Seeing Slavery Through A New Hollywood- Are We Ready?

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Today's entry will attempt to decipher a question that will no doubt permeate audiences' minds within the coming months and maybe years- in this modern society, are we ready to see Hollywood depict America's past with slavery? Two upcoming film projects seem to beg the question- the first will be director Quentin Tarantino's spaghetti western/blaxploitation inspired "Django Unchained", and the second, based on the true story of Solomon Northup, is "12 Years A Slave". It is important to note that both films boast A-list casting, with "Django" having the likes of Jamie Foxx and Leonardo DiCaprio, and "12 Years" lining up Chiwetel Ejiofor and Brad Pitt. As these stars and productions prepare for this gamble and ask their audiences to place their bets upon release, I wonder exactly how films with slavery in the main role will be interpreted by our generation.



Though slavery in America has been depicted in Hollywood before, the sensitivity of the subject has caused its story to be told in between lapses of time. Also keep in mind that historical films, as with other film genres, are perceived not by the era they depict but rather by the era in which they are made. Take for example D.W. Griffith's 1915 Civil War epic "The Birth of A Nation" (a film I have seen clips of, but not yet in its entirety for fear of anger); not only are blacks and slaves portrayed by white actors in blackface, but they are portrayed as stupid, selfish and barbaric in response to their "heroic" white Confederate counterparts. Now let's jump to an American film standard, 1939's "Gone With the Wind"; though it shows a kinder, more modern phase of race relations towards the 1860's South, viewers still see subservience in blacks even after their release from bondage.



Undoubtedly, the biggest production thus far to have its audience see the complete totality of slavery in America is the 1977 television miniseries "Roots". Based from the novel of writer Alex Haley, "Roots" traces an African and his American descendants' journey into slavery, from capture to freedom. As it was made after the Civil Rights era, the main characters' roles- especially that of the African, Kunta Kinte- were portrayed as more dignified, defiant and resourceful towards their situations and aspirations. "Roots" would become a cultural landmark, still remaining one of the highest watched television programs in American history. However, in the time since "Roots", most Hollywood productions involving blacks in antebellum/Civil War era America (i.e "Glory" and "Amistad") have had slavery as a shadowy, looming backdrop against their crusade.



Now with these past narratives in mind, how will Hollywood interpret American slavery in today's post-black, Obama-era society? As "Django" and "12 Years" works toward answering this question, I personally assume that the modern audience will need their protagonist slave to be heroically resistant against their bondage, resulting in their freedom by the end of the film. I also believe that these protagonists will be a more symbolic hero whose journey relates a more one-on-one, intimate correlation with their audience. Essentially, this new model of past American slavery will have to represent a combination of society's past truths with its current ambitions while not relying on the hurtful stereotypes of that past.

For fear of these stereotypes, there are some that believe that these films could regress the psyche of blacks in cinema; that the "angry, violent, black man" has been done and over. These are valid concerns, but from what I understand to know of these films' developments it seems that the protagonists' anger is justifiable and the violence (though expected to be more cartoonish for "Django") is needed when necessary. Also, remember that the top tier casting in these films says something about the material, as I'm sure these actors would not gamble on a project that they felt would totally destroy their credibility or careers. Therefore, I eagerly look forward to the production and release of these films with the thought that this particular new model of black uprising could lead to a new sort of "black superhero" to be seen and identified by our generation specifically. So I myself am ready to see how slavery can depicted in today's Hollywood- but I am one of many, some of that many agreeing with this anticipation while the others do not. Nevertheless, the opinions, debates and possibilities of seeing an American slave liberate himself in our generation's time are infinite and groundbreaking.

Well, I think that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

The King Memorial

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Nothing much for today's entry, but I will have more stuff for you coming soon. Instead, I thought I'd share some of the pictures I took from when I visited the King Memorial on Labor Day. As you will see, the area was immense with diverse people who came to see this new addition to Washington's mix of history, art and culture. The experience of visiting this memorial was nothing short of amazing; the essence of Dr.King's spirit and crusade felt very evident in walking throught the site. I do plan on going back in the near future, and encourage you to do so whenever possible. Meantime, check these pics out, and let me know your thoughts. Until next time, peace out.

The Importance of August 28th

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. On what should have been the opening dedication of the Martin Luther King, Jr., National Memorial on August 28, 2011, today's entry will be about the significance of the day August 28th itself in American and thus worldwide history. On that particular calendar day, three key events would shape the American Civil Rights Movement, a struggle where the youth and visionaries of that generation would change the navigational course of traditional "decency", equality and freedom. In chasing that tide of directive change, the courage of that generation- and those before them who had to suffer worse indignities- is very profound, as I surely cannot accurately fathom the level of disrespect and inhumanity they faced on a normal basis. With this in mind it could be argued that August 28th be viewed as a Civil Rights Memorial Day of sorts, as events on that day through the years would galvanize then stregnthen participation in both the movement and its following legacy.

August 28, 1955- the Murder of Emmett Till


A little over three months before Rosa Parks' defiant standing up through sitting in the whites only section of the bus in December 1955, fourteen year old Chicago native Emmett Till was murdered in Mississippi for the "crime" of whistling at a white woman. Taken late at night from the home of the relatives with whom he was staying, Till- in the last moments of life and first moments after death- would endure ghastly mutilation to his body by egotistical murderers who not only took his life but sought to take his humanity and manhood through such disfigurement. The latter goal would not be achieved, as Till's mother displayed his body and story in an effort to show how badly America needed to change in its race relations. Though it would be a few months before more Americans would begin to heed and spread this message- as Till's murderers would later confess to their crime as unrepentant free men- Emmett Till would become a cataclysmic symbol for such truth, justice, and sadly enough, growth.

August 28, 1963- Martin Luther King, Jr., Shares his Dream


Eight years into the Civil Rights Movement, the March On Washington for Jobs and Freedom was held at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. Using the march's platform for civic and economic growth as well as for its push towards legislation for voting rights, one of its prime leaders would vividly announce the intended goals and aspirations the movement itself aimed to achieve for present and future societies. In his riveting "I Have A Dream" speech, Martin Luther King, Jr., uses allegorical references from literature, religion and politics to speak of a possible society that overcomes bitter prejudices to engage with diverse cultures in achieving equal harmony. What strikes me most about the speech is King's near clairvoyant delivery; in switching from the written text to literally freestyling, he confidently uses his preaching gifts to have the crowd further envision his idealistic agenda as he speaks it. As with its brilliant orator, the "I Have A Dream" speech has its invaluable place in history -in its case as a spoken blueprint for modern tolerance and togetherness.

August 28, 2008- Barack Obama Accepts the Democratic Nomination for U.S. President


Fifty-three years to the day after Emmett Till's murder, forty-five years to the day of Martin Luther King, Jr., delivering his "I Have A Dream" speech, U.S. Senator Barack Obama accepts the Democratic nomination for the Presidency of the United States. Obama, a humble yet charismatic politician from Illinois, had began to captivate Americans and their potential votes through speaking about a committal to progressive change towards a better quality of life. He would also captivate through his keen sense of history, as other memorable dates and scenes in this country coincided within his journey to the White House. This certain August 28th event marks an event of change in America itself, as it shows a culmination- not the total culmination as there is more work to do, but a culmination- of evidence of efforts towards relativity through diversity.

The heroic life, work, and legacy of civil rights leader Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., would cause fellow Americans to memorialize him in the nation's capital. Although the dedication of his memorial did not happen on the forty-eighth anniversary of one of his greatest moments as was originally planned, keep in mind that the three previously described events on August 28th would help to transform ideas, thoughts, and possibilities for future generations. As I stated above, the Civil Rights Movement caused great changes that greatly accelerated our cultural and even spiritual growth, and today it reminds us to always work towards the best ideals for ourselves, our people and our societies.

Well, I think that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

The Top Five Spike Lee Movies

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Today's entry is a retrospective of classic American cinema, as we count down the top five movies of filmmaker Spike Lee. As the prime years of his career range from the late 1980's to the 1990's, Lee (seen in the above photo as his Air Jordan saavy alter-ego Mars Blackmon) told stories of the modern black community, accurately depicting its views and opinions concerning racism, sexuality and class. His unique brand of realism would both counter the imaginary, superheroic "blaxploitation" era of a decade before, as well as usher in a cadre of black filmmakers who would be inspired to tell stories from their own specific point of view (i.e. John Singleton, Lee Daniels, and even Tyler Perry). Here are my top five Spike Lee movies, films that I think display his genius at mixing cultural, diasporic values with biting political commentary.

5. He Got Game (1998)



As we all know Spike to stay front row center at any given Knicks game, in "He Got Game" he uses the love of basketball to propel dissonance in the relationship between an estranged father and son.

4. School Daze (1988)



The satirical title for this film is accurately appropriate; it simultaneously praises and criticizes HBCUs while exploring deeper levels of difference in the black community regarding class, education and skin color.

3. Get On the Bus (1996)



Set against the backdrop of the Million Man March, "Get on the Bus" is a movie that I venture to say is truly specific to the black male audience. To attend the march, a small group of black men ride a charter bus cross-country from Los Angeles to Washington, D.C., in hopes of finding solidarity within their race and communities. As we watch the group's pilgrimage unfold, we observe every possible interpretation and relationship of the black man, ranging from old to young, father to son, convict to lawman, even homosexual to homophobic. Though their individual personalities and lifestyles do provide division, it is at a cost that the group ultimately achieves the solidarity they journeyed for.

2. Do the Right Thing (1989)



Hailed by many to be Spike's greatest film if not his best known, "Do the Right Thing" parallels the hottest day of the year with rising, explosive anger towards gentrification in a black neighborhood. It could be said that most of the characters in fact do not do the right thing; they talk at each other rather than to each other, and each side wants the other to accommodate their culture while not being willing to do so themselves. The arguing and frustration catapult the film's most memorable scenes, such as when the comedically defiant Buggin' Out and friends have a dispute with a white neighbor over scuffed Air Jordans, or when the movie's breakout character Radio Raheem has a semi-hostile interaction with Korean store owners while trying to buy batteries for his boombox. The ending of "Do the Right Thing" is intentionally ambiguous, I think because Spike wanted the audience to draw their own conclusions about what was right or wrong, racist or defensive.

1. Malcolm X (1992)



Through this telling of Malcolm's epic story, the combination of Spike's direct narrative with Denzel Washington's commanding performance accomplishes the impossible; it makes an already iconic figure more grandiose in legacy but also more relatable to a new generation. "Malcolm X" was a total labor of love for Spike, as he had to fight to direct, produce and finance the film to be as accurate to his vision as possible. The film brilliantly evaluates Malcolm's constant and truthful spiritual evolution by breaking his life up into four parts that intermingle when necessary to show genuine feeling or thought behind certain events. His fiery yet elegant persona is perfectly embodied by Denzel in what is one of the greatest acting performances I've ever seen.

In recent years, Spike's range has expanded through directing both stirring, thought provoking documentaries (4 Little Girls, When the Levees Broke) and feature films that have his core audience relate to non-black, outlaw type characters (25th Hour, Inside Man). While some of this latter signature-styled films (She Hate Me, Miracle at St. Anna) have been more serious in subject matter but less playful in depiction, they nevertheless showcase his continued ability to tell stories accurate to black American society both historical and current. I hope that he will continue in this style in his upcoming remake of the Korean film "Oldboy", as some of the principles of that story can be amended towards his point of view. Though some of his releases have been initially recieved as controversial and insulting, Spike Lee used his movies to help the advance for "culture clash" in modern American society, as he pushes his audience into observing then relating to other races and cultures more in a common ground.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read to blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

The Daring Audacity of President Obama

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. In the spirit of American patriotism, today's entry will be about our current Commander and Chief, President Barack Obama. With the election year of 2012 on the horizon, Obama's chances of re-election are met with both anticipation by supporters and speculation by critics. We are left to ponder his chances of repeating victory; can he run the immaculate, well-oiled race again amidst the publicized doubts of his tenure in office over the last two and a half years? Right now the answer to that question splits down the middle, as those who believe Obama's best efforts are constantly constrained by "old school, politics as usual" government have as much power in their vote as those who believe his policies have since worsened the situation America was in when he first stepped into office. Nevertheless, most on either aisle can't (legitimately) dispute Obama's commitment to the American people, and in my opinion he is the most hardworking President I have seen thus far.



Barack Obama's race for the presidency in 2008 was nothing short of legendary, as his combination of fabled biography and idealistic vision led voters to view him as a symbolic hero within a matter of months. His was a style I call being so "classic it's original", as he had an grand backstory similar to that of Lincoln, a destiny that is aligned with the dream of King, the youthful optimism reminiscent of Kennedy, and had ahead of him a mountain of tasks to complete as Franklin Roosevelt did. America excitedly welcomed this type of heroic projection while facing the crises of downsized economy, rising gas prices and unemployment rates, and fighting in wars that were deemed unnecessary and unpopular. With the slogan "Yes We Can" as a battle cry, candidate Obama's main appeal to the voters was in rejuvenating their desire to join in the American process, poignantly reminding them that they must cite and enact the change they want seen rather than waiting on others to do so first.

In the two and a half years that Obama has taken office, he has worked towards fixing America's problems both domestic and foreign. However, his proposed plans and policies towards this effort would be met with resistance, mostly by a more conservative faction of Congress that claimed his agendas would be overexpensive and ineffective. This would lead to sparring between these conservatives and the liberals that supported the President's agendas, in turn making Obama become, unintentionally, the most polarizing figure in modern American politics. For the sake of having these policies go into active movement, Obama would go to compromise with Congress, even going as far to keep the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy (that he vowed to eradicate once in office) extended so that unemployment benefits for the middle, working class could be extended longer as well. Even for all his compromising and diligent efforts, the midterm elections of 2010 proved to be against the favor of Obama's Democratic party, as more Republicans were voted to Congressional seats.



After enduring such political defeats, Obama would gain a resurgance of popularity and confidence from the American people beginning in early 2011, its main catalyst being his order of raid and assassination of terrorist Osama bin Laden proving successful. This action would be Obama's crowning achievement in office (thus far); until his fatal capture, bin Laden had been elusive to worldwide law enforcement for the nearly one decade after the 9/11 attacks on America. This career victory would give Obama more clout to respond against critics who had previously questioned his competence and commitment to the presidency, as well as those who repeatedly (and foolishly) questioned his true nationality. I must admit that I enjoyed seeing this President wittingly address these opinions, as his responses were respectful yet defiant.



As the 2012 presidential election will soon be upon us, I beleive that Barack Obama will guide his campaign with two main factors; the first being his trademark, pop-culture styled accessibility to the American people, and the second being a showcase of the positive changes he made in America since being elected in 2008 (new reform on health care, finding services that creates new jobs, the capture of bin Laden). No matter what your opinion is of Obama and his policies, you must admit that he has gotten the American people to pay more attention to our country's problems and intended solutions more than any other President in recent history. One must also admit his bravery in being a "pop culture President", as he could far more easily be booed at public outings by the audience he works for than by the Congress he works with- and the fact that he doesn't get booed while appearing in these outings by the American public must mean that a great percentage of them must recognize his effort to change things for the better. I know Barack Obama can't entirely run the immaculate, well-oiled race again in 2012, but nevertheless I still believe in his chances for reelection due to the sort of idealism, accessibility and dignity he exemplifies.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

The Mythological Michael Jackson

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Being that June is Black Music Month and in remembrance of its 25th being the second anniversary of our subject's death, I would be remiss not to have today's entry be about the "King of Pop" Michael Jackson. He was indeed and undoubtedly the greatest entertainer that ever lived, performing superhuman routines that changed music, art, dance and worldwide society at large. Though he died at age 50, it could be said that Michael lived a life that had 100 years worth of experiences; throughout his entire existence he was never in between, either having mind-blowing successes or earth-shattering failures. Everything about Michael Jackson- both on and off stage- was truly an event to his worldwide audience, and thanks to his epic journey there are far too many of these moments to count.


Over the forty plus year time span from "ABC" to "This Is It", Michael Jackson centered his innovative style around his individually unique singing voice(s). When he and his older brothers were introduced to the world's stage as the Jackson Five, they catapulted to superstardom hugely due to their youngest member being a prodigal, energetic dynamo. The most interesting attribute about Michael's voice during this era is that he sings with a wiser beyond his years, "old soul" type of presence. This is especially evident with his vocals in romantic leads, sounding as if he has experienced the type of longing and heartache as depicted in "The Love You Save", "I'll Be There", "Got To Be There", and "I Wanna Be Where You Are". Michael is a vocal rarity in that he has sung with two very distinct voices- one as the wise child prodigy and the other being the signature and stylized adult megastar.



Such the calculating performer was Michael that he understood that the expressive physicality between song (voice) and dance (body) must match perfectly. Even as the child prodigy he would dedicate himself to this ideal by creating song specific dance patterns that demanded perfect timing and execution. Though he always danced with unbridled yet strategic energy, Michael would rewrite the relationship between song and dance during his "Thriller" era by fusing it unparalleled magical elements that fueled his audience's imagination. As we watched him perform the Moonwalk to "Billie Jean", the "West Side Story" inspired choreography to "Beat It", and later the lean in "Smooth Criminal", we realized that Michael was a "special effect" within himself, making us question Isaac Newton's theories of gravity. A true testament to his moves and cool factor is that after seeing him make the moves look so easy we instantly believed we could do it ourselves, but then proving it made us realize his dedication to flawlessness even more.



As he was always a performer that must be both seen and heard, Michael would marry pop music to theatrical vision through the medium of music video. When he released his juggernaut album "Thriller" in 1982, he put to work his grand vision of using filmmaking inspired by art, history and classic cinema to tell other areas of his songs' storylines that you couldn't get with just music and dance. The key element to these "short films" as Jackson called them was in fact the storyline itself; to me, it is as if Michael had these storylines in mind all along, even selecting the proper visuals and historic era in his head while recording the song and crafting the dance moves specific to it. With this mammoth combination of elements, Jackson's short films ranged from the stylized genre pieces such as "Thriller", "Smooth Criminal" and "Remember the Time" to the epic operas such as "Bad", "Captain Eo" and "Ghosts".



Just as Michael Jackson would come to symbolize the ultimate performer, he would also come to symbolize the ultimate celebrity. In this sense, he was P. T. Barnum's realization of bringing amazing entertainment to his audience from an act that was rooted from eccentric, bizarre greatness. Illusion plays a big part in Michael Jackson's legacy in that you didn't know what was real and/or fake in his life both on and off stage. It would be the offstage events in Jackson's life- the physical transformations, eccentric behavior and most notably allegations of child molestation-that fueled an imagination from his audience that he would shun and dismiss, causing him to have a love/hate relationship with media outlets. But it would be the ultimate performing persona of Michael that would win out, as when he died in 2009 he was "recanonized" by the media and his audience by holding weekend long marathons of his music and films, and airing his public memorial in an effort to remember to his great accomplishments.



The main element to Michael Jackson's mythology is surprise; good or bad, you really wouldn't have believed him unless you had seen him. His style, accomplishments, individuality and struggles cause him to be a modern day epic hero whose life's works have inspired others to elevate their own. It is amazing that over course of the forty plus years that we were his audience, and even today, Michael would use his magic to surprise us over and over again yet still leave us wanting more. As he is in a class all his own, it is without a doubt that I believe the greatest entertainer who ever lived was the "King of Pop", Michael Jackson.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Also, if you want more great commentary on music and culture, check out the Hip Hop's Politician's blog- trust me, it's good stuff there, you'll thank me later. Until next time, peace out.

The Autobiographical Artistry of Marvin Gaye

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. In celebration of June being Black Music Month, today's entry is about the always relevant and ever revealing musical genius Marvin Gaye. Since his filicide (murder by his father) in 1984, Gaye's legacy and music has elevated to the status of being culturally iconic due to its constant reexamination by critics, fans and a younger generation of audience. This is because his music- or art, to a higher degree- was geared towards pulpit and platform; it gave its audience a more deeper understanding of the human psyche through presenting rare honesty and connective emotion. In this meaning, I believe Marvin Gaye to be the defining artist of soul music; his "self-exposure" causes us to identify ourselves with him, as his theories on love, society and philosophy can beautifully mirror our own.

Before such finding and revelation, Marvin Gaye spent the first decade of his career being Motown Records' most chivalric and amalgamate artist; this "Prince of Motown" tried to find his own persona by imitating those of Nat King Cole, Frank Sinatra and Sam Cooke. He would also struggle with Motown's "assembly line" type of hit-making production, as it prohibited their artist's own creative expression in favor of exposure and development. Both conflicts would come to a head in 1971 when Gaye demanded that Motown release his "Whats Going On" album; a nine track sociopolitical thesis, "What's Going On" allowed Marvin to find his own voice as he was inspired from American upheaval, particularly in the divisive opinion of the Vietnam War. When Motown-"the sound of young America"- refused to put it out fearing its possible lack of commercial viability, Gaye would force them to by stating he would not record any other material for them otherwise. His belief in the material would prove to be vindicated, as "What's Going On" was a commercial and cultural smash and has since been celebrated in its' role in making the standards of pop/modern music more limitless.



"What's Going On" became the defining catalyst in Marvin's music and life, finally giving him the creative and even spiritual freedom he so desired. From this point, however, his musings shifted from the outer society to the inner self, deciding that his music would serve as a narrative for the ongoings in his own life. I think it is from this point on that Marvin always sung with a purposeful plea that asks of its listener for either some sort of relation, accompaniment or forgiveness. Prime examples of this are his virile encouragement for "Let's Get It On"; his admittance to guilt and its pleasures in "Ego Tripping Out"; his timidness towards finding new love in "I Want You"; his anger at marital separation in "When Did You Stop Loving Me, When Did I Stop Loving You". The amazing feature of Marvin's craftsmanship is that his music itself, apart from his singing and lyrics, could also describe the feeling he wanted to convey. Just as with his vocals, the instrumentation creates a fusion of gospel, jazz and blues that both invokes and appeals. I challenge you to listen to just the instrumental of a Marvin Gaye song and try to find the inspiration and emotion it aims to achieve.

In the tradition of all autobiographical artists, Marvin would gradually believe that he would have to live a life that provided the mythology necessary for such honesty; this meant heightening the dramatic, more negative aspects of his life so he could be more heroic in his storytelling. Needless to say that living in this ideal is a double-edged sword that services creativity at the cost of aggrandizing the demons that bred its subject matter. This ideal can also lead its artists into believing that their creativity is solely within their darker aspects, thus causing them to deny the more virtuous, pure aspects of themselves and their gift. As was the case with van Gogh, Hemingway and Cobain, Gaye would pose self-destruction as artistic suffering, assuming he would gain spiritual redemption through his creative legacy while mortally submerging into drugs, damaging relationships, and suicidal inclinations. Ironically, this excuse for downward spiral does have an element of truth for this type of artist, as their complete body of work grows to be more appreciated well after their physical demise.

The overall theme in Marvin Gaye's life and music is his desire for intimacy at all costs, be it erotic, familial, or societal. His was the type of intimate plea that is gut-wrenching to its audience, as they can hear in his empathic rhythms and expressive voice that his own quest for this virtue would never be fulfilled. However, this unfulfillment tends to brilliantly expand his legacy, as it displays that Marvin's genius was really bred from his humanity- he needs to understand himself just as he needs to connect to others. This exact sort of intimacy and connectivity is what I perceive to be most essential in soul music, therefore making Marvin Gaye its most defining and relative artist.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

The Visual Legacy of David and Goliath

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Today's entry is a fusion of art, history and religion that centers on a principal subject for each genre, King David. As he is mostly remembered and depicted for slaying the behemoth Goliath, David has become a symbol for taking a stand against oppression; for this reason he is my favorite biblical character (not just because he and I share the same name). To me, David's story resonates because of his being the ultimate "underdog" who not only has the courage to face his opposition but stands victorious over it. I see this story as a great parable for life, as we all will have to face Goliath-like enemies or problems within our lifetime and have the courage to fight against them. Thus, in the spirit of this relation, David has become a muse for generations of writers, musicians, and- here in particular- visual artists. What I find striking about artists in their depicting of David is that the timelessness of his story is not lost to them, as they bring him and Goliath into their communities and cultures.

Perhaps the best known artists' depiction of David is the larger than life statue that was sculpted by Michelangelo during the early 16th century, his face shown above. It shows the hero in preparation of battle, ready to defend his community against outsiders who wish to dominate through violence and intimidation. I think that this depiction of David is where artists begin to showcase him more realistically in regards to human emotion; it could be said that Michelangelo's David is representative of a soldier, as this is a figure who is calm and gallant yet wears on his face his worries about the level of opponent he faces as well as how and when this fight will end. This display of internal conflict makes the work more humane to its audience/viewer, as we can relate to the figure's expressiveness by recalling scenarios where we bravely fought through our fears for a greater good. As with its muse, Michelangelo's David has become something of a symbol itself as it has come to represent new vanguards for art and culture.



A little over one hundred years after Michelangelo's depiction of David readying to face Goliath, fellow Italian artist Caravaggio decides to take the more traditional route, as his painting shows the victorious young boy with his brutally slayed enemy. As the background's shrouding darkness provides more intimacy to its subject and storyline, David's wardrobe is a bit analogous, as it could be representative of either biblical times or of early 17th century peasantry. As Caravaggio's David holds the head of Goliath (a self-portrait of the artist himself), his compassion for his victim is evident; the look on David's face is somber, almost as if he is regretful that this altercation had to end in the taking of a life. This display of emotion gives a new element to the story, as we never before thought to imagine that David could be- at least slightly- saddened by the realization that he has caused a casualty through his fighting in war.



Just over a decade after Caravaggio presented a brooding David, the sculptor Bernini gives us an "action hero" inspired interpretation through marble statue. In this depiction Bernini shows us the fierce warrior in the throes of battle, as he is in the mid-swing of throwing the fatal stone. This David is by far the most theatrical, as the figure transcends from the statuesque into being physically human, as if he is an actor in a grand one man performance. Because of this effect, the "actor"'s realistic tension in his hands, body and face could make his audience almost believe they are witnessing the event for themselves. Honestly, it is because of these reasons that I believe Bernini's presentation to be, quite possibly, David's most consistently relevant depiction.

One great aspect that I have noticed about both sculptures (Michelangelo and Bernini) is that by presenting David in a grand manner by himself, they make Goliath's presence known in a more grandiose, mythic way. Supporting evidence of an ominous foe is seen in the hero's defiant and armed stance, as he looks away from from the audience but still in a concentrated stare. I perceive it to quite allegorical in that Goliath's invisibility makes him a giant, as the unseen opponent represents the problems and trepidation that individuals must confront in order to achieve goals.



And now we arrive to a more modern, more culturally diverse David versus Goliath thanks to Kadir Nelson's painting as shown above. I'll be honest with you, folks; it took me a little while to fully appreciate the visual metaphors Nelson added to the story by making it sports related, as David and Goliath go "one on one" in a basketball game as the crowd looks on. These visual metaphors include the court blacktop being the "battleground", as David has the basketball- or rather "the rock"- under his arm. Through this athletic depiction Nelson playfully makes the story more about competition rather than dominance, as they "battle" for bragging rights. However, this David appears more dominantly, courtesy of Nelson using visual perspective to depict distance. I gather that Nelson's intent for David in that perspective was to have the viewer relate to his journey in accomplishing the goals of outlasting and beating Goliath while giving the crowd a dazzling performance in the process.

As we've seen through these four depictions, the story of David and Goliath is both timely and timeless, as its different interpretations bred different perceptions and possibilities. As the hero and story serve as muses for creativity and individualism, it could be argued that David may be the most visually depicted biblical character except for maybe Christ himself. It could be a sort of "rite of passage" for most artists to present a new interpretation of this story given that it gives so much room for opportunity to think, feel and connect to a specifically human brand of heroism. As I stated earlier, David's unexpected victory, making him the symbolic underdog, causes us to believe in our total strength as we strive to be the symbolic underdog claiming victory against our behemoth occurrences. And who doesn't love an underdog?

Well, I think that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until then, peace out.

Frederick Douglass Selling Afro Sheen!

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. For today's entry I've decided to showcase a vintage advertisement from the 1970's that speaks volumes both then and today. A few months ago, I watched on television the "Soul Train" retrospective that talked about the show's cultural significance through establishing new tastes in music, fashion and commerce. In terms of commerce, "Soul Train" creator Don Cornelius knew to market both his own production company as well as promote other black owned companies such as Johnson Hair Care products; this partnership is possibly its most remembered and lucrative, as Johnson's "Afro Sheen" products received heavy boosts in popularity and sales thanks to the commercial spots "Soul Train" would provide for them. One such commercial (which caught my eye during the airing of the retrospective) combines historic pride with common fashion sense of the day.



This commercial, which depicts the spirit of former slave and abolitionist Frederick Douglass promoting pride through the "proper wearing" of the natural Afro, is quite genius if you think about it. I think they picked the perfect symbol for this depiction, as Douglass was the only black leader to wear the natural Afro (as it were) in the 19th century. In the time of the 1970's the modern Afro hairstyle was at best a decade old, so finding a historic figure who wore their hair in that way further connected him to the modern black American by affirming the political and cultural meaning that the hairstyle would come to embody. It can be assumed that the creative director of this commercial picked up on this, as both Douglass and the modern teenage blacks of the 1970s had journeyed for both individualistic and societal freedom while proudly wearing this new, expressive hairstyle.



When I first saw this clip, I thought it was a bit comical at first, as I am of a generation where we hold a bit of cynicism and skepticism towards some older displays of black pride. However, I have come to have a great respect for it not just as an commercial ad but also, in a sense, as a public service announcement, as in both terms it shows that pride in ourselves, our history and our community can prove to be enriching towards financial and cultural means. Ads like these, unexpectedly targeted at specific communities more so than demographics, can cause us to investigate what determines something to be a force or value within a particular culture's way of life.



Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until then, peace out.

Our Revolutionary Braggarts: Ali vs. Pac

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. For today's entry I've decided to do a compare and contrast between two of our culture's greatest anti-heroes, my definition of that term meaning that these two are individuals whose own specific ideals, actions, and dealings with their own unique opposition helped shape the societies in which they lived. These two anti-heroes, boxing legend Muhammad Ali and hip hop icon Tupac Shakur, are a generation apart but have striking similarities as well as outstanding differences both because of their rebellious legacies. I'll take it a step further and say that Ali and Pac symbolize being what could be known as a "revolutionary braggart", as their sociopolitical upbringings gave way to their defiant stances against conformity, prejudice and even traditional masculinity.

So how exactly are Ali and Pac "revolutionary"? You could start by evaluating them in their professional fields, where their legacies have reigning influence to this day. Since Ali, the main prototype of the modern black athlete has become more dominantly focused towards winning, thus becoming more unapologetic in determining the needs and surroundings they must have in order to win. Modern day hip hop has this sort of logic also, as it is verbally "athletic" due to its known competitive sparring- a facet of the genre that Pac would further influence (i.e "Hit 'Em Up"). But Pac's greatest contribution is allowing future hip hop artists to be more limitless in their musical and personal definitions, allowing them to be more multi-faceted and diverse within themselves than before.




Ali and Pac's professional legacies, of course, tie in to how they are culturally "revolutionary", but to appreciate the fullness of this particular aspect you must look at their own upbringings, as both came from and into social movements that were bred from modern anti-heroic, vigilante schools of thought. Cassius Clay's interpretation of the world became much broader due to his joining the Nation of Islam; and although they advocated total racial separation, Clay's devotion to this group informed him that there is a higher purpose and standard that he must fulfill, and he chose to display this through his celebrity and "rebirth" as Muhammad Ali. Tupac Shakur was literally born into the struggle as his mother, a Black Panther member, carried him during a short prison term and gave birth to him one month after her release. It is through his mother and her fellow radical allies and friends that Tupac began to gain awareness of his people, their struggle and a calling to make others socially and culturally aware.




So now that we've defined Ali and Pac in the "revolutionary" sense, how exactly are they "braggarts"? I think the most obvious answer is in how they both would never tire from proving their "righteousness" in their personal yet public battles. Ali and Pac would stop at nothing to make sure their presence and opinions were known through unconventional bravado that would resonate with their audiences yet intimidate their (chosen) opponents. In this spirit their bragging thus must come from the truths that represent themselves, their agendas and even their opponents. Both figures used this truthful bragging with great ability, but is here by their own personal usage of it that they begin to diverge. As an athlete, Ali figured out that he truly would have to incite his opponents through statements and antics that could be hurtful and insulting. This tactic would thus invoke his opponent with more emotional desire towards beating him; in doing it like this, Ali would perfect the art of "challenging entertainment". Pac, however, is more emotionally charged in his battles, as he sees his opposition more as the enemy that must be destroyed at all costs. Therefore, Pac's bragging uses the truth as a weapon that must vanquish those he deems unworthy in this challenge.

In all, I think that through their revolutionary bragging Muhammad Ali and Tupac Shakur became figures who represent a new kind of "eternal youth" that coupled fresh yet radical criticizing with a sort of sage wisdom that was beyond their years. Their courageous ability to stand for their convictions thus led them to condemning convictions, as Ali's draft refusal and Pac's murder, both at age 25 when these events occurred, robbed their audiences of truly seeing them go into their prime. It is because of this that their audiences helped shape their legacies as "the greatest" in their fields, as they inspired Ali to win professional and cultural victories past that prime, and they carried Pac's words, emotions, even (in remembrance of) his mistakes into their lifestyle and lexicon. Undoubtedly, these two revolutionary braggarts changed the expectations and capabilities that we set for ourselves and our future.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until then, peace out.

"The Greatest Story Never Told " Video

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. Today's entry isn't going to be too big, but there will be some more stuff coming soon. Instead, I decided to show a YouTube clip of a song that I've been playing for a little while now, "The Greatest Story Never Told" by the rapper Saigon. I heard it for the first time on 106th and Park a few weeks ago, and although it hasn't gotten a lot of spins on there or radio since, I've still kept with it. I actually think its a good single, as the beats and melodies are catchy (courtesy of the producer Just Blaze) and Saigon's lyrics serve the melody but also call you to actually listen his content, i.e how he says battle beefs are now the marketing tool of the executive as opposed to genuine worthy competition. But anyways, check it out for yourself, and until next time...PEACE.

Martin Luther King, Jr and the Young, Non-Southern Black Man

Hello again world and welcome back to my blog. In keeping with February's great tradition of Black History Month, today's entry will be about a man who I think is the only prophet America has ever produced, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The video I posted above I found about a month ago via YouTube around the King holiday while I was searching for interviews and speeches he did, as well as documentary clips. Though the specific date of this speech is unknown, I'm assuming that he made that speech somewhere between the last two years of his life (1966-1968). When I first saw this video, I played it like it was the new single for at least two hours straight. It actually surprised me, chiefly because it was the first time I had ever heard Dr. King refer to himself and his people as "Black" as opposed to the term known to his generation, "Negro". But what I also noticed about his speech in this video is that it is a bit more outwardly radical then I had known him to be, keeping in mind that King IS a radical (you cannot accomplish goals like desegregation, voting rights, and true working pacifism unless you are radical). What makes it so "outwardly radical" is that I believe this statement must have come from his observations and the influence that the younger, "Black" generation of civil rights leaders would have on him.

Continuing my search for King information, I watched on YouTube the PBS special "Citizen King". This special focused on the last five years of his life, starting from his delivering the iconic "I Have A Dream" speech at the March on Washington and ending at his assassination and massively attended funeral. The years that primarily interested me were from 1965 to 1967- a period where he observed and experienced the life of the young, non-Southern Negro. This is the period that I believe brought King to the speech on that video. It begins with his stay in Chicago in 1966, inspired by his realization that he needed to understand the non-Southern Negro's (and underclass minorities overall) struggle with race and class disparities. This leads to his march to desegregate the Chicago suburb of Cicero where, in watching the footage of it, is easily most frightened and courageous I had seen him. The march turns into a caustic and dangerous event courtesy of its opposition, who may have been partly inspired by the counter demonstrations led by American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell. Though some marchers began to lose their cool, King maintained his, even while being hit with bricks and stones, ducking from the sounds of firecrackers meant to depict gunshots. The experience of the Cicero march indeed shook him- he would go on to unfavorably compare the experience to those he had in Mississippi and Alabama- but it also gave him a semblance to the specific level of frustration and opposition non-Southern black America faced.



I believe that the experience of Chicago began King towards that speech I found on YouTube, and the inspiration towards that speech was continued by his experience with Stokely Carmichael while continuing James Meredith's "March Against Fear" in Mississippi in 1966. Carmichael, the newly appointed chairman of the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), was the definition of the young black radical; he was a Pan-Africanist who didn't fully believe in nonviolence, sharing the view of the pre-hajj, Nation of Islam era Malcolm X in that whites couldn't really help in the fight for black and minority civil rights. During their time together leading the "March Against Fear", King and Carmichael understood that they served as diverging symbols of black leadership; King is of the generation where Negroes use nonviolent decorum to achieve their collective goal, and Carmichael represents the younger generation's ideal of "Black Power" to inspire a racially unitarian mindset. King is in fact cautious of Carmichael's "Black Power" philosophy, believing it to be a type of segregation that will lead to loneliness and destruction. However, this relationship does prove to be one of collaboration and respect, as through Carmichael King sees the non-Southern Black man in his total individual form. As "Citizen King" reports, it is also through Carmichael that King begins to interchangeably use the terms "Negro" and "Black", a fact that Carmichael would boast about to others for the rest of his life.

It is my assumption that stemming from his experiences in Chicago and with Carmichael, King now had a source of relation with the rise of the new, non-Southern black man. This newfound perspective taught him to be aware of the changes of "Black" America, as well as give him more cause to look at America as a whole nation. I think that by the time he made the speech I found on YouTube, he found a way to keep his nonviolent tactics and sensibilities yet embrace at least part of the newer generation's mantra; still not accepting the connotation of "Black Power", but ready to acknowledge that "Black is Beautiful". It is a bit ironic that King's assassination in 1968 would trigger his prophetic fears of "Black Power" to come true, as Black America would riot in major American cities in retaliation. Nevertheless, ALL of America- black, white, other colors and creeds, and even the world in general- have grown to greatly appreciate King's legacy of work in making this great land a more equal and tolerant playing field.

King's speech that I found on YouTube initially surprised me, but I also found it refreshing. Why? Because it is proven document of his forward thinking being specifically directed at his love for his people, an indication of entrusting them to make significant leaps and bounds in America's great landscape. This video makes me realize that the terminology of a people is far from just labeling, as what they call themselves dictates their future prosperity; I think that without a speech like that, a "Negro" calling himself "Black", we would have never elevated to making those superior leaps and bounds as "African Americans". King's realization couldn't have come from anywhere else but his experiences with the newer generation, as they taught him to understand them, their country, and time overall more accurately.

Well, that's about it for now folks. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until then, peace out.

How "Superfly" Symbolizes Freedom

Hello again world, and welcome back to my blog. For today's entry, I decided to talk about my perceived deeper meaning towards a blaxploitation classic. Last night, I watched the film "Superfly" on television, my first time seeing it in at least two years (and second overall). Culturally, the film is a blaxploitation standard that is punctuated by its musical score/soundtrack by the great Curtis Mayfield. The film itself stands atop the pantheon with other classics as "The Mack", "Foxy Brown" and blaxploitation's first and greatest known effort, "Shaft". The plot of "Superfly" is about a polished drug dealer named Priest who wishes to leave the trade but must make one last score that will provide enough money for him to live comfortably (at least for a while) in his exile. But in performing this daring caper, he steadily deflects criticism for his decision, and more importantly must avoid entrapment from corrupt officials that plan to keep him in the life.

As I watched "Superfly", I came to appreciate Priest's journey to freedom. I took from this film that true freedom and choice means true sacrifice; I mean, to give up all that profit and luxury for, if anything else, peace of mind? That's an astonishing choice. But what strikes me most about it is that he knew to work and prepare for that true freedom, as he knew during the course of the movie he was not free. He also knew his captivity spread to others, as since he was in a position of power he knew he had to maintain brute force and intimidation. For example, he puts the nonviolent Fat Freddie to commit violent tasks (which would ultimately cost Freddie his life, "Freddie's Dead"), and then laments to his partner Eddie about this decision.

Speaking of his partner, in fact, I found their relationship through the movie quite allegorical to the house negro (Eddie) and the field negro (Priest). The reason behind that is for this mere fact; whereas Priest was a person who found the determination to be self-defined and independent, Eddie was basically floating towards whichever side or purpose fit him best and would have to work for least. Eddie had no sort of vision for himself, and never really claimed responsibility for himself or anything in his life. By the end of the movie I found him to be a willing, but paid, slave to whichever entity provided the materialistic lifestyle he so loved. This of course puts a rift between he and Priest, as Eddie would become his biggest detractor against going straight, moreso out of Eddie's self-preservational leech mentality.

I connect to "Superfly"'s dream of freedom in life most in his excited outlook towards new opportunity and choice. In the scene where his girlfriend asks him what will he do when he is out of the game, he in effect replies that he doesn't know what his future will be but is nevertheless excited by the possibilities of it; possibilities that from then on he will totally assume and control. I think that statement reflects what I feel to be the truest feeling of total independence for oneself, as they come to the realization that only they can- and must- commit themselves to the direction of their lives, having the confidence in their decisions and readiness in their outcomes. As I stated earlier, true freedom means true sacrifice, so in making this choice you must be fully ready and prepared. I think in all that is what I perceive to be the underlying message in "Superfly".

Well, that's about it for now folks. In closing, I'll leave you with the classic "Superfly" theme by the great Curtis Mayfield. Thanks for taking the time to read the blog- in all honesty, I hope it made sense.Let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until then, peace out.

Why is Batman Better than Superman?

Hello again world, and welcome back to my blog. Today's entry is basically an opinion piece; it revolves around my love for comic books, but has some philosophical and realistic relevancy to it. Ever since I could remember, I've been a Batman fan thanks to the movies, tv shows and comic books; I truly think he is the ultimate superhero in comic book history. But, in terms of strength and cultural relevance, a lot of people cite Superman as the greatest of all time. I can't say I don't see their reasoning, as Superman is the main archetype for every superhero that has followed him since his appearance in 1938- maybe even Batman, who made his first appearance one year later. However, this great reason is not enough for me to give Superman the title of greatest superhero over Batman- I've thought about this for a very long time, and now I'm ready to give my reasons why.

I'll start with the most obvious reason; Batman is much more a media "mogul" than Superman. You see, Batman is the one superhero who is both timeless and timely, as he can be cultivated around the pop culture of different eras. Prime examples of this are Adam West's quasi-comedic Batman of the 1960's, Michael Keaton being the omnipresent yet mysterious Batman of 1989, and the brooding, sorrowful vigilante that Christian Bale's interpretation is of today. Compare these vast interpretations against the Superman interpreted by the late Christopher Reeve and Brandon Routh (I cannot include George Reeves's interpretation of the 1950s tv show as I have never seen it); although these are fine performances, they are the same exact interpretation,and save from the time they are made you cannot tell one from the other. Many audiences spend more of their money on Batman merchandising and media; in fact, the current Batman visionary Christopher Nolan was hired by Warner Bros to conceptualize and produce a new vision of Superman because of he and Christian Bale's success with Batman.
Also, be sure to include the animated series of both characters; the animated Batman series of the 1990's is so popular and classic that is rated as one of the best cartoons of all time. Who really can debate that argument? At one time during the height of its popularity,it aired during prime time on Sunday nights. I actually think that Kevin Conroy (the voice of Batman) was so convincing that maybe it influenced the type of Batman that is of today. Superman's animated series was good, but again the character (by himself) is one dimensional and kinda physically weak; I mean, I know he was fighting fellow aliens and metahumans, but it always took the most out of him, then finding the strength to win at the last minute.

This leads into my next reason, being that Batman is the mentally superior of the two; and honestly not just of Superman but of many other superheroes and quite a few supervillains. Albeit, this is truly the most "nature vs. nurture" of my reasons, Superman being simply "anointed" with brute strength as Batman has to work towards many physical and psychological endeavors to become the crimefighter that he is. But it plays into their depths in the most definitive ways, as Batman cannot go into an adventure unprepared, and must be knowledgeable of and ready for the various outcomes; Superman doesn't really have that ability. You may say,'Well, he doesnt NEED that ability', but I think he may need it more than Batman, again because of the physical level of villain he fights. Now I will be fair; there are times that Superman does plan out some details, and it's not necessary for him to be the tactical genius quite like Batman. But what I am saying is for the most part Superman's initial form of attack is basic brawling, leading his villains to know how to at least incapacitate him for a while (i.e. Kryptonite). With Batman, however, there is a lot of range in his fighting and tactical skills, therefore his villains need to find different ways to attack him.

From here we go into the "meat and potatoes" of these heroes' mythology and lore, as we see how each hero shapes their community. Let us start with the villains they face; there is no shadow of a doubt that Batman has the best rouge's gallery of any comic book hero EVER. I mean, unless you're a comic book head or a Superman head, can you really name more of his archenemies than Batman's off the top of your head? I myself can name five or seven of Superman's, then eight to eleven of Batman's. From my perspective, Batman's enemies are more fearsome than Superman's because of- again- of their mental capability, as well as their unequivocal hunger for power and dominance. Look at how their villains go at their opponents; most of Superman's villains go personally at him because they realize he is the top power to either restrain or conquer. Prime examples of this are Darkseid, Bizzaro, and his archvillain Lex Luthor. The villains of Gotham City, however, want power entirely and are interested in generating it not from their hero but from the terror they bring from themselves- they know they would have to defeat Batman in order to further pursue power, not attain it. Also, Batman's villains serve as a "quadratic equation" towards himself considering his own personality and crusade; the Penguin makes him question his elitist inclinations, Catwoman (at her best) makes him question his self-denial of true love, and the Riddler is a dark depiction of his intellectual prowess and superiority. Superman has villains that make him question his discipline and self-restraint (Lex Luthor, Darkseid, Brainiac), but none that challenge his approach towards them. That might serve a point for him, I'll give you that one.



Let us not forget that Batman has not just the greatest rouge's gallery ever, but also the greatest villain ever- The Joker. This is the prime example of what a supervillain should be; he is every step Batman's equal as his competitor. Like Batman, he is calculating, uncompromising, and knows he serves as a symbol of choice. The vendetta between the Joker and Batman is more personal than any other of his enemies, as the Joker not only challenges Batman's true existence but will also fatally and/or gravely injure Batman's allies (Jason Todd/ Robin, Barbara Gordon) in his quest for total dominance of Gotham City. Yes, it is undisputed that the Joker is by no means a physical threat to Superman- and really, not even Batman- but I'm also sure that The Joker would find a way to push Superman's discipline of self-restraint to the maximum as he has Batman's.

So in fighting these villains, you must create, teach, and call upon a great army for assistance, this being where Batman truly shines. The "Batman Family" is unlike anything before it, and its best rival could be Professor Xavier and the X-Men. Batman actually takes people in like himself and trains them to be great warriors, then has them become a part of a great network at which he is the nucleus of. It's a pretty impressive count consisting of various Robins (spawning a Nightwing, Red Robin, and another Batman)and Batgirls, Huntress and even Catwoman among others. Like their primary leader/nucleus, most of these proteges and allies have no superpowers to speak of, so instead they are worked with from the ground up to become just as physical, perceptive and tactical. Not that Superman isn't a great leader himself, but in these regards Batman has this way over on him. Yes, he has allies and somewhat proteges such as Supergirl and Superboy, but as was with his own case, he didn't have to teach them much about using their physical capabilities on Earth. As for Superman leading the Justice League, Superman is more of a main delegate than primary leader; I really don't think you can tell other primary heroes (in a group which includes Batman) how to fight injustice in a way specific and/or similar to your own.



Before I give my last and most important reason why Batman is the best superhero over Superman, let me pose this question; Which city would you rather live in, Superman's Metropolis or Batman's Gotham City? My answer, of course, is Metropolis. I know; right now you're thinking "You spent all this time saying the best superhero is Batman yet you would live in Metropolis?". Let me explain why. In Metropolis I would be protected, no question, but I would be protected from evils that I cannot either foresee or really fight against- the only "person" who could fight that evil is Superman, who, to an ironic degree, is the person (and power) that attracts it. Therefore, I theorize in this sense that Metropolis is the closest realization to a utopia in comic books, as to be a citizen of Gotham City you couldn't be uninvolved in the war between good and evil and must play a part. This main reason bases all the others I've previously cited that Batman is better than Superman- because whereas Superman is a savior, Batman is a symbol. To be a savior is a great attribute, don't get me wrong, but being a savior is an attribute only non-humans- aliens or gods i.e. Superman- can attain. However, humans can be symbols to one another, inspiring works and accomplishments never before imagined. This is Batman's greatness over Superman, I feel; he truly shows that one man can make a difference and inspire a movement towards the best and worst extremes.

Well, that's about it folks. By the way, all the artwork displayed on this entry was completed by the iconic comic book artist Jim Lee. Thanks for taking the time to read this blog, and let me know what you think about this and other entries. Until next time, peace out.

Hello Again World!

Hello Again World! A belated Happy Holidays and New Year to all, I hope 2010 was kind to you and 2011 will be kinder. For me, the year 2010 gave me a lot to think about and significant changes to adapt to; I lost a grandmother, gained a nephew, made important career moves, and finally came to a good understanding about some of the thoughts and theories I have about this thing called life. In all, 2010 gave me the gift of perspective, extending itself to where I've been and where I need to go.
With all that said, I also return to this blog with some work that I hope you'll enjoy. This is something I did back in June 2010, a painting (or maybe character) that is called "The Medium".




"The Medium" was done with acrylic paint, and took about a couple weeks to conceptualize and paint. As seen, it's a boy pointing at the viewer with arrows coming from his back. The most obvious reference I used was Doctor Octopus, one of Spider-Man's most notorious supervilllains; I always liked how his "tentacles" were designed in a compact fashion, the artist always having the ability to attract them to the viewer with accurate foreshortening (either deciding to make them the main element in their drawings or unleash them in the element of surprise). But I take reference from Titian's painting "St. Mark Enthroned",as you see the figure with an arrow in him but still alive and gallant. Therefore, with these two primary references in mind, I made my figure with defiancy in his stance and some ego to his facial expression (what hero doesn't have some ego?); and the arrows coming from him going in many different directions, to represent the choices we have in life. The three colors (aside from the skin tone)- red (shirt), green (jacket), and gold/yellow(arrows)- came from Pan Africanism, a sublet of black history and African diaspora.
I'm still not yet done with this idea, though. Since finishing "The Medium", I've been working on something more full scale, using him as the main character in the work. Nothing on canvas yet, but I'm thinking it'll be an expansion of the choices we make- the best and worst- in their respective extremes.
All right everyone, I think that's about it for right now. Thanks for taking the time to read this, and if you can there are two blogs you should really check out; www.designerscomplex.blogspot.com and visionofhiphop.blogspot.com. Peace out.