HAMILTON READS 2021: BLAZE ISLAND"

 Hamilton Reads for 2021 selected "Blaze Island" by Catherine Bush as their choice. This is her fifth book.  Each of her books have been recognized by the Globe & Mail as well as other publications.  Born in Toronto and educated at the University of Toronto and Yale.  She has taught creative writing at Concordia University, University of British Columbia, University of Florida and at summer literary seminars in Kenya.  She has also been writer in residence at University of Alberta, University of Guelph, McMaster University and the University of New Brunswick.  In 2019 she was  a Fiction Meets Science Fellow in Delmenhorst, Germany.

One of her writing workshop stops has been to Fogo Island just off of Newfoundland where over eight summers she wrote "Blaze Island".   One of her concerns has been climate change and decided to make that one of her main themes partially inspired by her sister Elizabeth Bush who is a climate scientist..

Modeled on "The Tempest" by William Shakespeare.   I watched the Stratford version with Christopher Plummer on a DVD.  The story changed Fogo Island to Blaze Island and even used the house she stayed in as the main location.  Miranda is a relatively innocent girl in both stories.  Her father, Alan Wells was a powerful man, but with enemies some of whom forced him out a job at a major university.  A major hurricane headed to Blaze Island and generates a lot of human response.  Science and wealth clash.

 Geo engineering is an issue.  Some feel it is the easiest way to deal with climate change while critics charge we cannot predict unforeseen consequences.  Others feel that after mankind has failed to curtail harmful activities we may be forced to engineer a solution, if we can.  In any case it appears as part of a power struggle.

Each year the Hamilton library declares a noteworthy book to be the Hamilton Reads selection.  There will be some inter action with the author.  Climate change is a topic of prime interest. 

I would end with the last line of the book:  "Change is clear after it happens."

Here is a previous selection:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/04/hamilton-reads-2020-moon-over-crusted.html

Would you rather be burnt, mummified or rotted?

Since the conversation about death (especially your own) is generally avoided, when the time comes it is much easier to go along with tradition.  Some of us might be morbid, but prefer to think how we want to leave the world

Many years ago I had an interesting conversation with Greg Morden, who was about 14 years old and a very useful worker with the Oakville Journal Record.  He was the son of a funeral home owner.  He pointed out that many people really don't accept the death of someone until they actually see the body.  That does make sense, but is not always possible and I would argue not necessary.  I mention that because it did impress me at the time and I still see some merit, especially in a world where people do not feel comfortable talking about issues surrounding death.  Funerals are in one sense for the living, the ones left behind, but I also believe the dead person has a right to decide how they want to depart.

A few years ago, my brother in law, Ali died while visiting relatives in Morocco.  This created a problem for my sister, Rebecca and her daughter, Samia as they were in Montreal going about their regular affairs.  In Muslim tradition the body has to be buried the same day as their death.  With the help of Samia's boyfriend, now husband they arranged a flight to Morocco and were able to attend the burial along with their other daughter, Leila who was already there.  I don't know the details, but assume he was buried in a shroud, not a casket.

A few weeks later most of my siblings assembled in Montreal to comfort my sister and her two daughters. There was a memorial service that included some cousins and some of Ali's family that lived in the Montreal area.  I watched some Muslim rituals and it gave some sense of closure.  Ali was someone I had come to both respect and admire.  His death was a shock to me.

I have long been offended with the concept of embalming and the reasoning behind it.  It is our last appearance and we and our survivors want us to look as good as possible.  Mostly they wear their best clothes and their skin is as normal as possible.  A few have made a statement such as wearing motorcycle gear, that surprised me.  A few criticisms would include that it is not "natural" and the chemicals required to put on the show are toxic.  They are a poor man's way to mummify the body.

Very powerful Egyptian rulers were mummified.  I have seen one at the Royal Ontario Museum.  To me the notion seems very delusional.  Inevitably the body does deteriorate, but over a much longer period of time (in terms of human awareness).  It is man trying to defy reality.

Cremation when I was young was unheard of.  I stumbled on the practice when reading about Gandhi.  Later I learned some of the traditions and still later more of the details.  It has become mainstream in North America.  Some object to embalming, some to the expense of traditional funerals and some like the romantic notions of spreading the ashes over some significant land or water.  Originally in India it was thought that burying bodies contaminated the soil.  My obsession with Gandhi explained:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2012/08/gandhi-life-long-fascination.html

Recently I revisited the Netflix series, "Six Feet Under" and this time saw it through to the end.  Mostly it was dramatic stories of people who died and were disposed of traditionally with some variations.  Embalming and cosmetics were a regular part of the series.  As best they could the funeral staff did their best to present the deceased as pristine as possible.  Towards the end of the series we first encountered a natural burial.  In the last episode it seemed like the writers and producers were making a statement in favor of natural burials as a few of the main characters chose that method.

In my youth I learned of what seemed pretty radical practice in the Zorastrian  (now Parsi) religion where dead bodies were exposed to large birds that would peck away and essentially eat the body.  I have since learned that when the body (reaches) down to bones they use natural chemicals to dissolve the bones.  This practice has continued among that religion overcoming a problem of the birds being killed by pesticides.  It occurs not just in India, but also North America.

Our feelings about disposing of dead bodies is tied to our concerns for immortality.  Some people felt that there could not be a resurrection without a whole body.  Those who survived felt obligated to give their loved ones the best chance possible.

Mankind has always been fighting nature.  We all do.  We may come to feel the beauty of nature, but in countless ways we have always been fighting it.

To my way of thinking there are two concepts that humans cannot comprehend (I include myself) and they are infinity and eternity.  Many of us have pictured a place where we continue on (heaven) and we aren't bored.  Personally I am inclined to doubt these visions, but even more to be repelled by the notion.  Eternal bliss seems undesirable like a drug induced stupor.

An alternative vision is based on the concept that nothing in existence can be destroyed, but only transformed.  Water can be a solid (ice), liquid (water) or gas (vapors).  Vegetation breaks down and becomes compost.  Bodies do as well.  Your immortality is there--you were assembled from all sorts of physical entities and has been transformed by the food you eat, the air that you breathe and how you take care of your body.  Your body provides food for bacteria, insects and yes, worms.  They in turn are food for bigger animals.  Perceptions and ideas are imbibed and some passes on.  

How would you like to fit into all this?  To me the natural way makes the most sense.  The environment is meant to dispose of your body.  As for you when you understand eternity how long would you like to live your perception of yourself?  Well you don't have a choice, but if you did wouldn't it be more satisfying to think you have been transformed rather than locked in a box

An earlier blog:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2015/04/death-is-natural-but-disposal.html

I, Claudius

Roman history was part of my high school curriculum.  We talk of cut throat  regimes, but the Romans were way ahead of us.  For entertainment some of them demanded someone die usually by a sharp blade.  

 Back in 1976 the BBC released this series and it may seem dated, probably reflecting both technology and budget limitations.  How realistic by modern standards?  Several stabbings are depicted and one where a woman has a baby removed from her womb and cannibalized.  You don't actually see any penetration, but see blood flowing.  Romans were noted for orgies and adulteries and the viewer sometimes watches bare breasts or buttocks, but the simulation of sexual activity is mild by modern standards.  There are no large crowds, but we hear large crowds.  It is realistic enough and the story is compelling. 

 The story begins with an old Claudius writing his memoirs.  After his birth he was seen as lame and a stuttering fool.  An omen in his favor was when a wolf fell on him from a flying eagle.  He survived as not threatening, although at various times others want to get rid of him as he made them feel uncomfortable.  He was upset at the gladiator games. 

History interested the young Claudius and he later won respect of one historian while offending another.  He witnessed up close the rulers and their many intrigues.  There were many brutal murders, some by knife, sword or poison.  Lying was common to project false loyalties.  At one point a contest between a prostitute and an adulterer (Claudius's wife) to establish who have more sex in a limited time.  The story covers about 70 years and includes Marcellus, Augustus, Tiberius and Caligula.  The first are schemers, but Caligula is insane, believing himself to be a God.  Subordinates tip toe around him.  Claudius rules for awhile, but knowing a lot about intrigues was very careful. There are references to Jesus, but his importance is dismissed.  Claudius can best as a religious skeptic.  The story continues to the death of Claudius which is by poisoning. 

Herbert Wise, the director later married to Fiona Walker who played Agripina.  His career was mostly with  BBC television. most success after Claudius winning an award for "Skokie" about Nazi group in U.S.  Some of the series he directed included "Cadfael"(1996- 1997), and "Inspector Morse" (1989- 1996).

Jack Pulman, script writer who had worked on many BBC projects  "Portrait of a Lady" (1968) and  "War and Peace" (1972- 1973).

Robert Graves, wrote the novels that formed "I, Claudius".  He started as a poet and had poetry books published during WW I while he served as an officer.  He wrote a series of books on the story told by Claudius.  Decades later he was involved in the television script.

Derek Jacobi was a key motivation to watch this long series.   Recognized as a distinguished actor on stage, movies and television.  Over the years I have enjoyed watching him in "Cadfael (1994- 1998)", "Breaking the Codes (1996),  "The Jury" (2002)", "Last Tango in Halifax" 2012- 2020)  as the leading character and many more in supporting roles.  He said at one time that the toughest makeup was the six hours it took to get him ready to play Claudius as an old man.  He has studied history at Cambridge.

Sian Philips won a BAFTA award for her portrayal of Livia, perhaps the key intriguer in "I, Claudius".  She married Peter O'Toole and appeared with him in "Beckett" (1964), and "Goodbye, Mr. Chips" (1969.  Well known on stage, winning a Tony award for "Marlene" (1997- 1999)

.John Hurt, played the insane Caligua.  Has appeared in such films as "The Elephant Man" (1980), "Captain Corelli's Mandoliln" (2001), "Snowpiercer" (2013) and "Jackie" (2016).

Patrick Stewart played Sejanus.  Perhaps best known as Captain Jean-Luc Picard with Star Trek1987- 2022).  

Movie viewers in modern times become complacent about violence and treachery.  We shouldn't forget that violence and treachery are not new.  Ancient history really isn't ancient.  Instead of guns and explosives they dealt with knives and swords.  The Romans were organizers (and intriguers).  Well worth a look.

I have bolded the movies I have watched.

In Family We Trust

Checking Netflix "In Family We Trust" seemed like a good bet.  It had a rating of 8.1 and lots of favorable reviews.  It is actually underrated.  Twists I have never noticed before and very well done.  Misunderstandings, deceptions, patriarchal jealousies, spying and more.  Not exactly a happy ending, but satisfying. Illustrates how one deception/misunderstanding can compound.  But it also illustrates how families can stick together.

The film has an interesting development.  A special band Nine by Nine provided a core of the film taking on the roles of nine grandchildren in a family murder drama.   They were set up for a specific time (have since been disbanded) to do some music albums and at least this one movie.  In looking for a suitable format the producers patched together some ideas from Hong Kong films.  Some scenes are set in Hong Kong

It is supposed to be a Chinese family long established in Thailand.  That seemed new, but with English subtitles I came to assume they were speaking in Thai which sounds a little different than Chinese I have heard in other movies.  When the scene switched to Hong Kong, the Thai characters spoke in English when speaking with locals.

The first two episodes establish the family.  It consists of the grandparents who have established a major hotel and huge bank accounts.  Four families all live in high end houses along the same side road.   The Grandfather dies and leaves a will that treats his sons much better than the daughter.  The daughter Phatson had worked at the hotel for 22 years and was considered excellent.  Confronting the brother left in charge he slaps her.  Later she approaches him at his home, but is confronted with his bleeding dead body.  She flees and is spotted by her grandmother.  She becomes the first suspect, but shortly we learn of another suspect, but there are a lot of episodes to go.  His will also causes resentment.  Each episode provides another twist or wrinkle.  All four families are involved with mixed amounts of co-operation and distrust. 

I believe viewers will find it as engaging and smooth to watch as your typical Hollywood production.

Songyos Sugmakanan was a director and a member of the writing team.  A winner and nominee at several international film festivals.  Also involved as a producer of other films.

Anther member of the writing team, Supalerk Ningsanond took part writing "A Teacher's Diary" (2014) which was adapted to "Notebook" (2019) in Bollywood.

Another writing team member, Vadudhorn Piyaromna also took a role in "Bad Genius" (2017) and in addition made up the exam used in the film.   Later involved with the tv. series that was based on the film.

One of the cinematographer, Pithai Smithsuth had done some camera work for two Hollwyood movies, "The Hangover" (2011) and "Da 5 Bloods" (2020).

The Nine by Nine team all had experience in other films.  One, Teeradone Supapunpinyo had been in "Bad Genius" (2017).

I have watched a few Thai movies that ranged from fight to art and in between, but one that I really enjoyed, "Bad Genius" (2017)  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2018/06/bad-genius-out-of-thailand.html

Beynelmilel

Music makes life more pleasant for most of us, but it has been a political tool.  I have little love for traditional Turkish music, but this movie, "Beynelmilele illustrates the role of music as a weapon.  In truth the main reason I watched this movie is I had enjoyed the presence of an actress who I had seen in a most memorable film years ago.

Set in Turkey in the 1980's depicting a right wing dictatorship.  Aimed at traditional musicians who play music that is outlawed.  Many Westerners would be very bored with the music, but should respect that all music has evolved from common elements.  Wanting to survive the musicians try to co-operate.

We see a military leader demanding a change in the songs chosen.  A wedding is shown with women doing traditional dances on one side of a curtain and men doing the same sort of dance on the other side.  Later the men are forced to shave off mustaches and cut their hair.  We also see that there are informers who report of violations on petty matters.

There were warnings that the last few minutes were very different.  What I saw was a violent reaction to some revolutionary protest and several years later an ironic section with the Russian Army chorus singing a revolutionary song (The International) that the main female lead said had been written by her father who in fact had claimed that to save her.

Oversimplified, but the focus is on the music that is favored and hated by the dictatorial regime.

The director and co-writer, Sirri Sureyya Onder was born in 1960 and thus would have been in his twenties at the time of the actual events of this movie.  He played a minor role in the film.  He played oher bits and once appeared on "Anderson Cooper 360" on a Turkish themed episode.  This film won numerous international awards for .  In 2011 as a socialist he became a member of the Turkish Parliament.  "Beynelmilel" was his first script and the next year he adapted "Bliss" (2007) which is one of my all time favorite movies.  Check out http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2011/05/turkish-delight-in-book-and-movie-form.html

The co-director, Muharrem Gulmez is better known as a producer, but has written, directed and acted in some other Turkish films.  He was the second unit director for a James Bond feature, "The World is Not Enough"(1999).   (He is listed as the production manager for "Head-on" (2004). 

The cinemtaographer, Gokhan Atilmis won an award for his work on "Beynelmilel". and has 32 film credits to his name. 

Cezmi Baskin played the band leader and won a festival award for the role.  His acting career started in 1988 and with over 90 credits continues with plans for 2022.

Ozu Namal is the main reason I considered watching this movie.  She was mesmerizing in "Bliss" (2007).  She has won numerous acting awards including one for best comedic actress.  In "Beynelmilel" she plays the daughter of the band leader.

Getting wrapped up in modern Western music it is easy to overlook that music has always been part of society I suspect from caveman days. 

Are Campaign Strategies in Canadian Elections in Your best Interest?

 In trying to determine the best way to get elected Canadian politicians have to understand the system.  The Prime Minister is selected by members always on a party basis.  The members are elected by a First Past the Post system which means they have to get more votes of their candidates than any of their opponents.  If the total of member votes is over 50% we have a "majority" government.  If not, a negotiation ensues involving at least two parties  What this boils down to is each member does not need to get a majority to get power.

With polling resources, history and psychology factored in, the prospective leader decides which ridings are likely to be winnable and which issues will appeal to their core base.  This guides where they visit and what they promise and what they criticize.

We have 4-6 national parties who are all trying to put their limited resources to where they could expect the best results.  The FPTP system means they do not have to persuade everyone to vote for them or even 50%.  Another factor is that partially because of this system many do not bother to vote, either thinking (most often correctly) their vote would not make a difference and others feeling it was not needed.  Then you might try to determine what your core supporters would like to see.  After that what other issues could you address that would not deter your established supporters and perhaps gain more supporters.  The advantage of a multi party system is that each party could cater to nuanced thinking as for example those in favor of strong fiscal policies might split on social concerns.  We Canadians do not really fit into two schools of thought on how we want the government to represent our interests.  In the American system voters can protest with independent parties, but in reality they have to choose from two packages of policies.

The Canadian voter is faced with four or more choices and some without giving it much thought already made their decision.  Others wrestle a little bit about competing policies.  At some point a few decide who they do not want to win the election and then decide which one of the opponents has the best chance to prevent the selection of the dreaded opponent which often means they do not select their most favorite.

The national leaders are faced with a challenge.  They cannot go everywhere and they cannot please everyone.  Where they go is partially dictated by financial resources.  They try to pick ridings where they have a chance to win.  They know from history and possibly polling which are the best bets.  They know they do not have to achieve a majority, only a plurality.  Beyond the specific ridings they also consider provinces, regions and cities with multiple ridings.  Their schedule will be tied to where they think they can win a plurality.

What does all this mean to the country?  Often one party is able to win the majority of ridings and become the government, even though in some cases they did not get the most total votes and most often not over 50%.  Sometimes no party gets a majority of the seats and they negotiate to see what combination of parties are compatible enough to govern.  That process seldom goes beyond two parties, but at least does force compromises appealing to a wider range of voters.  The party in power makes the big decisions and can safely ignore the wishes of many.  If the leader of a minority government determines they have a chance to become a majority they can call an election at a time that they feel favors them.

 All too often a voter realizes that their first choice has no realistic chance while at the same time realize the party that they detest has a much better chance.  The solution is to vote for a less disagreeable party that has some likelihood of winning.  Proportional Representation offers a better deal. The voters votes for their first choice because it will be added to a wider range of voters and count towards actual representation.  They cannot be ignored even if they support a party that has less local support.

The established parties like the old system as they can understand what they have to do to win--basically split their opposition  (divide and conquer) while building up a strong base.  Minority leaders like PR because they see that is their best chance to get their foot in the door,  Voters benefit from PR because their vote really counts, all ideas have to be argued.  It encourages rational discourse.

After whoever gets elected the voters need to remind the members we want a better system.  Many countries have benefited and is reflected in greater co-operation among different viewpoints, greater progress against climate change. and other progressive goals.  It has been realized that counting on politicians to set up electoral reform is almost impossible.  A citizen's assembly has proven to be more effective.  An honest politician need not worry if they have a valid viewpoint as there likely will someone who wants the same viewpoint to be represented.  It is key to a voter decision that those they choose represent their viewpoint

A reminder and more explanation:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2017/02/a-broken-promise.html

Further thoughts regarding multi party system:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2019/08/when-your-guy-gets-in-is-it-ok.html

Move to Heaven---WOW!

Some of you must be wondering how a supposedly sane person of the English speaking persuasion could get so wrapped up in Korean mini-series.  Maybe you are right, but it is such an enjoyable delusion.  This series, "Move to Heaven" had an unusually high rating from IMDB (8.7), but I do realize that can be misleading.  Netflix has a number of Korean series worth watching. 

Nothing is original in this world, but the Koreans sure have a way of twisting ideas that seems original.  Another one with an autistic character.  Autism comes in various shades, but generally they take things literally, do not like to be touched, some of them are extremely clever and all them seem to have prodigious memories.  With "It's Okay To Not Be Okay" an autistic is one of the main characters that others like.  Check out:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/03/its-okay-not-to-be-okay.html

  In "Move to Heaven" Geu-Ru  (Asperger's Syndrome) picks up minute details and is very obsessive. Trauma cleaning is what Geu-Ru and his father do for a living.  Basically it requires a cleanup of the mess left behind after a death which can include bodily fluids and also a housekeeping mess.  Taught by his father he learns you can tell a lot about a person by what they leave behind.  The two collect some meaningful artifacts and pass on to suitable relations.  Trauma cleaning has perhaps been covered in other films, but this one seems more real.  The deaths selected for an episode are dramatic in different ways. Each episode is unique

Misunderstandings are the basis for many a story  We meet his father in the first episode and can see he has taught his son reverence for the dead and how to pick up details that affect the living who didn't know or understand the details.  Plot reveal:  the father dies on the first episode, (although his lessons are brought out in future episodes).   What seems strange coming from such a kindly man is he had named an unknown half brother as a guardian and we soon learn the guardian has just been released from prison and presents an arrogant and somewhat violent demeanor.  Finding out his true situation is very interesting. So much that Ge-ru who quick deciphers all sorts of very trivial details to learn the most important details that would be appreciated by the the apparently disinterested acquaintances is apparently blind to the true character of his uncle.  A friendly female neighbor gets involved, but also misunderstands the uncle.

We gradually learn the back story.  It contains unexpected disasters, broken promises, an unfortunate life path on one side and at bottom, a big misunderstanding.  The details which are well presented make for a riveting story.

The story is set in Seoul, but at one point we learn that the story really begins in Busan.

Almost none of the names are familiar to me, but I feel confident I will see more of those who put together such a great series.

Kim Sung Ho, the director. has done ten films before this one.  One of them "How To Steal A Dog" was an enjoyable one based on an American children's book which Sung Ho helped to adapt.

Yoon Ji-Ryun, wrote the script and this is his only listed credit to date.

Tang Joon-sang played Geu-Ru, the autistic young adult.  He had a supporting role in all the episodes of "Crash Landing on You," my favorite Korean series.  Check:  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/02/crash-landing-on-you-very-addicting.html 

Lee Jahoon played the uncle, Cho Sang Guwho had spent time in jail and was a fighter.  He has won numerous awards.

Hong Seung Hee plays the attractive neighbor who is protective of Geu-Ru.  This was only her second film, however she went on to do "Navillera" (2021).  See http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2021/11/navillera.html

The series does well despite no real romance with maybe only a hint.  

The high ranking is deserved and most of you will find it very absorbing.   

Here is another view of autism from an unusual angle (a standup comic):  http://www.therealjohndavidson.com/2020/04/funny-you-dont-look-autistic.html