slow down the line, but it is a thought.) Of course, I’d have loved to have gotten a signature from Julie Andrews or Michael J. Fox, but it wasn’t going to happen. For Julie Andrews, last year, I was around 105 where you needed to be in the first 100. For Michael J. Fox, I walked over, but I doubt I was even close.

LA Times Book Festival: Sunday Part 3

Overview 3

For the LA Times Festival of Books the price of parking was $8 on Saturday and $9 on Sunday. I can’t figure that one out. One thing missing this year from the Festival was the various colored banners that helped direct people to the signing booths. I personally didn’t need those banners, but I wonder if they were useful for those who were new to the event and wanted to get their books signed.

I saw a couple walking along. A coin slipping out from one of their pockets. They looked down at the coin and continued to walk on. A young kid ran over and picked up the coin. He then returned it to the couple. That kid is one honest kid. I hope he remains that way.

There was a booktv.org tape that played before a number of the panels. I think it was the same tape from last year. It got so irritating after awhile.

Back to Saturday. I was walking pass one of the signing booths and saw a long line of folks waiting to get their books signed. I checked out what book people were carrying with them. It was “Kiss My Math: Showing Pre-Algebra Who’s Boss” by Danica McKellar. I wanted to see if I could see her so I looked over to the tent. There was a blond posing for the cameras. I was like, “That can’t be Danica.” It was actually Tori Spelling. I guess Alyssa Milano was also signing books in the area, but I didn’t see her. She might not have arrived yet. It was nice to know that so many people had McKellar’s book versus Spelling’s. Just my two cents.

Sunday, Panel 1

The first panel I attended was at 11 a.m. It was titled “Climate in Crisis.” The moderator was Jon Wiener. The panelists were Stephan Faris, Edward Humes, William J. Kelly and Daniel Sperling.

The stolen bios are as follows:

Jon Wiener. Wiener is a contributing editor of the Nation magazine and a history professor at UC Irvine. He’s also written for the Los Angeles Times Book Review, the New Republic and the New York Times Magazine. His most recent book is “Historians in Trouble: Plagiarism, Fraud and Politics in the Ivory Tower.”

Stephan Faris. Faris is a journalist who specializes in writing about the developing world. Since 2000, he has covered Africa, the Middle East and China for a variety of publications. His most recent book is “Forecast: The Consequences of Climate Change.”

Edward Humes. Humes received the Pulitzer Prize for his journalism and is a writer-at-large for Los Angeles Magazine. He is the author of nine critically acclaimed nonfiction books, including “Eco Barons: The Dreamers, Schemers, and Millionaires Who Are Saving Our Planet.”

William J. Kelly. Kelly has written on environmental and energy issues for 25 years. He is the Southern California correspondent for California Energy Circuit, covering the energy industry. Kelly is the coauthor of “Smogtown: The Lung-Burning History of Pollution in Los Angeles.”

Daniel Sperling. Sperling, a professor of engineering and environmental science and policy at UC Davis, is the author of 10 books and more than 200 technical papers and reports on transportation. His current title is “Two Billion Cars: Driving Toward Sustainability.”

Sperling sees the two biggest environmental challenges being oil and climate change. He argued that green house gases must be reduced by 80% by 2050 to avert global warming. He mentioned that mass transit is used less than 3% of the time for all US transportation needs. Vehicles have not innovated much, which is unlike other technologies – I believe he mentioned telecommunications an another example.

Kelly mentioned that LA had huge smog issues in the late 1940s. Research was done and the conclusion was that it was caused by autos. Initially, nothing could be done, because states didn’t have the power to make state environmental laws. In the 1960s, this changed via Congress. Jerry Brown had some ideas, but these didn’t go anywhere. He said that the problem in California is that we delayed so long in making necessary changes that we now have sprawl and that people must have cars in order to get to work. This he sees as the main reason the electrical car initially died when first introduced. People live such far distances from where they work that the first generation of electric cars wasn’t useful. Current hybrid models should gain acceptance. A current problem is still that people view technology as a solution for our global warming. We really need a change of values – such as getting rid of those McMansions in the sprawled out areas of SoCal.

Humes made some interesting comments about people who are attempting to change the environment in increments. He mentioned certain wealthy individuals who buy land and then they set the land aside as a preservation area. He also mentioned the Center of Biological Diversity. There is a group that wants to develop a city and resort in the Cajon Pass. This pass is just south of Bakersfield, CA. If this development is allowed, it is just a leap frog sprawl, where you’re creating a new city far away from the major metropolis of Los Angeles. The Center of Biological Diversity is attempting to stop this development.

Faris discussed how his interest in the environment started with Darfur. He argued that the war in this area is based on environmental change. He mentioned that smaller changes will also occur due to global warming. He said that fine wine could be impacted. Grapes grown in Italy may need to get shifted to Germany. He mentioned that global warming might allow certain diseases to jump to different spots. He mentioned how a disease that is primarily in India jumped to Italy. A man who vacationed in India came back home carrying the disease. There was unusually mild weather that year and so mosquitoes survived longer into the year. The disease got spread to the community. He mentioned that if we don’t do anything, the weather could go to an extreme. He mentioned that the weather could get as hot as the ice age got cold.

A question was asked about the electric car. The various panelists argued that even though there are environmental issues with the electric car, these cars are still superior to combustion engine. The batteries do use toxic material, but these batteries will get recycles and not just tossed randomly into the environment. Also, the electric car might not be for all areas of the globe, but in California where emphasis on shifting from coal generated electricity to wind and solar make it more appealing here. They also argued that coal is still better for the environment versus oil, because electric cars are far more efficient and therefore the damage would be less.

As I was walking out of the panel, I overheard some people discussing how the air conditioner shouldn’t have been used, because the use of air conditioning increases global warming. I don't know if they were serious or sarcastic. I suspect they were serious, because a poll was taken and a significant number of people in the audience owned hybrids (I can only therefore assume that the audience was largely upper middle class, as well.)

Sunday, Panel 2

The second panel I attended was at 1:30 p.m. It was titled “Kevin J. Anderson in conversation with Geoff Boucher.” The moderator was Geoff Bourcher. The panelist was Kevin J. Anderson.

Stolen bios are:

Geoff Boucher. Boucher came to the Los Angeles Times in 1991 and, after years covering crime and local politics, he switched to the Hollywood beat covering film and music. He’s also the paper’s go-to geek, and writes the paper’s “Hero Complex” blog.

Kevin J. Anderson. Anderson is an internationally bestselling author of nearly 100 novels, including the “Dune” series of novels with Brian Herbert. His latest work is “Enemies & Allies: A Novel.”





“Enemies and Allies” is set in the 1950s and is about the first meeting of Batman and Superman. Bruce Wayne is rich and reads James Bond. Clark Kent is out investigating reports of flying saucers. Clark Kent is worried that aliens are always portrayed as the bad guys. Batman is suspicious of Superman. He thinks Superman is working with Lex Luther. Anderson stated that the advantage with a novel over a comic book, is that a novel allows you to get into the characters’ heads. He argued that Bruce Wayne wants to be Batman while Superman wishes to be Clark Kent.


Anderson is a fan boy who has written books about comic book super heroes, X-Files, Star Wars and Dune. He said that he felt comfortable writing about Star Wars. He said he was most intimidated by Dune. Frank Herbert died in 1986, leaving Dune on a cliffhanger. He waited for ten years for a final sequel – written by Frank Herbert’s son Brian Herbert. It never arrived. One day, Anderson decided to contact Herbert about a sequel. They first wrote a prequel. Then luck struck. Initially, Brian had mentioned that his father didn’t keep detailed notes about upcoming books, but Frank’s estate attorney called them up one day about keys to a safe deposit box. Inside were floppy disks with detailed notes for a conclusion to the book. The challenge he faced was trying to create a book that felt like the Dune universe, but not try to copy the writing style of Frank Herbert – since he would probably fail on that point.

He mentioned that when writing for a franchise, he immerses himself into that world. For example, for the Star Wars movies he watched the three movies over and over again and read the few books that had been written at the time. He said he was unlikely to write another Star Wars novel again, because now there are more movies and way too many books to read.

My comments: This was the least attended panel that I attended. I thought it was strange since Anderson is a well-known author – though I personally haven’t read anything by him. Of course, I have to admit I wasn’t going to attend this panel. I decided at the last moment between this one and the one on the Soloist. Of course, the Soloist panel was at 12:30 p.m., but I figured I wouldn’t be able to get from the Soloist to Anderson in time. Of course, if I knew how empty Anderson’s would have been, I would have done both. If you’ve read my other blog entries on the LA Times Festival of Books, you’ll notice that I went to some “heavy” panel discussions. To end my Sunday, I definitely wanted to go to a panel that didn’t deal with the end of the world or some social re-defining event.

Interesting moment for me regarding this panel was that while in line in the morning, I was reading Michael Crichton’s Airframe (note: I’ve had this book for about five years and just now got around to reading it, shows how long books stay on my shelf at times). A lady in front of me asked, “Are you possibly planning on going to the Kevin Anderson panel? My brother was going to go, but something came up and he can’t make it. You can have his ticket.” I replied, “Yes, I am.” She said, “Here’s the ticket . . . I figured you might be interested based on the book you’re reading.” Okay, I enjoy the quick read, but I didn’t realize it led to such quick assumptions. This is a note: I’ve found that generally people at book festivals are very friendly.

LA Times Book Festival: Saturday Part 2

Overview 2

Some additional thoughts about the LA Times Festival of Books. The weather was great on Saturday and Sunday. There were only a few minutes there where it felt like it was a bit hot.

For some reason, it felt like the LA Times was scaling back the event. (Read into this, the economy.) Royce Hall wasn’t being used, which is usually for larger celebrities like Tommy Lasorda and Julie Andrews. They also had fewer booths. In the past, booths were along the pathway between Franz Hall and the Physics & Astronomy Building. It also felt like there were fewer people waiting in line (9 a.m. line) for tickets than in past years. The panels I went to were largely filled, however. Was the attendance lower? It was hard to tell. I was in panels most of the day. I will say that I made it from panel to panel much quicker than normal so my guess would be that there were far less people than in past years.

I over-heard a small group discussing how they recognized fewer names at various panels versus prior years. One wondered if she was just not reading/listening to enough new voices or if something else was going on. Another said that he didn’t find as many interesting panels this year, but was still able to fill his panel calendar up for both days. I also over-heard one guy who said that for the first time ever he went to a panel where he hadn’t heard of any of the panelists.

Saturday, Panel 3

The third panel I attended was at 2 p.m. It was called “Poof! Our Evaporating Economy.” The moderator was Murray Fromson. The panelists were William Cohan, Robert Scheer and T.J. Stiles.

The stolen bios from the LA Times goes as follows:

Murray Fromson. Fromson, who has been in journalist and journalism education for 56 years, covered the Korean and Vietnam wars, the former Soviet Union and American politics during the Cold War. He is currently a professor of journalism at USC.

William Cohan. Cohan, formerly an award-winning investigative newspaper reporter in Raleigh, N.C., worked on Wall Street for 17 years. He is the author of the Bear Stearns expose “House of Cards: A Tale of Hubris and Wretched Excess on Wall Street.”

Robert Scheer. Scheer covered presidential politics for the Los Angeles Times for 30 years. He has written several books including “The Pornography of Power: How Defense Hawks Hijacked 9/11 and Weakened America.” He participates regularly on KCRW’s “Left, Right & Center.”

T.J. Stiles. Stiles is the author of “Jesse James: Last Rebel of the Civil War,” a 2002 Los Angeles Times Book Prize finalist. He served as historical advisor for two films in the PBS documentary series “American Experience.” Stiles’ new book is “The First Tycoon: The Epic Life of Cornelius Vanderbilt.”

In my opinion this was the best of the panels for the two day period (the ones I saw, of course.) I have to admit that I’m not a fan of Robert Scheer. I almost didn’t go to this panel because of him. I just think he’s full of himself. Maybe he’s mellowed out recently. He seemed rather toned down and reasoned at this panel discussion.

Cohan started the discussion out. His book was about Bear Stearns. The basic question of course comes to why did this company fall apart. He argues that it comes down to incentives. The goal was to make as much personal money in as short a period as possible. When people are motivated by greed, they do strange things. Wall Street used to be a series of small firms where individuals shared liabilities and profits. He argued that we need to make sure that we see the distinction between people on television who make stock suggestions versus those who do Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A). M&A folks create a myth about their own importance. The problem is that they do what is right only for their pocketbook. They think what they say and do smells good at all times. It is obscene that the best and brightest wanted to go to Wall Street to make quick money. He is not impressed with the individuals Obama has appointed to help with the economic recovery. He believes that Obama will need to start replacing some of these individuals. He does like Geithner; however. He attacked President Clinton for encouraging home ownership. Mortgages were given to people who couldn’t afford the homes. He personally saw loan docs filled out with inaccurate data. People claimed to have $100,000 in the bank when in reality they were on welfare. At the bottom, the documents were signed by the borrower. Don’t they have some responsibility for signing fraudulent docs?

Scheer argued that the problem with economics is that it became separated from sociology. It got too math oriented. He believes the economic crisis started with Reagan and continued under Clinton. Developing all these securities screwed up the economy. He also attacked the media for not properly covering business. He made a point that Paul Krugman is making. We only get one chance here and we need to make sure we’re not being conned. We’re spending so much money here that if all this fails, we won’t be able to borrow more money to try again. He wonders why the media doesn’t question why the people who got us into this trouble (Lawrence Summers) are now in positions of power. He said that he once thought Clinton was a great president. Now he believes that Clinton actually helped create a bubble. He was really worried about this one chance idea. He was also concerned about which Obama we are getting. Are we getting the Harvard elitist or the one who attacked deregulation? He said it was a myth that we didn’t see this mess coming.

Stiles saw similarities between our current economy and that with Vanderbilt’s time. Back then, there was rampant insider trading. They would purposely short their own stock and then attempt to manipulate the price via financial reports. The public hated this, but business people found these manipulations as shrewd business practices. Vanderbilt (even though he had his dark side) got credit for being honest. He got rid of corrupt employees. He refused a salary and only made a living off of a dividend. Stiles sees a potential cultural shift. There is now a growing belief in government regulation versus just trusting the free market. He also sees a great divide; however, where conservative economists are digging in. He thinks that we’ll need to see about Obama. He mentioned that abolitionist had issues with Lincoln, but we all think highly of Lincoln today. He warned that historical legacy often is contrary to the opinion of individuals who deal with the day-to-day events of the times. We may need someone like Obama who can compromise, but then who really knows for sure. He argued that this bubble is different from other past bubbles. We had a very bad recession in 1873, driven by a railroad bubble. When the recession ended, we at least had a railroad system. He said the problem with the housing bubble is that it was all equity, it didn’t provide any infrastructure that would expand productive capacity when the economy came back.

My comments: I really am getting this feeling that the elite are getting disillusioned with Obama. There were definitely some questioning comments made about Obama on this panel. Just to make clear, they weren’t anti-Obama. Also, while walking through UCLA, I noticed a flier (I should have taken a photo of it) which had a picture of Uncle Sam. Sam was crossed out with Bam (as in oBAMa). It questioned why Obama was sending troops to Afghanistan. I really got the sense that the “elite” opinion on Obama is slowly shifting from “he’ll make the necessary changes needed to push the progressive agenda” to “he was the best of two bad alternatives.”

I have to agree with Cohen about the individuals that Obama selected for his economics team. And I'd go even further, because I'm not all that sure about Geithner. I've gotten into discussions with a friend about how the elites got us into this problem and now they're the ones trying to fix it.

As mentioned, in the past I’ve gotten very irritated with Scheer. To me, in the past, he’d toss out a worded grenade and then wait to see what resulted. This time around, I found him reasonable. Perhaps it was driven by the fact that I somewhat agreed with him in regards to his interpretation of the past. I do believe we’ve lived in a bubble economy. He’ll argue it started with Reagan and continued on with Clinton. I’ll argue it started with Clinton and Greenspan. We can quibble about all of this, but I found myself largely agreeing with him. Now what he thinks we should do about this mess is probably something we disagree about, but I think that knowing we have the same baseline of thought probably got me interested in his opinions more. Or perhaps he’s just mellowed out over the years. He did have an issue with Cohan’s statement about individuals committing fraud on their statements. He said that this fraud hardly ranks up there with what happened on Wall Street. Perhaps, he’s right, but I also take a stand for what Cohan said. I don’t think Wall Street was the only place where people wanted to get rich quick. I think this permeated American culture over the last couple decades. I tend to agree with something that George F. Will stated, we’re all to blame for this mess.

Saturday, Panel 4

The fourth panel I attended was at 3:30 p.m. It was called “Religion: The God Question.” The moderator was Zachary Karabell. The panelists were Chris Hedges, William Lobdell and Rabbi David Wolpe.

The stolen bios are as follows:

Zachary Karabell. Karabell is the president of River Twice Research, where he analyzes economic and political trends. He is the author of several books, including “Parting the Desert” and “Peace Be Upon You.” Karabell’s next book, “In the Red” will be published in the fall.

Chris Hedges. Hedges is the author of numerous bestselling books and as a seasoned journalist was part of a team that received the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting. His most recent book is “When Atheism Becomes Religion: America’s New Fundamentalists.”

William Lobdell. Lobdell is an award-winning journalist, author, blogger, speaker, college lecturer and media consultant. His memoir, “Losing My Religion: How I Los My Faith Reporting on Religion in America – and Found Unexpected Peace,” was published earlier this year.

Rabbi David Wolpe. Wolpe is the rabbi of Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a teacher of modern Jewish religious thought at UCLA. He writes for many publications, including the Jewish Weeka dn Jerusalem Post. Rabbi Wolpe’s latest book is “Why Faith Matters.”

Hedges grew up in church. He earned a degree in religion from Harvard. Father was a minister. He finds institutional religion very cruel. His father supported gay rights and was attacked for this. He has a problem with the “New Atheist” who use scientific rationalization. He considers them like the religious right. He sees religion as an attempt to deal with the non-rational events in life. He attacked Rick Warren. Said Warren isn’t so much about charity as he is for justice. Even though Warren does AIDS work, he is still very homophobic. He considers Warren a softer version of James Dobson. He believes we must develop individual morality and not have fealty to an institution that may at times head towards moral compromise.

Lobdell doesn’t have an issue with the “New Atheist.” (Defined as Christopher Hitchens in this debate.) He thinks it allows many to question their beliefs. He sees many individuals as Cultural Christians. They don’t really believe the Bible, but still go to church. When he wrote his book, he got many e-mails from pastors who stated that they’d lost their religion. They still preach, because they need a career. They need a salary. We’re probably heading to a secular society, which is good for religion because it will get rid of the cultural believers. He told his personal story. He embraced faith in despair. He started to see flaws in organized religion. Doubts came in. He saw no difference in moral behavior between atheist and Christians. He said that yes Christians do donate, but they donate only at 3 percent versus the required 10 percent. He said the hope for Christianity is that the younger generation cares more about changing society versus worshiping in big churches.

Wolpe. The belief in God pits two ideas against each other: are we an accident or is there a greater power. You can’t blame religion for everything. We are not good by nature. Look at our playgrounds. Kids do not always get along with each other. Religion sometimes causes damage, but so does atheism. He pointed to Stalin and Hitler. People often tell him: I’m spiritual, not religious. He asks these people: How much do you give to charities? The purpose of this question is to emphasize the fact that institutions can often create something greater than individuals can. If we treat God as just an impulse than God is not important, he argued. We join institutions to help change the world. He also asked why desperate people turn to God. He said that we can’t hear the whole range of sound. He said we can’t see all that is around us. Perhaps, he argued, that out minds are also limited. Maybe during our despair, our minds open up to see something profound.

Karabell asked if people go to church just for a communal experience. He also wondered if the religious frameworks based on Western philosophy will change as we head towards a more global society, which brings different contexts to religion. Wolpe replied that he doubts that there is one path to God.

My comments: This was the second best panel discussion I went to over the two day weekend. Rabbi Wolpe is an amazing speaker.

LA Times Book Festival: Saturday Part 1

Overview

I love the LA Times Festival of Books. I’ve gone to this event for years now (I’d say somewhere between five and ten years – probably closer to ten years versus five years). I spend most of my time at various panel discussions. In my first few years, I’d just go to the stand-by line thirty minutes before a panel started -- I would always get in this way. That would limit how many panels I could attend in a day and would also limit my exploration of the various retail booths. (I never seriously tried buying tickets online since I’d tried that a couple times in the past and everything was always sold out.) The last couple of years I've switched strategies. I show up at the early hour of 8 a.m. and get my tickets via the Festival Ticketmaster booth, which starts giving away tickets at 9 a.m. It makes for a long day, but it also reduces my concern about getting into panels I really want to see. I can explore the Festival more and need only worry about showing up ten minutes before the panel starts.

Saturday, Panel 1

The first panel discussion I attended was at 10:30 a.m. It was called “Status Update: Social Networking & New Media.” The moderator was Andrew Nystrom. The panelists were Otis Chandler, Will Wheaton and Sara Wolf.

Stealing from the LA Times guide, here are the brief bios.

Andrew Nystrom. Nystrom, on Twitter at @latimesnystrom, is the Times’ senior producer for social and emerging media. His “Yellowstone & Grand Teton National Parks” hiking guide won a National Outdoor Book Award for Best Adventure Guidebook.

Otis Chandler. Chandler is the founder of goodreads.com. He is a software engineer at heart and loves tinkering on this website to make it the best product possible. He graduated from Stanford University. Along with a passion for building websites, he’s also a voracious reader. (My comment: an html link to his site is just a bit further down this blog page. For some reason, I was getting an error when putting an html link in this section.)

Wil Wheaton. Wheaton’s acting career began with roles in “Stand By Me” and “Star Trek.” He is also an author, blogger, voice actor and social commentator. With more than 300,000 rollovers on twitter, Wheaton is one of the best-known users of social media. His latest book is “Sunken Treasure.”

Sara Wolf. Wolf is co-editor of Itch, an evolving art project/artist forum/journal/zine. She is also a doctoral candidate and teaching fellow in UCLA’s department of World Arts and Cultures and a freelance dance critic for the Los Angeles Times.

Otis Chandler had a theory that reading was broken when he started up goodreads.com. He wanted to make reading a social experience by holding conversations via the web. He stated that there is peer pressure to watch certain television shows like American Idol, because it is water cooler talk. He’s trying to create that same atmosphere via the web where people see what others are reading and therefore wish to join in on the discussion of these books. He said that twitter asks what are you doing now. He said that his site asks what are you reading now. He mentioned that the interesting thing about his website is that it allows you to permanently keep your thoughts online about books so that in the future you can reference them – as well as your friends checking out your thoughts in the present.

Wil Wheaton discussed how twitter and his blog allow him to work outside of corporate publishing. He argued that early adopters of new technology create interesting communities, but then those on the corporate side or individuals who want to make money (spammers) come in and mess it up. His one warning about technology is that once you put something up, it’ll be up forever. He warns his children that they must be careful regarding what they post on Facebook. He said a great advantage of technology is that you don’t need to be in the same space with an individual to share moments. He mentioned that he had an over-sharing moment on twitter where he thought he had sent a text to his wife with a benign “I Love You” comment, but he instead posted this on twitter.

Sara Wolf has the smallest audience of the three panelists. She has a website/facebook called Itch. The focus of this site is on dance. The Facebook site has about 400 friends. There are three editors and they publish about three times a year. She likes her small community. There are shared conversations where a certain individual might post an item and then everyone jumps in to share a conversation.

Some thoughts. There was a contrast between Wil Wheaton and Sara Wolf. Sara mentioned a wish that she could write under a pen name. Wil Wheaton (based on the moderator) is around the 31st most followed individual on twitter. Sara Wolf has a community of only around 400. I obviously have more in common with Sara Wolf versus Wil Wheaton. I have even fewer readers than Sara Wolf and I blog under a pen name. I don’t twitter, but if I did I probably would also want to do it under a pen name.

This blog that I write shows that I have some interest in technology and communication. This is why I went to this specific panel. It was interesting, but not blow away interesting.

Saturday, Panel 2

The second panel I attended was at noon. It was titled “History: The Fight for Rights.” The moderator was Scott Kraft. The panelists were Ernest Freeberg, Randy Shaw and Thomas J. Sugrue.

Stealing from the LA Times guide again, here are the brief bios.

Scott Kraft. Kraft is senior writer for the Los Angeles Times, specializing in national and foreign topics. As national editor of The Times from 1997 to 2008, he directed the coverage of three presidential campaigns, and reporters who reported to him won four Pulitzer Prizes. (Sorry, no html link for Scott Kraft. I couldn't really find a decent website.)

Ernest Freeberg. Freeberg’s book, “Democracy’s Prisoner: Eugene V. Debs, the Great War, and the Right to Dissent,” is a 2008 Los Angeles Times Book Prize finalist in Biography. Freeberg is an associate professor of history at the University of Tennessee.


Randy Shaw. Shaw is director of San Francisco’s Tenderloin Housing Clinic and editor of the online daily newspaper BeyoondChron.org. Shaw, the author of two previous books, has now written “Beyond the Fields,” a chronicle of Cesar Chavez and the United Farm Workers movement.

Thomas J. Sugrue. Sugrue is a professor of history and sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. He is a specialist in the history of race, politics and society in 20th century America. Sugrue’s latest work, “Sweet Land of Liberty: The Forgotten Struggle for Civil Rights in the North” is a 2008 Los Angeles Times Book Prize finalist in History.

Freeberg talked about Eugene Debs. He ran for the 1920 presidency as a Socialist. He got one million votes. The votes were likely protest votes against the US involvement in World War I. It wasn’t likely an indication of a growing socialist movement. He ran for the White House from prison. He had argued that war benefited the rich and hurt the poor. This was considered anti-American and he was sent to jail for ten years. During World War I, Americans were divided about its involvement in the war. The government passed acts to limit rights, basically silencing pacifists. Debs crossed the line and was tossed into jail. The action started modern civil liberties. The ACLU came out from this action. Freeberg said that in current times, reaction to attacks on free speech (such as laws passed after 9/11) are much quicker. We are much more vigilant.

Sugrue discussed the Civil Rights struggle in the North. He mentioned that many hotels, restaurants and theatres were segregated in the North. In the North, blacks were often made to sit in the balconies of theatres. Blacks and whites children also had separate classrooms and playgrounds though they were both in the same school. These were the similarities between North and South; however, a difference was the fact that blacks had the right to vote in the North. He mentioned that even though Obama won the elections, it only represents a partial end of race. Change needs to come from the bottom. There is still inequalities in poverty, home ownership. Blacks have 1/10 the wealth of whites. Latinos have 1/14 the wealth of whites. He also warned that even though Latinos voted for Obama, there are still signs that new immigrants (Latinos/Asians) are anti-black.

Shaw discussed the United Farm Workers (UFW). His discussion was more about individual stories. A very interesting story was about a young teen girl. Her sister asked her to go buy a marker from the store. She got there and was met by some UFW protesters who asked her not to buy from this store. She had a dilemma. Her sister needed a marker, yet she wanted to support the UFW. She went inside and stole the marker. She later asked her parents if she could drop out of high school to work with the UFW. They allowed her to do this. She quickly took on more responsibilities. At fifteen, they wanted her to be a team leader, but as a team leader she needed to drive a car and she was too young to do so. She eventually joined Obama’s election campaign. Sorry, I wish I could recall the name of the young lady -- well, now probably in her mature years.

Some thoughts: Okay, here's a theme that ran throughout the event. Every single panel I went to only had white moderators and panelists. I saw a total of 25 people on stage throughout the two day festival. All were white. Only two were women. Now I'm not a supporter of affirmative action (as dictated by law), but considering how diverse Los Angeles is, doesn't it seem strange that I'd go to a number of panels over the two day weekend and see no Asians, Latinos or Blacks? And when talking about Civil Rights, wouldn't you think there should be someone who is Asian, Latino or Black? Just a thought. I admit there were probably other panels that were more diverse. Maybe it was just my choices this year. In the past, I'll admit that panels were more diverse, but this year's lack of diversity stunned me. Considering that many of the people that go to the LA Times Festival of Books are even more liberal than Obama or even Nader, I wonder if they ever complain about this to the LA Times? The question for me, of course, is: did the lack of diversity for this specific panel make it less interesting? Actually, no. It was a very interesting panel discussion.

Anyways, I'll post more insights about my time at the Festival of Books over the next few days.

Audra Mae and Dusty Rhodes at Silverlake Lounge

I wasn’t sure if I was going to make it to Silverlake Lounge on this specific Monday night, April 20th. Monday was that hot 100 degree day. I went home after work and fell asleep briefly. When I woke up, I was dehydrated and burning up. I made a quick dinner (turning on the oven, which made it even hotter – I have no central air) and turned on the television. Then the blurry vision arrived and I got worried about a coming migraine.

I’d mentioned this night to a trio of friends so I sent texts them, explaining that I wasn’t likely to make it. It seemed that one didn’t have the slightly clue what I was talking about. A second wasn’t planning on going. A third recalled our conversation and reading between the lines, had wanted to go. I decided to have a little water and then sat on the couch, waiting for the migraine. It never arrived. Perhaps my blurry vision was related to dehydration and heat exhaustion. I sent a text to the friend who seemed interested in heading out, mentioning the fact that miracles do happen. We met up at Silverlake Lounge.

I arrived to catch about two songs from Yellow Red Sparks. They have a stand up bass. I love the stand up bass. Other than that, I’m not sure what to say. I ran into anther friend of mine who saw the whole set and she said she loved them.

Next up was Audra Mae with her five-piece band and two back-up singers. She had the vocals going Monday night. Every single song was just slammed out of the park. I had this awful regret while listening to her regarding the fact that I had sent out a no-go text message a couple hours earlier. I wish I’d instead sent a text message saying that no matter the fact that I might not make it due to a migraine that my friends should head out anyways, even if it meant being at Silverlake Lounge by themselves.

While listening to Dusty Rhodes and the River Band, I wished even harder I’d sent out a text message saying that this definitely wasn’t a night to miss. This was the second time I’ve seen the band. The last time, I saw only about half of their set and was way in the back of Silverlake Lounge. At the time, I could only see the head of the keyboardist. This time, I was a bit closer to the stage. First off, this band has three vocalists who take the lead depending on the song. Second, you have Dustin Apodaca who does vocals, and plays keyboard and even an accordion for one song. Third, you have Andrea Babinski who plays violin and does some back-up vocals, and I do believe there was a mandolin in there. Anyways, their last song was extremely powerful. Not powerful in an emotional way, but powerful in sound. The floor and walls just vibrated and I felt my skin vibrating, as well. Way back when, I saw Mother Tongue and one of their songs just sent shock waves up my spine. The last song by Dusty Rhodes had a similar effect on my body. It was just this moment of, “Wow.”

Underwater City People, Silver Needle, Rainman Suite at the Knitting Factory

A quick review of a Saturday night at the Knitting Factory – trend observations.

This was a night filled with illness and broken equipment.

5 Days Dirty. This band came into town from the East Bay from Northern California. They’re on the road with the DC-Jam Skaterock tour. Per the lead singer, they were playing on their day-off. The lead singer was ill and actually had to give up the vocals for one song. He was intent on getting healthy as soon as possible, drinking a cup of tea on stage. I kept on calling them Five Door Down for some reason.

Underwater City People. I think it was during the very first song that Jon went down for the count with a failed guitar. I think he broke a guitar string. He was stuck at the microphone singing his lines without his guitar. There is that one song they sing called “Jennifer.” It always makes me reminisce during that song – usually about my college days.

Silver Needle. More broken equipment followed when Silver Needle went onstage. I believe that first off the Kick wasn’t working properly so they called on UCP to borrow some equipment. Then the snare drum broke. UCP came to the rescue again. Then some equipment wiring came unplugged from the wall socket.

Rainman Suite. They didn’t seem to have any equipment problems, but the lead singer was ill. Sometime early in the set he said something like, “I need to shot a snot rocket.” A few songs later he did. There was a trio of young ladies at the front of the stage. They were rather thrilled to see this band. In fact, they arrived just in time for the Rainman Suite’s set.

Jesus People: A movie review

Jesus People

I mentioned in a previous blog that there is a movie out there called Jesus People that people should go and see. A person reading that blog might have considered the suggestion strange considering the fact that I admitted that I hadn't seen the film yet. Well, I finally got to see it. The premise is about a pastor, Jerry Frank, who learns that he is dying from kidney disease. He also comes to the conclusion that his son is losing interest in Christianity. He bases this conclusion on the fact that his son enjoys rap music. Faced with his pending death, the pastor is driven to inspire his son to reconnect with Christ. He decides that creating a hip Christian music act is the way to reach his son. He finds four individuals for his band. His main target is Gloria Hamming. Gloria is a former CCM artist who fell out of favor with the Christian community due to her divorce. A second member comes from the pastor's church, Zak Crowner. Zak has very conservative beliefs. The third member is Cara Bosch, the current Miss Yucaipa. She has no Christian background, but the pastor decides he needs a hot blond in his band. The final member is Ty Raney. Ty is a Sunday School teacher who also works at Coldstones. He's also African-American. The pastor via some stereotyping concludes that Ty must know how to rap, providing the hip hop factor that will attract his son to the music.

If you can't already tell from the above description, let me say that this is an irreverent, satirical look at Christianity; therefore, if you are a Christian you need a sense of humor about Christianity to appreciate the movie. Though it isn't needed, it would also help having a basic understanding of Christian music. For example, one of the story lines in the movie is about how this band's hit song crosses over to the mainstream. By basic understanding of Christian music, I mean, it might be useful that you understand that a current band called Flyleaf is currently crossing over to the mainstream.

The humor does push the boundaries a tad. One of Gloria's previous hit songs was titled (not exact wording) "I love going down on my knees." If you have a slightly dirty mind, you get the double entendre in that one.

During much of the movie, folks in the audience were laughing. One young woman behind me was especially amused.
A Panel Discussion
There was an interesting panel discussion (not related to the movie) regarding Christianity and Hollywood. One individual on the panel was Barbara Nicolosi. She is a founding member of Act One Program. This is a non-profit program for Christians in Hollywood. She has a very direct personality. I suspect that those who go through her program are given a very honest assessment of their potential success in Hollywood. In her directness, she is also very opinionated. She argued that Christians who form Christian-only entertainment groups are doomed to mediocrity. In a previous blog, I mentioned a new Christian production company that is starting up called Cinema-Divina. By default, she provided a very harsh judgment of this venture. (Some of the people involved in Cinema-Divina were in the audience. I half wonder if she knew this fact and simply wanted to make her opinion known regarding this venture.) I would have liked to have followed up on her thought process regarding this, because she also made the following argument:

Her desire was for churches to once again be the standard of art -- like during the Renaissance Era (though she made sure we understood that she didn't feel we needed to return to the social, political and cultural mindset of those times -- just coop the concept.) She advocated setting up guilds that would guide Christian artists.

My question for her would be: Isn't there a disconnect between saying that Christian-only entertainment entities are by default mediocre and yet advocating for guilds being set up to encourage Christian artist? I suppose her argument would be that membership in a guild is meant to be temporary and that as soon as certain skill sets are developed those individuals are to venture out of the Christian-only circle.


There was one very uncomfortable moment during the discussion. Someone who looked like he was in high school asked a question about conformity to the world. One of the panelists jumped on him a bit harshly. I felt sorry for the kid.

My humble analysis of the Pittsburgh Steelers 2009 schedule

The Pittsburgh Steelers’ 2009 schedule came out earlier this week. Per ESPN, their strength of schedule ranks 29th. This is versus last year when their schedule was the toughest. Even though their schedule is viewed as weak, I think there are some tough games out there.

The Tennessee game is up first. That obviously is a tough one. Part of me wonders; however, if Tennessee will be as good this year as last year. Terry Collins is now 36. He’s getting to that point where he is old in terms of football years. Of course, Kurt Warner is older than Terry Collins and he took Arizona to the Super Bowl so that theory probably goes to the wayside. Chicago should be an improved team with Jay Cutler, but I suspect it takes awhile to learn a team’s offense so maybe they won’t be all that great at the start of the season. I think San Diego is probably much better than last year’s win-loss indicates. It is interesting how the Steelers play Baltimore so late in the season. They don’t meet up with Baltimore until week 12. They finish up with Cincinnati before they even meet up with Baltimore. It would seem that the AFC North won’t be decided until Baltimore and the Steelers meet up towards the end of the season. Green Bay may be an interesting team. Aaron Rodgers is now in his second season as the starter. I figure this is either the year he crashes and burns or he’ll start picking up the Green Bay system. The Steelers end the season against Miami, the team that turned it around last year, which may also indicate that Detroit might be more competitive this year.

This year’s schedule does seem easier than last year’s when I saw the following:

Week 8: NY Giants
Week 10: Indianapolis Colts
Week 11: San Diego Chargers
Week 13: New England Patriots
Week 14: Dallas Cowboys
Week 15: Baltimore Ravens
Week 16: Tennessee Titans

I couldn’t help but think before the season started that the Steelers needed to start out very hot, because if they didn’t weeks 8 through 16 would end their playoff hopes. Of course, I didn’t foresee that San Diego would not play up to expectations, Tom Brady would go down, and that Dallas would implode. It would seem that if the Steelers don’t get too full of themselves after winning the Super Bowl that at the minimum getting back to the playoffs shouldn’t be an issue. Reverse last year where the schedule appeared to weaken as the season progressed; however and there could be some teams on their schedule that might prove more challenging than anticipated. Who knows, perhaps Cleveland and Cincinnati will get their acts together. That would be scary outcome with six smash mouth football games guaranteed.

John Madden: I can’t believe he’s retiring. I can’t remember not seeing more than a few games each year with him behind the microphone.

The Mulhollands @ Cinespace

I headed to Cinespace on Sunday night to catch one of my favorite bands, The Mulhollands. Sarah told me on Saturday night (while at Club Dynamite) that it was free entrance as long as I got there before 10:30 p.m. I didn’t want to cut it close, because I wasn't sure what to expect as I'd never been to Cinespace before so I arrived at 10 p.m. (I’ve walked by Cinespace at times and seen photographers perched around the entrance. No problems this night. It was clear sailing on Sunday night with no hassles.)

I didn’t fully explore Cinespace, but here’s the layout from my vantage point. You go up a stairwell to the second floor. You enter a bar area. On your right is a smaller, intimate lounge area. To the left is a small dance floor. If you keep walking through, you enter a larger area where bands play. This is the area I headed towards.

Once there, I ran into The Mulhollands. I hung out with them for a few until the first band came on stage. The first band was called Mere Mortals. They’re a four piece band. As I was listening, I couldn’t help but feel that they were the equivalent of The Beatles with a psychedelic flair. Since I’m not extremely knowledgeable in regards to The Beatles, I felt a bit strange thinking that. (I only own one Beatles album and I hardly ever listen to it, which just highlights my lack of knowledge regarding this band.) Later, though, when I arrived home I looked up the Mere Mortals myspace page and they do state that one of their influences are The Beatles. Slight relief that I wasn’t totally offbase while listening to them. I loved their sound and would love to check them out again. The lead singer in the band is rather cool, as well. Later in the night, I went looking for him and told him that I’d love to get a sticker or something from him that had his band's information. He went out of his way to find me a card or sticker. He couldn’t find one for me, so he just handed me a CD single saying it was cool and I didn’t have to pay for it.

The band area. I have to admit I found the band area a bit strange. There were couches that lined the area in front of the stage. I suppose this area is used for more than just featuring bands so I won’t say that this area is totally designed wrong. It just felt strange watching a band while sitting on a couch.

The Mulhollands were the next band up. Here are some notes about their set: I have to say I thought this was one of their best sets ever. Sarah’s vocals were sharp and filled with emotion. The style of the band was low keyed with a focus on Sarah’s vocals. There was a distinct old-style feel that surrounded the band, which started off with a classic big sized microphone and flowed on with a large flower atop Sarah’s head. It was all beautifully done. There were some fun moments. At one point, Sarah must have over-heard something from the sound booth so she asked, “We have just one more song?” The guy at the sound booth must not have heard the emphasis that made the statement a question because he asked, “You have just one more song? Okay.” Sarah replied, “Are we allowed more than one song?” The sound guy, “Sure. I thought you said you had only one more song.” Sarah replied, “I thought you said we were allowed only one more song.” An observation made via multiple Mulhollands gigs is that I wonder if Sarah has a preference for moving to her right. It just seems that she always moves to her right. During the ending of certain songs, I clapped away. It wasn't clapping to show some love, it was clapping to show appreciation for what I thought was a well done set.

AME sticker at the Hollywood Farmers Market

I was doing my morning shopping at the Hollywood Farmers Market. I happened to look down at the guitar case of one of the street musicians. I did a double take as I noticed an Automatic Music Explosion sticker on the case. If you’ve read previous blog entries, you know this is one of my favorite local bands.

Club Dynamite

Club Dynamite. The first band of the night was The Ex-Gentlemen. This is a band I’ve heard about over the course of the last month or so. Two of the members come from bands I used to follow (they’re no longer in existence.) One comes from Bang Sugar Bang and another comes from The Overnight Lows. Dave from Bang Sugar Bang is the lead in this band. Even though I’ve heard of this band, this was the first time I’ve seen them on stage. It was nice seeing Dave back doing his thing.

Next up were the Dirty Kings. I’ve seen this band a couple times in the past. I over-heard one of the band members ask Rob Z (who was the MC), “When you introduce us, can you tell everyone this is our last show?” From what I overheard, one of the guys now has a new born baby and is moving closer to family. This band has been together for five years. A number of the people at Club Dynamite were there to see the Dirty Kings. I was at the front of the stage area before they started. By the time they started, I somehow found myself four rows back.

The final band of the night was The Automatic Music Explosion. This was a special night where the focus wasn’t so much on their music, but on a birthday celebration. Their producer, Mike Chapman, recently had or will have his birthday. During the set, Sarah from The Mulhollands came towards the front of the stage with a birthday cake. She brought it over to a table and attempted to light the candles. She wasn’t doing a very good job of it. She decided to head towards the stage as an AME song was coming to a close. As she walked towards the stage, she nearly dropped the cake. Now this sketch of life does have a point, because . . . she eventually did drop the cake. It went splat, but it somehow survived the fall with just some of the frosting coming off the top. Matt from AME partially complained that the frosting was all over him. Mike Chapman called her Calamity Sarah. It was a nice night with one of the guys from The Knack showing up to also wish Mike Chapman a happy birthday.

Dream: You want me to take a test for a job!!!

Usually, don’t people have dreams where they’re screaming at their boss? Well, I had a dream recently, which had an unusual twist. I was at an interview. Things appeared to be going okay until the potential employer put a test in front of me. “This is a take home test. Please take it home and return it to us.” It was probably 5-10 pages long. Who knows when you’re dreaming. It had a number of case studies that I had to analyze. I replied, “Are you kidding?” Then I really blew up and said, “I make $xxx amount of money a year and you want me to take a stupid test for this job!!!!” The potential employer then responded, “Hmm, we never asked how much you were asking for. This job pays between $xxx and $xxx.” This between $xxx and $xxx was in the range that I stated as my current salary. So I responded, “You want me to take this test for a job that doesn’t pay anymore than I currently make.” And with that I charged out of the interviewer’s office.

It sort of reminded me of that last episode of Battlestar Galactica where Admiral Adama gets irritated that he’s being given a lie detector test for a civilian job. Interested dream.

Rob Z's Beatnik Bonanza

Rob Z’s Beatnik Bonanza occurred on a recent Wednesday night at El Cid.

First off, the atmosphere needs to be described. Often times, when I head over to El Cid to listen to bands, most of the tables are removed from the restaurant floor. This specific night, all the tables were set up so that people could sit down, relax and listen.

Chissum Worthington started the night out. There were some classic moments. There was one sketch where he stated he wanted to sell us some merchandise, out came a number of books and DVDs. He also sang two songs about specific individuals, and those two individuals were in the audience to hear the songs.

Next up were three beatnik poets. The first had a relaxed attitude towards his verse. The next poet provided us with her beautiful words. The final poet made us attack our own fears via his angry vocals challenging his own fears.

Rob Z does a night at El Cid once a month. I probably go once every other month. They’re worth attending. Note: There isn’t a Beatnik Bonanza each month so don’t expect to show up in May and see beatnik poets.

A movie review: Adventureland

I so wish I was a better writer so that I could properly praise this movie, but you are stuck with the following . . .

Adventureland. This is one of those films that while I was watching the movie I found myself enjoying it more and more. I haven’t enjoyed a film this much since Rachel Getting Married. I’m not going to say that this movie deserves an Oscar nomination, because I don’t think it is an Oscar type of movie; but it is a movie well worth watching. (I did believe that Rachel Getting Married was a movie to consider for an Oscar nod.)

I found myself drawn into the movie immediately. It starts out with James (Jesse Eisenberg) getting dumped by his girl of less than two weeks (I won’t call her his girlfriend.) Next, he learns that he won’t get to spend the summer between his college and upcoming graduate school program in Europe due to unexpected financial hardship his family is facing. This one-two body punch got me attached to James immediately, who really didn’t seem like a guy who deserved such horrible luck. James must now find a summer job, his Europe trip a long gone dream. Since he graduated with a liberal arts degree (I believe it was English) and does not have any work experience, he quickly finds out that no one wishes to hire him for the various minimum wage jobs in the area. He eventually lands a job in the barely surviving Adventureland amusement park where only the cheapest prizes can be awarded, because the park really doesn't have enough cash to buy anything other than the cheapest prizes. This is where he runs into Em (Kristen Stewart). She comes to his rescue after he attempts to stand up to some tough guys who cheated their way into winning a giant panda bear. From there, a slow relationship starts to develop between the two that also includes such unfortunate events that moves them apart from each other like wondering eyes and entangling sexual revelations. (This slow build in the relationship is one reason I just love this movie. You know the two characters are meant for each other, but they themselves either don't realize it or run away from it; therefore, finding themselves taking detours along the way.)

Em. I think it is Em’s character that you learn the most about. I was watching At the Movies and I believe I heard one of the critics say that Greg Mottola, the writer, wrote this about his own life experience. It would seem that he had a great fondness for the person in his life that he now calls Em. You learn that her mother died about two years prior to the events in the movie. You also learn that her father wanted to find God during his wife’s illness, but instead found himself in an affair with a woman he married soon after his wife’s death. You learn that she attends a top tier school in NYU, but still has this rebellious trait of not wanting to accept the privileges that result from this (not only does she attend NYU, but her father is a well to do lawyer). She could probably find work at a law firm or for a business client of her father’s, but instead works at Adventureland, which her step-mother finds disgusting. She also makes a serious judgment error by having an affair with a married man who works at Adventureland. She has endearing qualities that draw James to her. She’s the one who came to his rescue. She’s the one who called someone out on their racism. She’s the one who befriended him before anyone else at the amusement park. Of course, a lot of the credit for the character of Em must go to Stewart. In the back end of the movie, when her heart is broken, you can’t help but want to reach into the theater screen and give her a big hug; and all the credit must go to Stewart’s emotional portrayal.

James. For some reason, I have this feeling that even though Greg Mottola wrote this story about his own life experience, I can’t help but feel that he held back in fully revealing his own back story. For example, I felt I actually got to learn more about Em’s own parents better than his own. Yes, you learn that his mother read his diary when he was young, but how much more do you learn about them? In a minute of dialogue from Em, you learn more about Em’s parents than you do about James’ parents throughout the film even though they have more screen time than Em’s. Admittedly, there are certain character traits that you learn about him; such as, his being overly honest with people. And like nearly any guy, when the hottest girl in town asks him out on a date, he risks damaging what he has with Em to go out with her. All in all, I just felt that Em's character was better defined in the movie.

The amusement park. I’ve never worked at an amusement park. I don’t know about the quality of people that work at amusement parks. What I found interesting; however, about this specific amusement park is that it provided some interesting socio economic interactions. This amusement park likely represented the last time that certain groups of people would interact with each other. You had the college educated crowd who in the case of James had some unfortunate luck hit him, which resulted in his working there. You also had others where their life ambitions were never going to go much further than working at an amusement park. An example of this is Mike (Ryan Reynolds), the married man having an affair with Em. Adventureland represents one of those moments in life where two groups of people interact with each other ever so briefly and then if you fast forwarded five years these same individuals would never even cross paths anywhere (even at a grocery store, because they would probably shop in different parts of town), because their life paths would take them on totally different adventures. I even got a feeling that there were moments in the park where the more educated group attempted to distinguish themselves from the others. There was the one scene between Em and James. She said something like, “So I heard you’re heading off to graduate school.” He replied, “Yes, I’m going to attend Columbia for journalism this fall.” Her reply, “I’m going to NYU.” It was a statement that indicated that the two of them were connected by education versus a summer job at an amusement park.

Here’s one major reason why I think I found myself so drawn to this movie: I worked at a summer camp. What does a summer camp have in common with an amusement park? First, there is a major difference. The characteristics of those working at the summer camp were very different from those working at this amusement park. Most of the people at the summer camp were in college so we all had certain ambitions in life similar to James and Em, and not very many with similar backgrounds as Mike. What was similar; however, was that for a short period of time we were like family. Those working at the amusement park organized around making sure that customers had fun on the rides and games. At my summer camp, the summer camp staff organized around making sure campers enjoy their week in the mountains. And during your free time, you hung out with the same group of people. In that limited time frame, you found yourself making fast friends and really having the time of your life. There were even scenes in the movie that reminded me of summer camp. The fireworks scene reminded me of how a bunch of us all planned on taking the 4th of July off so that we could take a road trip down the mountain to see the fireworks. The constant background music of Rock Me Amadeus reminded me of similar cultural themes during my summer camp years. And the raw intellectuality of James, coming into contact with the “real” world struggles reminded me of my years at summer camp, as well. This movie wanted me to go back in time and relive those moments.

At the Movies, gave high praise to Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig. In fact, I believe one critic said that they were the saving grace for this movie, which made this movie a must see in the theater versus just a movie you rented. I loved both actors, but I have to disagree with the critic. I think the whole movie revolves around the emotional connection between James and Em. Kristen Stewart and Jesse Eisenberg do make the movie.