Charlie falls down

The newest Charlie and the Chocolate factory was a flop. I read the book in grade three, and I saw the 1971 Gene Wilder film "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory". So I have a tainted view of it. However, my sister and I both agreed that the first movie did a much better job at story telling. So what's missing? I don't just mean scenes that are not there, I mean in the story telling experience. I much prefered the Charlie of the first movie, and how he interacted with his grandfather. They were more real. For example, Charlie wasn't some naive little angel who wouldn't dream of ever doing anything bad. He had a human side; the one that got into trouble with Grampa Joe. Willy Wonka was also more real. He played a character who was a little off his rocker, but then at the end of the movie Wonka dropped the facade and spoke seriously to Charlie from an adult's perspective, and that was a huge part of the reward, I felt. To have an adult treat the child as an equal. Here, Wonka is played as some deranged adult with psychological problems who can't get over the experiences from his equally messed up and very controlling father.

I think Burton's film dumbs down the plot, plays to the director's style, and to Johnny Depp as a character, and focuses entirely too much on scenery and Burton's slightly eerie edges. As a child, this film would be in my face and brain numbing. I don't think I would really be able to relate to anything in it; I would just get a feeling of gloss.

Sorry guys, but I just found that movie disappointing, especially at the end, becuase I was expecting Wonka to drop his facade and grow up, but when he didn't at the end of the factory tour, it just went downhill from there. The scenery, however, was quite like the original movie, and quite good.

Finally! Now, where do I get mine?

Tupperware Flat Out Containers
Credit: Tupperware Corp., Worldwide
Tupperware’s FlatOut! storage containers were designed for the consumer who needs flexibility in storage and for busy people on the go—students, working professionals and campers. Its accordion design allows FlatOut! to be adjusted to the appropriate capacity for the food to be stored or for space-saving stackable storage. When the container is closed the seals are completely watertight. For cleaning, they can be stacked like plates into a dishwasher and washed flat. In December 2004, the product was awarded a Good Buy Award by the Good Housekeeping Institute and was named by Fortune magazine as one of the best 25 products of the year in their December 2004 issue. It was also recently awarded a "Product of the Year 2005" award by the German Consumer Plastics Institute.

Daara J

I will be doing more blogging over these next couplr of weeks I hope, and this one is long overdue. This is all about a friday trip to Harbourfront a few weeks ago, and the Senegal group; Daara J. They were captivating! What a stage presence! They got the whole audience up and jumping and dancing, (well, some people stayed sitting, but whatevea) and they were jumping around the stage like they had fire ants in their pants! They had the aisles full, and the rows full there were so many people there.

Not only that, but their music is something everyone can be happy dancing to; they sing about religion, human well-being, "Esperanza", Exodus, and just havin' fun!

Here's a bit more about them, and their concert was GREAT!

"Goree, an island just off the coast of Senegal, was the last bit of the motherland seen by the millions of Africans caught in the slave trade en route to America. What the proprietors of this grossly profitable injustice could never have imagined was the tremendous socio-political impact those slaves would have on the country they were forced to call home. Ancient rhythms, rebellion, and the ability to express pain, suffering, and triumph through art would later manifest in what we have come to know as hip hop.

During Senegal’s 2000 presidential election, Daara J was hired to edit speeches and promote the anti-corruption political campaigns. Successfully bringing new voters to the polls, they were able to share in the defeat of a corrupt regime."

Are the Desert People Winning?

It's the ultimate culture clash.
The desert mentality, against the rain forest mentality. If it were up to me, I'd go with the rain forest view. This is a blog about a Discover magazine article. In it, Robert Sapolsky compares two different kinds of cultures as equals; the desert, and the rain forest.

I have no idea why the desert culture seems to be winning, but I can guess. The desert cultures had to fight for survival in every aspect of their lives. It was a constant battle between the people and their surroundings for possesion of the precious little resources available. Everyone had to hoard as much as they could find, and it really was a survival of the fittest. Later on, these behaviours translated to a fear their way of life will not survive, so they faced everything as a war in order to be the conquerors, and force their ideas on others as right.

On the other hand, their tropic-dwelling counterparts are much more assured of their survival, so they were able to more naturally adopt a laid back lifestyle, still based on survival, but more comfortable and confident with the way things were.

Obviously if you go back to a time where everyone was just trying to survive against the elements, everyone had their set of problems, but according to this cross-cultural study, those who lived in more lush climates have built up very different cultures; ones that were much more open to all opinions, and naturally comfortable with a variety. With differences. Other more typically dry (desert or ice) cultures were more the kill and conquer ones, and these two different approaches are very much alive in the world today. They were carried through religion and other traditional behaviours.

I would like to think that in Toronto culture there are no more constraints that religion or tradition used to have regarding rights and freedoms, but unfortunately that is not so. I am afraid I cannot quote directly, but I once read in another piece of literature that even though religion has lost much of its power and ability to govern peoples' behaviour in larger urban cultures, people are still fishing around, holding onto the same beliefssimply out of stubbornness. You know, the old constricting, "this is the way it was always done". Long after the reason is gone, the wherefore keeps hold.

This article is fascinating for me, and this book; A Cross-Cultural Summary by Robert Textor, would also be interesting to browse through. It would be interesting to see the patterns between cultures and draw my own conclusions. I am becoming more interested in cultures as I seek to define myself, and look for more liberal lifestyle approaches.

Sapolsky remarks that these cross-cultural examinations are often marked by people crying "racist!" at European cultures (ie the "conquerors") using these studies simply for their own proof "that northern European ecosystems produced superior cultures, more advanced morals, technologies, and intellects, and better schnitzel."

Well, they aren't superior. They are just different. That is probably why the subject of culture and differences are being subdued and censored, but that's another post. One difference: desert dwellers are often monotheistic, those who live in the tropics, polytheistic. Millions think monotheistic is better, and would gladly kill or convert (all throughout the centuries, not just current events) to prove they were right. These different climates explain family behaviours, belief systems, sexual patterns, militarism, hunting, what people eat, on and on and on. The main message: your culture is a product of your ecosystems. People need to do that to survive.

When you get to the section "Which kind of culture would you prefer to get traded to?" Sapolsky's writing takes off. It's a brilliant and powerful article. It's also short and sweet, and worth the cover price of $6.50 Cdn. Well, that and Discover is usually a good magazine.