H2Omeloncholy: papa was a steppin' stone

VOGUE copyright Conde Nast

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from KM Fikes is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to KM Fikes & h2omeloncholy@blogspot.com with appropriate and specific direction to the original content. No excerpt or link may be used for monetary compensation.

One hoped one could skip or electric slide-step this ~~publicity stunt~~ news. Pointedly, this is no comment on story. We post in non-judgement of a book by its controversial cover. Story is secondary - if that. In many cases (thaz bookcases n' magazine racks), the story here will be banned. Not a Bostonian hence how can it be one's place to proceed on (un)said topic?

How much of the present fury falls under our H2Omeloncholy™ edict? Granted, official 'edict' may be up for some debate. Chechen adolescent immigrant, cute-enuf-for-cover-albeit-'outsider'-irony-of-'Merican-assimilation...er, angle? Tempting - fo' sho'. Going there, though, may spear one a gooey s'more in the Apologists Camp. Ain't enough pest repellent.

Hold up...now...given the issue of...uh...incongruent 'cover' - a face in opposition to the dialectic?

To quote another popular Rolling Stone cover guy, Prince, in his jam, Kiss: "Gotta, gotta, gotta..."

when profiling met portraiture

The slur, "monster" has been bandied about to reference the individual, in custody, who - in 'support' ** of Boston - will remain sans identity in this post. Besides, all terrorists are compared to the Führer, anyway.

Too, too easy, gentlesoulfolk.

Po-lease, my good peops, do know that one makes no hint of excuse for terrorism or any perpetrator of violence. From the newest amputees amongst East Coast marathon runners to recent mourners for Pakistani or Yemen drone-taken teens, the cup of one's empathy runneth over with tortured tears. One cannot help but to wonder, howeva, with the utmost reverence, if more harm is done by the arrested development of 'Merica's myopic lens of good/bad? Good is not topped off in a tall, white Stetson. Did not JR Ewing debunk that myth in the Eighties? Bad is not always coiffed in a handlebar moustache. Bad does not automatically alternate from twisting the ends of said dramatic facial hair to stroking the back of Bad's cat. Forget not the requisite adjustment of Bad's monocle. Humph...H2Omeloncholic™ redirect? Do forget it, do try. Unconscionable horror can - and does - come in any guise. We can choose to delude ourselves and drive our bureaucracy into further debt - just profilin' away. One may loose a reader by the next assertion. Be thus warned - albeit warmly in da spirit of altruism. A Nazarethian carpenter by day and political radical who shepherded the G12 Summit by night - due to region of birth, heredity of womb, and Aramaic tongue - physically resembled Bin Laden more than most be willin' to admit.

One does not pen in defense of Rolling Stone magazine. Their cooperate identity long ago checked the provocateur box, much to 'Merica's cultural concession. However, one is, ostensibly, the most free amongst artists on Earth. Perhaps no longer the Second Amendment (keepin' it melon, Marissa Alexander), but the First Amendment is still one's red-checkered, security blanket. One would no sooner speak for the quills at Rolling Stone than those of The Framers. They sho' nuff did not think of H2Omelonmoi. Nevadaless, one ~~likes~~ needs to believe that the purpose of our Freedom of Speech is not some right for the mere notion of freedom's sake. A search for the phrase, 'juz sayin' comes up empty in the Bill of Rights. Freedom of voice equals freedom of thought. It can - when hip - breed further freedom of ideas. A democracy requires the flow of innovative discourse to sustain its original aim. If brainstorming is our birthright then articulation of egalitarian epiphanies is our duty.

Freedom - when exercised with authentic intent - aids human evolution. It is the very are in Art. History gifts us with the artist as the most sympathetic of dissidents, using their 'medium' to flee totalitarian regimes. When we self-impose parameters on what is tasteful to publish, we can find ourselves perilously above liberty's purgatory, walking a tight rope, in an ill wind. The close measure of those steps prevents an expansive eye stayed upon the journey of consciousness. Which proves more tacky - the unique ignorance of ire - that we allow to fester at the expense of our own forward? Conversely, do we bow to a singular, commercial image - yet another false idol - crafty in its exploitation of predictable, public emotion? If one had to choose, the isolation of awareness is preferred to the crowd engaged in their appall. Does that united appall serve or advance a constructive dissection of terror? Such is all grey matter. All. If we insist upon our entrenchment in the black/white of good/bad, are we not confusing patriotism with a discomfort with - as much as distortion of - Critique's raison d'être? Does critique signal a conscience? If so, does the tenor of this current eventful conversation - all about editorial 'cover' - let the terrorists win?

** One could not be more sincere in hoping the ironic quotes placed around 'support' were explained - to the best of one's ability - in the above paragraph. That punctuation choice is a promotion of dialogue as complex as the causes of terror. The city of Boston and the whole of global citizenship deserve no less.

a clever as compassionate critique

on the implausibility of

POSTness

Til our next 'post', feast upon produce in season...

CV

Monday, July 22, 2013

papa was a steppin' stone

No comments:

Post a Comment