ads without products

Archive for June 2005


images.jpgAlphonse Van Worden has thrown this my way… Definitely not up to “responses not anticipated…” but whatever…

If you could have one superpower, what would it be and why? (Assume you also get baseline superhero enhancements like moderately increased strength, endurance and agility.)
No, I insist on moderately increased strength, endurance and agility… That’s well enough for me… Or whatever superpower would allow me to actually manage to post something on Long Sunday

Which, if any, ‘existing’ superhero(es) do you fancy, and why?
Does this guy count? I fancy him because of his pithy superheroesque way of schpeakin. And his freakin moustache…

OK, here’s the tough one. What would your superhero name be? (No prefab porn-name formulas here, you have to make up the name you think you’d be proud to mask under.)
Easy. Everyman…

>For extra credit: Is there an ‘existing’ superhero with whom you identify/whom you would like to be?
How is this question different than the one two up, about “fancying?” Oh I see, you take it for granted that I don’t “identify with/want to be like” those that I “fancy”… Just how I’m set up, I guess… A sudden fluttering of the heart and it’s all Single White Female, except with 6’5” me with the uncannily familiar haircut…

Pass it on. Three people please, and why….
God, not at the blog stage where I can be sure that anyone actually looks at this page… First I’ll tap Reason Thunders

I’m not sure I like inflicting this on others… Hmmm…. OK – it’s gotta be my good friend, and frequent commenter here, Brad Delong. And, finally, just because it’ll be interesting to hear what he has to say about super-hero identification, Jesus.

Written by adswithoutproducts

June 5, 2005 at 1:17 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Uh oh…

h_2_ill_658563_00401173fabius.jpg The PS intends to take “une direction homogène,” apparently.

Written by adswithoutproducts

June 5, 2005 at 12:32 am

Posted in Uncategorized

Enriched Darkness

dancer.jpg From sign and sight, a page that presents a handy run down of the German papers, the feuilletons, each and every day, word that Lars Von Trier has pulled out of the Bayreuth festival, where he was to present his version (!) of the Ring cycle…

(Actually, makes a lot of sense, that he would take up a project like that, doesn’t it…)

Anyway, here’s s&s’s rereport:

The Tagespiegel has published Lars von Trier’s defence of his decision to pull out of the Wagner festival in Bayreuth next year: his plan not to let anybody see anything of his “Ring” cycle would have been too complicated to stage. “The essence of illusion is that it does not exist; or more correctly, it only exists in the mind of the spectator. How do we put it there? Simply by implication. By showing things that cause the spectator to deduce and ‘see’ the illusion that is precisely not shown. It is simple dramaturgy: if A via B leads to C, we show A and C, and let the spectator deal with B! It’s the simple recipe for conjuring tricks. … It doesn’t take much brainpower to deduce from this that all that is really interesting about the Ring cannot be seen! Like conjuring tricks, the visual mythology is a definite B! So I concluded without hesitation that the ultimate production would have to take place in total darkness! … But to a director, in addition to being consistent, total darkness is also rather meager and unsatisfactory. And anyway, Wagner’s words also include a small but very important and far-reaching number of stage directions. And to make this long story a bit shorter, permit me to take this chance to present my scenic conclusion! A conclusion partly in line with ‘theatre noire’ but which I would rather call direction using ‘enriched darkness’.”

You can find the English full text of von Trier’s piece here on his site…

Written by adswithoutproducts

June 4, 2005 at 11:43 pm

Posted in Uncategorized