text:
Sustainable Travel
Happening now in France
Places to go
Things to do
Plan your trip
Newsletter Subscription
The art of the unexpected
How I managed not to see a single star in Cannes
A trip to the Riviera with three extreme sports heroes!
Do you do you Saint-Tropez?
5 ways to celebrate the Mediterranean lifestyle at Le Byblos Palace
On the Côte d'Azur, admire the vivid blue of the Mediterranean that laps the coves, islands and golden beaches. It's an incredible natural colour chart that inspired the greatest painters of the 20th century.
The Côte d'Azur is also glittering with world-class events such as the Cannes Film Festival – and the warm hues of its villages and gardens give it an inimitable holiday atmosphere, bolstered by the famous scents of its hinterland.
On the Côte d'Azur, you never need choose between city and beach – the two are inseparable. The cities always have a slice of sand to put your towel down and a port to moor a boat. Here are some ideas to enhance your trip to the French Riviera...
In Nice, the famous Promenade des Anglais stretches for seven kilometres along a beach that's popular all year round. And just a stone's throw away in the old town, the Cours Saleya's fruit and flower market is a vibrant cultural spot.
In Cannes it's the famous Croisette bordering the sea that catches the eye, especially during the Film Festival when movie stars grace the red carpet. But to soak up the soul of Cannes, you have to climb up the sloping alleys of Le Suquet to the remains of its medieval chateau. From the top of the square tower, enjoy a dazzling panorama across the bay.
You can also head inland to Grasse, to smell the scents of fragrant plants prized by major perfume brands. An International Perfume Museum, unique in the world, traces the history of these prestigious fragrances of houses such as Chanel and Dior.
You can't miss Saint-Tropez on a visit to the Côte d'Azur: a real picture-postcard port where yachts gleam against a pastel-coloured backdrop. There has been a party atmosphere here since the 1960s, chic and relaxed, stretching out to the beaches of Pampelonne where you can have lunch on the sand while admiring the Mediterranean.
From the port of Saint-Raphaël, don comfy shoes to walk or cycle around the Esterel massif – marked trails and bike routes crisscross its 32,000 hectares, between glowing crests, coves and white sandy beaches shaded by pine trees.
From Hyères, make for the Golden Islands. Cycle around Porquerolles to immerse yourself in the Caribbean atmosphere of its beaches with turquoise waters, and discover the astonishing collection of contemporary art of the Carmignac Foundation. In Port-Cros, only pedestrians are allowed: the wildest of the Golden Islands is at the heart of a fabulous national park, where you can watch whales and dolphins. A must for your trip to the Côte d'Azur!
In Menton, you'll discover the famous lemon. Its softer flavour and more intense aromas are championed by the greatest chefs. The lemon is celebrated every year with a colourful carnival, the Menton Lemon Festival, giving visitors an opportunity to explore the remarkable gardens of this colourful city.
A holiday on the Côte d'Azur is also an active one. With 20 courses of 18 holes, golf is the star of leisure activities here. But you won't forget to take a dip in the Calanque des Anglais, a sublime creek of red rocks on the Esterel Massif; to witness the Monaco Grand Prix; or to stroll in the exceptional local gardens, which are becoming a major player in global biodiversity.
With so many hours of sunshine (nearly 3,000 per year), it's no wonder the specialities of the Côte d'Azur are so fragrant! Sitting at a table with your feet in the sand, you'll enjoy olive oil and sun-kissed vegetables in the form of ratatouille, anchoïade (anchovies, capers and garlic), pissaladière, Niçoise pizza with anchovies and pistou (pesto) soup flavoured with basil.
This is all accompanied by rosé wine, the 'cru' of the region, which is also drunk as an aperitif while munching bread topped with tapenade (mashed olives and capers) or panisses (chickpea patties). For dessert, locals love the Tarte Tropézienne, a decadent brioche full of cream – but you can always opt for candied fruits or a heavenly scented ice cream...
Filter by
Visit La Seyne sur Mer
Visit the Embiez Archipelago in Six Fours
Visit Ollioules, the City of Olive Trees
Practical info
Handiplage, accessible beaches in France
Visit Cannes, the City of Cinema
Family activities on the Mediterranean coast
Visit the Beaches of Six-Fours / La Seyne / Ollioules
Visit the August Trophy in La Turbie
Visit the Greek Villa Kérylos
City breaks
Nice, Capital of the Côte d'Azur
Visit Saint-Tropez, the City of Stars
Top French Cities: Nice
Visit Menton, a City of Gardens and Beaches
The Vineyards of Provence
The Fascinating Côte d'Azur
Everything you need to know about perfume
24 hours in a Palace: The Château de la Messardière
Fly me to Bordeaux
The Great Restaurants Right Now on the Côte d'Azur
Cannes, the movies' city
Jessica Fox, Stroke of success Au Campagne Magazine EF
Mediterranean dishes
Behind the scenes of the Côte d'Azur workshops...
Winter sun
The art of celebrating flowers on the Côte d'Azur
Holidays for those in the know: Xavier Veilhan at the Villa Noailles.
Côte d'Azur, the French Riviera
Practical Information
The Crit'Air anti-pollution vehicle sticker


text:
THERE HAVE BEEN examples of pop culture rescuing a nation's morale. In this country, scarcely a month after the John F. Kennedy assassination came the British Invasion spearheaded by the Beatles– an example of escape from trauma offered by ART. Simultaneously, home grown pop music exploded with the "Sound of Young America" emerging from Motown. The joy didn't last long– but left as legacy the best pop music ever recorded.
AT THE MOMENT American morale is in the toilet. Glum expressions from Debbie Downers everywhere. "Woe is us!" proclaims the intellectual class on Left and Right. As if the quixotic project called the American Dream Machine were over. To quote (name-drop alert) George Plimpton on the one occasion I met him: "Nonsense!"
If some believe the American experiment is over, with perhaps more perspective from the beaten-down streets of Detroit we see this moment as opportunity for a pop culture explosion.
WHY NOT pop literature? The last time writers were at the center of pop culture was the 1920's– ironically, a decade that was a huge influence on the Beatles. The "fun-at-all-costs" attitude of the Fitzgeralds' Jazz Age morphed into early 60's fun music that rocked the world.
Change will come from literature only if new writers present stronger attitudes, unbeatable confidence and more exciting art. Along with a dollop of pure fun.
If we're dynamic, there exists as antagonist and obstacle the moldy and static– the artistically inbred Manhattan monolith. We've been covering at our News blog the publishing Overdogs who run a phony puppet show known as the National Book Awards. Follow our coverage.
There's also the ongoing All-Time American Writers Tournament. More to happen there as well, soon. Stay tuned.
(Painting: "Where There's Smoke There's Fire" by Russell Patterson.)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Well "Mad dog Mattis", our beloved Secretary of Defense, has admitted that the 80 plus living people who are dead now after President Dump bomb the Syrian Airbase with Tomahawk missiles in 2017 didn't have to die.
Mattis, admits that THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ASSAD USED SARIN GAS ON HIS OWN PEOPLE IN 2013 OR IN 2017!
Remember that entire thing about Obomber's "red line in the sand" and the criticism he received because HE DIDN'T bomb Syria for the gas attack in 2013. He didn't have clear evidence that Assad really used sarin gas. And then later it was shown that "our" terrorists were the ones that used it.
So Obomber not retaliating was due to lack of clear evidence. And rather than blunder with death and destruction he stepped back.
However LittleLimpDickTrump RUSHED to bomb the Syrian Airbase and kill 80 plus people with no clear evidence that the Assad Government had done it. His action was ONLY because he wanted to ACT LIKE he had a large dick. Ask Stormy, he doesn't!
No surprise there.
But "Mad dog" didn't bother to explain how the United States was going to bring those 80 plus people back from the dead. Well, in truth he never really thought about the people.
He only admitted that the U.S. had no proof that Assad was involved.
Tubularsock is surprised that we didn't rush off and bomb Afghanistan like Bush did after 9/11.
You see, The U.S. has to bomb somebody! It's the MANLY thing to do.
That is what the presstitutes and the establish power structure calls "Presidential"!
And as "Mad dog Mattis has said, "Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet."
He is definitely a creepy little old limp prick!
But it is a systematic problem for the United States. We are a killing culture and it is condoned by the President and Congress.
AND the citizens of the U.S as well.
But the citizens of the U.S. don't really care much if we kill random men, women, and children in those foreign countries because they somehow find themselves on the battlefield called THEIR COUNTRY and get themselves killed.
And it is agreed that America is in THEIR COUNTRY to save them from THEIR COUNTRY!
And the fact that they get dead by the United States because we are there to save them ……….
WELL …… that is their fault
But then WE have ANOTHER school shooting and the American citizen gets, well you know, all emotional and they feel something should be done.
But the President and Congress NEVER wants to face the gun issue because EVERYONE is just too emotional to clearly decide ANYTHING about guns at this point in the latest crisis.
Let step back and support and send our prayers and face this crisis when the emotions calm down.
WELL THE PROBLEM WITH THIS is when will our emotional free period show up.
There have been 17 school shootings this year alone and we are only in mid-February!
But rest assured that the gun issue CAN'T BE DEALT WITH BY CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT!
Oh my, you still don't know? Shame on you.
The gun issue can not be changed until we change THE SHOW!
And what's the show that runs Congress and the President into INACTION?


text:
Early in the spring of 1944, when I was quite a bit younger than I am now, I parachuted into Nazi-occupied Poland as the leader of a team of Brooklyn-born commandos. We landed in a field not far from the train tracks that fed Jews to the gas chambers of Auschwitz. My team laid explosive charges on the tracks, destroying them utterly, and then I moved quickly on foot to the death camp itself, where I found Josef Mengele, the Angel of Death, in bed. I shot him in the face, though not before lecturing him on his sins. Before I killed him, he cried like a little Nazi bitch.
Then I woke up, ate a bowl of Rice Krispies, and walked to school—the Howard T. Herber Middle School—where a sixth-grade pogromist named Patrick Harrington and his Cossack associates pitched pennies at me in a game sometimes known as "Bend the Jew," which ended, inevitably, with me being jumped for refusing to pick up the aforementioned pennies, and also for killing Jesus. It is in part because of young Mr. Harrington and his lieutenants that I would later join the Israeli army, and that, more recently, I found myself sitting beside Quentin Tarantino's pool in the Hollywood Hills, listening in wonder as the writer and director of Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction diagnosed what he saw as the essential, maddening flaw of every Holocaust movie ever made.
"Holocaust movies always have Jews as victims," he said, plainly exasperated by Hollywood's lack of imagination. "We've seen that story before. I want to see something different. Let's see Germans that are scared of Jews. Let's not have everything build up to a big misery, let's actually take the fun of action-movie cinema and apply it to this situation."
Video: Jeffrey Goldberg contrasts Quentin Tarantino's new Nazi movie with Defiance and Schindler's List
It is true that most—some might even say all—films about the Holocaust focus on the persecution of Jews. The Holocaust was very bad for Jews; this is an immovable fact of history. But Tarantino isn't wrong to suggest that the cinematic depiction of anti-Semitic persecution can become wearying over time, particularly for Semites. In Judd Apatow's comedy Knocked Up, Seth Rogen's character praises Steven Spielberg's Munich for featuring Jewish assassins: "Every movie with Jews, we're the ones getting killed. Munich flips it on its ear. We're capping motherfuckers!"
Munich, though, is a neurotic's delight in comparison to Tarantino's preposterous, sporadically brutal, and greatly entertaining new film, Inglourious Basterds. (The misspellings are intentional, for reasons that Tarantino won't fully explain.) Though he opens the film with the murder of a Jewish family in a French farmhouse, he spends much of the rest of the two-and-a-half-hour film allowing his Jewish characters—including a beautiful young woman named Shoshanna, the only survivor of the farmhouse massacre—to beat Nazis, scalp Nazis, burn Nazis, and carve swastikas into the foreheads of Nazis. Inglourious Basterds is part Dirty Dozen, part Sergio Leone, part Leon Uris—but not much Night and Fog or Shoah, and certainly not much Schindler's List. (Spielberg is too nice a Jewish boy to have a U.S. soldier tell a Gestapo officer, before shooting him, "Say auf Wiedersehen to your Nazi balls!") The film also contains suggestions—intentional or not—of Ilsa, She Wolf of the SS and Springtime for Hitler. But Tarantino, a famously derivative filmmaker, has managed to create out of these parts something that seems entirely new: a story of emotionally uncomplicated, physically threatening, non-morally-anguished Jews dealing out spaghetti-Western justice to their would-be exterminators.
The film tracks two separate, though converging, plotlines: the revenge conspiracy of Shoshanna, who, after her escape from the almost comically evil SS officer Hans Landa, recreates herself as a cinema owner in Paris; and the deployment in occupied France of the "Basterds," a squad of American Jewish Nazi-hunters led by an officer nicknamed "Aldo the Apache," who is played by Brad Pitt and who is meant to be a Tennessee hillbilly, not a Jew, because even Quentin Tarantino understands that there are limits to plausibility. Shoshanna's plan and the Basterds' mission come together in Paris, with world-historical consequences. Suffice it to say that Tarantino brings about the end of World War II in a way that would please Jews, and most everyone else, including devotees of David Bowie, who sings "Cat People (Putting Out Fire)" as the Third Reich collapses. Along the way, the Basterds terrorize German soldiers and even Hitler himself.
On one level, Inglourious Basterds is a sophisticated and knowing evisceration of fascist cinema—the war ends, essentially, in a conflagration in Shoshanna's theater. And because this is Tarantino, scenes of unmediated gore are interrupted by debates about German movie-making, including a discussion (whose participants include Winston Churchill) of whether Joseph Goebbels runs his movie studios in the manner of Louis B. Mayer or David O. Selznick. But it is the unapologetic depiction of an alternate reality in which Jews torture and murder Nazis that made this film particularly interesting to a veteran REM-state Mengele-killer such as myself.
Early in the film, Aldo the Apache announces the goals of his unit: "We will be cruel to the Germans, and through our cruelty they will know who we are. They will find the evidence of our cruelty in the disemboweled, dismembered, and disfigured bodies of their brothers we leave behind us." Soon enough, the Basterds are committing war crimes, beating prisoners to death and collecting the scalps of dead Germans. "Every man under my command owes me 100 Nazi scalps," Aldo demands.
The horror-movie director Eli Roth—his film Hostel is the most repulsively violent movie I've ever seen twice—plays a Basterd known as the "Bear Jew," whose specialty is braining Germans with a baseball bat. Roth told me recently that Inglourious Basterds falls into a subgenre he calls "kosher porn."
"It's almost a deep sexual satisfaction of wanting to beat Nazis to death, an orgasmic feeling," Roth said. "My character gets to beat Nazis to death. That's something I could watch all day. My parents are very strong about Holocaust education. My grandparents got out of Poland and Russia and Austria, but their relatives did not."
Tarantino's producer, Lawrence Bender, says that after reading the first draft of Inglourious Basterds, he told Tarantino, "As your producing partner, I thank you, and as a member of the Jewish tribe, I thank you, motherfucker, because this movie is a fucking Jewish wet dream." Harvey and Bob Weinstein, the film's executive producers, also reportedly enjoyed the film's theme of Jewish revenge.
Tarantino told me he has received only positive reactions from his Jewish friends. "The Jewish males that I've known since I've been writing the film and telling them about it, they've just been, 'Man, I can't fucking wait for this fucking movie!'" he told me. "And they tell their dads, and they're like, 'I want to see that movie!'"
It is not an accident that it took a non-Jewish director to concoct this story of brutal Jewish revenge. It is difficult to imagine a Jew in Hollywood—each one more self-conscious than the next—portraying Jews as vengeance-seeking knifemen. Neal Gabler, the author of An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, told me that Jewish revenge fantasies aren't entirely alien to the movie industry, but they've always been exercises in sublimation, Superman being only the most obvious. "Jews have gone from being nonexistent in film to being thoroughly represented, but no Jew would ever make a film like Inglourious Basterds," Gabler said. "It's too brazen."
Tarantino in person is both larger and saner than he seems in his films and in his public appearances. He is a polite and enthusiastic host, and he spent part of a July afternoon with me analyzing German cinema of the 1920s, World War II iconography, and the career of Joseph Goebbels, which seems to fascinate Tarantino endlessly. (Goebbels provides one of the most amusing moments in Inglourious Basterds, crying when Hitler praises his latest film. "If Hitler says that this is the greatest movie you've ever done, I can see Goebbels getting choked up," Tarantino said in explaining the scene. "When Harvey Weinstein does that, I get a tear in my eye.") Tarantino was less thoughtful on the subject of torturing Nazis, but deliberately so. Excessive thoughtfulness, he suggested, is the reason his Jewish friends find most Holocaust movies so exasperating.
"I hate that hand-wringing shit," he said. He had a revelation in his early 20s, he recalled, when he saw Red Dawn, a Cold War revenge fantasy in which a group of American high-school students, the "Wolverines," battle Soviet and Central American soldiers who invade Colorado. "The Wolverines capture a soldier, and there's a little bit of back-and-forth—should we kill him or not—and C. Thomas Howell just blows him away with his shotgun," Tarantino recalled. "Those are the kind of things you say, 'That's exactly what I would do.' It's what I want to see, and when I don't see it, I become frustrated, and then it feels like a movie as opposed to real life."
He went on, "When you watch all the different Nazi movies, all the TV movies, it's sad, but isn't it also frustrating? Did everybody walk into the boxcar? Didn't somebody do something?"
The recent Ed Zwick movie, Defiance, about a group of Jewish partisans in German-occupied Belarus, featured armed Jews engaging in vigorous self-defense, in a way that most Holocaust movies don't. Tarantino said he had not seen it. "My guess is, that doesn't go far enough," he said. "My guess is that it's frustrating in a whole different way."
He is correct that Defiance doesn't go as far as he would go, but it is something of a corrective, not only to Schindler's List, which is a story of Christian redemption and Jewish passivity, but to the schmaltz and vulgarity of most Holocaust films, from Jakob the Liar to Life Is Beautiful. The Jews in Defiance kill Nazis, but they periodically stop to debate the merits and drawbacks of killing. When I described this, Tarantino argued that it would have been unrealistic to expect the Jews of Europe to debate the morality of killing Nazis.
I asked Tarantino if he thought the over-the-top violence of the Basterds might offend people. "Why would they condemn me?" he said. "I was too brutal to the Nazis?"
Well, scalping Nazis is a bit … much.
"One of the things that's interesting to me is equating the Jews in this case with the Indians in a Western," he said. "Maybe it's not nothing that I'm 25percent Cherokee Indian. If I go do a movie of Jewish Americans fighting back in World War II, then I equate them with the other race that I am, and I use the Indian battle plan, their methods, to attack the Nazis."
Eli Roth told me that Tarantino came to his home for Passover just as he was wrestling with the final act of Basterds.
"I was his Jewish sounding board," Roth said. "'Would a Jew do this, would a Jew do that?' He kind of didn't have an ending. But after the seder, he said, 'I'm going home to finish.' He understood that we are still pissedoff about things that happened to us 3,000 years ago. At the end of the seder, we talked about how the Jewish thing was to remember, that there was no absolution."
The ending Tarantino wrote includes the mass incineration of Nazis and their wives, with Shoshanna screaming "This is the face of Jewish vengeance!," and the very last scene features one final forehead swastika-carving.
"Why isn't that all right?" Tarantino asked me, when I noted the cruelty of that final image.
"Well, it's torture," I said. "Isn't torture wrong?"
Ten seconds went by as Tarantino weighed the question.
"He's a Nazi," Tarantino said, finally. "They're giving him a scar. I don't know if I would even go so far as to call that torture. He's scarring him. He's not torturing him. What he's doing isn't so ridiculously painful."
I asked if he'd ever had a swastika carved in his forehead.
"I'm sure it hurts," he said. But torture, he said, is something different: an attempt to elicit information by inflicting extreme pain. In other words, the pain inflicted by Tarantino's Jews on the Nazis was inflicted only to terrorize.
My ambivalence about some of the excesses of Inglourious Basterds fully emerged only in the days after our conversation. I had met Tarantino less than 24 hours after I first saw the film. When I came out of the screening room the night before our interview, I was so hopped up on righteous Jewish violence that I was almost ready to settle the West Bank—and possibly the East Bank. But when my blood cooled, I began to think about the morality of kosher porn in the context of current Middle East politics. Some of this was informed by my own experience in the Israeli army, in which I saw my fellow Jewish soldiers do moral things—such as risking their lives to prevent the murder of innocent Jews—as well as immoral things, like beating the hell out of Palestinians because they could.
When Tarantino asked me how I thought his film would be received in Israel—he's visiting for the first time this summer, to promote the film—I told him that Israelis, who have actual experience with physical power (in a way that most Jews over the course of the past 2,000 years did not), might not take to the film in the way that many of their American cousins might. Some Israeli liberals, including the country's many filmmakers, might not like his movie very much at all.
Lawrence Bender, Tarantino's loyal producer, is one of Hollywood's more famous liberals—he produced the Al Gore climate-change film, An Inconvenient Truth, and he is on the board of the Israel Policy Forum, a left-leaning pro-Israel group. Bender told me he could not view Inglourious Basterds without remembering his own experience with schoolyard anti-Semitism. "I was taunted and thrown into lockers, and I've never forgotten it."
I asked him to place the movie in the current stream of Jewish power politics. "Every time Quentin makes a movie, we're accused of promoting violence," he said. "Most people know the difference between real life and the movies. This is a movie. It's a fantasy. It's not meant to empower the Jews and speak against the Arabs. But on the other hand, to point out that the Jews have some degree of power today but are living in the middle of a sea of people who are basically saying that they shouldn't be around? I have zero problem with Jewish empowerment. The whole thing is complicated. At the end of the day, the people in that auditorium"—during the film's climax—"are Nazis. You kind of feel bad for them because they're burning to death, but you're not feeling too much sympathy, even for the Nazi who gets a swastika carved in his head."
But why risk creating sympathy for Nazis at all? Why have any scene that, in Neal Gabler's words, "conventionalizes Jews, puts them in the same revenge motif as everyone else"? Tarantino, of course, always goes too far: Sofie Fatale's cut-off arm in Kill Bill: Vol. 1; the police officer's sliced-off ear in Reservoir Dogs. I have a high tolerance for violence in Tarantino's compelling fantasy demimonde. But Inglourious Basterds is the first Tarantino movie to reference real historical events. Which might be why I find his anti-Nazi excesses—there's a concept—disconcerting. Or it might be because I don't actually have revenge dreams anymore. They stopped sometime after I left the army, if I remember correctly. Given the chance, of course, I would still shoot Mengele in the face. That would be a moral necessity. But I wouldn't carve a swastika into his forehead. That just doesn't sound like the Jewish thing to do.
We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to firstname.lastname@example.com.


text:
HEMPSTEAD, N.Y. - President Obama hoped to rebound from a poor performance as he squared off tonight against Mitt Romney in the second of their three nationally televised debates.
The incumbent Democrat and his Republican challenger met for 90 minutes at the Hofstra University on Long Island, in a debate sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Candy Crowley of CNN was the moderator for the townhall-style meeting, which was to focus on foreign policy as well as economics.
The debate was shown live on network television and C-Span, beginning at 9 p.m. EDT. Boston.com, BostonGlobe.com, and "Political Intelligence" offered a live blog below to chronicle the pre-debate proceedings and debate itself.
All three also offered contemporaneous fact-checking and analysis from Globe reporters expert in various fields, creating a unique "second-screen" experience for viewers seeking additional context for what they are seeing on TV.
The blog also served as a window into the debate to those not near a TV.
Obama and Romney face a quick turnaround before their next debate. It is scheduled for Monday night at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla.
Vice President Joe Biden and Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan had their lone debate last week at Centre College in Danville, Ky.
Click here for the latest updates.
10:40 p.m. - Nearly 10 minutes late, the debate ends.
Obama took Romney's invocation of the 47-percent remark to hammer him for stating it.
Says that as president, he is not anti-free enterprise, as labeled.
Thanks for logging on tonight. Sorry for some technical challenges that slowed our usual rapid-fire pace!
10:35 p.m. - Man asks final question to Romney: What do you believe is the biggest misperception the American people have about you as a man and as a candidate.
Romney thanks him for the chance to define himself. He says he is not as has been defined by the president's campaign.
"I care about 100 percent of our people," says Romney, raising his controversial "47-percent" comment himself for the first time in the night.
Then he segues to how he has been compassionate as a Mormon missionary, and how he saved the Olympics, and got people insured as governor of Massachusetts.
"I understand we can get this country going again. We don't have to settle," he says.
10:33 p.m. - Crowley, trying to wrap up debate, nonetheless asks how do you return manufacturing back to US?
Romney says answer is easy: leveling the playing field.
Also, he says America "has to be the most attractive place for entrepreneurs."
Obama retorts, "There are some jobs that will never come back, because they are low-wage, low-skill jobs. I want high-skill, high-wage jobs."
10:29 p.m. - Obama says US needs to create jobs here, in part by lowering corporate rates. But he wants to close loopholes that benefit companies moving to China.
"Now, Governor Romney wants to expand those tax breaks," says Obama.
10:27 p.m. - Woman asks Romney about outsourcing jobs and how to stop it.
Romney says the country has to make it more attractive to foreign investment, while also going after China for trade infractions.
10:25 p.m. - As the debate winds down, the spin room in the media center is filling up.
10:24 p.m. - Crowley re-centers question on why not have an assault weapons ban in light of recent mass killings.
Romney says he signed a gun control bill that was supported both by advocates and gun critics.
10:21 p.m. - Romney says he is not in favor of new gun regulations, "but enormous measures" to enforce existing laws.
He adds: "We need parents, moms and dads raising kids."
10:18 p.m. - Woman asks Obama what he has done to stop sale of AK-47s, as he promised during the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
The president is largely dodging this question, citing how he has comforted victims of gun violence, before saying that he has sought broader solutions not just to guns, but better education and community development.
10:15 p.m. - Crowley notes that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has taken responsibility.
Obama says that is true, but she works for him, and that he is ultimately responsible.
"The suggestion that anybody on my team ... would play politics or mislead, when we lost four of our own," is offensive," says president.
10:12 p.m. - President concludes by saying he cares for staff, since he has to greet coffins when they come home.
But, Romney says, there were days that went by before the administration conceded the attack was a terrorist attack, and that the president went off campaigning in the aftermath of the assassination of an ambassador.
"This calls into question the president's whole policy in the Middle East," says Romney
10:09 p.m. - Man says he and a group of co-workers wondered yesterday, who refused extra security for consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
President says he is personally concerned about diplomat safety, so he ordered beefing up security at all embassies, an investigation into what happened, and a plan to hunt down the killers.
Then, again, he pivots to Romney for criticizing the administration even before the fires were out.
10:07 p.m. - On China investments, Romney says he has some blind trust investments in China, but then he turns to Obama and asks if he had looked at his own pension investments.
"I don't look at my pension; it's not as big as yours," replies president.
10:05 p.m. - Romney replies, "I did not say that the Arizona law was a model for the nation," only it's "e-verify segment" was a model.
He also retorts that he did not stir opposition to immigration reform when Obama controlled both chambers of Congress and had his own chance to make immigration reform.
10:02 p.m. - Obama says he has tried to do everything he can - on his own, and with a reluctant Congress - to make changes.
They include making legal immigration easier, and blocking the border better, and by going after gang-bangers and other troublemakers.
He also highlights his work to provide pathway to citizenship for children of illegals who have been in school.
"His main strategy, during the Republican primary, was, 'We're going to encourage self-deportation,'" Obama recalls of Romney.
10 p.m. - Romney ticks through his immigration proposals, including encouraging legal immigration and turning off "magnets" for illegals, such as giving them driver's licenses.
Then, like Obama has been doing, he pivots to his opponent to accuse Obama of passing his own ideas.
"Why did he fail?" asks Romney.
9:59 p.m. - Crowley steers Romney to woman questioner, who asks him about his plans for immigration.
These last few questions have been good for the president and not great for Romney.
9:56 p.m. - Romney tells man as president finishes, "I think you know better."
He cites litany of administration failures, adding, "This is a president who has not been able to do what he said he'd do."
9:55 p.m. - Once again, Obama uses end of his answer to attack Romney's policy proposals, not just lay out his plans.
9:53 p.m. - Man asks president how he has made his life better; says he is not sure he can vote for him again.
The president ticks of his record.
"Does that mean you're not struggling?" says president. "A lot of us are not."
But he says his plans are better.
9:49 p.m. - This s a tee ball for the president.
"Well, first of all, I think it's important to tell you, we did come in during some tough time. ... But we have been digging ourselves out," says Obama.
Then he pivots to linking Romney to Bush policies.
Says he wants tax cuts, has been a businessman with China.
"Governor, you're the last person that's going to get tough on China," says Obama, turning to look at Romney.
9:47 p.m. - Woman asks Romney to cite differences with George W. Bush.
He says he will balance budget, and cut spending. He also says Bush was focused on big business, but "I came from small business."
9:44 p.m. - Obama says that Romney favors policies that are "not the kind of advocacy women need." He cites his lack of support for Planned Parenthood, and no position on the Lilly Ledbetter law.
9:40 p.m. - Romney formally answers that he respects women, as shown by the number of women he sought out for his Cabinet.
"We're going to have to have employers in the new economy ... that are going to be so anxious to have good employees they're going to hire women," he says.
9:38 p.m. - Young woman asks president how he will ensure pay equality for women.
"This is a great question," says president, who has hammered Romney for not supporting pay equity.
Romney usually retorts that women have suffered in this economy, and he will help them by creating more jobs.
9:36 p.m. - Crowley asks Romney, if the numbers don't add up, would you look at Clinton-era tax rates.
"Of course they add up," says Romney, recalling how he balanced budgets as bsuinessman, Olympics chief, and governor of Massachusetts.
Romney then goes after the president, saying his 2008 promises haven't been achieved.
"I know what it takes to balance budgets," says Romney.
9:34 p.m. - Obama says, "You wouldn't have taken such a sketchy deal" when he was a venture capitalist, as he accuses Romney of not being clear about his plans.
9:34 p.m - The theatrics of this are stunning: The two candidates standing just feet apart, debating their respective policies, with an audience right at their heels.
9:32 p.m. - Romney says he doesn't favor tax cuts for wealthy, but to lower rates for all taxpayers so job creators can retain more capital.
The Republican says, "We don't have to live like this."
9:29 p.m. - "Governor Romney has a different philosophy," says president.
He cites "60 Minutes" interview when Romney defended his tax rate.
"That is exactly the type of top-down economics that's not going to work," says Obama.
9:27 p.m. - Obama starts by saying his philosophy on taxes is simple: relief for the middle class.
That said, if it is a moral obligation to address the deficit, the wealthy must pay more, says president.
9:24 p.m. - Fourth question is about taxes, and to Romney.
What deductions would be cut, asks woman referring to her notes when she gets stuck?
Romney says he wants to cut middle-income taxes, to help middle class recover from recession.
After cutting rates, Romney says he will limit deductions and credits for people at the high end.
"The top 5 percent of income-tax payers will continue to pay 60 percent of the taxes," he says.
He also says people can decide which deductions they want to keep, as well.
9:22 p.m. - This debate is white-hot in just the first 20 minutes.
He says gas prices were lower when he took office because the economy was in recession. If Romney is elected, they might get back that way because he wants to pursue the same economic policies, the president says.
"That's not an energy strategy for the future," says Obama.
9:20 p.m. - Romney and Obama are clashing over extent of oil production on federal lands has been cut in past four years.
As Obama walked away, Romney followed him, challenging the president's answer.
"You'll get your chance in a minute because I'm still speaking," Romney says as president of the United States stands up to speak.
9:17 p.m. - Crowley follows up, "Are we looking at the new normal," with $4 per gallon gas?
Obama says demand is up, but so is production. But then, for third answer, he goes after Romney's record, saying he was proud to shut down a coal-burning plant when he was governor.
9:14 p.m. - For the second consecutive answer, Obama takes the fight to Romney, saying his energy plan is focused on gas companies, not clean energy companies like him.
Romney retorts: "Let's look at the president's policies, as opposed to the rhetoric."
Romney says gas production not from federal lands - where president cut permits - but private investment that the administration fought in some cases.
"I want to make sure we use our oil, our coal, our gas, our nuclear, our renewables," says Romney.
9:12 p.m. - Voter asks about high gas prices, saying energy secretary says it's not his problem to keep prices low. Agree?
President says best thing to lower gas prices to increase energy sources, but also to increase fuel efficiency for future cars to use half as much gas.
9:10 p.m. - Obama pours it one in rebutting Romney answer on auto industry.
"Governor Romney says he has a five-point plan. He doesn't have a five-point plan; he has a one-point plan," says president, referring to tax cuts for the wealthy.
9:08 p.m. - Sorry, technical problem.
9:06 p.m. - "More debt and less jobs; I'm going to change that," says Romney.
9:03 p.m. - First question to Romney from 20-year-old student: How make sure I have a job after I graduate.
"Your question is one being asked by college kids all across this country," says Romney.
The president is perched on the edge of his stool.
Romney says he has to make college more affordable and then make sure there is a job at the ready for them when they graduate.
9:02 p.m. - Crowley introduces the candidates. They shake hands at center stage.
9 p.m. - And the cable and broadcast networks are on the air.
8:59 p.m. - One minute air. Crowd is silent.
8:54 p.m. - CNN's Candy Crowley, the moderator, is welcomed on the stage. Viewers will notice a pronounced wave in her hair.
She repeats the no-electronic device warnings.
8:53 p.m. - Both Ann Romney and first lady Michelle Obama are both in the hall - and both in pink.
Meanwhile, Governor Deval Patrick has arrived at the media center to participate in spin duty after the debate.
8:50 p.m. - Hofstra president is wrapping up a long commercial of sorts for his school, highlighting its offerings. He noted that all students allowed in the hall tonight are registered to vote and plan to do so on Nov. 6.
8:46 p.m. - President of Hofstra University profusely thanking commission and his own staff for pulling off this debate.
It really is quite a logistical feat, especially as you try to keep a college running at the same time.
8:39 p.m. - McCurry replaced Paul Kirk, the former Kennedy aide and Massachusetts senator who started the commission with Fahrenkopf.
McCurr thanked the sponsors, including Southwest Airlines for moving around the commission staff and equipment, and Anheuser-Busch, for making sure that people at debate hall are fed "and never thirsty."
8:37 p.m. - The setting is this: About 80 people clustered around the candidates, asking them questions. And then an audience of students and invited guests watching from the stands and arena floor.
8:35 p.m. - The Commission on Presidential Debate co-chairs - Frank Fahrenkopf and Mike McCurry - are now addressing the audience as we get the rules laid down, etc.
Mitt Romney and his team have arrived at the debate hall and are holding, as is the president.
8:18 p.m. - The White House pool report had President Obama leaving his hotel at 8 p.m. on the dot.
7:07 p.m. - Besides Kerry, those working the spin room pre-debate including former New Hampshire Governor John Sununu (for Romney), Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley (for Obama), and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean.
As Kerry was just getting started with the media, Dean broke through, shook his hand to say hello and then chit-chatted with his 2004 presidential rival.
Kerry remarked that Dean looked like he had lost weight.
6:35 p.m. - My colleague Matt Viser and I ran into Senator John Kerry - who has been playing Romney for Obama's prep session - and a scrum quickly formed around the Massachusetts Democrat.
He lit into Romney, saying his claims of bipartisanship in Massachusetts were exaggerated, that he constantly vetoed bills and had then overridden, that he did health care because the Legislature wanted it but now, in the most "flim-flam" episode ever, is running away from the same plan at the federal level.
Kerry also tweaked Romney, saying he has a fixation on elevators: He had one locked down for his personal use while governor, he notes, and has plans to install one for his cars at his California home.
Viser wrote up the commentary, but it's clear from Kerry's aggressiveness that Obama is ready to go after his Republican rival tonight.
The incumbent Democrat and his Republican challenger were meeting for 90 minutes at the Hofstra University on Long Island, in a debate sponsored by the Commission on Presidential Debates. Candy Crowley of CNN was the moderator for the townhall-style meeting, which was to focus on foreign policy as well as economics.
The debate was being shown live on network television and C-Span, beginning at 9 p.m. EDT. Boston.com, BostonGlobe.com, and "Political Intelligence" will offer a live blog below to chronicle the pre-debate proceedings and debate itself.
All three will also offer contemporaneous fact-checking and analysis from Globe reporters expert in various fields, creating a unique "second-screen" experience for viewers seeking additional context for what they are seeing on TV.
The blog will also serve as a window into the debate to those not near a TV.
Obama and Romney face a quick turnaround before their next debate. It is scheduled for Monday night at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla.
Vice President Joe Biden and Republican vice presidential nominee Paul Ryan had their lone debate last week at Centre College in Danville, Ky.
Glen Johnson can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.com. Follow him on Twitter @globeglen.


text:
Happy Labor Day.
Monday, September 5, 2011
What happens when I leave the room?
13 comments:
That makes ME want to cry.ReplyDelete
Oh my gosh, that happens in my living room too! The ever dreaded question of, "Can I dump the bin?" Eek!ReplyDelete
They are much easier to sort through that way!!! :DReplyDelete
A lego pen instead of a lego tub?ReplyDelete
- Ilene WaterstoneSeptember 5, 2011 at 7:23 AM
I'm just curious to know how long you were gone.ReplyDelete
That photo actually made me gasp.ReplyDelete
It made Baby E laugh out loud.
Isn't in interesting that when it comes to Legos, that some kids like all the sets to be kept together just as they were in their box when bought and then some kids like them in one big pile.ReplyDelete
After the two or three days of sorting he went through with his dad..... oh my.ReplyDelete
I'd say it's time just to give in and let him keep them all mixed up in the huge bin. Or maybe have him sort out the really tiny pieces into a smaller bin and let the rest stay mixed.
Either that or it's time for a bulldozer.
when I was a kid, we didn't have Lego's, we had sticks with slots in the ends and round wooden wheels with multiple holes in which to put the sticks. And little plastic fin thingys to put in the slots. AND WE LIKED IT!ReplyDelete
Are those the same Legos that were painstakingly separated over the course of a few DAYZZZZZ? Ya' can't turn yur back for a minute, can ya'?! Oh well, perhaps more quality time sorting Legos with dad is on the agenda.ReplyDelete
Oh Lord Jesus. (And you know I don't use that name in vain too often.) This made my stomach turn.ReplyDelete
The Blob!ReplyDelete


text:
|Main floor bedroom.
This picture is the other side of the bedroom and you can see there are no windows that look into the backyard:
|Main floor bedroom.
What do you think? Good decision or a waste of our time and money?
In case you missed these posts:
The Story of The Fixer Upper - Part One
The Story of The Fixer Upper - Part Two


text:
Thursday, July 31, 2014
For 2014, there will 7 new notable openings in the upper 130s and the 140s mostly concentrated on the more western locale of Harlem. At The Wallace just opened its bar at Broadway and 149th Street and has been an instant hit. The same can be said for Manhattanville Coffee which arrived earlier in the summer at 142nd and Edgecombe and it now looks like Anchor Wine Bar will be next to open its doors over on Broadway by 143rd Street. Hog's Head Tavern at 142nd and Hamilton Place will surely receive much of our entertainment budget when it opens in the next couple of weeks while Grill On The Hill just 2 blocks south will also be a notable debut in a similar time frame. Finally The Edge cafe at 139th and Edgecombe or La Tarenga's contemporary French-Senaglese offerings just an avenue over will totally complete the restaurant revolution of the more northern reaches of Harlem.
5 comments:
- AnonymousJuly 31, 2014 at 10:13 AM
this is so great. go hamilton heights.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJuly 31, 2014 at 10:27 AM
Kudos to Harlem Public. Really smart business owners. Open a new business right next door to their old one? Absolutely brilliant. The neighborhood cant support it, wanted and needed it... why compete with anyone but yourself?ReplyDelete
- AnonymousJuly 31, 2014 at 10:39 AM
As someone who has lived in the neighborhood almost a decade, I'm not surprised. Accessibility to Hamilton Heights is fantastic and apartments are reasonable, especially considering you're in Manhattan and the big increases in Brooklyn, so the influx has really increased in the last two years. Houses were a relative bargain, but they're getting very expensive, so you have people with money moving into the area without a full range of local bars, restaurants, and services.ReplyDelete
There are a lot of very nice empty storefronts remaining in the neighborhood, so these seven openings will certainly not be the last.
- AnonymousJuly 31, 2014 at 8:55 PM
Great news and also an update, the spot opening at 139th and ACP now has a sign in the window saying it's going to be Ponty Bistro.ReplyDelete
- AnonymousAugust 14, 2014 at 10:12 AM
I agree with the area now gaining popularity with a set of people who are priced out of Brooklyn, and happily surprised with the housing, community and in Manhattan neighborhood. Well done on the part of these smaller non chain restaurants. I would love to see a west side market or trader's joe.ReplyDelete


text:
Now showing items 1-1 of 1
Identifikasi dan Karakterisasi Potent Odorant Mangga Kweni (Mangifera odorata Griff)
(Jurusan Teknologi Pangan dan Gizi, Fakultas Teknologi Pertanian, IPB, 1997-08)
Volatile compounds were isolated from flesh and skin of kweni fruit by dynamic headspace sampling. Aromagram of flesh and skin extracts were similar with respect to predominant odorants. Ethyl butanoate with sweet, fruity, ...


text:
Are you running around like a maniac, trying to find the perfect gift? Well, please take a breath. Take two. Sit down a spell in this comfy chair. Here, have a glass of wine.
Now, let us help you with your shopping! We have two exciting events coming up this weekend – expertly timed to help you find the tokens of handmade affection for your sweetheart, good friends, and even yourself.
Saturday, Feb 11: Kim Morris Trunk Show – Fabulous craftsmanship from start to finish. Kim is the *real* deal and if you haven't seen her work, please do yourself a favor and drop in. We'll have complimentary snacks and bubblies while you browse!
Kim will be in-house with her jewelry and Japanese silk scarves all day, from 11- 5pm.
Sunday, Feb 12: Valentine Party with Special Guest, the *Mistress of Good Fortunes Foretold and Love Advice,* Miss BAM!
Because we know our customers enjoy having another day to shop for Valentine goodies, we'll be open from 12:00 till 4:00 on Sunday to help you find the right gift and to celebrate the season of love with yummy bites, bubbling beverages, handmade greeting card making (free! Just bring your creativity! Small children are discouraged from this activity due to sharp scissors.)
And the BEST treat? All day our talented seer of good news (no doom here, folks) will be onsite, doing 15 minute readings for a mere $10 donation; a portion of which she has earmarked for one of her favorite local animal charities. We are scheduling readings HERE – so please go to this link and snag your spot! You don't want to miss out on this. She only has 11 spaces. See you this weekend!


text:
Aly Raisman, 3-time Olympic gold medalist, says she was abused by former USA Gymnastics doctor
A second member of the Fierce Five squad that won gold at the London Olympics has said she, too, was sexually abused by USA Gymnastics' longtime team physician.
Aly Raisman confirmed the abuse in an interview with 60 Minutes, which is to air Sunday night. The three-time gold medalist and captain of the 2012 and 2016 Olympic teams also describes it in her book, Fierce, being released next week.
"I am angry. I'm really upset," Raisman told 60 Minutes. "I see these young girls that come up to me, and they ask for pictures or autographs, whatever it is … I just want to create change so that they never, ever have to go through this."
Raisman's revelation comes a month after fellow Fierce Fiver McKayla Maroney came forward to say she was abused by Larry Nassar for several years, beginning when she was 13. A third Olympian, Sydney bronze medalist Jamie Dantzscher, has also said she was abused by Nassar.
According to the Lansing State Journal, which is part of the USA TODAY Network, more than 140 women have alleged sexual abuse by Nassar, under the guise of medical treatment.
Nassar was the USA Gymnastics' team physician for nearly 20 years, beginning in 1996. He was fired by USA Gymnastics in the summer of 2015, but the federation waited five weeks before alerting the FBI. Raisman told 60 Minutes that she met with the FBI after the Rio Olympics, where she won a second team gold as well as silver medals in the all-around and floor exercise.
► Out of balance: An IndyStar investigation into USA Gymnastics
► Timeline of allegations:Former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar
Raisman has been openly critical of the way USA Gymnastics has handled complaints against Nassar as well as other allegations of sexual abuse. IndyStar, also part of the USA TODAY Network, has reported more than 360 cases in which gymnasts have accused coaches of sexual transgressions over 20 years.
"It doesn't matter if you're the Olympic champion or you're an 8-year-old that goes to gymnastics in Ohio, or wherever you are in the United States," Raisman said in a joint interview with USA TODAY Sports and the Associated Press in August, when she and her Final Five teammates from Rio were inducted into the USA Gymnastics Hall of Fame.
"Every single kid is important, and I want USA Gymnastics to do a better job with that."
Raisman declined to detail her interactions with Nassar during the August interview, saying she wanted to keep the focus on the scandal and its overall impact.
"It's important to speak up for something and it's right. It's the right thing," she said. "More people need to talk about it and I just feel that it's not getting enough attention in the sport. That's what bothers me. I want these young girls to know. It should have never ever happened and I think that needs to be discussed more."
Last month, Maroney came forward in a Twitter post, saying Nassar abused her under the guise of medical treatment. Nassar abused her until she left the sport, Maroney wrote, adding, "It seemed whenever and wherever this man could find the chance, I was 'treated.'"
Maroney said Nassar abused her before the U.S. team won gold in the 2012 Olympics and before she won silver on vault.
At the 2011 world championships, Maroney said Nassar gave her a sleeping pill "and the next thing I know I was all alone with him in his hotel room getting a 'treatment.' I thought I was going to die that night." She was 15 at the time.
Maroney shared her account in October with the #MeToo hashtag.
► More:McKayla Maroney accused him of sexual assault; here's what other gymnasts say about Dr. Larry Nassar
►A 20-year toll: 368 gymnasts allege sexual exploitation
"People should know that this is not just happening in Hollywood," Maroney wrote. "This is happening everywhere. Wherever there is a position of power, there seems to be potential for abuse. I had a dream to go to the Olympics, and the things that I had to endure to get there were unnecessary and disgusting."'
Nassar pleaded guilty to federal child pornography charges in July, and he faces 22 to 27 years in prison when he's sentenced on Dec. 7. He also faces 33 charges of criminal sexual conduct in Michigan.
The sex abuse scandal led to the ouster of USA Gymnastics CEO Steve Penny, who resigned in March under pressure from the U.S. Olympic Committee. USA Gymnastics announced this week that Kerry Perry, formerly the vice president of business development at Learfield Communications, would start as CEO on Dec. 1.
USA Gymnastics hired former federal prosecutor Deborah Daniels to review its practices, and her report found USA Gymnastics needed a "complete cultural change" so safety and well-being of athletes was a greater priority than world and Olympic medals.
USA Gymnastics has adopted all 70 recommendations made by Daniels and is in the process of implementing them. Some have already been addressed with the opening of the U.S. Center for Safe Sport, an independent agency created by the USOC to handle sexual misconduct cases in the Olympic movement.
In a statement, USA Gymnastics said it was "appalled by the conduct of which Larry Nassar is accused, and we are very sorry that any athlete has been harmed during her or his gymnastics career."
"Aly's passion and concern for athlete safety is shared by USA Gymnastics," the statement said. "We are committed to doing what is right, and we want to work with Aly and all interested athletes to keep athletes safe."
► 'I knew what the cost would be': Why sexual assault victims stay silent
►He could have been stopped: How one pedophile kept coaching gymnastics


text:
BULLETIN: Somehow a humorous poem by Percy Bisque Silley managed to get sidetracked in my system and just surfaced even though the poem was submitted ten days before the cutoff for March. My sincere apologies to the poet! I've just added Percy's poem to the ballot box: "If Life Had a Wife." Please give this poem a read under the WOM page. I'll add it to the "Click to Read" box this afternoon.
On a sadder note, 4th grader Taylor McGowan's poem, "Life," didn't arrive until three days after cutoff so we can't vote on it with the other young poet offerings, but that won't keep us from reading and enjoying Taylor's poem. Please check it out under the Young Poet's page.
First, I want to thank Pat Lewis for his excellent and thought-provoking article yesterday. Judging from comments, I'd say that many of you agree that Pat not only writes beautifully but he has much to tell us about the craft. If you haven't had a chance to leave a comment for Pat, I hope you'll do it. Pat and all others who have graced my Friday blogs over the past months have given up time from their own work to contribute here and I know they appreciate hearing from you.
Next, please don't forget that Rebecca Dotlich will join us on April 16 and she has asked for questions in advance. You can contact Rebecca directly by going to her website at http://www.rebeccakaidotlich.com/ or scroll to the bottom of my announcement of her scheduled appearance (March 22) and leave questions in the comment section.
As you know, I think that part of the fun in seeing so many poems and comments on this page is to determine where they come from. In fits and spurts, I send out notes of inquiry. Some of you prefer your anonymity; others feel comfortable telling me your location. I haven't checked for the last two months, during which we've been joined by a good many new voices. Here's what I knew in January. If your state or country isn't included and you would like to add to the information, please let me know. Thanks.
States and Countries Represented
In Word of the Month Poetry Challenge
January, 2010
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New York
Rhode Island
South Africa
Sri Lanka
A reminder that voting is now going on for March's Hall of Fame Poets (see the ballot boxes posted March 25) and that you can vote once for your choice in each of the two groups: adult poets and young poets. If you are joining us for the first time, the rule is that no one can win the title twice during the same twelve month period ending this September. Previous winners are welcome to contribute poems each month, and their fans and supporters can certainly vote for them, but they can only be recognized once until the next cycle begins.
In the adult poets division, our previous Monthly Hall of Fame Poets are Mimi Cross, Liz Korba, Linda Kulp, Steven Withrow, and Beth Carter. Monthly Hall of Fame Young Poets are Alyssa Kirch, Claire Scott, Priya Shah, John Sullivan, and Megan Barnett.


text:
From the City That Has Everything
Writer/Artist: Dan Jurgens
Inker: Norm Rapmund
Color: Hi-Fi
Letters: Rob Leigh
This is the "primary" story of the issue–a sort of stand-alone "finale" to Jurgens-and-Co.'s run the last couple of years and 45-some issue run. We open on a narration/captions of Jon Kent and Lois talking, against imagery of Superman battling a Khund warship. Jon's worried his Dad won't get here in time, as Lois reassures him he'll be here. As Clark arrives, Lois reminds him that people just want to thank him. We see that they're at a Thank You, Superman presentation in the park–Metropolis has gathered to try to offer thanks to Superman, though knowing they can't begin to cover it. Amidst various testimonials of how Superman has impacted and saved folks, Clark keeps thinking he sees further traces of a Khund invasion…perhaps just looking for an excuse to get away from this presentation. Eventually, the crowd gets to see Superman fly into action, as Clark can't ignore his senses. He finds Wonder Woman, who reveals that there was indeed a major Khund incursion…but it's been handled. By everyone. Even his fellow heroes are fans, and thank Superman for his role in everything. Without him, none of them would likely be there.
On its surface, this is a rather cheesy story of little substance. There's some presentation to honor Superman, and he's avoiding it. Then, alllll the other heroes are there as well, because they wish to honor him, too.
Neat and simple, right? Evocative of classic Silver Age stories (to me), and not terribly deep.
But back to "on its surface."
See, this is the 1,000th issue of Action Comics. 80 years of Superman. This is a major event, a one-issue spectacular. An anthology of sorts with numerous shorter stories making up the whole. It's a standalone issue, something that draws from and can influence other stuff, but it's not truly coming off any To Be Continued… message. It's (as an issue) not leading directly into anything. It's expected that this will be read where the previous few issues, or dozens of issues, or even hundreds of issues, have not been read.
There's loads of "meta" to this–as a story, and as part of the issue.
This Superman–Dan Jurgens' Superman–comes from a take on the character where Clark Kent is the man, and Superman is a "mask." This Superman is Clark Kent…who does what's right because it is right–not to show off, not for accolades and recognition–and is actually rather uncomfortable being the center of attention. And we get to see that…as we get to see a bit of Lois' personality. She teases him for trying to get out of the ceremony, but we come to see that she's the one that spearheaded the gathering of the heroes, and helped coordinate with Batman and the others to "cover for" Superman, so that he could have this day, this event. We also see Jon, the son, both AS the Son of Superman and as a kid. Not fully understanding everything going on, loving his dad but not sure if he'll make it, and an eagerness to stand in for him, recognizing the importance of the situation and wanting to live up to the family tradition.
I knew going in that Norm Rapmund was involved with the art…and I was loving the art all through the story. There was something extra familiar about it, though, that had a slight smile trying to escape me as I read it, but I couldn't quite place it. Until I looked consciously at the credits for the story and realized why the art seemed that much more familiar and was evoking such a reaction in me: Jurgens on the pencils. Of course! Regardless of conscious realization in words, on sight I had recognized the (somehow UNexpected) presence of work by probably my favorite Superman artist!
Superman reluctantly accepts the recognition…somewhat awkwardly. The final spread with all the heroes and fans and such…metatextually, real-world…without Superman, there probably would NOT have been any of these other heroes. Certainly nowhere near as many, and probably not even a comics industry.
This story is a send-off of sorts from Jurgens–capping off his run, as well as recognizing and thanking Superman.
And for one such as me–a 30-year-fan of Superman, introduced to him when I was but 7 years old–this is a powerful piece, meaningful and deep, and moving…and if one has to put a one-off story as a capstone to a run, that stands alone and evokes the past, has elements from the run, but isn't beholden to it and all that…this does it well, and is a worthy opening to Action Comics #1000!
Never-Ending Battle
Story and Words: Peter J. Tomasi
Artist: Patrick Gleason
Colorist: Alejandro Sanchez
Letterer: Tom Napolitano
This story opens with a rather hellish, red-tinged image of Vandal Savage having Superman engulfed in some sort of red energy and alien machinery. The narration is Superman, speaking to Lois, apologizing for being sidetracked on the way home–he's late. Basically, Savage tried to blend Superman with the past, trapping him and leaving the future open for him (Savage) to rule without Superman's interference. So we get a bunch of pages evoking some key eras in Superman's history, as we know it in the real-world; but in-continuity the character himself acknowledges that despite the familiarity, he knew it was impossible to have been there in the 1930s, for example. These are all full-page images with the "voiceover" going along with them…not necessarily tied exactly to the image whose page the words are on, but particularly for those familiar with the history of the character and the stories/eras being referenced, the words take on additional (and deeper) meaning than they might otherwise. And the story ends with a shot of Superman standing at a table with a lotta candles (one can assume there are probably around 1,000 of 'em!), Lois and Jon on either side, a "Happy Birthday" sign strung up behind, and even Krypto in the foreground, as we celebrate Superman's 80th birthday, and the 1,000th issue of Action Comics.
Normally I would not care for this sort of story. Had this been a 15-page sequence in an otherwise-20-paged issue of something (especially if at a $3.99 price point) I would be disappointed and annoyed. Even as one of the longest stories within this issue, it's still a "mere" 15 pages, and as such, even this sequence is a relatively small portion of the entire issue. As a "short story" in this "anthology" issue of numerous creators…it works quite well. We have a basic story–Superman faces a villain, is flung throughout time, makes it home safe. This reminds me of other stories I've read, and feels rather familiar, like it's a sort of "trope" at this point–where you can have a numerous-issue "event" of a character being thrown through time, or it can be just a casual backdrop "referenced" but not really the point of a story.
Here, this does both: it's a sort of casual-ish "reference" thing…but the pages as we go through show Superman through the decades–Gleason's imagery evoking the general "style" and depiction of Superman through the decades. One page reminds me loosely of the Superman vs. Superboy issue from early in the Byrne era; the next is a familiar image from Miller's Dark Knight Returns (and signed by the artist after Frank Miller). There's a page with the black-costumed, long-haired Superman fighting Mongul, with Steel and Superboy in the background, in reference to the Death and Return of Superman…Reign of the Supermen. There's a page with a version of Zod, the pointy-crystal Fortress of Solitude in the background, and a Superman trapped in the pane of glass version of the Phantom Zone. There's even a page showing the Kingdom Come Superman facing Magog, a mushroom cloud in the background with several of the other heroes. And there's a page showing the New 52 Superman breaking through a wall, shifting to the black-costume, bearded Superman of Jurgens' Lois and Clark, shifting into the Rebirth costume, into the Reborn costume, punching Savage out.
This is an appropriate celebration of Superman, of how (ultimately) he easily overcomes situations, fights through whatever is thrown at him, and that Tomasi puts as Superman's words: "Each and every time stream, in the end, led home…to my family."
Tomasi and Gleason being the primary creatives the last couple years on the named Superman title that has run alongside Jurgens' Action Comics, this is a highly-appropriate story to cap off that run, to share in this issue, and to celebrate and acknowledge the rich history of the character. I often find I'm not overly thrilled with Gleason's art–just a personal issue due to comparing it so often to art I prefer–but here, particularly for the time-tossed pages, it shines excellently.
An Enemy Within
Script: Marv Wolfman
Art: Curt Swan
Inks: Butch Guice, Kurt Schaffenberger
Color & Production Assist: Hi-Fi
Letters: Rob Leigh
I appreciate the history of Wolfman with the Superman character, as well as the very fabric of the history of DC Comics in-continuity and out; ditto the importance of Curt Swan as one of THE Superman artists. That said…I did not really care much for this story.
Basically, we have narration from Superman as he's halfway across the world dealing with a Brainiac threat, while we're shown a hostage situation involving a principal and one of his students. From the narration, we get that the principal is being mind-controlled by Brainiac, and that Superman is facing the villain…but that action all happens off-panel, concluding with a single image of Superman, that may be recycled from a previous publication. The story is simple, has potential, but for me, personally–especially stacked against the Jurgens and Tomasi stories in this issue, and against numerous episodes of Law and Order: SVU I've been watching the last few weeks, it just doesn't really hold up in a way I particularly care for.
It's not a horrible story, and the art is solid in and of itself…I respect the inclusion here, but other than the "inclusion" aspect, I just don't really care for this one.
The Game
Storytellers: Paul Levitz & Neal Adams
Colors: Hi-Fi
Letters: Dave Sharpe
This is an interesting, short piece, where Superman shows up to the roof of Lexcorp Tower, and he and Lex talk over a game of Chess…and I'm reminded strongly of the Xavier/Magneto imagery from the Fox X-Men films. Luthor springs a trap of animated Kryptonite chains that wrap around Superman…before the hero straightens, flexes, and bursts the chains with an orange background obviously reminiscent of the Kryptonite Nevermore! from the original Superman #233. Superman reveals that he's got a Mother Box with him that temporarily prevented the Kryptonite radiation
This is another short piece that I don't particularly care for. I like the concept well enough, and it reminds me (as said) of the Xavier/Magneto stuff…and the more I think on it, I realize there's also a bit of that Batman/Joker meeting from The Killing Joke in here, too.
Adams is another whose work I appreciate, whose place in comics history I appreciate…but I just can't get into his Superman art. I didn't stick with The Coming of the Supermen, I didn't care for an Action Comics variant I had from some "Neal Adams Month," and his Superman in general looks rather "off" to me here.
As this is "only" a 5-page story, though, it's not horrible; but I might have liked a prose version a bit better, as I dig the story much, much more than I do the art.
The Car
Story: Geoff Johns & Richard Donner
Artist: Olivier Coipel
Colors: Alejandro Sanchez
Special thanks to: Matt Wilson
Letters: Nick Napolitano
This is an interesting story that seems to be set in the '30s; the color palette and general art style certainly gives it a rustic, "period piece" look that fits very well with the story being told. A busted-up car is brought into a shop, and when the mechanic tries to get its story from the owner, the tale is a little bit "out there"–all this damage caused by one man? One man lifted it and smashed it against some rocks, apparently. We then move to the owner–Butch–noticing a colorful figure…that of the "man" who smashed his car. Superman chats with him, showing compassion and having come to "understand" more of Butch's "side" of things, and leaving him with the notion that even having made mistakes, one can choose to make their life count for something, choose to make something of themselves, better the lives of others rather than doing harm.
I'm sure I would have realized pretty quickly that this is a sort of "sequel" to a big part of Action Comics #1; but this benefited SO beautifully from my having just re-read the Superman story from that first issue, and being probably THE freshest-in-mind Superman story for me prior to this 1000th issue.
This Superman feels very much like the "modern" Superman, though; less of the rough 'n tough version from that first appearance. But it works, and makes for an interesting piece overall. Especially when one considers just how heinous Butch's crime was–kidnapping a woman for rejecting him…and one could likely predict at least a couple likely outcomes of such action.
I haven't cared a lot about the Johns/Donner stuff–particularly the Last Son of Krypton, and Escape from Bizarro World stories, even as those are (now) a good dozen years in the past. I didn't care for them at the time as part of a seemingly-overly-overt rewriting of Superman away from the version I'd grown up on and back to more of a Silver/Bronze Age version. But this single story, I liked; the modern art showing the classic original Superman, with the feel of the contemporary Superman…and this being both a continuation/sequel and yet even if one doesn't know or connect that context, it works very well as a singular, one-off bit…
And of the "shorts" in this issue, I think this is one of my favorites.
The Fifth Season
Script: Scott Snyder
Art: Rafael Albuquerque
Color: Dave McCaig
Letters: Tom Napolitano
I'm not quite sure what to make of this piece. In a way, I think something to it is "over my head," perhaps..in a way that I definitely do NOT care for in my comics.
Superman arrives at the Smallville planetarium to find Lex Luthor, who has found the "Eye of Xotar" and Chronos' "Time Scissors"–that together can be used to literally erase any genealogical line from history. Given this is Luthor…obviously, that'd be Superman's line, the House of El. As the two muse over their shared past, and the present situation, we see a flashback to Luthor's early days in Smallville, where we also see that a potentially fatal accident that could have killed Luthor was prevented by a young Clark Kent–Superman as a boy. We also get a bit about a "fifth season," between Winter and Spring, when the weather can be wildly unpredictable…which seems to be a statement of the story itself. Luthor intended to wipe Superman from history, but maybe discovered that it was Superman that had saved him, and so opted not to.
This isn't a horrible story, but as said, something about it just feels like it might be over my head, needing extra consideration, disproportionate to its size in relation to the rest of this issue. The art also isn't horrible, but not really to my liking. On the last page particularly, I don't care for the depiction of the "S" shield…its top and bottom seem way too thin compared to the middle, especially compared to the "standard" licensed version I'm used to, that I tend to hold mentally as the "standard" to which the various takes on the "S" are compared.
This also plays on Luthor and Superman having known each other as kids–something that was NOT part of the story I grew up on, and so I'm a bit biased against it. Still, knowing that and seeing what's being gone for here in a way, I'm ok with the story, but won't single it out as a favorite or such.
Then there's the narration in the background speaking to the idea of Sol, our sun, eventually expanding: "…and eventually, the sun will eat our Mercury…and then Venus…and then Earth. And then, our time…ends."
Which seems almost intentionally to lead into the next piece:
Of Tomorrow
Writer: Tom King
Artist: Clay Mann
Color Artist: Jordie Bellaire
Letterer: John Workman
Superman kneels, scooping up some coal from the ground and squeezing it into diamond. He stands and we see blazing fire all around, amidst his speaking. It's been BILLIONS of years, and Earth is finally about to be swallowed up by the red giant Sol has become; no matter that Superman had apparently pushed the entire planet of Earth out of its orbit, it still finds itself being consumed. And Superman speaks to his long-dead parents–Jonathan and Martha Kent–as he says goodbye for the final time. He's got to let go–of them, and of Earth itself. After five BILLION years. Somehow, Superman, and Lois, and Jon, have been essentially immortal, thanks to (apparently) an "Eternity Formula." He speaks of them, as he forms the diamond into a specific shape. He tells his parents "I miss you. I love you. Every day. It doesn't matter how long it's been. It's still every day." And as the planet burns up and wee see the grave plate reading:
Superman leaves with the words "We're all stardust fallen. And so we look to the sky. And we wait to be reclaimed. Good-bye, Ma. Good-bye, Pa. And thank you. For everything."
This is an odd sort of story. While we can consider that the ongoing story of Superman is not one that's gonna end anytime soon; while we've had stories of Superman surviving into the far future–thousands, even millions of years…to consider that he'd live another five BILLION years seems a bit out there for me. It changes the character. It's best not to dwell on.
The point is: to the end of the Earth–literally–Superman has been shaped by his parents. He's continued to live. He's lived his life. He's gone on–but that doesn't mean that he's forgotten. The love of his parents–his adoptive parents, the REAL parents he actually knew–they molded him into who he became, and that's NOT something that changed with time. Their brief moment with him lasted through time, a huge legacy, outlasting the planet itself.
But on a smaller level, this speaks in an abstract sort of way to anyone who has ever lost loved ones. Wondering at the futility of visiting a grave, of speaking to those gone before, and I'd say to how even a year can feel like a lifetime, several years like countless lifetimes, when separated from the loved ones.
And on a "meta" level, Superman has outlived this planet, outlived all those lives…as he outlived his creators, and has and likely will outlive so many others.
On the literal level, this reminds me of an old story of an ancient Supreme or Mr. Majestic (I believe written by Alan Moore) (edit: yeah, I'm pretty sure that was Wildstorm Spotlight: Mr. Majestic #1: a story called The Big Chill.) recalling a world he once spent time on…he thinks its name had begun with 'E'.
On the general level, that abstract level…this just speaks to the heart and I got choked up contemplating loss to come and what that'll mean to me personally; and teared up considering losses I've already experienced. In a way, this had no reason to hit me like it did; yet, this is its own deeply personal, powerful piece…certainly worthy of being a Superman story, and well worth its inclusion in this issue!
Five Minutes
Writer: Louise Simonson
Artist: Jerry Ordway
Colors: Dave McCaig
Letters: Carlos M. Mangual
This is another 5-page "short." Clark is trying to finish a story, with Perry and Jimmy standing by, noting they're 5 minutes to deadline, with Printing already giving hell for holding the presses. Even as Clark points out he's nearly done, he's hearing cries of distress, and jumps from his seat to go into action, while Perry tells him he has five minutes. Superman stops a runaway train; saves Bibbo; stops space debris from crashing to Earth, and still makes it back to the Planet to finish his story. But turns out in being so focused on that, he didn't even consider the impact he just had, saving numerous people, maybe much of Earth…that the story he WAS working on is nothing compared to the story of Superman's recent super-feats.
This is a neat piece, and as with others in this issue of Action, not one I'd care much for as an entire issue, but as a "backup," as a piece included in this issue, I really like it. And with Louise Simonson writing and Ordway on art, it's one that's hard to beat, having such positive memories of both creators' work in the '90s on my early Superman comics.
And the idea of Clark Kent, Reporter, working, having to deal with stuff as Superman and still make his deadline is not new, but it works well here…and the fantastic art just makes it a beauty to behold.
I enjoyed this for that, and its relative timelessness.
Script: Paul Dini
Pencils: Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez
Inks: Kevin Nowlan
Colors: Trish Mulvihill
Letters: Josh Reed
What would a big, giant Superman comic be without Mr. Mxyzptlk? This is a short story showing an amusement park take on Superman and his history, where visitors get to "ride" in a replica of the ship that bore baby Kal-El away from Krypton; lift a tractor like little Clark in Kansas, witness Superman performing super-feats, view other heroes that served with Superman, as well as villains that were fought, and then the way things ended, with Superman… sacrificing himself…giving his life…the ending? The scene we've been seeing is a reality of sorts from Mxy, who just can't quite figure out how he'd like to see the story of Superman end, even though he himself has the power to blink him out of existence with hardly a thought.
I think my initial thought–that it's "fitting" to have Mxy get a story in something like this–comes from the Newstime special after the death of Superman, where there was some throw-away piece referencing the character, sort of explaining his showing up during all that, and yet not having an actual issue til well after the return.
Story-wise, I'm not overly enamored. It's a solid enough piece with an interesting premise. Structurally, not a bad story. I think I've just kinda felt put-off to Mxy stuff after Superman: Reborn and being reminded of stuff from Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? recently. It has its merits–a glimpse at parts of Superman's origins; shows us Mxy himself and reminds us he's around and his powers, and that he can be "just" an imp messing with Superman without wanting to truly destroy him. I just didn't singularly like this story that much.
Art-wise, this is solid, and though Dini has plenty of pedigree himself, having a new Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez story is quite appealing on principle. I can't say I'd recognize the art on sight, but knowing Garcia-Lopez has significant association with Superman, this certainly deserves its place in the issue!
Faster Than a Speeding Bullet
Writer: Brad Meltzer
Artist: John Casaday
Colors: Laura Martin
Letters: Chris Eliopoulos
This was an interesting story, touching on elements that I don't often think of with Superman stories. A gunman with a hostage prepares to pull the trigger…while from a significant distance, Superman's flying as fast as he can to the scene. We get Superman's inner thoughts as he zips toward the gunman, even as he pulls the trigger and the bullet begins to move, as Superman does the math and everything remaining as-is, knows he will not make it in time. Yet, it turns out while he was focused on the gunman, the hostage was shifting, which bought the extra fraction of a second Superman needed to get there, and he saves her. He compliments her on her bravery, that she could be Police, and flies off.
The story here does a good job with building tension as Superman tries to get to the scene. All too often we have the imagery and stories of Superman getting somewhere JUST in the nick of time to bounce bullets off his chest, or pluck them from mid-air, mid-movement before they strike their intended target…but we rarely get something from his point of view, where even he might realize he will be a fraction of a second too late. We get a positive ending here, though, as the woman–Lila–shifts to resist her attacker and Superman is able to save her.
I was not expecting a Meltzer piece, but he's another name that I feel certainly deserves his place and involvement with the issue…if not for prior Superman work, then for his real-world involvement with stuff–helping bring attention to the Siegel house, helping bring about the Superman display at the Cleveland airport, and other involvement with folks preserving the history of Siegel and Shuster and all that.
The art isn't bad…and actually, is quite good–overall. There's just something to the way Casaday does Superman's face that seems really "off" to me. It looks like someone else's face, a stranger's face, is pasted onto a body with "a" Superman costume. Where some artists' Superman is recognizable just by the face, I wouldn't be able to look at the faces in this story and just form those know this was Superman.
For another "short," I can't really complain beyond that about this one!
"The Truth"
Writer: Brian Michael Bendis
Pencils: Jim Lee
Inks: Scott Williams
Colors: Alex Sinclair
Letters: Cory Petit
Outside of the number, I'm sure this story is one reason for a lot of people to pick up this issue: it offers a prologue to a prologue to a mini-series that itself will lead into the ongoing story in the continuation of this title and rebooted-numbering fifth-volume of Superman. This piece kicks off Bendis' work on Superman…and does so with a beaten, bloodied Superman crashing through what looks like a cave wall, and on zooming out, we see a couple more hits as he smashes through the ceiling and out the side of the L-shaped Lexcorp tower, and then hits a road so hard he bounces a few times, destroying pavement, vehicles, and storefronts. Bystanders of course whip out cellphones to take photos/video of the fallen hero, while they try to drag Superman behind a counter. They comment on him wearing "the red shorts" again (rather than the cosmetic change being just there). Some giant creature with a huge battle axe is after him, and after taking a huge punch and repeated jabs from the just-arrived Supergirl, hits her once, taking her outta the fight (sending her flying toward the huge globe of the Daily Planet). Maggie Sawyer and the SCU shows up, though their weapons do nothing to the creature. There's more discussion from further bystanders of him having "the shorts" again, and the creature continues to get the best of Superman, continuing to physically beat the crap out of him (so to speak), and a simple energy-blast wave-of-the-hand takes a just-returning Supergirl back out of the fight. Transforming the handle of the axe into a sword, he seems to plunge it with a splash into Superman's chest, as he claims to be wiping out remaining Kryptonians, finishing the job he started when he destroyed Krypton.
Once upon a time, Jim Lee was just about my favorite Superman artist–perhaps behind or tied with Jurgens and Ed Benes. But here, I just don't care for the art. I'm sure part of it is the coloring…this seems "dark" and "grim and gritty" especially compared to the rest of the issue, and feels out of place visually with the rest of the issue.
Ditto on the story side–this beating, this violence and Superman just being pummeled and beaten and such, and Supergirl coming off as completely ineffective as well–is sickening after so many happier, brighter, celebratory bits.
Sure, this is a new villain, but we don't even get the name here. We just get nothing but fight. Superman himself points out he hasn't gotten a name, and the villain accuses him of stalling, rather than giving his name. And sure, on one hand, it would be old-style, stereotypical monologuing or such to just give a name at that point…typically, the villain would be depicted in a large panel with a logo-style word balloon declaring his "cool"-sounding name and such, so instead he calls Superman out for stalling, and on a technical level, I guess this is good to get away from the typical.
I don't like that we're thrown into the middle of a fight like this, that we end on a cliffhanger, when the entire rest of this issue has been self-contained one-off stories and whatnot.
Surely we could have started on a brighter note, seen a bit of a different status quo or perspective maybe hinting at this villain's coming or some such. I don't know–but based solely on this 12-page piece, I'm not looking forward to the upcoming Man of Steel mini, and I'm suddenly quite concerned about what to expect from Bendis' run, where until now I've been content to "wait and see" and been fairly optimistic. I suppose I'll now have to "wait and see" what we get in the DC Nation #0 issue and go from there.
I guess it's appropriate enough in its way to launch Bendis' run with this issue…and yet despite assurances to the contrary, the part of me that suspects his "coming" heralded the end of Jurgens' and Tomasi's runs feels like they should have had more pages to play with in this issue, and Bendis could launch with DC Nation or The Man of Steel (after all, the last time, one creator (Alan Moore) ended the previous Superman, and it was the interstitial mini-series Man of Steel where Byrne's stuff started.
This is 12 pages of what's likely a multi-year, dozens-of-issues run by one writer, so ultimately may not be indicative of what to expect on the whole and long-term…but for just these pages, and to come after such positive stories for the other 60+ pages…this just seems out of place and inappropriate for something as celebratory as a 1,000th issue…especially seeing nothing but Superman take a beatdown outta nowhere.
Overall Thoughts on the Issue As a Whole
I've looked forward to this issue for a long time. In some ways, I've probably looked forward to it for nearly 30 years, ever since the first issue I ever owned of the title (#651). At the least, I'm sure I wondered at a comic making it to #1,000 during the Doomsday! and Funeral for a Friend stuff, and the years following, as Adventures of Superman hit #500, Action hit #700, Superman (vol. 2) hit #100, and so on. I certainly wondered about it seven years ago when DC announced what came to be The New 52, that every single title including Action Comics and Detective Comics would be restarted with a #1. Though I still feel that Action making it to #1,000 technically needs an asterisk denoting the 1-52 sequence (there are no issues numbered 905-956) from the New 52 run. But I give DC a "pass" on that, as it was only one "hiccup" in the numbering. Given cover dress, paper condition, and literally the pricing should anyone actually find a copy of the original issues 1-52, one just needs to add 904 to the issue number to know what the issue is in that sense. There have not been numerous iterations where multiple hundreds of issues here, a hundred issues there, another several dozen issues, a mini-series, and a couple of less-than-20-issues runs suddenly add up to a big number. Number-wise, there's virtually no reasonable confusion.
When Rebirth was announced, when it was announced that Action Comics and Detective Comics would get their original numbering back, and that Action Comics (especially) would indeed get to make it to #1,000, I jumped back in. And all these issues and almost two years later, here we are. I feel like this issue is a sort of reward, an attained destination, a prize that's been driven toward since Action Comics #957 back in 2016.
A few months ago, there was some definite ambiguity as to formatting and such for the issue and what to expect for the issue. Part of me thinks this should have been even bigger, included even more–both in the way of original stories as well as reprints. But the companion hardback collection Action Comics: 80 Years of Superman handles a lot of that–with essays and reprints of stories both for characters and creators tied to Superman, and Action Comics itself. I was also a bit curious about what the issue's story would be, or if it would be an anthology/"jam" issue.
Back in the 1990s there were periodic special issues such as The Wedding Album that were key, integral chapters in the ongoing Superman story unfolding in the actual, ongoing titles; though this would be an actual numbered issue, I'd wondered if this would have any singular through-story that just happened to have a bunch of different artists and maybe some narrative structure allowing for different writers to leave a mark on the story.
Obviously what we got was 15-page chunks of the two main creative teams of the ongoing titles, and then 8 more stories/contributions, and a 12-page launch sequence from the new writer coming onto stuff.
As with my excitement for Rebirth and Action Comics #957, I bought this digitally, and I bought this in-print, and I'll gladly buy the hardcover edition that I believe will be out this Fall. I also ordered the "Decades Variants" through DCBS, and will be getting the 1,000 covers poster, which will be an excellent, appropriate addition to my comics space.
This is an issue that rightly deserves the "celebration" that variants offer. There are artists who may not otherwise have had involvement with the issue, who get to be associated with Action Comics #1000 if only with a variant. And as the first American comic book to make it to #1000…it's more than worthy. 80 years of continuous publication of a comic titled Action Comics is nothing to sneeze at. I'm among the first to complain and gripe and grouse about variants, and will continue to, where they merely cheapen stuff and are "abused" (really, does a #17 or a #81 or a #962 truly deserve a variant? What makes such numbers special if they're just another issue?) But this 1,000th issue deserves the added recognition, the "fun" of certain variants…especially what I've seen of the "Decades" variants, that bring back the logo style and even the DC logo of each decade…the DC Bullet I grew up on is back with several of the issues, and even the "swoosh" logo gets some love with the 2000s variant.
$7.99 for a single issue is a bit much in most cases. This is squarebound and has 81 story pages with no ads between stories nor interrupting any stories, and the cover is a stronger cardstock…so this is absolutely worth its price for the physical product as well as the content it contains.
None of the stories seem to specifically continue from anything; nothing I'm aware of comes off of a To Be Continued; and other than the Bendis segment leading into stuff out of/after this issue, that's still 69 or so pages that stand alone quite well, neither requiring previous reading nor requiring subsequent reading. This is well worth getting just for itself; a 1,000th issue; a standalone, celebratory Superman issue. Perhaps it's an endpoint; maybe it can be a starting point; it's definitely an excellent one-off, special thing.
I highly recommend this to any Superman fan or anyone interested in checking out some Superman content, period, and especially if you don't want to commit to anything ongoing or long-form.
Filed under: 2018 posts, 2018 Reviews, Action Comics, Action Comics, DC, DC Rebirth, DC Universe | Tagged: 1000, Action Comics, Actionland, Alejandro Sanchez, Alex Sinclair, An Enemy Within, Brad Meltzer, Brian Michael Bendis, Butch Guice, Carlos M. Mangual, Chris Eliopoulos, Clark Kent, Clay Mann, comic books, Comic Reviews, Cory Petit, Curt Swan, Dan Jurgens, Dave McCaig, Dave Sharpe, DC, DC Comics, dc entertainment, Faster Than a Speeding Bullet, Five Minutes, From the City That Has Everything, Geoff Johns, Hi-Fi, Jerry Ordway, jim lee, John Cassaday, John Workman, Jordie Bellaire, Jose Luis Garcia-Lopez, Josh Reed, Kevin Nowlan, Kurt Schaffenberger, Laura Martin, Lex Luthor, Lois Lane, Louise Simonson, Marv Wolfman, matt wilson, Neal Adams, Never Ending Battle, Nick Napolitano, Norm Rapmund, Of Tomorrow, Olivier Coipel, Patrick Gleason, Paul Dini, Paul Levitz, Peter J. Tomasi, Rafael Albuquerque, Richard Donner, Rob Leigh, Scott Snyder, Scott Williams, Smallville, Superman, The Car, The Fifth Season, THe Game, The Truth, Tom King, Tom Napolitano, Trish Mulvihill | 3 Comments »


text:
Players expect that content will get harder over time in an expansion. Our characters do braver and more heroic things (modelled by content getting more challenging) and pick up better loot. Raid instances get harder. Rewards get better. And you may need the loot from older raids to tackle the newer ones.
The Coliseum may be a momentary blip in that progression. It is easier than Ulduar but gives better rewards. Perhaps this is a special case, just to make sure that everyone is geared up for Icecrown and the apogee of the Wrath storylines. A special catch-up instance to make sure no one falls behind.
But right now, we effectively have no gear progression. There is no special reason to go to Ulduar, which is the most recent raid instance prior to the Coliseum. There's no benefit to going there either, you'd be better served for rewards in the newer easier instance. It's a cool instance, and I sympathise a lot with Copra, who laments that he can't find groups there. But I understand why people are reluctant to go. And the crazy thing is: If they'd upgraded the Ulduar badges to be badges of triumph when the Coliseum came out, I think it would have been fine. Coliseum would still have been more rewarding but Ulduar would have at least dropped current tier badges.
My Naxx geared alt hopped into a Coliseum raid and came out with upgrades and the all-important achievement that is my passport into PUGs (unless I lie which is what I normally do). If she hadn't been to Naxxramas, I could have geared her up in crafted pieces, heroic badge loot, and drops from the Coliseum 5 man instance. In the next patch, when heroics shift to giving out Triumph badges, everyone will eventually get full sets of Tier 9 gear by running heroics.
It doesn't bother me that my alt (and other people's alts, or non-raiders who want to get into the game) can raid alongside everyone else. But it bothers me that my alt is almost as well geared as my main, and that all the extra work I did on Spinks now seems to mean nothing. I don't say it's logical.
Surely the whole point of persistent games was that we could keep working on our characters to progress them over time? What does it really mean if all that time spent means nothing any more. I don't know the answer to this question, but I think that finding out is going to affect whether I want to raid in Cataclysm or not. Or even how much I want to play WoW at all after finishing Icecrown. Because if there's no real point putting extra time and work into a character, if there's no payoff … then perhaps it would be better to focus less on one character in one game.
What I am seeing is simply the way that the genre is evolving now. The movement in many of the big MMOs is very much towards minimising the effect of previous grinds or raids because those things make the game more inaccessible to newbies. It isn't just WoW.
What we lose when we lose progression
Despite the fact that progression makes games more inaccessible, it encourages drama, it can frustrate people, and all the other inevitable reasons that it will die, it has served a very very important purpose in achievement driven MMOs.
Gear progression meant that different players were motivated to tackle different content. There was a constant stream of raid guilds focussed on different levels of PvE. It would have been much more likely that Copra could have found his Ulduar raid.
If everyone and everything is focussed only on the newest and most recent raid, then the game narrows down. There is no longer the broad base of accessible content for players. Sure, they can all be in the same instance, but it's the only instance they can possibly tackle due to lack of social support for the raids needed for the rest.
If we want broad-based MMOs with a wide variety of possible things to do, then maybe losing the gear progression isn't such a great step. It is certainly one way to funnel everyone into raiding together. But players will get bored more quickly and if there isn't any different content for them to work on when they aren't raiding, they'll wonder where the actual game went.
I think that Blizzard have proved that their vision for the raid game does work. More people are raiding now in WoW than ever before. But they have also proved that raiding alone isn't enough if they break the gear progression. One little raid instance can't keep the entire player population happy until the next one.
As for progression itself, I wonder if ultimately the only progression that will count is social progress. Are you in a good guild? Do you have friends in the game? Those are things that genuinely take time and effort to build up, and unlike a raid instance, those things will not be reset in the next patch or the next expansion.