To rekre8 meaning!

What is required to recreate a man? To breathe new life into old flesh... I would suggest - with the backing of one of the greatest thinkers to grace the moors (and pubs) of Ireland - we need new metaphors in order for man to breathe new meaning into his oft-assumed meaningless life.

As we celebrate the visual masterpiece that is the adaptation of one of the greatest literary works of the last two centuries, it is a delight to take a look behind the lens at the man who dreamed a new dream of what life can be when we learn to trust our wild and good creator, and allow him to re-create us.  Thanks to Relevant Magazine, we also get to take a look at the man who brings these stories to life for a new generation in honor of his beloved adopted dad "Jack".

Douglas Gresham says of Jack, "I think it's pretty obvious when you read the Narnia Chronicles that this man had a very close connection with the Author of all things."

Yet for a world that is slowly denying the existence of any Author, or any cohesive "story" to our existence here, Jack's work requires re-imagining.  As Mr. Gresham attempts to stay as close as possible to the inspired work of his father, the visualization of this literary text requires that we breathe new life into it! And that is what the folks at Walden Media and Carrie Underwood have done with The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:

Miss Carrie loudly proclaims "There's a place for us!"  in stark contrast to the post-modern disconnectedness that we cynically accept as the truth of our evolutionary, globe-trotting modern existence:

We can be the kings and queens of anything if we believe. 

It's written in the stars that shine above, 

a world where you and I belong, where faith and love will keep us strong, 

exactly who we are is just enough 

there's a place for us, there's a place for us. 

Interesting that Carrie (or her writers) take aim directly at the post-modern assumption that "exactly who we are is NOT enough".  She proclaims that if we believe that there is a story written for us then we can step into the "place for us" just as Lucy and Edmund step into the painting which washes over them with adventure they never dreamed of before.

This is re-creation to the max! Look at the excellence with which the producers weave Carrie's song into this narrative, giving hope to those with "eyes to see" as through the silver screen dimly.  My verbage has become indiscernable to most, yet Lewis would likely agree that even in his text or on the screen the glory of the Narnia Chronicles is only a taste of the "place" that he hoped his faith would deliver him unto one day.  After 32 years of unbelief, Lewis found new life breathed into his bones, largely through the re-creation of mythology practiced by J.R.R. Tolkien and Lewis' "Inklings," a crew of pub regulars who liked to philosophize, smoke and imbibe their favorite brews all the while taking pleasure in the story that started all of this, which we only get "glimpses" of until that day when we find our place.

Keep re-creating stories friends.  As Kenneth Burke has said, they are "equipment for living"!

Re-Kre8ing the Auto Industry!

The auto industry might seem like a weird place for a pop culture commentator to look these days, but consider how so much of our North American "exceptionalism" which has come much under fire in recent months, particularly by our commander-in-chief, is rooted in an ethos that in former times was exampled by the Cowboy Trailblazer, and in the 70's to mid-80's was exampled clearly in the Muscle Car Culture.

So, here we go...

President Obama addressed the nation last Thursday concerning GM's first IPO since becoming the first "government-owned" auto company in history.  (Now, I'm sure Ceasar owned some chariot-manufacturing facilities back during the Roman empire, but really that's like comparing a stone wheel to a chrome rim... so  do I get a pass on that historically-accurate fact?)  First, take a look at the address here:  

Taking note of a few of his high points he claims surreptitiously (as this President is seemingly want to do on many occasions) that this is the "first time in 6 years that Ford, GM, and Chrysler are all operating at a profit."  This may be true for GM and Chrysler, but the innovative company that brought us the Mustang has been operating at a profit since the outset of 2010, which was the first time in four years for them.  Their ability to innovate, trim costs, re-negotiate union wages to more realistic levels, and sure up their cash position set them up to succeed during the downturn.  As GM and Chrysler ignored reality and  while GM received a bailout, Ford and our Friend Elon Musk at Tesla Motors continued to innovate and grow.

I will now turn to focus on Ford and Tesla's re-creation of the auto industry, but will eventually come back to a critique of this misleading presser that would have us believe that GM is the bastion of hope and change that - should we follow this Government down their proposed paths elsewhere - will lead to a prosperous and widely flourishing populace.  Not true, but for now let's turn to look at what Tesla did during the downturn, and how this start-up is changing the imagination of the auto industry and the eco-imagination of the world.  (I hope GE won't sue me for using that word.  That stinks that they can trademark that by the way!... or maybe it's eco-magination.)

Elon Musk and Tesla made some bold moves during the downturn!  Here, my friends, is a perfect example of what a free-market, entrepreneurial framework can bring about when companies compete:

"GM had already pulled out of the plant after declaring bankruptcy in 2009, and Toyota planned to stop production in less than a month. There weren’t too many people interested in buying a 200-acre white elephant of a car factory, so Toyoda opened the door for Musk."

Musk pulled off an incredible feat to make this dream seem within the realm of possibility.  Tesla had developed and produced the Tesla Roadster and sold no less than 1300 units in 08-09.

As you may know this plug-in electric whose battery technology has been incorporated by Daimler's SMART division will beat out a Ferrari in the quarter mile.  Impressive for a startup in an industry of behemoths with multi-million dollar R&D departments.  Yet this is what happens when David is allowed to step on the field against Goliath.  (Wired's article on musk is a good read.)

So president Obama wants to credit his own baby w/keeping the auto industry in America strong, but a company that will be re-building based on a new brand in China and more Chinese manufacturing doesn't sound like the American success story he would make it out to be, which raises a question: "Is this president as delusional about his ability to save America's economy as the former president was about his ability to 'free' the Iraqi people from an oppressive, dangerous dictatorship?"  I say yes. Or more so.

One thing our president is correct about... the American people.  We can and will provide a shot at the American dream to our children's children, if the Government will just get out of the way and let re-creators like Musk and Tesla compete!

As a closing visual to describe the amazing effect that Tesla has had on our economy, the green technology market, CO2 emissions, and "green jobs" check this car and graphic out.  Pretty unbelievable what has happened largely without the government's involvement1.

Go forth and Rekre8!

Cheers,

Kyle

1 - The government did give Tesla a 465 million dollar load to produce it's four-seater Model S for which Musk purchased the California Factory.

Re-Kre8-ing Mythology

The Walt Disney Company is in the interminable and important business of re-creating our mythologies.  Why is this business important you ask?  To quote Kenneth Burke, "Stories are equipment for living."  Without good stories to breathe life into our existence, we wind up with little more than nietzschean, disconnected beings trudging through the warp and woof of life without hope of any greater meaning to the work we do day to day, whether raising a family, leading an international corporation, or making art.  With his studio's most recent work, Disney continues posthumously to re-define what it means to be a man, and what a woman out to look for in the proverbial 'white knight' who will sweep her off of her feet and carry her into 'happily ever after'.  Check it out:

The artists at Disney have masterfully crafted a 'want ad' for the hero of Rapunzel.  This re-creates the story of man and woman coming to be married, as our modern 'liberated' culture finds women taking matters into their own hands, often posting craigslist ads or being the first to reach out on popular dating sites like eHarmony.  This example has sadly become the norm in a post equality movement world where men default to waiting, rather than heroism to win their beauty:


I was on eHarmony twice, for 3 months at a time, a couple of years apart. I got a 4 month relationship out of the first time and my current relationship out of the second time. Both times, I initiated contact and it paid off.

Make contact!

The first time, I was the only woman out of (I believe) about 200 matches that had the nerve to contact him. The only one. Absolutely made me stand out, and that piqued his interest, so he replied. We ended up dating for 4 months.

This seems to be the story of the Disney heroine these days.  I'm reminded of a picture that I really enjoyed a few years back which was also created by Disney.  However, one part really troubled me.  At the climax of the film, a love story, the hero has to be prodded by his girlfriend to kiss 'Sleeping Beauty', as he had come to realize he was no longer in love with his girlfriend, but was the one man who could awake his true love from her sleep.  Watch the scene here, and comment below as to whether you find this a strange hesitation for a 'hero', or does it slip under our radar since Disney and others have so emasculated our post-modern heroes?  (If you continue on in the clip you'll actually see the writers were very transparent w/their desire to emasculate our modern day 'prince charming'.)  Conversely do you think it simply reflects back true life, where men wait for one of their 200 matches to reach out to them, because they are too afraid to initiate a relationship.  Art imitating life or life imitating art?






While I truly appreciate Disney's ability to create fine art (and Susan Sarandon's performance!), I don't think it breathes new life into our culture.  Rather I think it imbibes the draught of post-modern existentialism which would say, "we must try something new.  The old stories are so 'traditional'.  They can't really lead to life." I'd be interested to meet the writers of this and other Disney films and hear more of their stories to see whether they have a scarred conscience or not.  By that I mean that I can totally empathize with someone writing these sorts of stories if they are the heroine who is ignored by men until she takes bold action, and if her father never really affirmed her or told her how beautiful and amazing she is.  


We all must re-create from a true place in our hearts, but the greatest challenge and most worthy of recreation is to breathe new life into broken bones.  


I'd challenge Disney and others to re-write the story of the hero, realizing that if he regains his strength, boldness, and risk-taking love in his heart, the heroine will gladly follow him to happily ever after.


Cheers,


Kyle

Rekre8-ing the Funny Man

With all of the off-kilter, immature funny men pervading our pop culture films how could an actor possibly breathe new life into this art form?  All throughout the history of men there have been jesters, and at certain points we like to think our humor is "evolving" or becoming more "fresh".  Often this desire for "new material" is fueled by a cynicism that says, "Been there, heard that joke before, done that!"  If we're honest with ourselves however, we'll admit that the sort of cynical humor that we see on the rise currently does not give us any life.  It simply positions us as more intelligent, witty, or humorous than someone else and offers nothing life-giving to the communities in which we practice this particular brand of humor.  Who can save us from ourselves?

This guy?  Really? In a word... yes!

Enter Zach Galifianakis.  Jester extraordinaire of the moment!  Pictured above in his seminal role as a druggie, self-depricating, adolescent brother-in-law to the groom to be... he epitomizes the sensational humor that pervades our workplaces, our universities, and oftentimes our homes.

So you're wondering where I'm headed with this... well, have you taken a look at either one of Mr. Galifianakis' new films?  Currently he stars in two films that fall at entirely opposite ends of the comedic spectrum.  Due Date finds Zach starring across from Robert Downey Junior for an almost plotless acting tour-de-force that has received a 71% audience rating at RottenTomatoes.com.  And while most critics give it low marks for a ridiculously incoherent and unbelievable storyline Peter Travers remarks:  "Galifianakis and Downey gift Due Date with something rare in any kind of movie: a soul."  Quite a ringing endorsement for an actor that most write off as the court jester of the moment, and little more.  If you'd like more evidence of Zach's budding maturity and ability to challenge the mores of our society look no further than his other film currently in theaters:  It's Kind of a Funny Story.  Starring as the ringleader resident of a mental institution Galifianakis uses his unique brand of humor to help a young man who has checked himself into the institution to realize how normal he really is, and how he can have a great life if he simply comes to terms with being who he is.  

This may bring to mind memories of Adam Sandler's shift into more serious roles a la Punch Drunk Love or Farrell's shift into the melodramatic with Stranger Than Fiction.  And while there are similarities, this film stands out as a stronger commentary against cynicism.  It celebrates the good in our world, and stirs up a bit more hope than 'Punch' did.  This may be an unfair comparison of three very different films, but then again what else do we have to hold this one up against?  In this one, as opposed to Sandler's and Farrell's, the characters we find most infused with hope are the youth.  While Sandler's and Farrell's films saw a middle-aged man and woman find new hope, this one gives hope to a very often hopeless, begrudging class of our society... the youth.  Seldom do we find young characters exiting a film more hopeful about the world than when they started.

How does Zach pull off these roles so effortlessly? He self-professes in Relevant's article profiling him: "I'm a graduate of the self-taught acting school in my head, which is hard to get into."  And "I think there’s a gravitational pull in the entertainment business toward people who are [messed] up already,” he says, “and the business makes them even worse.” I'd encourage you to read the article.  I found him to be a very unassuming, charming, disarming, honest man who is struggling to make sense of his life just like the rest of us.  And we're fortunate to read his story along the way to help make sense of ours.  You can read an excerpt of it here.

So let's cheer Galifianakis, Boden, and Fleck for giving us a true, beautiful nugget to hold onto in this often dark, cynical world we call home for now.   Again Travers speaks endearingly of the filmmakers, "the writer-directors are Ryan Fleck and Anna Boden, who did Half Nelson and Sugar and rep the best kind of indie cinema, the kind that doesn't sling bull{edited for the kids}."

I encourage those of you who haven't before to begin writing fiction.  Base the characters on truths or stories that you have experienced, but write the piece as if the end of the age will be glorious, not hopeless.  Let's join our friend Zach, and act out stories that breathe new life into our homes, our schools, our places of business, and our lives.  Let's rekre8 together!

Cheers,

Kyle

Re-Kre8-ing Political Advertising

As promised this week's re-kre8 focuses on the political side of pop culture.  Very apropos since we are electing 37 governors and a large number of congressional and senatorial representatives tomorrow.

(Side note: please take a moment to educate yourself on your gubernatorial candidates, their positions, their character, and order your schedule so that you can exercise the freedom we have been granted at such a dear price to so many who went before us.)

You're getting a special treat this week.  Below we'll take a look at my very own contribution to the political spirit of the day!  Before we do this let me give voice to what seem to be common concerns about the world of political advertising these days.  Many say that we often fall pray to character assassination rather than justly raising issues of concern that voters ought to look into more for themselves.  They say we use the power of imagery and aural composition in more coercive ways than most advertisers ("Mad Men's" ploys often being more coy or covertly manipulative).  We fearmonger. We mudsling. We distort facts for our own purposes.  Now, let me answer some of these charges: You are correct! Often these approaches are par for the course in political advertising.  Unfortunately, when we practice this regularly we create a body politik in our nation that is both fed up with political discourse and polarized by extreme imagery which they associate synonymously with whichever party was responsible for the advertising.  And it typically lowers rather than raises the level of discourse over the issues facing our country.

But wait, on the horizon their rides a lone white knight with a glimmer in his eye, and a sword in his hand to smite all the political evildoers.  What is that knight's name?  Sir Kyle Vitasek... and what is that insignia on his shield? The Republican Governors Association crest!  [Obviously I've devolved into the realm of lunacy for a moment here.]  However, in all seriousness I do believe our organization does better than most in presenting hard facts in a just manner.  Sometimes we fall off the horse in one direction or the other, but in the example below you will witness a little bit of political re-kre8-on.

What do I mean by that?  Well, if you take the original elements we had to work with for this ad, you wind up with a very boring, very ineffective conglomeration of facts.  The gist of the ad is that the Inspector General for the state of Ohio investigated the Governor's office for a number of irregularities in the way they did business, which could have led to criminal prosecution of particular officials the Governor was directly responsible for hiring and indirectly responsible for managing.  However, we took a tried and true crime drama theme, and breathed new life into it (and into the facts at the same time) with the effect that viewers will be entertained and enlightened at the same time, and the gravity of the facts will sit a little heavier.  It is my opinion that we did not fall off the horse into character assassination because all of the facts we use are true, and we do not take ugly photos and make them look uglier, or facts far out of context.  We simply lay out the case clearly, that another has made against this man's administration, in a winsome fashion.  Enjoy! -

What did you think? A good re-kre8-on? More of the same we've come to expect from any political org? Something we could use more of in political advertising? Silly? Well/poorly executed?

Please comment, share on facebook, twitter, etc. And please vote tomorrow.

Cheers,

Kyle