THRIVE

It's over two hours long and you're free to make of it... what-you-will. Many will consider it but a compilation of every "conspiracy" theory imaginable, from: free energy and UFO's, to our collapsing environment and The New World Order. The production values vary and it can be a tad "new Agey" at times, but keep in mind this is a man born to privilege, groomed for power and success, who mixed and hobnobbed with the monied elite. Some will dismiss it out of hand, others as the food for thought that it is...

Because We're Stupid

Not stupid because we didn't understand exactly how the banks were conducting business, it was made purposely too complex for us to understand. No one can be faulted for that. Stupid because once they were finally exposed, finally exposed bare and naked and clean for all to see just how longingly and lovingly they were fucking us up the ass each and every day, we chose to... 

1.) Allow them to be rescued with our money,

2.) Demand no accountability whatsoever,

3.) Blame exactly who they told us to blame ("poor people, teachers and immigrants"), and-

4.) Smile as we continue to let them fuck us each and every day, to this very day!

The beauty and genius that was Jon Stewart and The Daily Show was that they broke down complex (and often boring) social, political and economic issues into logical, easy to understand bits and pieces that were... goddamn funny to boot. The Big Short does much the same, and does so brilliantly, covering the financial meltdown that happened under our watch (Anthony Bourdain explains CDOs, Salena Gomez breaks down synthetic CDOs)- and that continues unpunished and unrepentant, however disguised, as you read this.

But, hey, it's Christmas- grab the eggnog and a warm blanket; you can kick the dog when you're hungover after New Year's. 

PS- Oh... And when someone with a big, self satisfied smirk demands you explain just how the government could ever possibly keep a secret as overwhelmingly HUGE as UFO's under lock and key for soooo damn long- kindly just remind them that... it's all so easy, when we're the ones who do it for them; aliens are small potatoes indeed, compared to knowingly letting them rob us blind each and every day of our hard earned $$$...

Just try not to roll your eyes when you tell them.

The Ideal Indian

I have written about the Indian for scientific magazines all my life and I have never seen one, I would like to learn about their life and logic.    -"Indian scholar" in 1905 conversation with Edward Curtis

Sacajawea- unknown sculptor. Wonder what Edward Curtis would've thought- or any American Indian for that matter. Photo: © S. Banos

"The advent of the White man was a pleasant episode in the lives of these savage people," one of the first chroniclers of Seattle said. "Their arms opened to receive them as superior beings, and the lands they possessed were freely offered for their acceptance."

... by 1900, the tribes owned less than 2% of the land they once possessed.

Thug Life!

Photo: Sergei Bachlakov/ZUMA Press/Corbi

Dang! These thugs don't have nothing better to do with their lives than go around starting riots for no good reason! All they know is how to break stuff up, stuff that other people have to work hard for- something they know nothing about!!! What's wrong with those people!?!?

The Open Road...

The Open Road: Photography and the American Road Trip from Aperture Foundation on Vimeo.

Greatest Hits compilations whether musical, photographic or otherwise are usually uneven affairs; the usual played out, super hits squeezed under one rock for those who must have been living under one, and the mixed bag compilations containing a few of the aforementioned thrown together with a few B tracks or outtakes. I opened this delightfully designed book and it most certainly didn't have that run down, retread, let's milk the very last penny out of it feel. Yes, it does lead with the best and brightest usual suspects in the genre, but the graphics, layout and editing make for one impressive presentation! I anxiously leafed through a world class collection, all under one roof that made me want to purchase it right then and there- even though I already had many of the photographs in separate monographs (save for Inge Morath's impressive showing); beautiful reproductions that often contained one or two "new" finds (at least for me) for each photographer featured to add some zest and make it all the more worthwhile. Why then did I leave it lying on the shelf?

Two thirds of the way through I was pretty much besides myself at how solid a find this was; the damn thing had no weaknesses, no filler, no questionable additions whatsoever- and then... and then, the inevitable weak links finally surfaced as the book progressed in its timeline (ie- the eighties and beyond). More recent photographers with their own post modern versions of reinterpreting, reinventing and reconstructing the great American road trip. Not that they were necessary all bad: I do love Doug Rickards' A New American Picture, but Todd Hido's recent work (good as it is) looked kinda pale in comparison, and dare I say it, even Ryan McGinley's selected photographs weren't as bad as expected- but if ya even have to go there... not to mention the few I had no interest in whatsoever (so much for a clean sweep). Pity it didn't include Lizzy Oppenheimer's remarkable Rest Stops- it could have ended on a much needed high note!

Final verdict? A must get if you don't already have the monographs of included favorites- it's one beautiful, well laid out compilation, no doubt about it. And still worth getting, if ya got the idle cash to spare... better yet- save it, and take to the road!

Beyond Success...

The very saddest aspect of the whole Edward S.Curtis legacy is not only that he died penniless, but that in the end, he did not even retain copyright of his own work. The work for which he struggled and  fought and worked himself ragged for (every single glass plate and photographic image of The North American Indian) was ultimately usurped by the multi-million dollar estate of J P Morgan's heirs. And although it was J P Morgan himself who was largely responsible for funding the work- Curtis never received a nickel in salary, every penny went to the creation of the work, and he operated mainly in an overwhelming, though thoroughly disguised, deficit.

And ever lovin' insult to injury- the heirs would then sell off the vast majority of his grand legacy (that cost millions to create even then, and was heralded far and wide as a major artistic achievement) to some Boston rare book dealer for the not so princely sum of (ya ready?)... $1,000!!! And some of the remaining work would then be ultimately thrown out with the trash.

Many an artist dreams of success, fame, and fortune; Curtis had all of it, he was literally the toast of the town- Seattle's home grown contribution to the great American success story!  And he gave it all up to produce art highlighting a segment of humanity that most of society actively sought to obliviate. His legacy endures because of a willingness that went beyond success.

Manhattan

An Algonquin word for "isolated thing in the water."

(via Short Nights of the Shadowcatcher)

And speaking of NYC...

Salt Of The Earth: Epilogue

Finally, saw Salt Of The Earth. And what can I say... a better than expected film about a great photographer who has seen, experienced and documented many incredible, as well as horrendous things that life has created, and man has wrought. And as alluded to before, with all that said and done, with all the good he has (obviously) done in his life- why oh why, would he then so casually ally himself with an entity whose very existence threatens and belies everything he's ever stood for? 

Belle de Costa Greene

Photo: Edward Curtis

One of the more intriguing figures in Short Nights of the Shadow Catcher is none other than Belle de Costa Greene. In a book which chronicles the White witness extraordinaire of the vanishing culture(s) of the American Indian, here was a Black woman, passing for White, who was the guardian of JP Morgan's (the world's richest man) fortress of renowned artistic treasures. Edward Curtis had to first get through her, before having any chance of getting to the man who would become his number one patron.

Yeah, you heard right! This self professed librarian, this high society, New York celebrity and art world  juggernaut, this highest flying curator amongst curators was a woman of color gliding ever so discreetly under the most oppressive of racial radars... Her's was a world few White women could maneuver comfortably or successfully in- let alone someone who could ordinarily aspire to be little more than a domestic in a White household.

In response to her many, very wealthy suitors, she wrote a friend, "I sent word that all such proposals would be considered alphabetically after my 50th birthday."

The Curtis Critique

Photo: Edward Curtis

Curtis has received considerable criticism from contemporary critics who object to the fact that he sometimes asked his subjects to dress in traditional clothing. He even had the audacity to retouch a clock out of a photograph! Seems he wasn't exactly being true to today's professional PJ standards- established several decades after the fact. So what on earth was he thinking!?

Curtis slowly came to the realization that traditional Indian life as practiced for centuries was coming to an end with the very generation at hand. After them, the centuries old tradition of Native American life would be forever broken. They would be the last to experience and actually live it in a personal, daily context. It was the foreign life and customs being forcibly imposed on them by Whites that were totally alien and disingenuous. In fact, had Curtis presented images of Indians in their then current state, as they were forced by Whites into a life of abject poverty and misery- those representations would have simply reinforced the prevailing attitude that Indians were lazy, slovenly beggars; regardless that they had been reduced into complete reliance and subserviance by the government for their food, livelihood and well being- and that none of those most basic of needs were sufficiently addressed in any humane or satisfactory manner whatsoever. Native Americans were legally prohibited from practicing their religion (in a country claiming freedom of religion as one of its founding principles), customs and traditions, including the potlatch- where notable families would give away their wordly possessions (smells like socialism!). They were not even allowed to speak in their native tongue! Did I mention that their White overseers also stole the overwhelmingly vast majority of their land?

Curtis was pretty emphatic in what he was trying to preserve in his photography- a way of life as practiced by those who would be the last to live it. His goal wasn't so much to idealize the American Indian, as to present them as a once independent people of a once independent culture. And he was most certainly not a working photojournalist bound by a code of ethics which had no relation to him or his work, and which for all practical purposes- did not even exist as of yet...

Picture That!

Woulda done anything to get a picture of this...

Wish the Right would question their leaders as directly... (see 13 min into video below)

The Christian Capitalist

Remember how Christ always preached that charity began with Capitalism, how he lovingly reminded lepers to stop begging for entitlements and pick themselves up by their bootstraps, and commanded the dead to raise their own damn selves up without the aid of Big Government?

Well my friend, THIS traces the history of those classic Christian economic, self help favorites- and if you act now, we'll also throw in Christ's Twelve Easy Steps To Wealth and Prosperity at no extra charge (and that's one parable you won't find in your Bible)!

Back In The Day...

A Boy and His Dog  (aka- Stan & Bob);  Photo: © S. Banos

One often looks back on one's youth through a nostalgic haze that conveniently filters out the negative- until you cut through the haze and start remembering in earnest. Moving into NYC (even from its outer boroughs) would mark a definitive milestone in anyone's life, it most definitely did in mine. It was 1980, the height of the Punk/New Wave scene, and New York still had a coupla remaining years before being meteorically launched into warp speed gentrification. 

The New Year's Eve photo that will never be surpassed, Studio 54- Photo: © Tod Papageorge

Thirteen in '69, I desperately craved to participate in my own version of The Sixties (which really started in '63 and ended in '72), but had well given up as the mid seventies devolved into a "modern" version of the '50s- the advent of disco pretty much signalling the final death knell. And then, a funny thing happened at the end of the decade, this thing called... Punk. And all of a sudden there was this crazy energy out on the streets again. No, it wasn't the unavoidable, universal sea change of the sixties; it was on a much smaller scale, but there nonetheless, if you chose to acknowledge it- in all its pre-digital, unconnected wonder!

New York was still in its post Gerald Ford, Drop Dead doldrums- ads in the Village Voice still advertised 3rm apts in Alphabet City/Loisaida renting for $650 (with the understood agreement that anything you were foolish enough to move in would be automatically removed free of charge), a heroin renaissance was still to occur, and crack had yet to be invented. Williamsburg was still Hasidic and/or Puerto Rican and nowhere near hipsterdom- in fact, anyone from the outlying boroughs was condescendingly referred to as "Bridge and Tunnel." This was also the time when you could walk out unto any East Village street on any given day and see the likes of Quentin Crisp, Afrika Bambaataa, The Beastie Boys or any of thousands of indie rock celebrities and wannabes. Robert Frank drunkenly burned original prints from The Americans in his loft on the Bowery, Alex Harsley held shop at The 4th St. Photo Gallery, and Hip Hop was about to spill from the Bronx and invade the the rest of NYC, the nation and the world.

Photo: © Ken Schles- who & where to go for more of a sense of the period...

Of course, this last ditch reverberation of The Sixties could not possibly endure unabated; it too would implode, and  by 1985- the tsunami called gentrification, fueled by unbridled greed, crack and mass Madonna commercialization inevitably dawned and triumphed. And just as jellyfish are now consuming the earth's vast oceans filling the void once occupied by fish- bodegas and local, centuries old Lower East Side storefronts were replaced, seemingly overnight, by a plague like torrent of small art galleries whose owners saw and promoted not art, but their own dreams of $$$ and art world stardom. Within a year, most would not even linger long enough to become memories, replaced by... upscale boutiques- it would never be quite like Paris.

The look Madonna popularized the world over... several years before she appropriated it; London,  Photo: © S. Banos

Youth would expend its final, semi-glorious gasp, my dog would soon depart- and New York, of course, has always had a way of cashing in on one's dreams, sweat and determination... and crushing them all the same. The photo biz (like everything else both seen and/or imagined in this town) was incredibly cut throat and competitive even then, I wanted no part of that hustle and would soon embark on a Special Ed career that would well occupy my time for years to come in Harlem and Oakland, CA when I made the move to the Left Coast. Marriage, a blog, pet cemeteries and the dawdling years of middle age awaited...

The Scourge Of Inequality

The Face Of Ignorance

Whether it's White Supremacist Nazis burning books, or Jihadi crazed fundamentalists- this is what IGNORANCE looks like... and it always leads to, is concurrent with, was preceded by, a blatant disregard for the value and sanctity of life itself.

American Realities...

Photo: Joakim Eskildsen

Actually, I'm not the greatest Joakim Eskildsen fan. I have The Roma Journeys, and while most of the photos are perfectly... OK, most of them really don't light my fire. I bought it primarily because of the half dozen or so photos that I saw online and imagined the rest to be as good, but (for me) the book just didn't follow through visually (purchased online). Truth be told, I bought it for the photo of the guy in the tub- I had to have the guy in the tub. He still makes me smile just thinking of him.

But I am, very much, looking forward to American Realities.* Personal aesthetic preferences aside, Eskildsen is one very thorough photographer, who once again looks like he went into this project to break it down not just visually, but sociologically, to give us a more intimate, accurate and nuanced portrayal of how far our once common American Dream has dissipated and deteriorated. Besides, I already see a coupla photos I just have to have...  *(not yet out)

Photo: Joakim Eskildsen

Robert Kalman- Portraits Of NYC

Recently, readers at TOP were treated to the work of Robert Kalman; and it's always one of the greatest kicks imaginable to come upon a relative unknown with a body of work that makes one actually stop and look- instead of just scan forever forward as we've become so accustomed in our current digital mindlessness.

Portraiture has always been one of the most difficult of photographic genres, perhaps because it is, in fact, such a collaborative effort. It's significantly easier to go out and make an anonymous landscape or street shot than it is to work together with subject at hand and have two divergent personalities combine to create a "work of art." And popular myths aside, while photographic portraits certainly can't reveal anyone's "soul," they can most definitely lie, deceive and manipulate every bit as much as any photographer or subject- whether intentionally or not; but I digress.

What good portraiture can deliver however, are striking images of individuals that capture our imagination and hold our attention, so much so, that we continue to wonder about the subjects long after we've stopped looking. Kalman's portraits in all their quality (and quantity) do just that, and unlike Avedon, he didn't have to go scouring about In The American West with a van load of assistants to find proper subjects. He does it without an entourage (other than his wife), in his own hometown.

What's that? You don't live in New York? Neither did Peter Feldstein- didn't stop him from shooting The Oxford Project. I make mention of the above, since so many photographers are not exactly privy to exotic locales, and must also work within the confines of (their own) very limited budgets. When all is said and done, it's the resulting images that matter, and fortunately, when it comes to portraiture- interesting subject matter can be had wherever humans can be found.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Unlike back in the day, I no longer need to know every detail of how and why someone shoots the things they do, now I mostly just... look at the work- it's the work that speaks and delivers. Every once in a great while however, I'm still captivated as to why and how someone operates- their motivations, philosophies, strategies, etc; whether it's how someone goes about attempting to photograph history, or how a young photographer goes about making an old tradition current and vital.

 

Intrigued by the hybrid approach and execution of Mr. Kalman's NYC street portraiture, I asked if he would agree to a brief interview, and he was kind enough to consent:

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: I suspect you're a native New Yorker. I'm always curious as to how natives perceive their fellow New Yorkers, how "immigrants" come to view their adopted hometown, and how it all relates to how one approaches and interacts with the denizens of Metropolis.

RK: You're correct; I'm a New Yorker. I was born in Manhattan and grew up in Queens (although most Manhattanites don't consider the outer boroughs as part of "The City").  I don't interact with the "denizens of Metropolis" any differently than people anywhere else in the world. I'm simply always on the look out for faces that move me; faces that have a certain quality of presence. I know that New Yorkers have a collective reputation for being cold, abrupt, wary and in a hurry, but my experience of the New York cultural identity has very little of that. Actually, when we stop a person in the street and ask if we can make their picture with a large format camera, rarely are we turned down. We show the person samples of our work, explain that it is an extended project and that we will send them a print. All that makes it a bit easier for them to agree. I find most people are flattered to be asked, and curious about the process. After all, there might be dozens of people passing by, and I've singled you out. (When I refer to "we" as in "we stop people," and "our" work, my wife, Linda, is my assistant. While I'm the one who selects the people I want to photograph, it's Linda who makes the initial approach. That's because it is much less threatening to have a woman do the asking. Plus, since she's from Kansas, she has this gentle mid-western demeanor that people find disarming.) What we've learned from making hundreds and hundreds of portraits in many different countries is that people everywhere are quite willing to share themselves with us and with the camera, as long as we are respectful and genuinely interested in them.

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: I noticed (thankfully) that there aren't a lot of overtly smiling faces in most of your portraits- is that a conscious decision?

RK: When you wake up in the morning and look at your face in the mirror, that is your authentic face. People tend to adopt a cheesy mask in front of the camera. When I make a portrait, what I'm after is the face that you typically present to the world, the face that initially drew me to you. So, yes, it's a conscious decision. What I'm after is an experience, for both the sitter and for myself. I want us to publicly connect for the brief, intimate moment we're drawn together. When I'm working with the person in front of the view camera I usually say to them, "Just look at me." Smiling simply isn't a desired or necessary part of the experience.

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: What makes you choose the people you do? Is there a certain look you're after with each individual, or are you cool with whatever they choose to present you? How many sheets do you average per individual; do you pretty much know when you've nailed it?

RK: As I said, I'm searching for presence. And the way I know that it's there is through a visceral response; words aren't sufficient to describe the feeling. I just know it. When I make portraits in the street, as a general rule, I only expose two sheets of film. This is something I learned from studying the portrait work of Joel Meyerowitz, who once wrote, "I need only one or two sheets of film and the patience to see it through." This usually works for me; I'm usually pleased with the results. 

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: I'm a big fan of including original text from subjects, it can lend so many additional layers of depth and meaning- one needs not look further than Jim Goldberg's landmark Rich And Poor, or Jeffrey Wolin's Written In Memory/Portraits Of The Holocaust. When did you decide to include the written component, and how do you think it adds to the overall strength of the portraits and presentation?

RK: In December 2010 I returned to a village in Nicaragua to do a series of portraits of people I had photographed twenty years before. In addition to making their photographs, I asked them to write about how their lives had changed or remained the same. Eventually, I incorporated their writing alongside their two portraits in a self-published book. I thought the writing created a poignancy and a deeper dimension to the work. Sometime in 2012 I started shooting 8x10 portraits in the street using white seamless as a background rather than my usual practice of incorporating the environment as part of the image. Although I liked the look of a neutral background, it seemed derivative; too much like Richard Avedon's pictures shot in the West in the 1980's. So I decided to move beyond the Avedon look by having the person write a brief autobiographical statement and then fashioning the words and picture into a diptych. At this point the portraits have evolved back to using the environment as background, but I've retained the practice of having the person write something.

For me, the writing alongside the portrait works on a number of levels. Just as the portrait reveals something unique about the person, so does what they choose to reveal about themselves. Lately, the writing prompt is, "So, what's life like for you right now?" It elicits all sorts of deep and intimate responses. Moreover, each person uses the spatial constraint of the single sheet of paper in an idiosyncratic way; the size of their handwriting on the page reveals something about them, as well. When the writing is juxtaposed next to the image, I think it gives the viewer a greater opportunity to build meaning and inference about the person they're looking at.

Because I work with film, and I have to wait to see the result, I make it a practice to wait to read what the person writes until it's time to scan the writing into the computer. This allows me to be open to feelings of delight, surprise or disappointment when I finally read the subject's work. This is similar to what I may feel when I develop the film and view my own work: astonishment, pleasure or distress. Using their words with the portrait essentially makes us collaborators. And I find this extremely energizing.

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: What have you learned since you started this particular series, about: life, people, photography (especially in relation to the strengths and limitations of the medium)?

RK: I've learned that people from very different cultures can behave in very similar ways when standing for a portrait. The large format camera is almost like a third person,and its presence makes the experience for the sitter somewhat of an event. Consider for a moment how many photographs of you have been made in your lifetime. How many photographs of yourself can you look at and also recall the experience with the photographer? It’s my hope that years from now, when a person looks at the photo we made together, they'll remember that experience. I think the view camera helps make that happen. There is a physical limitation in  using the big equipment, however. While I can walk about with a 4x5 on a tripod perched off my shoulder and find subjects as we walk along, I have to plant the 8x10 in one spot and wait for people to come to me. Right now, I'm partial to the 8x10 so I'm living with that limit.

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: Finally, and forgive me, but I think it a fair question if only because of the current phenomena and the similarity, if only on the most superficial of levels- that is, how would you differentiate your work from say... something called- HONY? I find them one broad universe apart, but would be interested in how you would interpret and analyze the two. I've tried to be fair and not quite so critical, but Stanton's purely feel good, snapshot imagery often seems to undermine and devalue the very strength of the narrative that he is supposedly trying to emphasize. Or perhaps, that is, in fact, the strategy all along- bite sized pieces of occasionally somber narrative balanced by the accompanying happy shots, so that no one walks away thinking too much or feeling too down.

RK: Someone that I photographed recently posted this comment on her Facebook page: “Before there was Humans of New York, there was Robert Kalman, who saw us walking down 6th Ave in the W. Village back in 2009 when I was pregnant with Mariel. He was doing a photo book of interracial couples- would we pose for him?”

Every so often while we're photographing in the street, people ask if we are "Humans of NY." I find this mildly amusing since what Brandon Stanton is trying to accomplish is very different from my outcome. Clearly Stanton has very successfully tapped into an emotional link for people who want to "humanize" New Yorkers. People who appreciate Stanton's work appear willing to set aside their notion of the New York stereotype and make an empathic connection. I think his work is more about  the person's story than their picture. I've seen You Tube clips of Brandon talking about his work and he acknowledges that he's only been shooting portraits for a few years. What seems to drive him is his passion to meet strangers, get at their story and make that story accessible through the Internet. Shooting the portrait seems merely how he breaks the ice so that he can conduct an interview. It's clearly worked out for him; his pictures and stories have great popular appeal.

For me, however, it's the image of a compelling face that matters most, followed by the relationship and experience I have with the sitter. The words that my subjects offer are confined to a limited space and are presented side by side as a diptych with their image. I think having the words displayed in the person's own handwriting creates a gestalt that is more intimate and unique than the HONY design concept. I guess I just have to wait to have the public figure that out so that I can have my work become as widely shown as Mr. Stanton's.

Photo: © Robert Kalman

SB: Has there been any interest from any institutions on the publication or exhibition of your work; a possible Kickstarter drive or the like?

RK: Some of my work has lately come to the attention of a few galleries through contests that I’ve entered, but I'm possibly the oldest emerging photographer on the planet. One of these days someone will be pleased to discover my work and represent me. Until that happens, I just hope people buy my art before I'm dead.

SB: Robert, thank you for the effort involved in creating this window of insight into what is always the work in progress we call "New York City." And I sincerely hope that discerning eyes considerably higher up the food chain will soon recognize and acknowledge your work for its sheer visual merit, and the diverse cultural and historical relevance it so effectively documents and celebrates.

Meditation On The Obvious

Photo: © S. Banos

No, it probably won't make the official "portfolio," but it's actually one of my favorite shots. It's the kind of shot that probably had passerby wondering what the hell that nut was taking a picture of, the kind of shot that had me wondering what the hell I was taking a picture of. And most of the time, when the banality level is that high- the picture does in fact... suck. No doubt, most people looking at it probably think it sucks, and sucks bad. I got no problem with that. 

Surprisingly, the shot came off exactly as I wanted, which doesn't exactly guarantee anything in and of itself- especially when there's just so very little there to begin with. Human imperfection, front and center, accentuated and amplified in almost perfect symmetry for all to see- lipstick on a pig! Someone thought to go all out and class up the joint by sticking a couple of Ionic columns on a building facade already so fake and shallow, it just screams- "Why!?"

Why do we do it? Why do we always so desperately try to be exactly that which we are so clearly not- when it's all so desperately obvious...

Ryann Ford's Last Stop

Photo: Ryann Ford

Can't believe just how good this essay is, each and every photo a small world unto itself- and a near perfect one at that! Each and every image a sight to behold for its: beauty, humor, and alas, fragility- many of the subjects no longer exist. The perfect amalgam of history and kitsch, scenic wonder and nostalgic delight; like a good film comedy or stand up routine, that absolute rarest of commodities that manages to import and redefine so many of life's trivialities, offering depth and insight well beyond the cheap laugh.

Won't be the most important, socially relevant, or artistically innovative monograph of the year, but Ryann Ford's The Last Stop will be THE book I want most in 2015, one that I will look at often, with great pleasure, and for many a year to come...

Photo: Ryann Ford

Honesty And Mass Murderers

On one hand you have those that kill innocents seemingly for the hell of it, sometimes even killing themselves in the process- then there are those who claim to be beyond such outright barbarism, kill anyway- then proclaim innocence. I'd say they're both small minded, murderous bastards- and very much deserving of each other. But one is definitely the bigger liar.

But... Stan! Over a dozen innocent people were just slaughtered in Paris- where's your so called compassion for them!? And over 2 thousand more in Nigeria- and don't forget the hundreds of thousands we're personally responsible for in Iraq for no good reason (making Sniper doesn't count), not to mention our ongoing drone collateral recruitment program... that never does gets mentioned. The point is, it's time we stop playing whack-a-mole throughout the world and start addressing this global problem as a human one, one that can not be addressed, let alone solved strictly by military means... Ours, or theirs.

And another thing's for damn sure- Houdini in all his greatness could not have pulled off what the US of A claims these three did one night (in their zeal to get back at us)...