Category: Article

  • Fangs, Fur & Forgiveness

    The werewolf’s life has never been easy. But the complications of twenty-first-century living often result in even more confusion and frustration. Fortunately, a few sessions with a qualified life coach can help today’s lycanthrope adjust to those inevitable crises of confidence.

    OWN YOUR ASPIRATIONS.
    Werewolves often lack a sense of purpose in their lives, personally and professionally. As any good life coach will tell you, it’s your choice to make. Whatever the lunar phase, whatever your dreams, you must first decide whether you want to go through life as a victim of society’s ridicule and fear or as the latest toast of its reluctant acceptance, like hip-hop performers. Once you own your aspirations, the rest is outrageously simple.

    ACCENTUATE YOUR POSITIVES.
    Sure, it’s difficult being a monster. But don’t let that spoil your prospects for happiness. Steer clear of negative, stereotypical thinking. Instead, learn how to accentuate your unique, mostly positive werewolf qualities, such as the razor-sharpness of your fangs and your superhuman physical agility.

    TRANSCEND YOUR FEARS.
    The world can be a scary place, it’s true. But remember, nearly everyone you’ll ever meet will be more terrified of you than you are of them. Nothing frightens a community more than sudden pet disappearances—except possibly when a bunch of tasty babies go missing. The only thing werewolves really have to fear is being shot by a vigilante carrying a gun loaded with silver bullets.

    BALANCE CAREER & FAMILY.
    All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy, and it doesn’t do much for werewolves, either. That’s why it’s important to prioritize your priorities to make sure you balance your responsibilities at work and at home. Wandering parks and city streets with your children in the wee hours of moonlit nights is the best way to watch them grow up. Remember, the family that preys together stays together!

    BE YOUR BEAUTIFUL SELF.
    Body-image issues plague teenage girls, homosexual men, and werewolves alike. Look beyond your hirsute reflection in the mirror and discover the inner beauty hidden beneath the coarse brown fur that covers your body. Once you’ve done that, you may also want to spring for a makeover, or at least a comb.

    HOWL YOUR HEART OUT.
    Worried that your neighbors will think less of you because you’re always out howling at full moons? Learn how to howl in a discreet, socially acceptable manner. And when ripping out a neighbor’s throat, there’s no need to rub in the embarrassment by behaving like some kind of brute savage. Your victim will feel bad enough already.

  • that Speaks French

    Of all the depressing novels I know, Jude the Obscure takes the prize for sustained doom and gloom. Don’t let the film mislead you; it is far too pretty. All those authentic Victorian sets (not to mention the delightfully authentic Kate Winslet) undermine the exposition of Jude’s law, that Sod and Murphy were incurable optimists, because if anything can go wrong it will, particularly when something might seem just for once to be going almost right. It is not Jude one loses patience with; it is his creator, for being so beastly to him. No wonder the nineteenth-century public hated it.

    Jude is a country lad with an ambition to study at the University of Christminster, so he starts to teach himself Latin. He swiftly discovers that there is no one-to-one correspondence between English and Latin words, that a foreign language is not simply an alternative set of vocabulary but a wholly different way of putting thoughts together (something that the users of Internet translation services have not always understood). With characteristic determination (doomed, of course), Jude sets about the systematic exploration of Latin grammar and syntax.

    I was thinking of Jude’s experience the other day while being lectured by one of those well-fed wiseacres who like to tell us there is no point learning foreign languages because soon everyone will know English. “What can he know of English who only English knows?” I muttered to myself, sotto voce. Those who do not take the trouble to study languages end up like the Monsieur Jourdan in Molière’s Le Bourgeoise Gentilhomme, who is amazed to learn that what he has been speaking all his life is prose.

    More to the point, foreigners who learn English do not ipso facto stop talking Foreign. They may know English, and so understand what we tell them. They can say in English what they would like us to hear. But heaven knows what they are muttering about us in the privacy of their own tongues. I wonder how many people in Washington speak Farsi or read Shi’ite theology (though I have it on good authority that at the time of the Tehran Embassy hostage crisis in 1979, the State Department had a computer programmed to simulate the presumed mental processes of the Ayatollah Khomeini). The trouble with my well-fed wiseacre was that the voice he most liked the sound of was his own.

    The swiftest method of learning Foreign is, they say, the Horizontal. It usually involves one-to-one tuition and is, in general, employed only in those colleges and universities that have a hearty appetite for protracted and expensive litigation. That said, I know someone who learned French in six weeks by adopting a suitably unclothed and recumbent posture, though the fact that he had come straight from twelve months learning Coptic in an Egyptian monastery may have whetted his whistle. I must say I have not tried it myself, and if I had, I would not be saying.

    Wines, too, have their characteristic syntax. Let me introduce you to a red wine that certainly speaks French. It is the 2004 Côtes du Rhône from the well-known Burgundy shipper Charles Thomas (pronounced, of course, Sharl Tomah in the manner of Peter Sellers asking for a rhoom). It is available hereabouts for not much more than ten dollars.

    This wine is constructed not in the languorous language of Proust, pursuing evanescent flavors of madeleine and fancy tea down long, convoluted corridors of memory. Rather, like Edith Piaf, it combines sweetness and husky pungency: “No, nothing of nothing. No, I not regret nothing, neither the well which one has done me, nor the bad, all this is for me well equal” (perhaps something does get lost in translation). The initial fruit leads to the tannins at the center of the taste with the inevitability of a well-made sentence. The weather has a lot to do with it; 2004 was not as spectacularly hot and dry as 2003, which produced astonishingly concentrated wines all across France. In 2004, it rained in August. The result is a wine that has both charm and a mind of its own—and plenty of alcohol. Taken with steak frites, it might even put you back on your feet (even if Hardy and his President of the Immortals knock you back down in the very next chapter). Santé!

  • Hell in a Hamburglar Glass

    I had a garage sale a couple of weeks ago. I relish regularly purging my home of crap. However, I also think it is a special kind of hell to have to arrange crap artfully on card tables in the driveway, assign a value to each item of crap, and look at the neighbors with a straight face when one of them holds up a crappy McDonaldland-character glass tumbler and tries to whittle down the marked price of ten cents. C’mon, people. It still holds water, and we’re talking about the Hamburglar here.

    So, okay. Maybe it actually isn’t hell. After all, it’s a beautiful, seventy-five-degree day spent out in your driveway. But it is purgatory. Because you can’t go anywhere else. All you can do is sit there on a lawn chair and stew in the lovingly hand-painted juices of your own tchotchkes.

    I’ll tell you this. I hate figurines. I have never purchased a figurine for myself, but I have had them thrust upon me by people who claim to know and love me. Perhaps this hatred of ornamental figures stems from years of moving from apartment to apartment during my twenties, but I never collected stuff like that when I was a kid, either. Figurines have always made me feel big and clumsy, like King Kong with Fay Wray.

    I remember a childhood pal, Shelly, who was abnormally fond of horse figurines. Fond as in boyfriend fond. Abnormal as in no one else could touch them but her! abnormal. These plastic replicas of real horses lived on her dresser in a specific formation, and woe be to anyone who dared draw so much as a pinkie finger across the glossy mane of the centrally positioned Clydesdale. If that happened, the usually sweet, retiring, Sunday-school-attending Shelly would screech, through bared, tinseled teeth, “GET OUT OF MY ROOM, YOU BUTTHOLE! THOSE ARE MINE!” And she would chase you out of her room, down the dangerously creaky, ankle-twistingly irregular staircase of her illegal attic bedroom, through the terrifying Lladro-ballerina-choked formal living room and out onto the religious-icon-ornamented front lawn. There she would grab fistfuls of your unattractive, gender-neutralizing bowl haircut and march you toward the legal property line of her yard, where she would throw you roughly to your knees on the sidewalk and explain that you and your dirty, oily, Ho Hos-icing-stained fingers were never, ever to cross that line again.

    Not that this ever happened to me, dear readers, but this is what would happen if anybody ever dared touch one of stupid Smelly Shelly’s stupid plastic horses that lived on her stupid dresser in her stupid room in her stupid house.

    Such is the dark power of collectibles, which is why I have made a concerted effort to keep my existence free from any item that requires its own display case or its own Certificate of Authenticity. I’m terrified enough by official documents.

    I’m not sure where my dog’s breeding papers are right now. For all I know, his identity credentials may have been sold out of a van idling behind the mercado on Lake Street. Also unaccounted for are my marriage license and copies of my 2002 federal and state tax returns. There are autographed baseballs out there with a better paper trail than mine.

    Do you get the feeling that the Certificate of Authenticity was dreamed up by people who feel the need for additional official documents in their lives? Are they expecting art historians to question the provenance of their Thomas Kinkade prints? Are they waiting for the moment they can whip out their certificate and say “Ha! Who dares question the validity of this painting of a lighthouse amid storm-splashed rocks?”

    But the art historians could, of course, challenge the authenticity of the Certificate of Authenticity. And then there would be a war of “nuh-uhs” and “uh-huhs.” Feelings would be hurt, and there would be much emotional eating afterwards.

    The woman haggling over the Hamburglar glass finally wore me down. I just gave it to her. Looking deeply satisfied, she greedily stuffed her treasure into her large pocketbook and sniffed, “For a single glass, it wasn’t worth much.” It would have been a totally different story if I’d had a set.

  • The Toll of City Living

    I was asked once to reveal some “universal truth” I’d learned. When I couldn’t dredge up the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus from my faded memories, I settled for, “Things are usually more complicated than they seem.” I give the same answer when asked why I live in Minneapolis.

    Each day here is an exercise in ambiguity. My commute to our Warehouse District office is short. I can follow one route that never leaves city streets. That path passes the three cathedrals that reach up to God from their plots on Lowry Hill, then curves behind the Christian mission. There the sidewalk is lined by shopping carts full of scrap and their custodians, who sit on a low concrete wall, smoke cigarettes, and wait for their next meal.

    Sometimes I vary my route and enter the freeway at the Basilica entrance to skirt downtown for one exit. I usually take a long look at the suburban commuters at a dead stop in the oncoming lanes. They are all angry, I imagine, as they wait for their turn to exit into a high-rise parking ramp and begin their daily visit to purgatory in the city. They don’t see the line behind the mission, but I expect some may be panhandled at lunch time or hear the dreadlocked drummer in front of the Target store on Nicollet Mall.

    The suburban tourists sometimes venture downtown at night, too, and lap up Cold Stone ice cream or Applebee’s margaritas on the second floor of Block E. Some grab a burger and beer on First Avenue before a Timberwolves game. You don’t see the same scrubbed faces so much at Café Brenda, though. There you know nearly everyone, at least by face, because they are from the neighborhood. They are the people who have perhaps seen Kevin Garnett going into a dance club in his impeccably fitted five-button suits, but have never seen him in his baggy white basketball shorts.

    One suburban tourist was killed this summer on First Avenue, hit in the head by a bullet that wasn’t meant for him. Another man from out of town was shot dead by a robber as he left an Uptown restaurant. Forty others who lived here have been murdered in the city this year. Hundreds have been wounded. The reactions to this vary from resignation to outrage, from mere sadness to fury. My city friend who was robbed at gunpoint last week in Uptown says it was “no big deal. He only got twenty bucks.” My other Golden Valley friend, whose wife and daughter were subjected to some obscene suggestions when he brought them to a Hennepin Avenue musical last year, says he will never come downtown at night again.

    The people who live in the city pay a price. The cacophony of the streets assaults us daily. We know nearly every walk through downtown is going to mean, at best, being panhandled at least once, or, worse, being actively menaced. Most busy intersections feature mendicants with cardboard signs containing a “God Bless” and a short plea for a donation. Our City Council members didn’t bother to offer an apology when they told us last week that our property taxes were going up eight percent. Any available additional revenue would be used to hire more police. The amount available is limited, however, by the many bad decisions the city has made in the past. We pay off the purchase of Kevin Garnett’s showcase arena, yet provide scant playgrounds for youth soccer. We finance downtown office towers while most of our branch libraries are open three or four days a week. There was a bullet hole in the second-floor window of the Central Library before it even opened in May.

    But this is what we pay for having sidewalks in front of our homes. In my neighborhood, we’re thankful for quirky restaurants like Auriga, which you can walk to for an imaginative pizza and Malbec by the glass after 10:00 p.m. Though the drug dealer next door in a Northeast neighborhood does a brisk business every night, we can still walk to the 331 Club. In Southeast, we can get a three-course Chinese lunch at Shuang Cheng that costs less than six bucks and wasn’t cooked an hour ago.

    The tourists who visit the city daily for their wages or nightly for their entertainment don’t sleep here and don’t pay the day-to-day toll exacted from the people who live here. Instead, they take what they come for, retrace their paths home, cluck their tongues at our problems, and only rarely partake of our real treasures.

  • Paul Shambroom

    Although he has focused throughout his career on the political realities of life in America after the Cold War, Paul Shambroom’s work isn’t the sort of blunt, unambiguous photo-polemics that one traditionally expects from strictly documentary art. His images are open for interpretation, and more likely to raise questions than offer easy answers. The New Jersey native and Minneapolis College of Art and Design alum has had a rambling career to date; he’s photographed factories and corporate environments, spent ten years documenting the country’s nuclear facilities and stockpile of weapons, and traveled thousands of miles to take pictures of town council meetings. Here, he discusses works from his most recent project, Security.

    Initially, at least, these new photographs look like a huge departure from the Meetings project. How do these things come together?

    The Meetings photos came about after I had wrapped my nuclear weapons project, and as a result of that experience I had become fascinated and sort of obsessed with the whole command-and-control aspect of nuclear weapons—you know, the question of when and if these things are ever going to be used, who makes that decision and how is it arrived at. That led me to the question of citizen responsibility for the actions of our government, and the way many of the basic civic decisions at both the highest and lowest levels are made.

    Was there a natural evolution from Meetings to Security?

    I knew I wanted to do something in response to September 11th, but it took a couple years for the idea to percolate. It’s difficult to wrap your head around history or see it with any perspective when you’re in the middle of it. My process always works pretty much the same way; I’ll have a subject in my head that I’m interested in, and as I research and dig around, I’ll start trying to figure out a way to put a visual face on it. Not necessarily to provide answers, but to offer a visual form in which to raise questions and issues.

    That visual form here isn’t the typical sort of thing we’re accustomed to seeing labeled as response to September 11th. There’s no flag-waving, for instance, and no real military presence.

    Well, with all the Homeland Security issues, I wanted to do something about what was going on here in the U.S. There are all these political issues with the money and how it’s being spent, and the role fear plays in public policy. You realize that fear is both a natural human response and also a valuable political currency. This was a really difficult project in that previously there wasn’t much question about how I felt about the subjects I was working on. After September 11th, though, there are no easy answers. I don’t have a clear stance, which makes it very complicated.

    You made most of these photographs at training facilities around the country. How did you get into these places, and what was going on there?

    Visits had to be arranged well in advance, and access can be very difficult. I did a lot of research into the places I wanted to go, and then it was just a matter of figuring out who controlled access and how to work with them. Most of the sites are funded by Homeland Security. There are five of these institutions around the country, and most of the people who go to them are law-enforcement people, firefighters, first responders. I have one photo taken at a place in New Mexico—Playas—which is this old mining town that Homeland Security uses for really large-scale exercises. Everybody calls it Terror Town.

    The portraits are particularly interesting. You have these guys wearing bomb-squad outfits or biohazard suits, covered from head to toe.

    The portraits were sort of a departure. They’re very mannered and posed. I was looking for these iconic subjects, and I thought it was interesting that you couldn’t see their faces. They became almost superhero-like. Some of them had a science-fiction quality to them, and in some of the others I guess I was looking even further back for inspiration, to the grand-portrait tradition in Europe in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, painters like Gainsborough and Joshua Reynolds.

    How long have you been working on Security?

    I made the first photograph in November 2004, so it’s been two years of traveling and photography, preceded by three years of scratching my head and research. And the project is still very much in progress. There are other things I’d like to do with it, and I think we’re probably going to be living with this reality as a major part of our consciousness for the rest of my lifetime.

    The Weinstein Gallery will exhibit photographs from the Security series September 15–October 28

    (908 46th St. W., Minneapolis; 612-822-1722; www.weinstein-gallery.com).

  • George Morrison: Finding Abstraction

    Those who regret missing George Morrison’s drawings at Todd Bockley last winter can more than make up for it with this exhibition. Though the museum points out that this exhibit is not a retrospective, it is, in fact, a decent overview of Morrison’s career from the 1940s to the 80s—effective but not overwhelming. Included are life studies from the 40s and 50s, Abstract Expressionist-inspired paintings from the 50s and 60s, and a lovely 1976 example of Morrison’s “paintings in wood” made from driftwood. There’s also a series rendering the same view overlooking Lake Superior from his studio at different times of day, a project that recalls Monet’s late series of haystacks and the Rouen Cathedral; and, finally, a selection of Morrison’s thrillingly intricate line drawings. 651-266-1030; www.mmaa.org

  • Ordinary Culture: Heikes/Helms/McMillian

    Broader even than “pop culture,” the theme of this show seems so all-encompassing as to be almost pointless (or, at least, to invite too much esoteric theory for our tastes). The good news is that the show itself is elegantly sparse and impressively installed, showcasing several works each from three artists, who’ve shown mostly at hip, cutting-edge galleries on the coasts, but also locally at the Soap Factory and Midway Contemporary Art. In the middle of the gallery is Jay Heikes’ grid of acoustic-tile ceiling hanging from—and doing insult to—the gallery’s own lofty white beams. This cheap slab of ordinariness plays nicely off Rodney McMillian’s huge sheet of vinyl flooring, whose pattern is a grid of imitation stone tiles; presumably lifted from a dilapidated home, it is hung as a sort of imitation painting. Meanwhile, Adam Helms’ grid of forty-eight “portraits”—black masks, hoods, and kerchiefs, rendered in ink on mylar—points to his interest in the “ordinary culture” of rogues, renegades, and outlaws. 612-375-7622; www.walkerart.org

  • Incidental

    Hand it to Coen + Partners for establishing this gallery as an adjunct to its offices; by doing so, this landscape architecture firm has been admirably carrying on—if not reviving—the gallery tradition within the legendary Wyman Building, featuring both local artists and guest curators. Incidental brings together a quintet of artists whose work, according to curator Michael Fallon, is “not about anything in particular, but happens to be about everything at once.” Among them are the gum-obsessed Andy Powell, whose paintings, with titles like Bubblishous and Little Big Red, include chewed-up wads that transcend grossness to look playful and even sensuous; and Alexis Kuhr, who pencils delicate patterns, evocative of eyeball, headphones, and chain-link fencing, onto oil backgrounds. 400 1st Ave. N., Minneapolis; 612-332-5252; www.galleryco.net

  • Life in Shadows: Hidden Children and the Holocaust

    The tiniest detail, one that would seem perfectly innocuous in another context, can in this exhibit bring to bear the full horror of the Holocaust. Take, for example, a picture of some children on an outing. In the front row, a girl called Celina Cedarbaum appears to be caught in a merry moment, turning her head to laugh with a friend. In fact, the five-year-old had been trained to obscure her face whenever confronted by a camera—someone, out of kindness, had made this child understand that she would die if she were identified in a photograph. Life in Shadows is made up of such details: tiny toy soldiers stored in a pillbox, a drawing of a farmer, diary pages, and other artifacts from the few thousand Jewish children who went into hiding in their attempts, which were not always successful, to elude the Nazis. 651-296-6126; www.minnesotahistorycenter.org

  • Jane Hamilton

    Jane Hamilton has been blessed or cursed—take your pick—by not one but two bolts of Oprah’s lightning. Having her novels The Book of Ruth and A Map of the World chosen for the distaff Midas’ book club elevated Hamilton to the rarefied ranks of best-selling literary authors and guaranteed her books ample display space in stores until the end of her days. You’d think such success might stifle a writer, or at the very least make her cautious. Yet Hamilton keeps producing novels of disturbing domestic complexity, loaded with echoes from classic literature. When Madeline Was Young is a family saga that spans six decades and revolves around a brain-damaged woman who is living with her ex-husband, his new wife, and the couple’s children. With its gothic undertones, wide-ranging themes, and moral concerns, Madeline appears certain to provide hearty new fodder for book clubbers everywhere.