Of Ants and Babes

Ye_xin_enfant_fourmi
Growing up
I knew I was special
My ears were bigger
My fluff was thicker

My pillows were made of dreams

Give me your honey covered tongues
Or I’ll tear them off
Hand over your hearts
Or you better watch out

Life isn’t for the easy sitters

Ants tear into the skin
Heh, look at them go
Stare into the lights

And they’ll start to glow

I told my mommy to keep it down
Told the mailman to watch his head
I am the Batman
Coming for you tonight

In bed before nine and I’ll be alright

I can’t escape my fate
Greatness among ya
Hold my crown while I spit
I’m the bearer of the claws of justice

Perpetrator of the laws of trust us

Ants tear into the skin
Heh, look at them go
Stare into the lights

And they’ll start to glow

Death from above
I am the chosen
It’s what I tell the doll
When I’m about to drop

Some plastic munitions on its head

Freedom is another word for play
With the cat’s tail or chasing
He’s better off this way
You called me your favorite little man

Come give me my hug

Ants tear into the skin
Heh, look at them go
Stare into the lights

And they’ll start to glow

The crowd cheers
The girls fear me
I am a dinosaur
Throw them in the pen with the rest

There is no rest, I’ve got school soon

I love me a little competition
Why are you crying?
Sit in the corner, you’re out
No time for mourning

What’s fair is fair is fair is fair is fair is fair is fair

Ants tear into the skin
Heh, look at them go
Stare into the lights

And they’ll start to glow

I am your son
You can’t deny me
I am your son
Isn’t this what you wanted?
Isn’t this what you wanted?

Isn’t this what you wanted?

Ants tear into the skin
Heh, look at them go
Stare into the lights
And they’ll start to glow

Pacing on the train

Francis_Luis_Mora_-_Subway_riders_in_NYC
A young man was pacing on the train, shouting, banging on the seats.

“Do you know what I’m doin’ when I get home? I’m gonna read the Bible.”

Passengers flooded out into neighboring cars.

“You gotta read it front to back, not back to front.”

Other passengers quietly continued their conversations and avoided eye contact. The train was stopped at the station, and the doors were still open.

“You might be a Muslim or believe in Buddha, but you still pronounce the Lord’s name when you stub your toe. Why?”

A blonde woman in a pink baseball cap stood up and peered out of the car.

“Hey! This fuckin’ asshole keeps hittin’ things and scarin’ people.”

The young man turned to her.

“Watch your language, lady!”

“I thought you stood for free speech.”

“You’re calling the cops on me.”

Two police officers stepped into the subway car on either side and grabbed the young man by his scrawny biceps.

A man in a suit stood up and faced them.

“I am a preacher too!”

The cops said they were just going to speak with the young man. He’d be able to take the next train.

The man in the suit sat down and the doors closed. I think he was Kenyan.

“God may not shout, but he’s still taking note of everything you do.”

He tapped the briefcase in his lap and sighed. The train started moving, and the passengers nervously studied each other.

An African-American man in blue shorts walked over.

“Look, brother, I get it, but you have to understand that in America you can’t force people to talk about God outside of church. People here believe in all sorts of things.”

A Salvadoran woman, who had been quietly listening, jumped in.

“But they didn’t do anything about the lady who was cursing.”

The train had reached maximum velocity, and the doors were rattling.

“Well… that’s true.”

The Alternative to Hope

Vanitas still life with a self-portrait, by David Bailly

The alternative to hope is the acceptance of death, the acceptance that things can’t really change, that we already live in the best of all possible worlds, that real democracy doesn’t exist, shouldn’t exist, but is better as a constantly eroding shell, held up as though it were the whole and worshipped as piece after piece falls off — isn’t democracy beautiful and perfect? Don’t you wish you were dead too so your dried up shriveled remains could more closely resemble the objects of our worship? Don’t you wish you were dead too so they could toss your little corpse into the impenetrable cavern of their delusions? Look, there lies the nation and the well-educated informed voter, the responsible and responsive policymaker and justice and freedom and the free market and reason. How they shine when I aim my light at them! And how they meld in with everything else in the dreary damp darkness when I turn my light off again.

On Protests and Unity

vincenzo_camuccini_-_la_morte_di_cesare

Do people understand what politics is or how it works? When I see talk about how divisive politics has become or how bad we’ve gotten at listening to and respecting the other side, it makes me wonder.

The New York Times has an odd article called, “Are Liberals Helping Trump?” that features a handful of Trump supporters, who are put off by “Protests and righteous indignation on social media and in Hollywood” against Trump. The article ponders the lost opportunity.

One of the Trump supporters is described as “a small-business owner in South Carolina, [who] voted reluctantly for Donald Trump. As a conservative, he felt the need to choose the Republican.” The man “should be a natural ally for liberals” if only he weren’t “feeling battered by contempt and an attitude of moral superiority”. Another compares being a Trump supporter in today’s political climate to being gay in the 50s.

But should we really be shocked that a self-declared conservative is treated by liberal friends and acquaintances as though he “took sides”? Would a softer touch really turn another Trump voter who thinks protests are “destroying the country” and activists are worse than “Islamic terrorists”?  Maybe what’s shocking is that somebody would consider them natural allies of liberalism in the first place.

There’s a revealing passage in the middle of the article: “if political action is meant to persuade people that Mr. Trump is bad for the country, then people on the fence would seem a logical place to start. Yet many seemingly persuadable conservatives say that liberals are burning bridges rather than building them.”  Underlying this peculiar notion of who is “on the fence” is the erroneous assumption that the central work of politics is persuading the other side, that political victories are predominantly the fruit of dispassionate debates and expressions of unity.

This would make sense if every action a politician or bureaucrat took was a direct response to the will of their constituents, but even assuming the Platonic ideal of a responsive politician, who exactly are their constituents and how would they know their will? Moreover, how do these constituents even find each other to come together and guarantee their will is heard? A debate can’t fix a logistics problem. A vote doesn’t oblige a legislator to act.

Moral exhortations and protests aren’t supposed to change the hearts and minds of the other side — protestors didn’t flock to airports to sell wavering Trump supporters on rejecting the Muslim travel ban. Instead they’re supposed to pressure people in power to stop posturing and do something and to identify and embolden political allies.

The protests are also a direct challenge to the legitimacy of the President that Trump’s supporters chose, an attempt to wrest political power from them, to weaken and demoralize their political ideals. There is no pleasant way to do this. As the article goes on to say,“…for many Trump voters, even peaceful protests are unsettling.” But how else could it be? Should the opposition give Trump voters a hug and treat them to ice cream as they try to defeat everything they stand for?

Now obviously protests and political criticism aren’t enough to win elections. Nobody is arguing they are. A positive vision for the future also has to be developed that can attract some of the people who voted for Trump or who didn’t vote at all, a vision that concretely shows how they too will benefit. But not all political power is derived from elections. And elections are won with more than just personalized sales pitches and measured debates. They’re won in part because of existing political alliances and the logistical infrastructure they produced, alliances and infrastructure that formed and solidified through other political actions, such as… well, you get the idea.

There’s an appealing narrative out there that because Trump is so extreme, liberals and so called reasonable conservatives will have to set aside their differences and work together to defeat him. It’s cute, but one has to wonder what that would actually look like. Coalition building requires more than just recognition that the present is bad. What issue do the defenders of national unity imagine could bring together, for example, a white Evangelical small-business owner from the Midwest, a white Silicon Valley tech engineer, a white Wall Street banker and a minority fast food worker from Atlanta? Fake news? Sexism? Racism? Ties to Putin? Civic norms? Realistically somebody is going to have to be left out if common ground is to be reached.

Politics is definitionally divisive. It’s the contest of irreconcilable moral visions for how society should be organized and whom it should benefit. This is bound to be uncomfortable.

Yet the article would blame these divisions on something called “moral Bolshevism” or “the belief that the liberal vision for the country was the only right one”. It’s hard to know what to make of the notion that belief in a political vision makes one a Bolshevik. What kind of confused take on the world assumes that liberals (who are apparently communists?) are the only people who think themselves right?

I guess we’re supposed to conclude that having a political view and taking it seriously is bad, that is unless it’s really the views themselves we’re supposed to have a problem with and not how they’re being expressed.

I Hugged a Cactus

abaporu

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

Its thorns melted in my warm embrace

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

The blood tasted like silky champagne

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

Sand in my eyes but not my heart

 

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

Deliverance, my tear-stained mercy

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

All comfort requires a little pain

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

Who doesn’t want a hero’s demise?

 

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus

I hugged a cactus…

The Other American Exceptionalism

Edward_Gennys_Fanshawe,_The_Cuesta_de_Chacabuco,_looking_towards_San_Felipe_de_Aconcagua_(Chile),_Jany_14th_1851

As the bus headed North leaving Mendoza, Argentina behind, I looked out my window at the mountains in the distance. In the seat next to me, my neighbor sat transfixed. The Andes impose their beauty on you. It’s no wonder they have inspired poets and novelists like César Vallejo, Mario Vargas Llosa and Pablo Neruda, who remarked about his trip across the mountain range to return from exile, “Todo era a la vez una naturaleza deslumbradora y secreta y a la vez una creciente amenaza de frío, nieve, persecución.” (Everything was simultaneously a dazzling secret natural world and an increasing threat of cold, snow and abuse). Even from the relative safety of the highway I understood him. The mountains seduce you with an otherworldliness and a capacity both to sustain life and to destroy it.

Not everybody enjoys the song of the unknown, those tempting murmurs of another world. A comfortable life is incompatible with multiple truths. But for those who do, its call is rapturous.

My tastes had always been a bit out of step. In college I was an odd kid who walked around campus with a hollowed out gourd filled with wet ground up leaves and danced salsa by himself in the middle of the quad. They must have thought I was crazy. I started describing myself as “half-Irish, half-Jewish, gringo by nationality, and latino at heart.” The phrase perfectly embodied the estrangement I felt at home in the US and the affinity and affection I felt towards Latin America. Nevertheless it’s a phrase I’ve recently come to see as inadequate.

My interest in Latin America began with funny words printed on plastic packaging and mysterious overheard conversations. What were these opaque jumbles of sounds?

It soon turned into stubborn hunger. So I improved my vocabulary and grammar, started watching telenovelas, chose a Mexican soccer team, ¡Vamos Águilas!, started drinking mate and tereré, devoured online newspapers, and struggled through books full of paranoid dictators, bitter intellectuals, shrunken-head exporters and bunny rabbit vomitters. I interned at a laboratory in Chile and befriended Mexicans, Argentinians, Brazilians, Colombians and Peruvians. Back home I deejayed a Latin American music show on the college radio and learned Portuguese, allowing me to study abroad in Brazil and have my heart-broken.

I even wrote a sprawling mess of a manifesto inspired by Cuban novelist and essayist Alejo Carpentier declaring the Americas the future center of the art and literary world. He was confident that Latin American artists would produce “los clásicos de un enorme mundo barroco que aún nos reserva, y reserva al mundo, las más extraordinarias sorpresas.” (the classics of an enormous Baroque world that would still reserve to us, reserve for the world, the most extraordinary surprises). And how could I disagree?

Where else could you find Indians speaking Dutch, Japanese speaking Spanish, Arabs speaking Portuguese and Germans speaking Guarani? Where else could you see the medieval, the colonial, the modern, the indigenous and the natural world mix together with such ease? Where else could you find nations, founded on the whip and the gun to bring fast gold and cheap sugar to European shores, that kept on living anyways like a condor nesting in the crevices of the side of a mountain, because humans were born to dream and not to serve? As Cuban poet and patriot José Martí said:

“De factores tan descompuestos, jamás, en menos tiempo histórico, se han creado naciones tan adelantadas y compactas… no hay patria en que pueda tener el hombre más orgullo que en nuestras dolorosas repúblicas americanas… vencedora veloz de un pasado sofocante, manchada sólo con sangre de abono que arranca a las manos la pelea con las ruinas, y la de las venas que nos dejaron picadas nuestros dueños.”

(From such disjointed elements, never, in less time, have such precocious and compact nations been created… there is no homeland of which man can be more proud than our painful American republics… the speedy victor of a suffocating past, stained only with the blood from a payment that strips the hands of their fight with ruins, and the blood from the veins that our masters left perforated).

Great art starts with the siren call of the unknown and the promise of a better world, and in Latin America, both were all around me. How could Europe and the US, lost in their futile self-indulgent search for the end of history, compete?

I reinterpreted the pan-Americanism of South American liberator Simón Bolivar and later Martí to include the US, dreaming of a future great continent with no economic, political or cultural center, and with pride, I declared myself just as much a Guatemalan, a Chilean or a Brazilian as an American.

Then I moved back to Brazil, fell in love and got married.

But as I settled into life in São Paulo, adjusted to living with others with a different view of the world and traveled more, something changed. I realized what was novel and romantic for me could be oppressively familiar to someone else. Friends didn’t have much patience for a foreigner extolling the beauty and virtue of their national traditions. From early childhood they’d been hearing variants of it and wanted more.

I rethought my fervent Latin American boosterism. I didn’t want to be a cheerleader helping governments attract investors, helping travel agencies attract tourists. Nationalism needs myths to survive, but myths don’t need nations to grab us and make us wonder. My regional preferences were getting in the way of seeing what it was that I truly loved.

I looked upon the mountains now covered in an ethereal orange and thought about the people who were still loving and dancing and fucking and making music and writing poetry and taking care of each other and dreaming of more in spite of everything, in spite of every flaw outsiders claimed they had. That’s the America I wanted to be part of, a place that exists wherever people struggled to live together and overcome a cruel past.

Someday the frigid winds will come for me and bury me under the snow. They won’t ask me for my papers. They will only roar, and I’ll be gone. Just like everyone else. A memory of an unknown world, a whisper of what might have been. I hope when that day comes, I’ll be able to say I danced and dreamed and fought by my neighbors’ side.

This matchbox hates me

Magdalen_with_the_Smoking_Flame_c1640_Georges_de_La_Tour

This matchbox hates me. I turn it over and over in my fingers. White cardboard all the way around, one side roughs up my skin as I pass over. It hates me, and it taunts me.

I already burned myself three times. I can’t get the damned thing to light. I’m a fraud, and I’m useless, and the matchbox knows it. I don’t smoke. I’ve got lightbulbs and a heater and an electrical current. I’ve never dreamed of setting anything ablaze.

I look down at the broken bits of wood lying in the sink.

I’m too nice. A matchbox isn’t interested in pleasantries. A matchbox doesn’t care if I step on people’s toes. A matchbox produces a flame. I’m the one who has to use it.

I succeed on the fourth try. Looking too close at the flame, I start to see yellow spots everywhere. It scares me. What if my vision is somehow damaged? What if smoke gets into my lungs? But the matchbox doesn’t care. Didn’t I need it? Why am I complaining now? The matchbox hates me. If you need fire, you shouldn’t be upset when things start to burn.

A Quick Guide to the Brazilian Protests of 3/13 using Images Shared on Facebook

You are what you share.

A lot of people went to protests against corruption in Brazil this past Sunday
Paulista
Av. Paulista, São Paulo’s main artery
A big question is who went and why

Supporters of the protests argued they were a legitimate expression of the Brazilian people’s frustration with government corruption. Opponents criticized the protests, claiming they were were overrepresented by a white economic elite more interested in advancing their own political interests than seriously combating corruption.

Some protestors were in fact from the elite
man,wife,baba
Vice-President of Finances for popular Rio de Janeiro soccer club Flamengo, Claudio Pracownik, accompanies his wife in protests, while a uniformed nanny pushes their children.
Iate Fora Dilma
Caption reads: Protestors go to the streets to protest against Dilma government. Banner reads: Dilma out!
Though this wasn’t necessarily representative of all present

Man carrying cart with children

Some protestors were less concerned with corruption than with what Brazil could become
Menos Venezuela, Mais Argentina
Sign reads: Less Venezuela, More Argentina!! (Brazil’s neighbor to the South recently voted the right-wing Macri into power)
Or with how much of their money was going to the government
Sonegar e legitima defesa
Sign reads: Tax evasion is self-defense!
Or with whom this was benefiting
A Dilma nao foi eleita por pessoas que leem jornais

Shirt reads: Dilma wasn’t elected by the people who read newspapers, but by the people who clean themselves with them. Dilma Out
Or with food?
+ Coxinha - Acaraje.jpg
Coxinha is a fried food typical of São Paulo; acarajé is a fried food typical of the Northeast of the country. This could refer to a Federal investigation of former President Lula for corruption and/or be a swipe against the economically poorer Northeasterners who traditionally make up the PT’s base.
Or with, well… ???
Inconfidente Brasil
Really not sure about the reference. Historical hero Tiradentes? It should be mentioned the homeless are sometimes found murdered in Brazil.
Some were just feeling nostalgic
Porque nao mataram todos
Sign reads: Why didn’t they kill everyone in 1964? (A reference to the coup d’etat that brought a right-wing military dictatorship to power. Many members of the ruling PT had active roles in opposing the dictatorship.)
Main targets of the protests were current President Dilma, former President Lula and the leftist Worker’s Party (PT).
Fora Eu.png
A man dressed as Dilma. Sign reads: Me out
De Grades Abertas
Sign reads: [the city of] Curitiba welcomes Lula with open bars
Aceitamos cartoes.jpg
Inflatable dolls of Dilma and Lula. Banner reads: We accept cards
PT PAI DO AEDES EGIPT.png
Main sign reads: PT: Father of Aedes aegyPTi (the main mosquito vector for the Zika virus)
The opposition party didn’t come out unscathed

Governor of Sao Paulo Geraldo Alckmin and Senator of Minas Gerais Aécio Neves, both former presidential candidates from the right of center Social-Democratic Party of Brazil (PSDB), were booed when attempting to participate in the protests, protests which they themselves had supported. Both have been accused of corruption.

Alckmin e Aecio Hostilizados.png
Heading reads: Harassed by protestors, Aécio and Alckmin stay just half an hour on the Paulista
They’re a protest movement in search of a hero. But who do you turn to when everybody is corrupt?
Queremos os Corruptos na Cadeia do PT, PSDP, PQP

Sign one reads: We want all corrupt politicians in jail, from the PT, PSDP, PP or PQP (Wherever the hell they’re from)! Sign two reads: Cunha (the opposition President of the Chamber of Deputies from the PMDB also accused of corruption), we haven’t forgot about you!
A judge?
Super Moro
The first inflatable doll is of Sérgio Moro, the Federal judge leading the current round of corruption investigations.
The police?
Thank you, Federal Police
Shirt reads: Thank you, Federal Police (responsible for investigating corruption)!
The far right?
Jaraleco, bolsanaro, Olavo.jpg
The hashtags on the sign in front say: Olavo (a fringe political writer) is right and Bolsonaro 2018 [for president] (an extremist Deputy for the PP, recently interviewed by Ellen Paige)
The military?
Military Intervention
The sign reads: Military intervention now!! Brazil demands: Order and Progress!!
Donald Trump?

Trump help us

A fast food chain and an Austrian school of economics?
Habib's & Austrians.jpg
Habib’s, a Middle Eastern-style fast food chain, launched a campaign encouraging people to protest.
The Power Rangers?
Power Rangers.png
Sign reads: Heroes against Corruption

Final Thoughts:

More than anything, Sunday’s protests highlighted an underlying trend of increased polarization and mistrust in Brazilian politics. A deteriorating economy and a weakened central government can’t be helping. Those who attended the protests, mostly people from the right, view supporters of the government as good-for-nothing mooching hypocrites who will support the PT’s crimes as long as they get welfare benefits, without any concern for the way the party is apparently driving the country to economic ruin. Meanwhile those who objected to the protests view the opposition as elitist/racist/sexist/paternalistic/etc. hypocrites, uncomfortable with the social changes that the PT has brought about in recent year and unaware or uninterested in the harsh reality of Brazil for the most vulnerable sectors of the country’s population. Both sides are haunted by ghosts: the left by memories of a military dictatorship that only ended 31 years ago and the right by fears of a Castro-style Communist takeover.

The protests also brought out two less-talked-about protagonists: a far right mistrustful of both the mainstream center-right political elite and the center-right mainstream media and an ideologically-unfixed middle mistrustful of politics in general, who only want to see lawbreakers punished and have somewhere to direct their anger. The direction this middle swings the next few years could determine the shape of Brazil’s political landscape.

A few questions remain: How serious of a problem actually is corruption in Brazil relative to other issues like poverty, education and violence? Can it be fought against in a bipartisan fashion? If not, should it be combatted in a partisan fashion regardless?

They are especially important in a political climate where plausibly denying the implications of one’s beliefs takes precedence over responsible coalition building.

 

Were there any images that I missed? Feel free to share with me in the comments.

Also for an article I did on a different kind of Brazilian protest from 2013, see here.

Throw them in the gulag with love

A rabid half mad half starved dog
Skin torn, fur pulled, blood dried,
Flesh plucked from bone
Beats on the door

But the door, obstinate door, won’t budge
So the creature whines, whimpers and wails
But the door, lonely door, doesn’t care
So the creature growls, howls and grunts

Still the door remains shut
Paws upon wood scratch and claw
Splinters pierce pads, chips fall
Dust grows, despair thickens the eyes

Dear door, old door
Won’t you open?
Won’t you fall?
Dear door, brother of mine

The hole deepens
And the wound
Stains and blurs the soul
Waiting for the silence to come

Waiting for the rain to fall
For the wind to rage
For lighting to strike
And burn us all down

Then from the shadows someone whispers
Throw them in the gulag with love
Strain your ears, friends, and you can hear
The voice in the frigid air:

You can’t have unity without compassion
You can’t have justice without the guilty
You can’t have faith without suffering
You can’t have equality without destruction
You can’t have prosperity without a lie
You can’t have peace without forgiveness
so
Throw them in the gulag with love

7 Things On My Mind This Week – Fun with Coffee, Politics and Sex

skinney_badass_kafka

This is pretty much what it sounds like. Yes, I’ve sold my soul to the internet-fame demon. Deal with it. I can’t do posts like this every day.

1. Milan Kundera

I just finished reading The Unbearable Lightness of Being by Czech writer Milan Kundera. It’s a dark, nimble and thought-provoking novel about the Prague Spring and the subsequent Soviet invasion. Kundera is interesting in the way he relates sexuality to politics as different approaches to finding meaning in life. Sex promises a deeper understanding of the world by penetrating the social distinctions between us. Politics promises a deeper understanding of the world by denying the legitimacy of these same social distinctions. Neither activity fully delivers on its promise. It’s a fun ride. The dude is hooked on Nietzsche, but who isn’t? I’m debating whether to see the movie with Daniel Day-Lewis.

2. Modeling Portfolio

I’m working on a modeling portfolio to try to get work as a greeter at some events in São Paulo. A friend originally suggested the idea, and since I am in search of the absurd, I said why not? We’re all a little vain. Whatever happens I’m sure I’ll learn a lot and gain some interesting experiences. I just hope my younger idealistic self isn’t rolling over in his grave.

3. Rain in SP

It’s been raining a lot lately, which wouldn’t be so weird if it weren’t for all the catastrophic predictions about the city’s water running out. Extended droughts and political incompetence, you know how it goes. Now that it is raining, it’s shifted to the other extreme with water flooding some people out of their homes. At this rate Milan Kundera could probably write a book about rain and politicians. Plus I keep forgetting when I hang my clothes out to dry.

4. Art, Culture & the Weight of the Past

I was thinking about art and culture after reading a short story by a friend of mine. While visiting an art museum or a library, it’s easy to be overwhelmed by the weight of our cultural heritage. Look at all these Great Writers and Painters! At the right time in your life, the experience is magical. But inevitably you leave these “sanctuaries of the past” and much to your disappointment, you return to your comparatively cold, empty contemporary reality. The Great Artists you loved suddenly seem inaccessible and out of touch. Were they wrong or are you? You’re faced with a choice: either preserve your heroes and be crushed by the weight of the past or rid yourself of your idols and suffer through, what our Czech friend calls, “the unbearable lightness of being”. In other words, the whole of modernity could be summed up with the question: politics or sex?

5. Coffee is never strong enough

Ever since I moved to Brazil, I’ve been drinking a lot more coffee. It really is tasty down here. We received a shiny red coffeemaker as a wedding present. Unfortunately, I probably have borderline narcolepsy, which means that whether I drink one shot of expresso or six, I still worry about chance encounters with the sleepy monster. At least it makes me feel artistic and intellectual when sipping on it. Maybe I should make another batch.

6. Torture in the CIA

So I haven’t read enough to write about the topic intelligently. But it doesn’t look good. The arguments in the US over what constitutes torture, whether torture is a useful tool for acquiring information and more fundamentally how you define an undemocratic use of force remind me of similar debates in Brazil (which also involve the CIA) on the fiftieth anniversary of the military dictatorship. How likely was it that deposed President João Goulart would have turned the country into the next Cuba? How dangerous and numerous were the leftist guerrillas? Who and how many were the victims? How much violence is permissible and/or necessary in the name of democracy? Brazilians seem to have made up their mind, reelecting Dilma Rousseff, herself a former Marxist guerrilla and victim of torture during the military dictatorship. Nonetheless there have been protests calling for her impeachment or even military intervention. We all tread a thin subjective line.

7. Looking at Honeymoon Photos

While preparing the modeling portfolio, my wife and I have been looking at photos from our backpacking trip around Europe. The experience was surprisingly intense, seeing which photos we did and didn’t remember, how our memories changed, how much we both wanted to go back. I’m not sure if I can adequately express it. There are some moments that are neither light nor heavy. How does one quantify looking at photos or sipping on coffee?