You want to sue the Church?
And tonight I made a sautéed mushroom and black olive quiche for dinner, using the cheddar and the goat's milk gouda on hand.
rushthatspeaks made the crust out of Emergency Biscuit. The quiche itself took at least twenty minutes longer to bake than expected because of the insulating properties of Emergency Biscuit, but fortunately the extra filling had already gone into a buttered cake tin on the top rack of the oven and therefore there was a quiche-like object available before people got so hungry that the cats were in danger. Overall, a success. We plan to use the biscuit crust for all relevant pies from now on. I was really happy with the mushrooms. I made them in the small frying pan, in three batches, while fending off a cat.
1. Courtesy of
schreibergasse: what the Magdala Stone tells us about concepts of sacred space in ancient Judaism.
2. Courtesy of
handful_ofdust: Julia Lillard's "The Alchemist." I saw it first without the title and thought it was a Tarot illustration of The Star.
3.
nineweaving asked me what I thought about Thomas McCarthy's Spotlight (2015). My textbrick response, recopied here:
Worth seeing. It is a solid, genuine ensemble picture, meaning that all four of the Spotlight reporters get their own threads, no single character is the protagonist, and all sorts of recurring, significant supporting characters come and go and reappear as the story moves on. As a retelling of historical events, it gains a lot of power from its restraint, by which I do not mean that Spotlight is not an angry film—it's a very angry film—but the material is inflammatory enough that it would feel cheap if sensationalized and so I really appreciate that, as far as I can tell, there are no melodramatic twists and turns to confront the reporters with the awful truth; it is taking enough of a toll on them to live for months with the study of systematic sexual abuse and conspiracy, day in, day out, and worse every time a new piece of information comes to light. (In a quirk of statistical distribution, all members of the Spotlight team at the time were Catholic. Even for the most lapsed of them, there's an element of personal betrayal—and the subjectivity of being embedded in a system. In 2001, the new editor of the Globe was a Florida Jew who had no compunction about investigating the Church. He is played very well by Liev Schreiber as an undemonstrative figure with acute social instincts; he never gets a scene where he opens up, but by the end we trust him. He is the outsider; he can see some things more clearly than people who have lived in this culture all their lives. He has no affinity whatsoever for baseball.) It's a very good movie about silence and the ways that the factors in institutional complicity are not all malevolent, like the reporter who doesn't know how to tell her devoted Catholic grandmother who goes to Mass three times a week and whose heart will break as soon as she finds out about the child abuse; it's a very good movie about the hard work of speaking out, how the real trick is often not the willingness to speak, but the willingness of other people to listen and then to amplify. Some of the survivors have been trying to get this story out for years. Even the Globe brushed them off: it's awful, but is it news? I've seen the movie compared to All the President's Men (1976), but even that was more of a thriller. In its deliberate, almost documentary procedural pace, Spotlight reminded me more of The Naked City (1948). It starts when Marty Baron suggests investigating a story; it ends when the story goes to press. Anything that doesn't occur within that six-month window is not the movie's problem. One of the reporters is separated from his wife, living in a basement apartment while his colleagues drop by with pizza because otherwise he will patently starve to death on a diet of boiled hot dogs and beer; we never find out what happens to their marriage, because it didn't resolve before "Church allowed abuse by priest for years: Aware of Geoghan record, archdiocese still shuttled him from parish to parish" came out in January 2002. I like that sort of thing. I like that all of its characters are people, even the ones we see incompletely or antagonistically; I applaud the casting of Len Cariou as Cardinal Law, because as soon as he opens his mouth, all you can hear is Sweeney Todd. The cast includes Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Michael Keaton, Brian d'Arcy James, Stanley Tucci, John Slattery, other character actors I like. I don't have much to say about the cinematography or the music, but Boston is played by itself rather than Vancouver or mostly Toronto. I don't know if it's the best possible film that could have been made from these events, but I don't know what that would look like, either. I was not sorry to have seen it and I rather hope it wins some awards when the season comes around.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
1. Courtesy of
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
2. Courtesy of
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
3.
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Worth seeing. It is a solid, genuine ensemble picture, meaning that all four of the Spotlight reporters get their own threads, no single character is the protagonist, and all sorts of recurring, significant supporting characters come and go and reappear as the story moves on. As a retelling of historical events, it gains a lot of power from its restraint, by which I do not mean that Spotlight is not an angry film—it's a very angry film—but the material is inflammatory enough that it would feel cheap if sensationalized and so I really appreciate that, as far as I can tell, there are no melodramatic twists and turns to confront the reporters with the awful truth; it is taking enough of a toll on them to live for months with the study of systematic sexual abuse and conspiracy, day in, day out, and worse every time a new piece of information comes to light. (In a quirk of statistical distribution, all members of the Spotlight team at the time were Catholic. Even for the most lapsed of them, there's an element of personal betrayal—and the subjectivity of being embedded in a system. In 2001, the new editor of the Globe was a Florida Jew who had no compunction about investigating the Church. He is played very well by Liev Schreiber as an undemonstrative figure with acute social instincts; he never gets a scene where he opens up, but by the end we trust him. He is the outsider; he can see some things more clearly than people who have lived in this culture all their lives. He has no affinity whatsoever for baseball.) It's a very good movie about silence and the ways that the factors in institutional complicity are not all malevolent, like the reporter who doesn't know how to tell her devoted Catholic grandmother who goes to Mass three times a week and whose heart will break as soon as she finds out about the child abuse; it's a very good movie about the hard work of speaking out, how the real trick is often not the willingness to speak, but the willingness of other people to listen and then to amplify. Some of the survivors have been trying to get this story out for years. Even the Globe brushed them off: it's awful, but is it news? I've seen the movie compared to All the President's Men (1976), but even that was more of a thriller. In its deliberate, almost documentary procedural pace, Spotlight reminded me more of The Naked City (1948). It starts when Marty Baron suggests investigating a story; it ends when the story goes to press. Anything that doesn't occur within that six-month window is not the movie's problem. One of the reporters is separated from his wife, living in a basement apartment while his colleagues drop by with pizza because otherwise he will patently starve to death on a diet of boiled hot dogs and beer; we never find out what happens to their marriage, because it didn't resolve before "Church allowed abuse by priest for years: Aware of Geoghan record, archdiocese still shuttled him from parish to parish" came out in January 2002. I like that sort of thing. I like that all of its characters are people, even the ones we see incompletely or antagonistically; I applaud the casting of Len Cariou as Cardinal Law, because as soon as he opens his mouth, all you can hear is Sweeney Todd. The cast includes Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Michael Keaton, Brian d'Arcy James, Stanley Tucci, John Slattery, other character actors I like. I don't have much to say about the cinematography or the music, but Boston is played by itself rather than Vancouver or mostly Toronto. I don't know if it's the best possible film that could have been made from these events, but I don't know what that would look like, either. I was not sorry to have seen it and I rather hope it wins some awards when the season comes around.
no subject
no subject
You're welcome! I wasn't even thinking of pizza when I put them together. I should remember to do that the next time I order one.
(I haven't had such a pizza for more than a decade and have known that I'd better not for nearly four years.)
What is the obstacle to pizza?
no subject
Obstacles: cow milk (casein), wheat. :)
no subject
Man, I can't wait until I can drink carbonated beverages again. I am currently prohibited on account of the cement used to hold my braces to my teeth. I don't even drink that much soda as a rule, but right now I really miss ginger and root beer.
Obstacles: cow milk (casein), wheat.
Fair enough!
no subject