Wednesday, August 10, 2011
The Museum of Modern Art
I just visited the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York yesterday. I have been in NY for the past week and while vacation time here is usually better spent in more epicurean pursuits, I like to take a detour into the museum scene in the city every now and then.
I am not a big connoisseur of modern art, to be honest. I am not very keyed in to the newer trends in art and I often have trouble understanding modern art because I'm seldom able to put these works into context. It is easy for someone in my position to dismiss a lot of modern art as pretentious twaddle from a bunch of hipsters. I wanted to keep an open mind and see if I could learn and appreciate something new in MoMA.
On the first level, the most prominent exhibit was the sculpture garden. Even though the exhibit was closed due to rain, we could see the sculptures through the glass walls. There were abstract pieces coupled with more concrete ones in intriguing arrangements and I really wish I could have had a closer look.
On the second level, there was an exhibit by an artist named Harun Farocki which was essentially based on audio visual depictions of war. There was a darkened room with four videos in a loop which showed footage of American soldiers training in simulated warlike conditions using virtual reality and similar technologies. I was not sure about the artistic merit of this exhibit per se, but it was quite intriguing to watch. It was also a bit disorienting to have four different audio streams interfering with each other, but this was an interesting exhibit nonetheless.
There was also a reasonably large section devoted to contemporary art, which consisted mostly of what people usually associate with modern art. Here, many of the works were as much about using a new medium in interesting ways as they were about expressing ideas. Most of the work in this part puts the onus of interpretation squarely on the shoulders of the viewer and points to a different kind of artistic experience. This should not be so surprising because every bit of communication that bombards us during our lives requires different levels of involvement from us as the audience. Metaphor and suggestion are probably as old as language itself and art has always shared these roots with language as a means of expression. Modern art is a bit more forthcoming about this, even if the end result is often confusing to the uninitiated.
At the third level, there were exhibits about architecture and design, drawing and photography. Each of these genres has its own conventions and its own history in the arts, and these exhibits would require a lot of time to explore carefully. There was also another special exhibit devoted to artistic connections with modern technology. To me, this was very interesting because it was very different from what I would expect from an art museum. There were displays that were very technology oriented in nature, like a pyramid of distractions which essentially graphed various communications technologies in terms of how distracting they are versus how effective they are as communication tools. Such a display is not something to be taken literally (even though I agreed with the IPad as the most distracting device). It is more an oblique commentary on how we are so easily distracted in such a well connected world.
There were other graphical displays, such as one which contrasted federal spending versus media coverage of various departments, displays of the amount and spread of campaign contributions to both Obama and McCain and other items with a political slant. There was also weird inventions, such as a bunch of micro-robotlets (a term I made up just now) which could be assembled like lego blocks to make actual robots, and replicas of commonly seen items that do unusual things. There was a lot of creative energy in this exhibit, and it blended art and technology in ways I could never have anticipated.
The fourth and fifth levels were devoted to more "standard" artistic fare. There were works by artists who were precursors to many modern movements, such as Monet, Van Gogh, Gauguin and the like. There were also famous works by people like Picasso, Lichtenstein, Jasper Johns, Duchamp, Matisse, Warhol and so on. A veritable cornucopia of stuff that used to be the vanguard but is slowly inching its way towards classic status. These parts are a treat, even if the odd painting doesn't look like anything more than a bunch of squiggly crisscrossing lines.
Overall, it was an interesting experience and I must say I enjoyed myself a lot in MoMA. While modern art often allows for very fluid interpretations, the very act of viewing it and trying to decipher the works can be quite tiring and exhilarating at the same time. The trip to MoMA was a great one and I might revisit it sometime in the future to see if my views of modern art change with time.
I am not a big connoisseur of modern art, to be honest. I am not very keyed in to the newer trends in art and I often have trouble understanding modern art because I'm seldom able to put these works into context. It is easy for someone in my position to dismiss a lot of modern art as pretentious twaddle from a bunch of hipsters. I wanted to keep an open mind and see if I could learn and appreciate something new in MoMA.
On the first level, the most prominent exhibit was the sculpture garden. Even though the exhibit was closed due to rain, we could see the sculptures through the glass walls. There were abstract pieces coupled with more concrete ones in intriguing arrangements and I really wish I could have had a closer look.
On the second level, there was an exhibit by an artist named Harun Farocki which was essentially based on audio visual depictions of war. There was a darkened room with four videos in a loop which showed footage of American soldiers training in simulated warlike conditions using virtual reality and similar technologies. I was not sure about the artistic merit of this exhibit per se, but it was quite intriguing to watch. It was also a bit disorienting to have four different audio streams interfering with each other, but this was an interesting exhibit nonetheless.
There was also a reasonably large section devoted to contemporary art, which consisted mostly of what people usually associate with modern art. Here, many of the works were as much about using a new medium in interesting ways as they were about expressing ideas. Most of the work in this part puts the onus of interpretation squarely on the shoulders of the viewer and points to a different kind of artistic experience. This should not be so surprising because every bit of communication that bombards us during our lives requires different levels of involvement from us as the audience. Metaphor and suggestion are probably as old as language itself and art has always shared these roots with language as a means of expression. Modern art is a bit more forthcoming about this, even if the end result is often confusing to the uninitiated.
At the third level, there were exhibits about architecture and design, drawing and photography. Each of these genres has its own conventions and its own history in the arts, and these exhibits would require a lot of time to explore carefully. There was also another special exhibit devoted to artistic connections with modern technology. To me, this was very interesting because it was very different from what I would expect from an art museum. There were displays that were very technology oriented in nature, like a pyramid of distractions which essentially graphed various communications technologies in terms of how distracting they are versus how effective they are as communication tools. Such a display is not something to be taken literally (even though I agreed with the IPad as the most distracting device). It is more an oblique commentary on how we are so easily distracted in such a well connected world.
There were other graphical displays, such as one which contrasted federal spending versus media coverage of various departments, displays of the amount and spread of campaign contributions to both Obama and McCain and other items with a political slant. There was also weird inventions, such as a bunch of micro-robotlets (a term I made up just now) which could be assembled like lego blocks to make actual robots, and replicas of commonly seen items that do unusual things. There was a lot of creative energy in this exhibit, and it blended art and technology in ways I could never have anticipated.
The fourth and fifth levels were devoted to more "standard" artistic fare. There were works by artists who were precursors to many modern movements, such as Monet, Van Gogh, Gauguin and the like. There were also famous works by people like Picasso, Lichtenstein, Jasper Johns, Duchamp, Matisse, Warhol and so on. A veritable cornucopia of stuff that used to be the vanguard but is slowly inching its way towards classic status. These parts are a treat, even if the odd painting doesn't look like anything more than a bunch of squiggly crisscrossing lines.
Overall, it was an interesting experience and I must say I enjoyed myself a lot in MoMA. While modern art often allows for very fluid interpretations, the very act of viewing it and trying to decipher the works can be quite tiring and exhilarating at the same time. The trip to MoMA was a great one and I might revisit it sometime in the future to see if my views of modern art change with time.
Labels: art
Saturday, July 09, 2011
Trust me, I'm a doctor.
Yep, that's right. I defended my Ph.D. successfully on Thursday. I'm still letting it all soak in and taking some time to relax and enjoy and moment while it lasts.
I'll try and resuscitate the blog while I have some time. I'm thinking of writing some posts about my Ph.D experience as a whole. It is likely to be a series of posts as I feel I have quite a bit to say. Stay tuned.
Friday, August 07, 2009
An interesting article from the New York Times.
I found this interesting article on reddit today, about a woman's efforts to save her marriage when her husband appeared to be trying to end it. It's called Modern Love - Those Aren't Fighting Words, Dear.
The article is interesting primarily because the woman's responses are so unusual. I might come back to this post later and maybe elaborate on some things which I found particularly interesting and intriguing.
The article is interesting primarily because the woman's responses are so unusual. I might come back to this post later and maybe elaborate on some things which I found particularly interesting and intriguing.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
Visit to Cedar Point
I have been in South Bend for four years and I had never been to Cedar Point. My friends were always saying that Cedar point was world famous and that I should visit it at least once, being only three and a half hours away. Last Saturday, a few of my friends found out that our university was arranging to take a busload of us there, and we decided to join in.
The bus ride from South Bend to Cedar point is nothing to write home about. We were more interested in what lay in store at our destination. My friends had actually researched a few of the rides and made a mental list of the unmissable ones. I was going there for the roller-coasters. I had seen something on the travel channel which mentioned Cedar Point in glowing terms and I wanted to experience it for myself.
As we approached the place, we could see tall steel structures in the distance. Weirdly twisted girders and loops and arches which would be scaled by caterpillar like cars. The closer we got, the more we realized how crowded the place was. It was a Saturday, a day when everyone and their kids seemed to be here to have fun. The serpentine queues were everywhere. We had reached the place at noon and we had till 9 PM to do whatever we wanted.
Our first ride was called power tower. It is the one where they lift you up vertically and then let you free fall for 2/3rds of the way to the ground. It was a brief but nice start to the whole experience. The feeling in the pit of your stomach when you are in free fall is quite weird at first, but the whole thing lasts barely two seconds. It was almost like an appetizer.
Our next ride was the one they called Top Thrill Dragster. This was quite a daunting one to watch even from a distance. The entire ride lasted maybe 7 seconds. We could see that there was one huge upward climb (of 420 feet, although we found out this exact number later) , followed by an immediate vertical drop. The cars would accelerate to an almost bullet like speed of 120 mph in order to climb the ascending part of the ride. If we had given ourselves time to think about it, we might have got cold feet and backed off. However, we decided to leap first and look second, and we have no regrets.
We waited in line for almost an hour to get into the ride. I was seated in the second row with my friend Sunil. I remember my heart pounding from the excitement and the anticipation. Just like a dragster race, they have lights that go from red to orange to green. The few seconds before the ride starts are absolutely pulse pounding.
The initial burst of acceleration is indescribable. Imagine going from 0 to 120 mph in about 3 seconds. You are like a deer in the headlights. If you had the time to collect your thoughts, you would be afraid, but the whole world is such a blur around you that you don't think anything meaningful. You entire body is pinned to the seat by the incredible acceleration and you stare ahead because there is no time for anything else. At the base of the climb, the acceleration eases just in time for you to catch your breath. The vertical climb followed by the vertical drop were a total adrenalin rush and unlike anything we had ever experienced before.
Of course, one might think I'm crazy to rave like this about a 7 second ride, but this was unlike anything I had even been on before. No other roller coaster accelerates like this. All other coasters try to build tension by starting with a slow climb, followed by a steep drop and other twists and turns. The dragster takes you completely by surprise right at the beginning. On a scale of 5, I would rate the dragster a 10 :D
Of course, after such an exciting start, I was afraid the others would be underwhelming, but I was wrong. The next one we went on was the Millenium Force. This is more of a traditional ride, starting with a slow climb and 300 foot drop followed by twists and turns galore. Where the dragster was all speed and power, this one is over two minutes of sustained thrills and spills. This one gets a 5/5 from me.
The wooden roller coaster, aptly named mean streak was also another attraction which promised to be different. By the time we got on this, we were anyway tripping on adrenalin and the smaller roller coasters simply would not be thrilling enough. The ride on this one was unfortunately very bumpy. It was like a horse drawn cart on an Indian gravel road, only ten times more intense. The climbs and drops were not bad, but the roughness of the ride made it less enjoyable. This ride gets a 3/5 from me.
There is a roller coaster called the mantis which is unique in that you are in a standing position all the time. This also has more loops and twists than average and is quite thrilling to ride on. Imagine going through several vertical loops in a standing position and you can see why this one was an instant hit with us. This ride gets a 5/5.
Lastly, we went on the raptor. usually, the raptor is the first one people ride because it is close to the entrance. We unfortunately kept this to the last and we did not feel to excited by it. The other rides were so overwhelming I could have dozed off on the raptor. However, it is still a good ride and I would give it 4/5.
There were a couple of other minor rides we went on, but Cedar point is worth visiting mainly for the roller coasters. I remember falling into a deep sleep that night when we got back home. If I visit Cedar Point again, I'll make it a point to go on some of the other rides for comparison.
The bus ride from South Bend to Cedar point is nothing to write home about. We were more interested in what lay in store at our destination. My friends had actually researched a few of the rides and made a mental list of the unmissable ones. I was going there for the roller-coasters. I had seen something on the travel channel which mentioned Cedar Point in glowing terms and I wanted to experience it for myself.
As we approached the place, we could see tall steel structures in the distance. Weirdly twisted girders and loops and arches which would be scaled by caterpillar like cars. The closer we got, the more we realized how crowded the place was. It was a Saturday, a day when everyone and their kids seemed to be here to have fun. The serpentine queues were everywhere. We had reached the place at noon and we had till 9 PM to do whatever we wanted.
Our first ride was called power tower. It is the one where they lift you up vertically and then let you free fall for 2/3rds of the way to the ground. It was a brief but nice start to the whole experience. The feeling in the pit of your stomach when you are in free fall is quite weird at first, but the whole thing lasts barely two seconds. It was almost like an appetizer.
Our next ride was the one they called Top Thrill Dragster. This was quite a daunting one to watch even from a distance. The entire ride lasted maybe 7 seconds. We could see that there was one huge upward climb (of 420 feet, although we found out this exact number later) , followed by an immediate vertical drop. The cars would accelerate to an almost bullet like speed of 120 mph in order to climb the ascending part of the ride. If we had given ourselves time to think about it, we might have got cold feet and backed off. However, we decided to leap first and look second, and we have no regrets.
We waited in line for almost an hour to get into the ride. I was seated in the second row with my friend Sunil. I remember my heart pounding from the excitement and the anticipation. Just like a dragster race, they have lights that go from red to orange to green. The few seconds before the ride starts are absolutely pulse pounding.
The initial burst of acceleration is indescribable. Imagine going from 0 to 120 mph in about 3 seconds. You are like a deer in the headlights. If you had the time to collect your thoughts, you would be afraid, but the whole world is such a blur around you that you don't think anything meaningful. You entire body is pinned to the seat by the incredible acceleration and you stare ahead because there is no time for anything else. At the base of the climb, the acceleration eases just in time for you to catch your breath. The vertical climb followed by the vertical drop were a total adrenalin rush and unlike anything we had ever experienced before.
Of course, one might think I'm crazy to rave like this about a 7 second ride, but this was unlike anything I had even been on before. No other roller coaster accelerates like this. All other coasters try to build tension by starting with a slow climb, followed by a steep drop and other twists and turns. The dragster takes you completely by surprise right at the beginning. On a scale of 5, I would rate the dragster a 10 :D
Of course, after such an exciting start, I was afraid the others would be underwhelming, but I was wrong. The next one we went on was the Millenium Force. This is more of a traditional ride, starting with a slow climb and 300 foot drop followed by twists and turns galore. Where the dragster was all speed and power, this one is over two minutes of sustained thrills and spills. This one gets a 5/5 from me.
The wooden roller coaster, aptly named mean streak was also another attraction which promised to be different. By the time we got on this, we were anyway tripping on adrenalin and the smaller roller coasters simply would not be thrilling enough. The ride on this one was unfortunately very bumpy. It was like a horse drawn cart on an Indian gravel road, only ten times more intense. The climbs and drops were not bad, but the roughness of the ride made it less enjoyable. This ride gets a 3/5 from me.
There is a roller coaster called the mantis which is unique in that you are in a standing position all the time. This also has more loops and twists than average and is quite thrilling to ride on. Imagine going through several vertical loops in a standing position and you can see why this one was an instant hit with us. This ride gets a 5/5.
Lastly, we went on the raptor. usually, the raptor is the first one people ride because it is close to the entrance. We unfortunately kept this to the last and we did not feel to excited by it. The other rides were so overwhelming I could have dozed off on the raptor. However, it is still a good ride and I would give it 4/5.
There were a couple of other minor rides we went on, but Cedar point is worth visiting mainly for the roller coasters. I remember falling into a deep sleep that night when we got back home. If I visit Cedar Point again, I'll make it a point to go on some of the other rides for comparison.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
The Seventies and Eighties are Dying Out
Apparently, Both Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson died today.
Correction. Three celebrities who were famous in the Seventies and Eighties died today. I forgot about Ed McMahon.
What is the first thing that comes to mind about Farah Fawcett? I can remember the bright smile, blond hair and a very attractive face. Not to forget posters of her in swimwear, showing off a very attractive figure. I guess i'll stick with those images, rather than recent pictures that showed a weak and sickly person who was at death's doorstep.
While Farah Fawcett's death was probably expected, Michael Jackson's was totally out of the blue. It is unfortunate that he will be remembered for the alleged child abuse and his general all round weirdness rather than being an icon in the world of pop music.
Is it fair for him to be remembered in this infamous way? Life is sometimes unfair to celebrities and no one can change that. Michael Jackson is a pretty easy target even without the child molestation allegations. One cannot defend his brand of weirdness easily. Anyone trying to defend him on the basis of the fact that he was found "not guilty" by a jury will be pointed to O. J. Simpson's trial and acquittal as a rebuttal. Such is the nature of the American judicial system.
One cannot say for sure whether Michael Jackson was guilty or not. Doubtless, some people are glad that he has kicked the bucket and some are mournful at the loss of an idol in the realm of pop music. One can only wonder what his legacy will be 20 years from now.
All my rambling about aging celebrities aside, I wonder if anyone else is curious about the number of people from the seventies and eighties who have died over the past few days. First it was David Carradine, now it is Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson and Ed McMahon. I just hope Mr. T and Michael J. Fox aren't next.
Correction. Three celebrities who were famous in the Seventies and Eighties died today. I forgot about Ed McMahon.
What is the first thing that comes to mind about Farah Fawcett? I can remember the bright smile, blond hair and a very attractive face. Not to forget posters of her in swimwear, showing off a very attractive figure. I guess i'll stick with those images, rather than recent pictures that showed a weak and sickly person who was at death's doorstep.
While Farah Fawcett's death was probably expected, Michael Jackson's was totally out of the blue. It is unfortunate that he will be remembered for the alleged child abuse and his general all round weirdness rather than being an icon in the world of pop music.
Is it fair for him to be remembered in this infamous way? Life is sometimes unfair to celebrities and no one can change that. Michael Jackson is a pretty easy target even without the child molestation allegations. One cannot defend his brand of weirdness easily. Anyone trying to defend him on the basis of the fact that he was found "not guilty" by a jury will be pointed to O. J. Simpson's trial and acquittal as a rebuttal. Such is the nature of the American judicial system.
One cannot say for sure whether Michael Jackson was guilty or not. Doubtless, some people are glad that he has kicked the bucket and some are mournful at the loss of an idol in the realm of pop music. One can only wonder what his legacy will be 20 years from now.
All my rambling about aging celebrities aside, I wonder if anyone else is curious about the number of people from the seventies and eighties who have died over the past few days. First it was David Carradine, now it is Farah Fawcett and Michael Jackson and Ed McMahon. I just hope Mr. T and Michael J. Fox aren't next.
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
President Barack Obama
The news of Barack Obama's election to the highest office in the USA has been out for less than 24 hours now and the response the world over has been overwhelmingly positive. It is not only the rest of the world, but a majority of the Americans as well who are celebrating not merely the end of the Bush era, but the beginning of what will hopefully be a time of rebuilding and renewal. As one black comedian succinctly put it, I'm sure many Americans are smiling inwardly while asking themselves - "Damn, did we just elect a black guy to the white house?"
I for one, am relieved that the enormous political circus surrounding the campaigns and this election is finally over. I'm happy that America has indeed voted for the better man this time around. For the past several months, there have been numerous political ads on TV (which I have done my best to avoid). There has been so much discussion on all kinds of trivial (and a few non trivial) issues in the media. I was hoping for an Obama win not merely because of the symbolic significance of having the first non white american president, but also because this is a turbulent time in American politics, and turbulent times call for a rational mind at the helm.
I am mentioning rationality because that has been a hallmark of the Obama campaign, in complete contrast to the trainwreck that the McCain campaign had become in the weeks following the selection of Sarah Palin. The McCain campaign was starting to look childish, vindictive and too eager to engage in mudslinging and FUD tactics. The Obama campaign did occasionally hit back at the incessant republican attacks, but did it in a way that was much classier and more effective.
Of course, now that the republican menace has been temporarily repulsed, the democrats have quite a bit of work to do. They have inherited a huge mess from the republicans. The economy is in tatters, American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is bleeding this anaemic economy dry and the political landscape does not look like it can generate solutions. Obama's administration is in for a hellish first few months on the job. While I'm not overly optimistic about the ability of one man to clean up such a huge mess, I hope Obama can somehow generate the political will to at least get started on solutions to such problems.
One wonders what the future of the republican party is going to be. Is it going to be taken over completely by the evangelical nutcases and the extreme right wing bigots who seem to love and embrace Sarah Palin's idiocy without reservation? Will the moderate republicans (if they still have any voice within the party) actually be able to reclaim it before it metamorphoses into the american fascist theocratic party? Will the neoconservatives who have championed a lot of the extremism of the last eight years finally be routed? Will the party undergo a period of deep introspection and emerge from it like a butterfly after pupation?
I do not know the answer to these questions and I cannot forecast anything about the future of the Republicans, but the Americans probably know deep down that the fight isn't really over. There is some hushed talk in many circles about Sarah Palin running for president in 2012. Although I think she represents the worst of both America and the Republican party, I think Americans are finally ready to reject her brand of narrow divisive politics as completely and thoroughly in 2012 as they have done today. Americans can be happy that their democracy is at least not in as much danger as it appeared to be in. There is a new hope in the air. A hope that the divisiveness and the ugly partisanship of politics in the past two decades of America's polity is coming to a close, to be replaced by a system which finally works for the people. The future of American democracy just appears a little brighter than yesterday, and I'm optimistic that it will stay that way.
I for one, am relieved that the enormous political circus surrounding the campaigns and this election is finally over. I'm happy that America has indeed voted for the better man this time around. For the past several months, there have been numerous political ads on TV (which I have done my best to avoid). There has been so much discussion on all kinds of trivial (and a few non trivial) issues in the media. I was hoping for an Obama win not merely because of the symbolic significance of having the first non white american president, but also because this is a turbulent time in American politics, and turbulent times call for a rational mind at the helm.
I am mentioning rationality because that has been a hallmark of the Obama campaign, in complete contrast to the trainwreck that the McCain campaign had become in the weeks following the selection of Sarah Palin. The McCain campaign was starting to look childish, vindictive and too eager to engage in mudslinging and FUD tactics. The Obama campaign did occasionally hit back at the incessant republican attacks, but did it in a way that was much classier and more effective.
Of course, now that the republican menace has been temporarily repulsed, the democrats have quite a bit of work to do. They have inherited a huge mess from the republicans. The economy is in tatters, American involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is bleeding this anaemic economy dry and the political landscape does not look like it can generate solutions. Obama's administration is in for a hellish first few months on the job. While I'm not overly optimistic about the ability of one man to clean up such a huge mess, I hope Obama can somehow generate the political will to at least get started on solutions to such problems.
One wonders what the future of the republican party is going to be. Is it going to be taken over completely by the evangelical nutcases and the extreme right wing bigots who seem to love and embrace Sarah Palin's idiocy without reservation? Will the moderate republicans (if they still have any voice within the party) actually be able to reclaim it before it metamorphoses into the american fascist theocratic party? Will the neoconservatives who have championed a lot of the extremism of the last eight years finally be routed? Will the party undergo a period of deep introspection and emerge from it like a butterfly after pupation?
I do not know the answer to these questions and I cannot forecast anything about the future of the Republicans, but the Americans probably know deep down that the fight isn't really over. There is some hushed talk in many circles about Sarah Palin running for president in 2012. Although I think she represents the worst of both America and the Republican party, I think Americans are finally ready to reject her brand of narrow divisive politics as completely and thoroughly in 2012 as they have done today. Americans can be happy that their democracy is at least not in as much danger as it appeared to be in. There is a new hope in the air. A hope that the divisiveness and the ugly partisanship of politics in the past two decades of America's polity is coming to a close, to be replaced by a system which finally works for the people. The future of American democracy just appears a little brighter than yesterday, and I'm optimistic that it will stay that way.
Monday, September 01, 2008
The Great American Political Circus Part 2
Even though few Americans know enough about cricket and the terminology associated with it, I cannot resist describing senator McCain's latest political ploy as a googly. However, one must also watch with bated breath to see if this googly flummoxes his democratic opponents or whether McCain will be hit for six. I'm referring, of course, to his bizarre choice of an unknown from Alaska, Sarah Palin, as his running mate.
At the face of it, his choice makes absolutely no sense at all. For the past year or so, all the republicans have been attacking Obama's inexperience and used it as the reason why Americans should not vote for him. Now, they go and choose someone that has been Governer of Alaska for a mere 20 months. That's less than the time since McCain started campaigning to be president!!
How does this make any sense given the rhetoric of the McCain campaign all along about his experience and wisdom and all the other jazz which comes with being an old white guy in American politics?
Its interesting too see that while Obama chose Biden as his running mate in order to complement him and bring some more experience into his platform, McCain chooses an unknown and his only way to justify his choice is to say that he wants a change from the old style of Washington politics!!! While this dual volte face of sorts is fascinating in itself, it is unlikely to work to McCain's advantage.
First of all, Sarah Palin is an absolute unknown and it appears that McCain met her only once before he selected her. In other words, this choice seems to be a cynical politically motivated one which also appears to be made on a personal whim(Some of McCain's Staff were as shocked as the rest of America). Secondly, Alaska has a population of a little under 700,000. Being a 20 month Governor of a state whose population is smaller than Detroit is far from impressive. This doesn't stop people from touting her other credentials, such as being the mayor of a town with less than 9000 people and being in PTA (WTF!!) and a couple of other silly organizations. Overall, her supporters look desperate to justify her candidacy but they seem to be grasping at straws.
There are also a couple of scandals plaguing her barely a week from her nomination. It looks like the internet is feverishly doing what John McCain should have done before choosing her. There has been frenetic activity on the internet highlighting the scandals associated with Palin.
One of the scandals is about a possible abuse of gubernatorial power by Palin. The other major scandal is about the pregnancy of her 17 year old daughter. Her supporters are spinning her daughter's pregnancy as a confirmation of her pro-life credentials that she didn't insist on an abortion but it also highlights her stupidity for opposing sex education in the first place. Incidentally, Palin herself had a baby only four months ago, which is supposed to prove her pro-life credentials further. This looks like something from the script of a badly written soap opera, and I don't see this helping the McCain campaign much. There are some other rumors floating around the internet which are much racier but I'll refrain from mentioning them until more evidence turns up.
However, there are a couple of constituencies where this cynical decision might help McCain. After all, there are a few disgruntled Hillary supporters who might vote for Pain because she is female (even though they would be shooting themselves in the foot by voting for her). I'm not sure this is a big vote base because it is a bit of an insult to Hillary supporters but McCain apparently thinks it has some payoff potential.
The one constituency where her selection might really help McCain is with the evangelicals. These people are usually single issue voters who think abortion is a major travesty and might vote for Palin on the basis of her position on that issue alone. These people might actually have sufficient levels of cognitive dissonance not to see the hypocrisy of a party which apparently stands for moral and family values nominating a woman whose daughter clearly doesn't practice what her mother preaches. This is probably the only thing democrats might have to worry about but its far from a big problem.
All in all, the whole thing looks like it will blow up in McCain's face. The way things are developing, the democrats should comfortably get into the white house in January. It looks like McCain's "strategic" googly might end up being an own goal.
At the face of it, his choice makes absolutely no sense at all. For the past year or so, all the republicans have been attacking Obama's inexperience and used it as the reason why Americans should not vote for him. Now, they go and choose someone that has been Governer of Alaska for a mere 20 months. That's less than the time since McCain started campaigning to be president!!
How does this make any sense given the rhetoric of the McCain campaign all along about his experience and wisdom and all the other jazz which comes with being an old white guy in American politics?
Its interesting too see that while Obama chose Biden as his running mate in order to complement him and bring some more experience into his platform, McCain chooses an unknown and his only way to justify his choice is to say that he wants a change from the old style of Washington politics!!! While this dual volte face of sorts is fascinating in itself, it is unlikely to work to McCain's advantage.
First of all, Sarah Palin is an absolute unknown and it appears that McCain met her only once before he selected her. In other words, this choice seems to be a cynical politically motivated one which also appears to be made on a personal whim(Some of McCain's Staff were as shocked as the rest of America). Secondly, Alaska has a population of a little under 700,000. Being a 20 month Governor of a state whose population is smaller than Detroit is far from impressive. This doesn't stop people from touting her other credentials, such as being the mayor of a town with less than 9000 people and being in PTA (WTF!!) and a couple of other silly organizations. Overall, her supporters look desperate to justify her candidacy but they seem to be grasping at straws.
There are also a couple of scandals plaguing her barely a week from her nomination. It looks like the internet is feverishly doing what John McCain should have done before choosing her. There has been frenetic activity on the internet highlighting the scandals associated with Palin.
One of the scandals is about a possible abuse of gubernatorial power by Palin. The other major scandal is about the pregnancy of her 17 year old daughter. Her supporters are spinning her daughter's pregnancy as a confirmation of her pro-life credentials that she didn't insist on an abortion but it also highlights her stupidity for opposing sex education in the first place. Incidentally, Palin herself had a baby only four months ago, which is supposed to prove her pro-life credentials further. This looks like something from the script of a badly written soap opera, and I don't see this helping the McCain campaign much. There are some other rumors floating around the internet which are much racier but I'll refrain from mentioning them until more evidence turns up.
However, there are a couple of constituencies where this cynical decision might help McCain. After all, there are a few disgruntled Hillary supporters who might vote for Pain because she is female (even though they would be shooting themselves in the foot by voting for her). I'm not sure this is a big vote base because it is a bit of an insult to Hillary supporters but McCain apparently thinks it has some payoff potential.
The one constituency where her selection might really help McCain is with the evangelicals. These people are usually single issue voters who think abortion is a major travesty and might vote for Palin on the basis of her position on that issue alone. These people might actually have sufficient levels of cognitive dissonance not to see the hypocrisy of a party which apparently stands for moral and family values nominating a woman whose daughter clearly doesn't practice what her mother preaches. This is probably the only thing democrats might have to worry about but its far from a big problem.
All in all, the whole thing looks like it will blow up in McCain's face. The way things are developing, the democrats should comfortably get into the white house in January. It looks like McCain's "strategic" googly might end up being an own goal.
Labels: politics
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]