So I recently decided to start writing on my blog again. I had started this and then written once in a blue moon and saved the posts as drafts because I was never pleased with it, and then eventually I stopped all together. I just never seem to have the time to write between school, tests, homework, plays and their late rehearsals and work I have to do at home for them but, now that it’s summer I think I’ll be able to write a bit more. I can’t tell you how silly it feels to write these words and feel like they’re hollow since who knows if anyone will ever read it. I can only really relate it to speaking to a brick wall. Well, I guess we’ll see if I continue to speak to a brick wall.
Controversy Drives Change June 19, 2010
Friday, June 04, 2010 By Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig
Four months after its worldwide release date, the movie ‘Creation,’ a movie about the scientist Charles Darwin and his life as a scientist, father, and husband, was finally shown by Newmarket Films in the U.S. This movie was picked up so late that the UK newspaper, ‘The Telegraph,’ had time to write an article on how the U.S. would not screen the movie anywhere. Soon after the article was published, describing the controversy it would cause in America, the movie was snatched up by Newmarket Films. The reason it took so long for a film company in America to screen the movie was because the movie deals with Charles Darwin’s life and since Darwinism proves be a touchy subject especially in America, the movie of course followed in the same path. But the movie mainly deals with the life of the scientist and his inner struggle concerning his research and the possibility of it “killing God” (as his friend, Thomas Huxley, in the movie stated), not dealing as much with his theory, but with his life.
The sad thing is that not many people in America know about the movie, and that it took so long for them to show ‘Creation.’ The other thing is it’s not a movie that only contains no-name actors; notable actors such as Paul Bettany and Jennifer Connelly assumed the roles of Charles Darwin and his wife. Even with a fairly well known cast, and interesting storyline, ‘Creation’ remains a sadly, silent triumph because of the controversy that surrounds the subject matter of the film.
Religion can be a large instigator of debate when it comes to anything, especially in America and especially movies. Movies that have been controversial for other reasons have been better received and some even nominated for Academy Awards in the U.S. despite the disputable material and less-well-known actors. Controversial for explicit rape scenes, phallic sculptures, suggestive material, and violence, ‘A Clockwork Orange,’ was nominated for an Academy Award and the book is a staple read in high schools across the country. In general, the subject content of the movie was faintly argued but it only faced seemingly interminable problems in Britain where the movie was blamed for copy-cat gang violence and was withdrawn from circulation after numerous death threats were sent to the director, Stanley Kubrick.
I think it’s terrible that such wonderful blatant expressions of human nature are censored or discontinued because of content some people find questionable. In 1891, the show ‘Spring Awakening’ by Frank Wedekind, stirred up a tempest of controversy in Germany for the story line that involved the lead characters’ children committing suicide, having sex, masturbating, getting pregnant, being killed by abortions gone wrong, and being forced into correctional facilities. The play was subsequently banned in Germany for about a century. Of course for the time, it was very radical, but also extremely poignant and insightful, delving into the common place families where strict moral codes were implemented by parents leading to the unintentional tragic corruption and death of their curious children who were sheltered far too much for their own good. The show has such a crucial lesson to be learned back in 1891 and now in 2010.
It’s a shame that such thought evoking movies, and even stage plays are swept into obscurity because they cause people to feel and question, which is the ambition and definition of art. How many countless pieces of art have been lost and shrouded in oppression? How many emotions and questions have people been denied because a piece of art was never given the chance or was erased from the access of the general public because it was “too controversial”?
America’s touchiness about religion almost cost it the moving, thought evoking movie ‘Creation.’ Controversy, time and time again keeps insightful movies from being seen. I understand people feel strongly about their religion and morals and that’s great to have such passion, but a movie is a movie, take it at face value and enjoy the movie for what it’s worth. The script, actors, and cinematography, the new perspectives that can be seen should make the movie. Controversy is what drives change and affirms the vehemence people posses; why should everything that challenges a person’s beliefs be stamped with a seal deeming the movie evil, wrong, immoral, or sinful. There is something to be learned from every piece of art be it a movie, stage play, or literary work; a way to become aware of another spectrum of thoughts, beliefs, and emotion or create a further realization of your own.
Viper Vibe- Volume 9, Issue 8
This article was also featured on The National Edition.
Infomania Review June 19, 2010
Friday, March 26, 2010 By Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig
Sarcastic, witty, and ingenious, ‘Infomania,’ hosted by Conor Knighton, has been entertaining viewers and “chewing up this week’s media so we can regurgitate it, half-digested, into your mouth,” as the show’s slogan on their website says.
With a plethora of segments that vary from episode to episode, ‘Infomania’ is sure to keep viewers entertained, even for those people that easily find themselves losing interest in long tedious news programs. Since there is such an overload of media sources everywhere, constantly bombarding the public, it can make staying current on topics seem overwhelming. ‘Infomania’ covers subjects in a short 30 minutes.
Knighton reviews news that happened in the past week and the media’s reactions to what is currently happening, along with their ability to turn a blind eye to pressing problems in the world. ‘We’ve Got You Covered’ helps those who wish they had more time to peruse the magazine stands by summarizing the covers and stories of popular magazines that week. There is then a closer at the end of the segment, discussing a magazine that viewers submit, that is far-fetched and strange; it’s unbelievable that there is an entire magazine dedicated to it.
‘Sergio’s White Hot Top Five,’ a segment that takes statistics of the most popular genres of music from sources such as iTunes, and MTV and reviews them. Sergio, with a false sense of enthusiasm engages the audience by poking fun at music videos, song titles, and artists, making us take a second look at what we really listen to and watch.
Sometimes featured in ‘Infomania,’ Ben Hoffman reviews new or up-and-coming advancements in technology, from the new iPad, to outrageous applications for the iPhone. ‘Viral Video Film School,’ hosted by Brett Erlich discusses the uses of viral videos found online in all their strange, peculiar glory.
Hoffman, among other segments he hosts, also does an ‘Infomania Editorial’ where he discusses a current issue on his mind and his opinion on the topic, from the Super Bowl to the “Octo-Mom.”
Sarah Haskins sarcastically explores the stereotypes of women portrayed in the media, from commercials to products that attempt to target today’s women, in the appropriately titled segment ‘Target Women.’
In a segment with a similar ambiance, ‘That’s Gay’ with Bryan Safi sarcastically and satirically tackles issues such as the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy in the military as well as how to come out of the closet based on TV shows’ uses of gay characters and the way they come out. Safi facetiously reflects America’s views and opinions of the gay community as represented by the media.
Entertaining and informing is what ‘Infomania’ does best, keeping their viewers laughing and considering the way today’s media portrays itself and how absurd it is that people invest so much trust and time into it. ‘Infomania’ can be watched at http://current.com/infomania or on Current TV every Thursday night at 10 pm.
Viper Vibe- Volume 9, Issue 6
Also featured on The National Edition
New York Senate Stops Gay Marriage, Others Follow June 19, 2010
Friday, January 29, 2010 By Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig
The New York State Senate denied a bill supporting gay marriage on December 2. The vote was 38-to-24, which for a heavily Democratic New York was a surprising ultimatum.
According to the New York Times, “Senators who voted against the measure said the
Data Collected by: Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig, Graph by: Amilynn Soto
public was gripped by economic anxiety and remained uneasy about changing the state’s definition of marriage.” The possibility of same-sex marriage is now laid to rest until 2011, when a new legislature will be put into action. With another state denying gay couples the right to marry, it brings up the question of how many states allow same-sex marriage so far and with research, a surprising trend.
So far, same-sex marriage is only allowed in five of the fifty states, which is a mere 10% of the country. But more states allow marriage between first cousins than gay couples.
Twenty-six states allow first cousin nuptials. Alabama, Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia, make the list of states allowing marriage between first cousins (one parent of the husband is a sibling to one parent of the wife), and then Arizona, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Utah and Wisconsin will allow the prior but some require the couples to be older and unable to reproduce and one requires genetic counseling.
In contrast, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire, make up the small amount of states allowing gay union. Four more states allow same-sex couples to register as domestic partners, including Washington, Oregon, Nevada, and California.
All states, with the exception of Massachusetts and Iowa, allow marriage between first cousins, but not between gay couples. It’s not as if there are no first cousin marriages and that legislature just left it in their laws for some reason. According to an article in USA Today, genetics researcher Alan Bittles estimates that 20% of marriages worldwide are between relatives who are first cousins.
This trend is as surprising as it is because of possible health risks for the children that are a product of a marriage between first cousins. Fornication between two people of the same bloodline as close as first cousins can cause recessive birth defects in their children that can come in the form of different genetic diseases. Some have argued that the children produced by first cousins only, have an extra 1.7 to 2.8 percent chance of having genetic diseases.
In a study led by Robin Bennett, a genetics counselor at the University of Washington, the researchers found that children of marriages between cousins inherited recessive genetic disorders in 7% to 8% of cases. For the general population, the rate was 5%. (USA Today)
However, according to Philip Reilly, a geneticist and author of ‘Abraham Lincoln’s DNA,’ a popular history of human genetics, “A 7 to 8% chance (of genetic disorder) is 50% greater than a 5% chance. That’s a significant difference. People counseling first cousins who want to marry need to be very careful and clear on this.” (USA Today)
These recessive genetic diseases can span from cystic fibrosis to albinism to sickle cell anemia and countless others. For gay couples, married or not, adoption is a large option many consider, as well as surrogate parents. This may help orphaned children to find loving homes.
In a survey taken of 50 males and 50 females that attend Varela, all were asked whether they would support marriage between same-sex partners, first cousins, both, or neither.
The most prominent trend that appeared was that no one surveyed said that strictly first cousins should be allowed to be married.
A question posed by many people in the poll was “If more states allow first cousins to marry even with possible health risks, why not same-sex couples?”
Viper Vibe- Volume 9, Issue 4
‘To Serve and Protect’ Shouldn’t be Optional June 19, 2010
Tuesday, December 08, 2009 By Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig
Violence. Is it me, or has violence taken the forefront of the news nowadays? Someone was lit on fire by irrational, vengeful teens, a California girl raped right in front of school, a mother’s three daughters are kidnapped and killed by their estranged father, the drawn out list goes on and on.
Yes, the first 20, maybe 30 stories we hear put us in total shock and we abhor the blank-faced, frenzied, destructive, barbaric excuses for humans that we’ve ultimately become, but after about 50 to 100 stories flashing on our TV, computer, and even cell phone screens, we start to get used to it. We expect it on the morning news and dripping out of newspapers- we accept it. It’s not that we don’t hate it any less, but we are no longer shocked.
What has the world come to that we almost expect gruesome tales of violence to wake us up every day? We become desensitized, and only a heinous crime can muster up a bit of shock.
But what happens when the people that are supposed to protect us from these crimes and bring the perpetrators to justice start to become desensitized too?
Take what happened to Titus Andronicus (an indie band from New Jersey), while at a gig for VICE magazine. Their front man, Patrick Stickles, wasn’t allowed to reenter a venue to play with his band because of an American Flag prop.
Stickles figured that the security guard must have had a good reason to ask him to step out, but once he reached the door, the security guard yelled “Now leave!” In Titus Andronicus’ blog, he recounted the incident. The security grabbed him around the torso and forced him toward the barricades, and then grabbed Stickles by the throat and lifted him off the pavement, tossing him over the barricade.
Also from the band’s blog: “I figure that either, a) he saw his position of authority as a good opportunity to stomp queers like he used to with the other good old boys, or, b) this guy was a real American and seeing a degenerate hipster like me hoisting Old Glory, was just so offensive a sight the he was driven into a blind rage, like any reasonable person would.”
Stickles was “feeling very insulted and violated,” and his neck was tinged with the security guards handprints. He then made his second ever call to 911 in his life.
“Woo! Indeed, the police did arrive a minute later, sirens and all, and I ran after the car to tell them that I was the man who was so ghastly offended, but they turned the corner and sped off into the night, probably quite satisfied in knowing that the victim was some hipster douche bag who probably had it coming. Thanks, guys. To serve and protect. Fantastic,” said Stickles in his blog.
The thought of being the victim of a crime is worrisome, but the thought of the police being apathetic and the fact that a crime just isn’t worth their attention- that’s appalling. And the worst part is, Patrick Stickles’ brush with indifferent cops hasn’t been the first. There is a plethora of stories far worse than Stickles’ where the police decided for one reason or another that it wasn’t worth the effort. In Jessica Gonzales’s case, the police’s disinterest led to the kidnapping and murder of her three daughters by her estranged husband.
Sure Stickles’ encounter wasn’t as serious as that of Jessica Gonzales and numerous others, but his rights were violated, and the people who dedicate their lives to ensure that very occurrence doesn’t happen, turned a blind eye and drove off.
How can one human, especially one sworn to serve and protect, decide the fate of another’s isn’t worth a second glance? I’m not saying all law enforcement displays a stolid disposition, but a handful do. Why would someone decide to choose a career that they’re not 100% committed to? Is it for the gun? The flashing lights that get you through traffic?
The power? Or the ability to play “God’ in a sense, and choose who you do and do not help?
Viper Vibe- Volume 9, Issue 3
Era’s Verve Fades to Fad June 19, 2010
Friday, September 25, 2009 By Kelbi-Caitlin Carrig
When the media has control over trends and fads that make their way into our culture, as demonstrated all throughout history, things seem to get lost in translation. The problem with an era that is being reintroduced is that it’s been reduced to purely to the look and none of the feel. Either through the course of time or just for lack of comparable principles and understanding, or both, the once iconic era has lost its verve and potency. That indiscernible spark it once had has faded to an unrecognizable glimmer with the touch of our current times.
With ‘Taking Woodstock’ out in theatres, it’s become even more apparent that The Age of Aquarius is edging back, but this time around the soul of it has been gutted and only the semblance remains. The late 60s and early 70s were a time when peace, music, and free love flowed freely. When the hair was long and life seemed too short. The music was wrought with passion and purpose; and minds were open to new ideals. It was before MTV, when artists were artists and you saw a person through their music, not by what they looked like. For that, their music was deeper and possessed a certain intangible, multi-dimensional quality.
Fast forward to now. The Who’s music is known as “the CSI songs”, and people have no clue who Janis Joplin is and some that do, don’t even know one of her songs.
Some people didn’t even know what Woodstock was until they watched the movie. This past culture seems to be forgotten. Yet music, fashion and symbols from the 60’s and 70’s are strewn everywhere the eye can see. But not many people seem to know where these came from or the history behind them.
Peace signs once held a certain power and meaning behind them. Peace signs stood for the strife to get to that ultimate utopia where there was peace through out the world. At that time the Vietnam War was raging, and people were dying everyday. Had it been friends or family, it really hit home (as any war does), but there just seemed to be something about the youth of the time that made it feel more crucial to endeavor to convince people and the government to make strides towards peace. All that zeal the peace sign held made it cogent, but now, you don’t feel any underlying cause or struggle or even the heart behind the symbol anymore.
The peace sign’s principle has been hallowed into nothing more than a superficial ornament. Peace signs are worn because they’re seen as “cute” or “pretty” or because what it stands for sounds appealing, but the person displaying it doesn’t truly care. Hardly ever is the peace sign worn as a statement. It’s been slapped on everything from bags, to sweaters, to jewelry, and even Myspace layouts. This has been done so much so that the conviction of the peace sign has been lost.
Movies that come out can cause quite a stir in the culture and the way people think. With the announcement of ‘Taking Woodstock’ coming out, suddenly interest in the historical event and time period was ignited. Book stores set up tables stacked with books about Woodstock and random items pertaining slightly to it, from coasters, to peace sign paper weights, to mugs, and daily planners.
The History Channel also paid it’s respects to Woodstock by televising specials on Woodstock and its performers. A similar trend arose when ‘Across the Universe’ came out. All of a sudden people loved The Beatles but they only would listen to the over-processed movie versions of the songs, not the raw, soulful originals actually performed by The Beatles. Some people didn’t even take enough of an interest in them to look for more songs by the Beatles, they just settled for the over-done ones in ‘Across The Universe,’ but with all of the songs by the Beatles, ‘Across the Universe’ only scratched the surface.
And now you even have The Beatles Rock Band out. Which is great, but of course some of us Beatles fans are a bit apprehensive as to whether or not it will be made tastefully and at least try to emulate their music and the vibe that emanates from it.
I must say though, I love that there is a Hair revival (Hair is a Broadway Musical that hit Broadway on April 29, 1968), I may have only seen clips and tid-bits of the play, but it is the one accurate depiction that seems to fully embody the time. The music is written with that passion and vigor that you just can’t seem to find today. Since Hair was written in the 60s, the lyrics and story truly captures the tension and struggle and vehemence that existed during that time that some modern movies may let slip through the cracks.
I love and hate that the 60s and 70s seem to be creeping back. I love it for the ideals and mind sets from that time to reappear now. But I hate that what is coming back is the empty one-dimensional husk of what used to be.
The 60’s and 70’s wasn’t a trend, or a fad, or a style. It was a vibe, a feeling, a movement, and a state of mind and body. Somehow our generation has managed to transform this iconic era into something superficial and tangible. All depth, passion, and vivaciousness from the time have been washed away, and all we’re left with is a mirror image; just the flat, physical facade.
Even though we weren’t born during The Summer of Love, all of us that grew up listening to music from the 60’s and 70’s and being taught about the time and the way things were, what is happening now, is disconcerting. The ardor, rebellion, and effortless flow of peace and love that saturated the quintessential Aquarian Age has deflated to an empty skeleton prided on appearance and not bothering to delve into the heart and soul of an era, a counter culture, and a phenomenon.
Viper Vibe- Volume 9, Issue 1
Featured on The National Edition
