photographer

Hashtag Philosophy  /  Just For Fun
Bad Responses To ‘I Love You’
October 23, 2016
charles i. letbetter - bad responses to I love you

Laughter and tears are both responses to frustration and exhaustion. I myself prefer to laugh, since there is less cleaning up to do afterward. —Kurt Vonnegut

 

charles i. letbetter - bad responses to 'I Love You'

When someone says “I love you” and you don’t exactly feel the same way, how are you supposed to respond?

Saying “I love you” is a traumatic and critical portion of every relationship. I still remember how I felt when Kat and I exchanged that phrase for the first time. It was important because, prior to that point in our lives, we had both questioned whether there even was such a thing as love. When one starts talking about love we invoke a powerful set of emotions that are not always within our ability to control. Good things often happen when people say those words, but our responses are not always predictable.

The hashtag game #BadResponsesToILoveU is trending this morning and I can’t say that I’m too terribly surprised. Almost everyone I know has been on one side or the other of saying “I love you” to someone and not getting the response you were expecting. Silence, of course, is probably the worst of all responses. When the person to whom you just said, “I love you” doesn’t say or do anything, you’re not sure for yourself exactly how to proceed. Do you apologize? Do you explain? Do you blow it off as though nothing happened? Getting a bad response to “I love you” is devastating.

However, when it’s not happening directly to us, bad responses can be hilarious. This is one of the places where the Internet shines because people can think of thousands of ways to be hilariously cruel. So, I thought we’d take some time to be thankful we’re not the one putting the “I love you” out there.

What Twitter Has To Say

I don’t have time to cull through the thousands of tweets this hashtag has generated, but here are a few that I really enjoyed.


There are thousands more, if you are looking for an entertaining way to waste time.

Things We Didn’t Say … Yet

I laughed when I saw this game because, having been on both sides, I really enjoy a good burn of a response. Of course, I’m probably, almost certainly too nice to actually every use these on anyone, but here are a few I have in my back pocket, just in case the need arises.

Why is it I always seem to attract crazy people?

You know, your roommate said the same thing last night.

This wouldn’t have happened had you not had that last shot of tequila

Yeah, this is why I keep considering a life of celibacy

Sigh. Too bad. There’s no cure for addictions like yours. It’s a brain disease.

I’m going to let you down easy: I’d rather be kissed by a cobra

I blame the Republican Party for making you feel that way

Right, you know I volunteered to help colonize Mars, don’t you?

Have you ever considered shock therapy?

Sure, but will you still feel that way when I’m crowned Emperor of the Underworld [strike a pose]?

You know, I’ve been looking for a way to not say that same thing to you.

You stole my M&Ms, didn’t you?

Okay, now try saying the same thing while naked and see if that makes me feel any different

Don’t worry, we all have our little pet annoyances

That’s funny (laughing). For a second there, I thought you said you love me

{Putting finger in one ear and wiggling it) Hold on, my hearing aid isn’t working. I thought you said you love me.

Sorry, I’m fresh out of sperm. I gave your sister the last batch.

And the guys on Gamma 9 tried telling me there’s no intelligent life on this planet

Dammit, that ball gag just keeps falling out of your mouth

I know, I’m having entirely too much fun with this game. And again, I would never actually use these on anyone.

Probably.

Except in the event of an emergency wedding.

 

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  PotD
Sleeping Right Through History
October 23, 2016
charles i. letbetter - sleeping right through history

Never under any circumstances take a sleeping pill and a laxative on the same night. —Dave Barry

 

charles i. letbetter - sleeping right through history

When we sleep through historic events, what we are missing is the chance to tell a story

Won for the ages: After years of waiting and suffering, Cubs are in World Series declared the banner headline on this morning’s Chicago Tribune. The excitement is palpable across social media. It’s been 75 years since the baseball’s Chicago Cubs played in a World Series, even longer since they actually won one. There was yelling, screaming, and excitement all over the place.

I slept right through it.

This isn’t the first time I’ve slept through history. I missed the first Apple commercial in 1984. I missed Bill Clinton’s appearance on the Arsenio Hall show in 1992. The Supreme Court decision that decided the 2000 election? Yep, I was asleep when that came down. Slept right through Saddam Hussein’s capture in 2003 as well. Sleeping through history is something I’ve become quite good at doing, and I’m reasonably sure that I’m not the only one who does so. I know because Kat was sleeping right next to me when the Cubs won last night.

On some level, sleeping through historic events is common. After all, we have to sleep. We can’t always anticipate that something historic is going to happen. The Cubs have been letting us down and choking on the big game for 75 years. What reason was there to think that last night would be any different?

At the same time, though,sleeping through events of global importance deprives us of one of the most exciting experiences in the human condition: telling a story.

Culling Through History

A fair portion of the time, we have good reason to sleep through what is being called a historic event. When something is actually happening, we don’t always know if it is something that history is going to bother remembering. For example, when we think of school shootings the one that continues to be the most important, historically, is Columbine. Why? The country was shaken to its core. We, collectively, had never imagined that such a thing was even possible. However, there has been 31 school shooting since Columbine. Each, in their own way, could claim some historical significance, but history itself doesn’t remember them because they became too commonplace.

Historic events are sometimes obvious. The assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and John Lennon, for example. The Challenger explosion would be another. Certainly, the events of 9/11 fall into that category. Something so massive, so startling, is immediately etched in our brains the moment they happen we know they’re important.

Others, however, sneak up on us when we’re not paying attention. As Hurricane Katrina approached the Gulf Coast, forecasters attempted to warn residents, and the government, that this storm was stronger than anything we’d seen before. Too many people didn’t listen. Governors didn’t listen and force evacuations that could have saved lives. The federal government didn’t listen and as a result, aid was slow in arriving. Citizens of affected areas didn’t listen to the warnings, tried riding out a storm that couldn’t be ridden. Because we weren’t expecting the hurricane to be historic, the nation tried sleeping through it and was knocked right out of our comfortable beds.

Perhaps we can be forgiven for sleeping through some historic events. Our lives are full trying to handle every-day events. We are too tired to handle the big stuff. When we sleep through moments of great significance, though, we miss out on more than we expect.

Living To Tell The Tale

I remember talking with my father about the events of December 7, 1941. He was still a child on that fateful morning, but he still remembered quite clearly the response of those around him: everyone was scared. The men were torn. They shared a farm and if they all joined the military, which they were inclined to do, then who would handle the 500 acres that provided the only source of income for five families? Those with older children were concerned about sending them off to fight an unfamiliar enemy. Since news moved much slower during that era, anxiety ran high as the future of the nation seemed uncertain.

Being alive when a historic event takes place doesn’t always change our own lives directly. We don’t always see things then as they turn out. I remember the Watergate Scandal, for example. The only way in which it directly affected my life was that the televised hearings preempted my afternoon cartoon shows. I was less upset that the President of the United States had committed a crime and more pissed off that I was missing Popeye the Sailor and Roadrunner. I remember watching Hank Aaron break Babe Ruth’s homerun record. While it was exciting, there was also a sense of relief. Network news programs had regularly interrupted whatever was showing every time Aaron came up to bat for what seemed like a month (it was only a few days) before he hit that ball. We were glad the constant interruptions were over.

Regardless of our perspective on an event, however, we still come away with a story that is worth telling. If anything, it is the wide-ranging differences of our perspectives that making listening to those stories so great. We can get the historical facts of an event from any history book or a quick bit of research on the Internet. To truly understand the emotion of an event, though, we need to listen to the stories of the people who witnessed those events. Without those stories, our understanding of history is rather empty and void of context.

Our Own Historical Record

One of my favorite radio programs is the Moth Radio Hour.  The Moth isn’t a news program and it’s not really a matter of commentary, either. The Moth is people telling stories, real stories, not fiction, in front of a live audience. These stories relate to us things that happened around historic events in people’s lives. While the event itself might not have made the news, it was important to the history of the person telling the story. So, an astronaut explains what it feels like to be in space for the first time. Another story is a woman telling about her search for her signature scent. A military veteran relates the rigors of Honor Guard training.

All the stories we tell are important to history because it is our stories, the explanations of how we felt, what we saw, how we were affected, that gives context and meaning to the cold, dry facts of history. If the generations that come after us are to learn any lessons from the history that has come before them, they need more than history books. They need our stories, yours and mine, to give them a sense of why an event was so very important and why they need to pay attention and learn.

What happens when we do not tell those stories? Our history is empty. We know events occurred, but we fail to understand them. We know the fight for civil rights was challenging, but we don’t understand that battle until we listen to the stories of people like John Lewis, who was there next to Dr. King, who was arrested and beaten, who was sprayed with the fire hoses. We know the dustbowl era affected migration to California, but to hear my Uncle Fred tell about his decision to pack up and move injects the sorrow and pain of that momentous event make the experience real.

We need these stories.

Sharing Our Own History

When it’s all said and done, the fact that I slept right through last night’s game is probably not significant to the global understanding of history. Baseball and I aren’t that close. Other events, though, require that I stay awake. The evening of November 8 would be a good example. No matter how one slices it, this election has important historical significance. We need to be awake not just because we need to know the outcome. We need to be paying attention because there will come a day when our stories will be an important part of the historical narrative of our country.

Sharing our stories, whether through the centuries-honored oral tradition or through creating a video for social media, is an important part of history. We need more than dates and numbers and names. Those who come behind us need to know why we vote the way we do, how our lives are affected, and how we adjust our plans based on the outcome. History is not something we watch happen. History is something we experience, even if it is passive.

We need to stay awake. Our stories are important. Make sure you tell yours.

Continue Reading

science  /  Social Commentary
Creatives & Addiction: Rethinking Our Approach
October 22, 2016

Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol or morphine or idealism. —Carl Jung

 

charles i. letbetter - creative & addiction: re-thinking our approach

Recent changes in the definition of addiction should have us re-thinking how we respond to addicts. [photo concept and makeup by Sasha Starz]

I’m not sugar-coating this one for you: addiction among creatives is too common and too frequently undiagnosed. Even when it is diagnosed, it has previously been almost impossible to “cure.” Some handle it better than others, but we’ve lost too many, from Janis Joplin to Amy Winehouse and, apparently, even Prince. And those are just the names you recognize. I’ve seen addiction in photographers old and young, ruining creative lives before their full vision is ever realized. Writers seem to be especially prone to addiction. I’ve had several tell me they couldn’t even start to write without being high or being drunk.

I’ve always taken a hard line in my attitude toward addicts. I don’t like them. I don’t want them around. Addiction is something I’ve always seen as a weakness, a fundamental flaw in one’s character. If you know you have a problem with something, stay away. Understanding how anything can control someone to such a fatal degree is not something I’ve been able to do. I try to be sympathetic for those struggling, but I tend to blame them for their own problems.

Now, the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)  has me re-thinking my disdain for addicts. As it turns out, taking such a hard line has probably been exactly the opposite of what those people have needed. Shoving them into rehab facilities might not have been as productive as we thought. 12-step groups could possibly be completely misdirected.

Maybe we were all wrong.

A New Definition

Addiction is a chronic brain disorder and not simply a behavior problem involving alcohol, drugs, gambling or sex.  That’s the direction the ASAM is now taking in regard to addiction. Stop and think about that for a moment. Addiction is a chronic brain disorder. Let that sink in. All these years, we’ve been looking at addiction as a character flaw, perhaps a psychological psychosis brought about by some childhood trauma or something. We have ultimately looked at addiction as a choice one makes and faulted them for making that choice.

Here’s the first part of the ASAM’s short definition of addiction:

Addiction is a primary, chronic disease of brain reward, motivation, memory and related circuitry. Dysfunction in these circuits leads to characteristic biological, psychological, social and spiritual manifestations. This is reflected in an individual pathologically pursuing reward and/or relief by substance use and other behaviors.

Make special note of the use of the word “chronic.” That’s important. “Chronic” puts addiction is the same class as heart disease and diabetes. “Chronic” means that it’s not going to go away. Either one deals with addiction their entire life, religiously, continually, or they risk dying. There is no cure. There is only treatment and without that treatment, the disease gets worse.

Obviously, there’s some disagreement with this definition. Therapeutical psychologists, the folks who make their living getting one to lie on their couch at $500 an hour, don’t care much for this definition because it means their attempts to treat addiction as a psychosis is misdirected. One is not an addict because their father slapped them when they were four-years-old or because they didn’t get the bicycle they wanted when they were seven. Instead, genetic factors are responsible about half the time. We’ve been looking at this totally wrong.

A Personal Story

Mark Cummings was one of the best young photographers I ever knew. We first met out on assignment, both of us covering the same event for different entities. He was sharp, funny, and had an incredible eye for seeing things that everyone else was missing. He noticed, for example, that one particular Senator from Oklahoma always had his shoes untied. Always. He caught the look of burnout in a young pop star whose label was pushing her too hard. Mark infuriated editors because he didn’t capture the image they wanted to see. Instead, he captured a dark reality that was unnerving.

Mark also had an addiction to alcohol. He carried a flask of whiskey in his camera bag. Always. He would have another in his car, a third in his suitcase, and kept a bottle hidden in his office. Mark started the day with  a shot of whiskey in his coffee, then dropped the coffee by 10. In the three years that I knew him, I don’t think I ever saw him sober. He was functional. He took fantastic pictures. Mark Cummings was never sober.

Cummings wasn’t one to admit he’d had too much. Truth was, most days he was over the legal blood alcohol limit by noon. One evening, after being yelled at for over an hour by his editor for “wasting” five rolls of film and not getting anything printable, Mark was “extra thirsty.” When I saw him, he was already six glasses in. I stayed for two more and tried to get him to share the cab ride home with me. He wouldn’t leave.

I received the phone call early the next day. About three hours after I left, and who knows how much more whiskey, Mark put his head down on the bar, fell off his bar stool, and died from alcohol poisoning. Another brilliant photographer, gone.

Understanding The Problem

Again, quoting from the long definition of addiction from the ASAM:

 Addiction affects neurotransmission and interactions within reward structures of the brain, including the nucleus accumbens, anterior cingulate cortex, basal forebrain and amygdala, such that motivational hierarchies are altered and addictive behaviors, which may or may not include alcohol and other drug use, supplant healthy, self-care related behaviors. Addiction also affects neurotransmission and interactions between cortical and hippocampal circuits and brain reward structures, such that the memory of previous exposures to rewards (such as food, sex, alcohol and other drugs) leads to a biological and behavioral response to external cues, in turn triggering craving and/or engagement in addictive behaviors.

Understand, two decades of neurological research have gone into formulating this definition. Mark, along with every other creative addict we’ve known, was repeatedly told he had “a problem.” What he should have been told was that he had a neurological disease, one for which there is no cure, only treatment. I can’t say that would have saved Mark. He was stubborn, as a log of addicts are. It would  have, however, made a difference in how everyone responded to him.

The causes of addiction are worth noting as well. Again, from ASAM:

When persons with addiction manifest problems in deferring gratification, there is a neurological locus of these problems in the frontal cortex. Frontal lobe morphology, connectivity and functioning are still in the process of maturation during adolescence and young adulthood, and early exposure to substance use is another significant factor in the development of addiction. Many neuroscientists believe that developmental morphology is the basis that makes early-life exposure to substances such an important factor.

There’s a lot more that I encourage you to read on the ASAM website.

Our Response Is Part Of The Solution

Dr. Michael Miller, past president of ASAM who oversaw the development of the new definition, states, “… we have to stop moralizing, blaming, controlling or smirking at the person with the disease of addiction, and start creating opportunities for individuals and families to get help and providing assistance in choosing proper treatment.”

When I think of all the times we’ve gotten it wrong, I want to cry. We blamed Mark for being a drunk, for not taking responsibility for his “habit.” His boss tried to control Mark’s drinking by pairing him with writers who would confiscate any alcohol they found. People would laugh at him when he couldn’t stand or took pictures too blurred to tell what they were. Every last one of those responses was wrong.

We have to change our way of thinking about addiction. If someone has a stroke you don’t laugh at them, do you? Should a friend you’re with suddenly have a heart attack, are you going to tell them they need to do something about that problem and walk away? No, you help them get help. Addicts are exactly the same. While the choice to get help is ultimately their own, we have to guide them toward professionals who genuinely understand the problem. While a 12-step program might help, they need a lot more than just a weekly meeting or two.

The ASAM states:

Recovery from addiction is best achieved through a combination of self-management, mutual support, and professional care provided by trained and certified professionals.

Each year, we lose too many wonderfully creative people to addiction. Help them get help. The ASAM can help connect you or a friend with the appropriate professional. Let’s stop treating addiction as just “a problem” and treat it like the disease that it is. Let’s do more to save our addicted friends. The world needs their creativity.

Continue Reading

Photography  /  PotD
Photography Nightmares: What We’re Really Thinking
October 22, 2016
charles i. letbetter - photography nightmares: what we're really thinking

I told my therapist I was having nightmares about nuclear explosions. He said don’t worry it’s not the end of the world. —Jay London

 

charles i. letbetter - photography nightmares: what we're really thinking

Photographers love most of our clients, but the nightmares come when unreasonable requests are made

We like you. We really, really like you. Photographers love their clients, especially repeat clients who keep coming back for portraits or other special imagery. We love clients who understand the value of what we do, who don’t keep needling us when it takes longer than expected to finish their pictures, and especially the ones who tell their friends that they need to use us as well. These are the people for whom we might consider bending the rules every once in a while, and for whom we’ll at least consider their more outrageous requests.

Then, there are the nightmares. These are the clients who are never satisfied with their pictures, the ones who question your quality, whether you even know what you’re doing, and claim that their four-year-old could do better. We stay up at night fearing the client who trashes us to their friends, but then comes back again and has the audacity to ask for a discount or special service that you don’t normally offer. These are not nice people.

Yet, as professionals, we are supposed to take the nightmares with a grain of salt, keep a smile on our face, and attempt to say no to their requests while re-directing them back to our stated policies. I was amused earlier this week when a sponsored article popped up in my Facebook newsfeed offering a chart with answers to the most common objections photographers face. The chart was created by Joy Vertz, a portrait photographer based in Mequon, Wisconsin. The advice she gives is solid. However …

What We Say Isn’t Always What We’re Thinking

Ms. Vertz is one of those lovely, positive, go-get-’em people who doesn’t take no for an answer. She smiles, redirects, restates, and closes the sale. She’s successful both in terms of her own photography business and also with helping other photographers who are struggling. I’ve never met her, but I’m sure she’s a wonderfully nice person who could sell a block of ice to a resident of the South Pole. Some people just have that right attitude for selling.

The rest of us, however, struggle with closing sales. Not all of us are natural-born salespeople. In fact, the more creative we are, the more difficult it can be for us to function in a business capacity. We work best when someone else handles all the sales closing stuff, leaving us to take the pictures and be creative and occasionally do some really amazing work. Dealing with anyone who is the slightest bit contrarian isn’t our strong point.

As I was reading through Ms. Vertz’s list of objections, I couldn’t help thinking, “Yes, that’s what you should say, but that’s not what I would be thinking.” I’m one of those people who does better when Kat closes the sale. She’s friendly, cheerful, and can keep a smile on her face even when talking to a complete idiot. I can’t. Stupid people make me want to throw things. So, I thought it might be fun, since it’s Saturday and if you’re reading this after 8:00 AM you’re probably not out shooting today, to consider what we would actually like to say to clients who cause us nightmares. The objections come from Ms. Vertz’s list. I don’t have time to address them all, but this should be enough to make my point.

You are too expensive. I can’t afford you.

Wrong. You don’t want to pay me for the value of my work. You want a discount. You always want a discount. Yet, you’ll pay $8 for that freakin’ latte you’re holding. You down what, three of those a day? I’m not too expensive, you just have really lousy priorities, are selfish, and fail to value anyone in the service industries. Go away. I don’t have time for you.

I just want a disk of images

Why? Because you want to share them online (which is fine if you’ve paid for the disc) or because you want to take them to the drug store and get really crappy prints instead of paying my prices? Or even worse, you’re not going to try printing them on your home inkjet, are you? After I’ve spent hours getting the tonal and color quality of your images just right, you’re going to ruin them by printing on some non-calibrated crappy little no-name printer you picked up at a garage sale? And then you’ll complain because the pictures don’t “look right.” Please.

Just put them online for us to look at

Damn, you’re lazy. If you think I’m going to wait around for months while you do everything but choose your proofs, you’re crazy. Make a decision already. Chances are you’re going to go with your first choice, anyway. Better yet, let me decide for you. You’re too distracted to pay attention to what you’re doing. You’re giving me a headache.

[By the way, Joy’s answer to this one is spot on: To have an online gallery is $500 which applies 100% to your order placed within 1 week. It is $25 for each additional week. ]

What is the cheapest way I can get an image for Facebook?

Take a fucking selfie like everyone else? Pay for a session and we’ll happily give you permission to use the finished photos online with appropriate credit. Re-edit the picture or fail to give credit, though, and I’m SO going to bitch. Okay, not really, but I’ll think bad thoughts about you and complain about you to my dog.

Can I see all the photos?

Uhm, no. Part of my job is to make you look good. You know, remove the blemishes from things like really bad acne, or removing those horrid dark circles from under your eyes because you don’t sleep, eat horribly, smoke like a fucking chimney, and drink three bottles of wine a night. You come here wanting me to make you look flawless and glamorous like a model. So no, I’m not showing you all the photos.

You don’t mind that I brought all of our cousins along, do you?

Uhm, YES! First of all, pull those kids off the props. This is not a fucking playground. Do I look like someone who has the patience of a preschool teacher? You do realize there’s no way I’m getting five toddlers all looking in the same direction at the same time, even if I had a puppy. I’m going to need half a bottle of scotch after we finish this one and you had damn well better buy the largest package we offer. Your child just peed on my carpet. I hate you.

We really love our clients.

Of course, we would never actually say any of those things to anyone’s face. We do our best to be polite and nice and not curse too much in front of children.  At least two-thirds of our clients are really wonderful people. We enjoy working with them. However, we keep having nightmares. Every photographer I know has nightmares.

If you look on our home page, where we describe our services, we provide the instruction: Please be sure to communicate your needs fully to avoid any surprises. One of those surprises is that we will charge an additional fee to clients who are especially difficult. If someone is going to be a complete pain-in-the-ass, they’re going to pay for that experience.

Now you know what we’re thinking. Be a good client, not a nightmare. Thank you.

 

Continue Reading

Advertising  /  Art  /  studio nudes  /  video
Waste Of A Perfectly Good Afternoon
October 21, 2016
charles i. letbetter - waste of a perfectly good afternoon

How did it get so late so soon? It’s night before its afternoon. December is here before its June. My goodness, how the time has flewn. How did it get so late so soon? —Dr. Seuss

 

charles i. letbetter - waste of a perfectly good afternoon

If we’re going to waste a perfectly good afternoon we might as well do it with something good

Friday afternoons are notorious time wasters. One is either rushing to get something done by the end of the day, or one is putting everything off until Monday. Oh, and then there are the Friday’s where one can’t get anything done because you need the approval of someone who decided to take the afternoon off. Never fails. Now, if you’re one of those people who should be rushing to meet a deadline, WHY ARE YOU READING THIS ARTICLE? Geeze, get back to work already! You’re holding up everyone else.

Now, if you’re one of those people who should be rushing to meet a deadline, WHY ARE YOU READING THIS ARTICLE? Geeze, get back to work already! You’re holding up everyone else.

For everyone else, however, I’m in the mood to waste some time and we might as well do it together. Only, I’ve already watched the videos below. If I hadn’t then I would be able to recommend them to you, would I? And since I was watching them specifically so that I could include them in this article, it wasn’t exactly wasting time on my part. We call that research.

Amazing how we justify things around here.

Anyway, I’ve chosen three short films that, combined, kills less than an hour of your afternoon. Go grab you a soda and maybe a chocolate bar. Tell everyone you’re doing research. Hey, it works for us.

This Is Supposed To Be A Commercial

A seven-minute long commercial? Really? I’m not sure exactly what the folks at Ford were thinking with this one. It certainly isn’t something that one is going to see one television, even late night. We’ve we’ve got here, though, is some incredibly creative writing. Not since Herbie, the Love Bug has a car played such an integral role in the telling of a story. You may need to watch it twice, though. The plot unfolds in such a way that only on the second viewing do you see all the hints that were dropped. And to the folks at Ford, you’re welcome.

https://youtu.be/QMTBTm30JR8

A Little Relationship Advice

This little thing was just uploaded a couple of days ago, but it has “award winner” written all over it. What happens when two people’s lives become so incredibly entangled in each other that separation becomes impossible? Is this why one shouldn’t go into business with a spouse or lover, or is this exactly why you should? This is an incredibly well-done piece with a few surprises slipped in along the way.

Think Of It As Art That Moves

I thought twice, actually three times before including this last one. First, it’s long, a little over 20 minutes. Second, I was concerned that it might only appear to those in the advertising industry. However, I think any creative person is going to find a lot here that is valuable. Discussion of design, white space, and NOT filling the frame are something anyone involved in the visual arts is going to appreciate. Plus, there is such a strong sense of history and nostalgia here, especially for people my age who areally are bored on a Friday afternoon and bummed that it’s too chilly to be out taking a walk.

That’s all you’re getting from me today. Kat said something about going “out.” Lock the door and turn off the lights if you’re the last one to leave, please. See you in the morning.

Continue Reading

PotD  /  Social Commentary
I Think It’s About Forgiveness
October 21, 2016
charles i. letbetter - i think it's about forgiveness

The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong. —Mahatma Gandhi

 

charles i. letbetter - i think it's about forgiveness

Forgiveness is never easy, but it is forgiving ourselves that is perhaps the most difficult task of all.

Forgiveness is a challenging topic, and a rather sobering one for a Friday. Normally, I try to keep things a bit lighter as we head into the weekend, but my instinct, or my gut, or whatever you want to call that nagging voice in the back of my head tells me to go with it. We need forgiveness and we especially need to forgive ourselves.

This is important. I want my boys to see this not because of anything they’ve done but because, as humans, they will inevitably do something that lingers on their conscience. Forgiving ourselves is a lesson we are challenged to learn because we must first have a reason to learn it, and that reason is often painful.

Also, before we get too deep into the conversation, I want you to know that the examples I use here are intentionally fictional. I’m not throwing anyone under the bus, so to speak, and I’m certainly not inclined to make any great confessions of my own faults. Confession is good for the soul, but not for the Internet.

Let’s start, however, by taking a look at a new short film by the folks at Pixar. This isn’t the same fun, cheerful, feel-good type of film we usually see from the animation company. What we see here strikes a dark tone and, honestly, I’m not sure I would recommend it for young children unless you are ready, as a parent, to hold a serious conversation. The film runs a little over six minutes. Take a look:

Borrowed Time from Borrowed Time on Vimeo.

[This video source doesn’t always scale well for some mobile devices. If you’re having difficulty viewing the video, you can find the original on Vimeo]

We’ve All Been There, Sort Of

Borrowed Time is one of those poignant little films that one almost wishes were longer, but at the same time we’re rather glad it isn’t. Emotion that strong carried out for the length of a feature film would be difficult for a lot of people to handle. The short film is challenging enough. The producers behind the film wanted to quickly, briefly, drive home the point that it’s not only okay to forgive ourselves, but that forgiveness is necessary if we are to continue living.

We’ve been there. Okay, perhaps we didn’t accidentally kill our fathers as they clung desperately to the side of a cliff. We’ve done other things, though; things we shove to the back of our mind and try to not think about. Letting a dying aunt suffer in pain because you stole her Percoset. Beating up that little kid when you were eight-years-old because  you were angry about being abused yourself. The night you let a drunk friend drive away and they killed someone with their car.

Those experiences, those moments of personal trauma, never really go away. You remember the look of pain, the pleading, in your victim’s eyes. Maybe you remember screams or cries for help. Or maybe you just remember the silence as you did nothing. We do our best to hide those memories. The past is the past. That all happened when you were young and didn’t know better. Yet, those pictures still haunt your mind. No one else in the world may know what you did, but you do. If you dare think about it very long you fear you’ll go mad.

Some Things We Can’t Fix

Recovery programs often include a step called “making amends,” doing something to make up for the wrong  you’ve done in the past. The exercise is appropriate for some discrepancies, but there are some things we do, the really big things, that simply can’t be fixed, ever. Like the young man in the film, there’s no bringing his father back. We see the pain in his eyes, drawn beautifully by the Pixar animators, and know that he has replayed that scenario over and over in his mind, trying to find some way to fix it, looking for scenarios where his finger doesn’t find that trigger. There’s no changing what happened, though.

How do we get beyond this? How do we pick ourselves up and keep moving? For the man in the film, it was a matter of revisiting the site of that most horrible event, walking among the skeletons of dead horses and a decayed stage coach, feeling the desert wind, and finding his father’s watch. Everything happened in a neat package of six minutes. For most of us, however, forgiveness takes a little bit longer than six minutes.

Let me say right here that if you have a matter of guilt, justified or not, that is interrupting your life to a severe degree, seek professional help. You don’t have to do this on your own. Finding a path to forgiving yourself is not safe for everyone. If you’re prone to depression, have had thoughts of suicide or harming yourself, don’t address such emotional matters on your own. Don’t even try.

For the rest of us, though, there are multiple ways of finding your path to self-forgiveness.

Identifying What Really Happened

Memory is a tricky thing that loves to mix up the facts. The further removed we are from an event, the more likely it is that we are getting at least some of the facts wrong. This is why witness testimony is often unreliable. Our memories are easily influenced by external sources, including our dreams, and therefore unreliable.

So, before you continue beating yourself up over something, consider what actually happened. Get the facts straight. Try to understand what your motivations were at the time and how the circumstances participated in your action. Come to grips with the decisions you made and how the consequences of those decisions affected you and other people.

Only when we are totally honest with ourselves about what we did and why we did it can we begin to move forward. Again, this can be a very emotional and difficult step. Don’t be afraid to ask for professional help.

Mistakes Don’t Make You A Bad Person

There are few truly horrible people in the world. There are a lot of people whose actions are misunderstood and regrettable, but the number of genuinely murderous, maniacal beasts are actually small enough that you’re probably not among them. Unless you’re burying bodies in your backyard or somewhere, you have hope.

Society likes to label people and,  especially throughout the 1980s and early 90s we, as a nation, were obsessed with labeling “bad guys.” The whole “three strikes” program that sentenced repeat felony offenders to life in jail, is a sad commentary of how quickly our society just gives up and throws people in the trash. The personal effect of that philosophy is that we become willing to throw ourselves away, also.

When you have someone tell you that YOU are valuable, they’re not just pandering to you. You are not a bad person. What you did might have been very wrong, but it does not rob you of your humanity. Even if you vote for the Republican nominee for President, as deplorable an act as that might prove to be, you are still not a bad person. You are capable of love and of being loved. Don’t every forget that.

You Can Start Over

Too many people feel that they cannot escape their pasts. Granted, sometimes making that jump is difficult. I can think of one acquaintance right now whose past is chasing him like a hound dog. He feels that he can’t catch a break because every time he turns around something he did in the past raises its ugly head and knocks him back down. When that happens you have but one move: start over.

Leave town. Change jobs. Go back to school and study something completely different. Select a radically different group of friends. Become someone who makes you proud. You can do it. This isn’t a new path that no one’s been down before. In fact, this path is so well-worn that it’s deep-rutted from use. Forgiveness means, at some level, shutting forever those doors to the past and making a conscious decision that you are moving on with your life.

Yes, starting over is scary. I get that. Again, we’ve been there. You can do it, though. You deserve this.

Learn From Your Mistakes

You’ve heard this advice before. Just as it applies to other less traumatic mistakes in our lives, it applies to the big stuff as well. Okay, so you totally blew it. Part of the forgiveness process is learning what to do differently so that we don’t make those mistakes again. Sure, we hope the circumstances that led to that error don’t re-occur. Part of learning may be knowing how to avoid the circumstances that put you in the position to do whatever you did wrong. Fate sometimes intervenes, however. You need to be ready.

Life throws us a lot of curves. We never know when a situation might arise that requires us to make a critical decision. One does not always have the luxury to sit and reason through the possibilities and possible consequences. When those moments come, it is our experiences that teach us how to respond. Those who have frequent mistakes in their lives are better equipped to know what not to do, which inherently puts them closer to the correct action.

What happened in the past can make you a better person today and into the future. We make better choices. We avoid dangerous circumstances. We are able to forgive ourselves and continue living.

Borrowed Time

Notice that I’ve not excused anyone’s behavior. The man in the short film was placed in a situation where any number of accidents could have occurred and a most horrible one did. Not everything bad that happens to us is an accident, though. When we intentionally make bad decisions there is no excuse.

What we must do instead is forgive. Not forget, mind you, but forgive. Forgiveness opens our souls, our consciousness  so that we can move on and achieve great things. We diminish our potential when we bind ourselves with guilt. As humans, we are capable of truly amazing things when we remove all the obstacles that we place in front of ourselves. The process of forgiveness helps clear the way for us. We move on. The clock starts ticking again.

Time is elusive, though. Don’t wait. The longer we hold onto that guilt the tighter we bind ourselves.

Give yourself permission to live. Forgive.

Continue Reading

Advertising  /  Photography  /  PotD  /  publishing
Paper’s Place In A Digital World
October 20, 2016
charles i. letbetter - paper is not dead

You can only generate ideas when you put pencil to paper, brush to canvas… when you actually do something physical. —Twyla Tharp

 

charles i. letbetter - paper's place in a digital world

We’ve been convinced that that world is going digital, but there’s still a place for paper that is larger than expected

I walk the dog every morning at 4:00 AM. Most mornings, it’s a nice, quiet stroll through the neighborhood. Everyone’s asleep. Well, almost everyone. Each morning, in about the same location, we pass a vehicle with its hazard lights flashing as the person on the passenger side flings copies of the Indianapolis Star out the window. The first time we encountered them I was rather surprised that there would be many people in this neighborhood who would still subscribe to the print edition of the newspaper. What I’ve learned since then is that no only do a lot of people subscribe to the print edition of the paper, they prefer it to the digital edition even on mornings like this where the paper is likely to be a bit soggy despite the plastic bag surrounding it.

Some fifteen or so years ago, a fair number of Americans, intelligent people who know how to reason and think critically, became enamored with and perhaps too easily accepted the idea that the future of all media lies in digital content and presentation. Everything was going to be online. The rush to do everything online was so great that many large businesses fell in its wake. Booksellers with hundreds of stores nationwide went out of business. Magazines with decades of experience either went online only or closed completely. The little film-developing kiosks that were once ubiquitous suddenly all disappeared. No more paper. Everything online.

What we’re beginning to realize, though, is that we still need paper.

Everyone’s Online Now, Aren’t They?

Those who make their living bringing companies and individuals online have long been evangelists for the digital movement and they have been very effective. Like the big tent Christian revivalists of the 20th century, they’ve made the rounds from company to company, boardroom to boardroom, warning that to remain with paper is certain death and that digital would be their economic salvation. Everyone drank the Kool-Aid. As a result, we are now seeing a shift at the top of corporations, especially in publishing fields. Consider some of the developments this week alone:

  • The New York Times named A. G. Sulzberger Deputy Publisher.  No one was surprised. The paper has always been a family business and it is expected that the younger Sulzberger will eventually take over for his father and current publisher, Arthur Sulzberger, Jr. What made him the front-runner, though (two of his cousins were also considered for the job) was likely the fact that he chaired the team that, starting with their report in 2014, resulted in a complete digital transformation of the Grey Lady. The Times‘ seemingly successful shift to a digital-centric philosophy is seen as an example for other traditional media companies.
  • Condé Nast completely restructured its management team, placing everyone, including all publications, under the cooperative leadership of five executives.  Jim Norton is now chief business officer, in charge of all revenue operations including sales, brand development, and consumer marketing. Edward Cudahy was promoted to chief technology officer, responsible for software engineering teams and tech operations. Anna Wintour was already artistic director over all Condé Nast publications, her success likely the motivation behind this recent set of consolidations.  Christiane Mack is now head of content, strategy, and operations over all brands. Raul Martinez has been promoted to head of the creative group, leading both editorial creative and business-side creative as well as the company’s native advertising division 23 Stories. Critical to this re-alignment is an over-arching push to create better digital products across all brands. Pink slips for those who fall between the cracks could start going out as early as tomorrow.
  • Meanwhile, Time, Inc. announced yesterday that the UK edition of InStyle is closing its print edition and will be digital only by the first of the year. Again, more pink slips. The company is hoping that the move results in a 200 percent increase across all digital platforms by the end of 2017. They’re hoping that more video and 24-hour content management will be sufficient to accomplish their stated goals.
  • At the same time, the digital conversion of Style.com from a content site to an e-commerce site hasn’t been as smooth as the folks at Condé Nast would have liked. While the UK version launched earlier this year, the US version has lagged behind and still isn’t online. Luxury brands have yet to hop on board. The UK site’s mere 677,000 monthly hits is but a drop in the bucket compared to competitors such Yoox.com which boasts 9.8 million visits a month.

At a casual glance, it would appear that everyone’s sold on digital and there’s no significant market for paper.

But Wait, Not Everyone Wants Digital Content

With everyone rushing to jump online, some assumptions were made that, possibly, were not true. Primarily, print was declared prematurely dead. Paper, we were told, was out. Everything has to be online. That assumption, we’re finding out now, was not only premature, but very, very wrong.

The major piece of evidence in this argument is the paper, Reality Check: Multiplatform newspaper readership in the United States, 2007–2015 by Hsiang Iris Chyi & Ori Tenenboim, both from the University of Texas, Austin, School of Journalism. They make an indictment at the very beginning that is rather damning of this massive rush to kill paper and put everything on the web.

Results indicated that the (supposedly dying) print product still reaches far more readers than the (supposedly promising) digital product in these newspapers’ home markets, and this holds true across all age groups. In addition, these major newspapers’ online readership has shown little or no growth since 2007, and more than a half of them have seen a decline since 2011. The online edition contributes a relatively small number of online-only users to the combined readership in these newspapers’ home markets.

The same seems to hold true for those who declared that print books were deceased as well. Nielsen BookScan unit sales of print books rose 2.4 percent in 2014. Publisher’s Weekly reported earlier this year that bookstore sales for 2015 were up 2.5%, the first time that sector had seen an increase since 2007. Ebook sales actually declined, as did sales of book readers such as Amazon’s Kindle series.

Even in photography, where the push to put everything  online has been nothing short of maddening, we’re seeing an increase in the number of articles such as this one (paid content by Canon) that tout the revenue advantages of selling prints, not digital images. Some even claim to be making half a billion dollars off print sales, though careful research finds that those claims are likely exagerated—by a lot. Still, the point is that the financial benefits of being exclusively online, or even predominantly digital, are quite possible overstated. Paper is far from dead.

How Is That Even Possible?

For starters, let’s consider the fact that, believe it or not, everyone in the United States does not have access to the Internet. Some 20% of American households are not “plugged in” in any way.  Think globally, and that number jumps to a whopping 56%, over 4 billion people, without Internet. That means there are millions of Americans and billions of people around the world who are wholly dependent on print publications for their information.

Even beyond those numbers is the fact that a lot of people, especially those over 50 who were not raised with computer monitors in front of their faces all the time, don’t like reading material online. While Baby Boomers are no longer the largest generation on the planet, they are still extremely significant and, more than anything, set in their ways. We grew up reading printed newspapers and magazines and we like it that way. For many people my age and older, trying to read an article online actually hurts our eyes, especially when we’re looking at black letters on a white background. Paper doesn’t hurt our eyes the way those white pixels do.

Rural residents tend to prefer printed publications for local news, especially. Smaller cities and towns (anything under 500,000 population) are less served by online sources. Those communities are heavily reliant on the print edition of their local newspapers, even though, in most cases, an online edition is available. Local news is perceived as being easier to find in a print paper and keeps subscriber numbers at least steady. Eugene, Oregon’s Register-Guard is a good example of a local newspaper that is more valued for its print edition than its online presence.

There is also some evidence that those who would be considered under-educated, immigrants for whom English is a second language, those whose Internet access is limited to public-use facilities such as libraries all prefer print publications as their primary source of information.

Paper is so very far from dead.

Striking The Right Balance

For many publications, regardless of size, and for photographers and other visual artists as well, the argument between online and print often comes down to a matter of finances. Newspapers, especially, have seen a steady decline in print advertising. Ad agencies, and in some cases the publications themselves, have convinced advertisers that their ads get more views and a wider spread online than they do in print. That statement is not necessarily untrue.

However, the online concept is challenged when one considers the low conversion rate for online ads. We are all so horribly inundated with ads online that we ignore the vast number of them, even when they are for items for which we might have already expressed a need or want. Have you noticed that grocery stores still send their bulk mail ads on newsprint to your mailbox every week? There’s a good reason. People are more likely to shop at the store after seeing the ads in print versus viewing them online. Online advertisers have to generate hundreds of thousands of more views to generate an equal conversion rate to print ads. For many advertisers, especially small-market advertisers, print makes a lot more sense.

No one, from the New York Times to Joe Schmoe photography, is wise going with a single media solution. There’s no question that digital media is a powerhouse that everyone needs to embrace in some form or fashion. A well-designed website is still a must for every business and even more for anyone involved in any form of publishing. However, whether we’re talking about newspapers or photographs, there is still a tremendous need and market for print products. Where we need to focus more of our effort is in finding that balance that works both from a financial and customer service perspective.

Paper is far from dead. Chances are, if you glance around and see the clutter on your desk, most of that clutter is paper. We need paper a lot more than we think. Digital assistants such as Siri and Cortana are a long way from replacing Post-It notes. Even when I sign up for digital payment with my health insurance, they still send me three sheets of paper to confirm that the payment was received.

Perhaps we need to take a giant step back and reconsider our strategies. Paper is not an enemy. Ignoring it ignores a large number of customers, which means we’re leaving money on the table. I don’t know anyone who can afford that kind of strategy.

Continue Reading

Art  /  Current Issues
Missing The World Summit On Arts & Culture
October 19, 2016
charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit on arts & culture

Our culture is more shaped by the arts and humanities than it often is by politics. —Jim Leach

 

charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit for arts & culture

Global discussions of arts and culture are taking place and the US is largely sitting on the sidelines

There is a conference taking place in Malta right now involving arts and culture organizations from all over the world. The World Summit On Arts And Culture includes participants from every populated continent, people dedicated wholly to preserving the future of the arts and the cultures they represent. Interestingly enough, this is one international program where the United States is sitting mostly on the sidelines. Yes, National Endowment for the Arts chairperson Jane Chu did speak this morning, but the only other American organization on the very full speaking schedule is Robert Lynch, CEO of Americans for the Arts late tomorrow. The conversation is very diverse with points of view from places whose cultures and arts have long been overlooked by the Western arts community.

From the summit’s website:

The focus of the 2016 World Summit on Arts and Culture, will be on Cultural Leadership in the 21st Century. The arts and culture can be considered to be at a crossroads – faced with many challenges and opportunities at the global, national and local level such as: the impact of new technologies on the production and distribution of cultural goods and services; threats to global security; new patterns of migration; changing contexts at the national level including austerity measures and continuous requests for reform; aspirations from artists and culture operators to extend their impact and outreach to other sectors, while also struggling to guarantee freedom of expression and ensure cultural diversity. 

charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit on arts & culture

Relying On The Voice Of Others

I really can’t comment too terribly much beyond this point because I’M NOT THERE! Sigh. No one ever wants to send me to the fun stuff. I could volunteer to be shot at and be accepted right away, but offer to be involved in conversations about how photography factors in arts and especially non-Western cultures and nooooo, I’m still sitting here at home. Fortunately, though, those who are participating have been very active on social media, especially Twitter. There is also a discussion paper that covers many of the issues addressed today and tomorrow. The paper’s quite academic so you’ll most likely need to give it multiple reads. However, there are some gems from that document that are well worth quoting here.

… the cultural leader is an agent of change who contributes to cultural development in their country, Discussion Paper 21 Ayeta Anne Wangusa region or continent. The cultural leader does this through visioning and building relations with partners to address systemic challenges resulting from our colonial history and the current globalisation era. It is also about conserving our intangible heritage for posterity, as well analysing the underlying belief systems of Africa and their interaction with the Global North and Global South, to promote social cohesion and sustainable development. —Ayeta Anne Wangusa,  Executive Director of Culture and Development East Africa (CDEA)

What is urgently needed today is leadership which promotes dialogue for new governance, collaboration and coproduction endeavors with civil society and cultural movements. —Lucina Jimenez, Director General of ConArte Internacional

charles i. letbetter - missing the global summit on arts and culture

Voices Not Expected

One of the areas we tend to dismiss when discussing arts and culture is the Middle East. We do so out of great ignorance. The regions where war is most commonplace are also homes to great troves of artistic and  cultural importance that have influenced artists, writers, playwrights, and politicians for centuries. Many of these artifacts have been recently destroyed and preserving them seems almost impossible. I found these statements from the discussion paper most interesting.

I n Arab cultural scenes with no or overpowering art infrastructures, small and short circuit networks formulate; friendships sustain some of the bonding. Within these networks, collaborations force themselves on individuals; time is limited, shifting dramatically, and so are the identified resources, therefore sharing or teaming up allows being in and outside of a production process. There is no continuity for those who fall out of these processes. Personal, or collaborative, collections of notes, writings, ephemera, accesses, experiences and interests in miniscule histories are the sites of intervention. There is still a huge discrepancy in sustaining rights; to access, to copy, to say, to stay, to object, to reject, to exit. 

…

A cultural leader is not a state, but its policy; is not an institution but its dynamic; is not a community, but its bond; is not a social (media) space, not a financial model, nor a future built by forecasts, but their logic of probabilities, that could continue to enhance our working models. —Ala Younis is an artist, trained as an architect in Amman.

charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit on arts & culture

Wait, There’s More

The discussion paper is quite full of perspective that should yank us from thinking exclusively about local perspectives and open our conversations more to immigrants bringing their culture and artistic perspective to us. Consider these examples:

In Asian cultures there is a long tradition of artistic creativity as communal, rather than the individual specialist called artist, and in many Asian societies there is no word for artist.

…

Lopsided emphasis on left brain thinking stunts creative imagination. It is unfortunate that many Asian countries inherited educational systems from the industrial revolution of eighteenth century.

…

Cultural leadership, especially in education and official policy, should be able to promote not only the intelligence quotient, but intuitive, creative intelligence and all other intelligences that enrich the creative imagination. —Felipe M. De Leon, Jr., Chairman and Commissioner for the Arts of the National Commission for Culture and the Arts, in the Philippines

Cultural leadership is not only the implementation of concepts and theories from the business world into the cultural sector, but – like the concepts of cultural management and cultural entrepreneurship – it has also to do with the creation of social value by artists and organisations and how to balance managerial effectiveness with artistic value for society.

…

Regardless of how and where these challenges emerge, indisputably leaders will be required for the cultural sector. The cultural sector now has little choice but to respond: the present challenges of new media, changing audiences, dwindling public funds, and a decline of historical awareness are merely the next steps in this continuing pathway. —Annick Schramme,  President of ENCATC, the European Network on Cultural Management and Cultural Policy

charles i. letbetter - missing the world summit on arts and culture

What I’m Missing

While justing being in Malta this time of year would be nice, what I’m missing are the voices of incredibly talented and intelligent people as they discuss ways to make sure the arts and culture continue to develop throughout the century in the face of numerous obstacles. Participants posting from Twitter give us just a taste of those conversations.

I could, of course, go on and on and on.  You wouldn’t read them if I did, though. If you’re interested in more, search #artsummitmalta for current tweets coming from the summit.

We have thousands of arts organizations scattered across the US, most of which do absolutely incredible work. We need these larger conversations, though. Art and cutlture is not merely a local experience, but a global one. The questions and challenges are universal. We need to grab hold of these conversations and push them forward.

And maybe next year I can hid aboard a tramp steamer or something and actually participate.

Continue Reading

Photography  /  PotD  /  science
Being Alive, Right Now, Is Challenging
October 19, 2016
charles i. letbetter - being alive, right now, is challenging

When you arise in the morning, think of what a precious privilege it is to be alive – to breathe, to think, to enjoy, to love. —Marcus Aurelius

 

charles i. letbetter - being alive, right now, is the best

We already have more advantages, more options, than any other generation to inhabit this planet. Maybe we should take advantage of that

I hesitate to write anything sounding too terribly positive. While I want to be encouraging and supportive, every time I do it seems to backfire on me and I have the worst day possible. There are times one might get the impression that the universe is saying, “How DARE you be positive and hopeful? You must be punished for your remarks.”  I know I’m not alone. Many days we wake up and absolutely nothing we do goes as planned. Flat tires. Disappointing people. Failed expectations. A stain on your new shirt—before noon. I’m not really expecting today to be any different.

I finally got around to reading President Obama’s article in Wired this morning, though. He presents a rather challenging premise:

We are far better equipped to take on the challenges we face than ever before. I know that might sound at odds with what we see and hear these days in the cacophony of cable news and social media. But the next time you’re bombarded with over-the-top claims about how our country is doomed or the world is coming apart at the seams, brush off the cynics and fearmongers. Because the truth is, if you had to choose any time in the course of human history to be alive, you’d choose this one. Right here in America, right now.

Do I want to believe the President? Sure. Intellectually, the points he makes are valid. What we actually experience is often different, though.

A Matter Of Perspective

When discussing how things have improved over the years, the President makes some compelling points:

  • Life expectancy is up.
  • The share of Americans with a college education is up too.
  • Tens of mil­lions of Americans recently gained the security of health insurance.
  • Blacks and Latinos have risen up the ranks to lead our businesses and communities.
  • Women are a larger part of our workforce and are earning more money.
  • Once-quiet factories are alive again
  • More countries know democracy.
  • More kids are going to school.
  • A smaller share of humans know chronic hunger or live in extreme poverty.
  • In nearly two dozen countries—including our own—­people now have the freedom to marry whomever they love.

I can’t and wouldn’t want to argue any of those points. Some tremendous strides have taken place over the past several years and, combined, they have made life on this planet better than many of our parents and grandparents could have ever dreamed. Tremendous advantages and opportunities make this a great time to be alive.

At the same time, however, being alive right now, in 2016, holds some pretty significant challenges.

  • Unjust and disproportionate incarceration of people of color
  • Police violence against unarmed citizens has reached a breaking point
  • Corporate takeover of the political system has turned us into an oligarchy
  • The gap between the richest one percent and everyone else is wider than ever
  • Family revenue has either stayed flat or declined while inflation has soared
  • A record number of adults have been unemployed for over six months with increasingly fewer prospects.
  • Native peoples are still the most disenfranchised group and their property rights are not respected.

We’ve made progress, but we’re a long way from being where we should, where we want, and where we need to be.

Looking To The Future

Taking an honest assessment of where we are right now, what it means to be alive in 2016, is both sobering and hopeful. We’ve gotten some things right, but there is still much to do. President Obama refers frequently to the late Gene Roddenberry’s Star Trek science fiction franchise as an example of an ideal society:

What I loved about it was its optimism, the fundamental belief at its core that the people on this planet, for all our varied backgrounds and outward differ­ences, could come together to build a better tomorrow.

While such optimism is laudable, it is difficult to anticipate we are anywhere near that ideal when one of the top headlines this morning reads: Russia may be getting ready ‘to level Aleppo to the ground’  While those of us in the United States might be in a cooperative mood, the same can hardly be said of the rest of the world. Uhm, Brexit, anyone? The current mood seems to be that everyone wants to do their own thing. Cooperation will just have to wait.

Looking to the future, though, we have to have some degree of optimism, don’t we? If we can’t find any points of hope, any signs of encouragement, any indication that things might improve, then what is it going to mean to be alive in 2020 and beyond?

I’m sitting here this morning wondering what the future of photography is going to look like. Will any of us manage to stay in business through another ten years of rapid change? We not only face technological advancements that are impossible to predict, but we are also experiencing a complete upheaval in how people view photography altogether. Is it possible for our profession to survive?

What Science May Yield

The President is sold on the concepts of Science in solving the greatest challenges facing the world. His take is that one of the reasons now is a great time to be alive is because science is poised to develop new solutions to problems that have plagued us for centuries. He writes in the article:

Just as in the past, to clear these hurdles we’re going to need everyone—policy makers and commu­nity leaders, teachers and workers and grassroots activists, presidents and soon-to-be-former presidents. And to accelerate that change, we need science. We need researchers and academics and engineers; programmers, surgeons, and botanists. And most important, we need not only the folks at MIT or Stanford or the NIH but also the mom in West Virginia tinkering with a 3-D printer, the girl on the South Side of Chicago learning to code, the dreamer in San Antonio seeking investors for his new app, the dad in North Dakota learning new skills so he can help lead the green revolution.

So, the answer to our challenges is that we need to re-conceptualize? I love the President’s optimism, but when I’m sitting here worried about keeping the lights on and having enough food for my family, it’s rather difficult for me to re-conceptualize anything much beyond how to find yet another way to make ground beef interesting. I’m not even sure what it would mean to reconceptualize photography. I try wrapping my head around that question and end up having to take a couple of pills and lie down for a moment.

Alive And Functioning

I am thankful for all the advantages that come with being alive right now. I’m thankful that we have this thing called the Internet that allows me to share with you both my words and my pictures. I’m thankful that life has improved for whole groups of people and that there are almost endless opportunities for my children.

Still, there is more to live than just being alive. For life to be fulfilling we must also be functioning toward some end.

My AARP card came in the mail yesterday. I am of an age where many of my peers are enjoying grandchildren and looking forward to the joys of retirement. Not all of us are there, though. Many of us look at the potential demise of our careers and wonder how we are going to continue to function in this science-oriented future.  We can try to keep up, but doing so is a struggle. We don’t especially have a lot of money to spend on new equipment, or classes to teach us what Millennials inherently know.

Did you catch that line in the President’s statement about “soon-to-be-former presidents?” President Obama is breaking with tradition and remaining in Washington, D.C. after the new president takes office. Rather than running away and retreating in quiet and solitude, as Presidents before him have done, Mr. Obama plans to stay active and stay involved in helping shape the future development of the world.

Maybe we can do the same. Stay active. Stay involved. Don’t let ourselves be pushed aside, relegated to some memory of how things used to be. We are alive now. Therefore, we need to be an integral part of what is happening now. 

Will we?

Continue Reading

Art  /  PotD
Color In Life As In Pictures
October 18, 2016
charles i. letbetter - color in life as in pictures

Oh, half of what’s out there is worthless. The only pictures I like are the ones I’ve taken. —William Eggleston

 

charles i. letbetter - color in life and pictures

What color brings to pictures is the same thing it brings to life: excitement, variance, and a different way of seeing things

I had difficulty choosing pictures to go with this article. I just finished reading the New York Times interview with William Eggleston that was published yesterday. Times writer Augusten Burroughs calls Eggleston, “The pioneer of color photography.” I’ve also heard of him referred to as the godfather of color photography. Whichever title one chooses to use, the man has done a lot to further color photography. So, choosing images that really match that topic involved a mental argument as to exactly what color photography represents.

Being brutally honest, I’ve not always been the world’s biggest Eggleston fan. I’ve seen the images from his 1976 exhibit at the New York Museum of Modern Art, which the article casually glosses over with little more than a side mention. I understand why critics at the time weren’t impressed. Eggleston’s work has, at times, been the sort that one looks at after a few years and thinks, “Oh, now I get it.” Just casually browsing through his images without taking the time to understand them can, depending on one’s level of photographic comprehension, leave one disappointed and unimpressed.

What Eggleston’s work did, though, was bring color photography legitimacy in a world that was stuck looking at things in black  and white. As color film and processing changed over the years, color pictures changed our perspective of life. We were forced to look at things differently, something that a lot of people don’t find comfortable.

The Color Of Emotion

Photographers who have never shot film, and there are millions who haven’t, don’t understand the challenge of having to choose whether to shoot in color or black and white. Digital cameras inherently take color pictures. Even if one has a camera with a black and white setting [which is never a good idea, in my opinion], the sensor still “sees” in color and then makes the conversion. When using film, though, one has to make a decision before the pictures are taken, often before one even stops onto the set. Sitting in art meetings over the years, whether to use color or black and white film was almost always one of the first arguments the team would face. Opinions both directions tend to be strong.

Critical to this discussion is understanding that color changes the emotion of pictures. If I were to set two pictures side-by-side, one color, one black-and-white, your opinion hinges not on different qualities of processing, but on how the different images make you feel. Consider the image at the top of this page. Here it is processed in black and white:

charles i. letbetter - color in life as in pictures

Emulated Fomapan film with LAB processing

The question is not whether one version is better than the other; both have their distinctive qualities. What matters is which version best communicates the emotion I was attempting to capture with the image. In this case, I prefer color if for no other reason than the striking contrast of red blood in the water.That aspect is so muted in the black and white version that one might miss it entirely if just casually glancing at the photo.

One can argue that either version of the picture is better than the other and be technically correct. Are we shooting merely for technicalities, though, or are we taking pictures that allow people to feel something? When we choose color, we make a choice in how we want to direct viewers’ emotions.

 Color In A Black And White World

Because photography started out monochrome, there have been, and always will be, those who are strongly adamant that black and white is the only legitimate format for professional photographs. The Times article makes that point when the author asks Eggleston what he thinks of Ansel Adams. Eggleston replied:

We didn’t know each other, but if we did, I’d tell him the same thing: “I hate your work.”

The sentiment runs both directions, though. The article recounts a conversation between Eggleston and renowned photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson in which the latter tells the former, “You know, William, color is bull shit.”

Not everyone wants to see the world in color. Not everyone wants to feel the emotions and challenges that color brings to pictures. Black and white gets straight to the point, emphasizes the facts, and allows some things to become lost in the shadows. We all know people who are the same way. The rules are the rules and either one follows them or they don’t. People who view the world in black and white tend to be very precise in their judgments, they appreciate the clarity of strong, well-defined lines and the clean contrast that black and white affords.

Color brings more freedom to the world, and to imagery. Color opens up possibilities that maybe the rules are bendable, or not necessary at all. Color lets us see what’s lurking in the shadows, enjoy the subtle gradients of light, and feel the warmth, or the coldness, of an image. You almost certainly know people who are colorful, who take chances without regard to the consequences, who explore beyond traditional boundaries, and are very open about how they feel. Their emotions are obvious and their communication often louder than we might appreciate.

Analysis Paralysis

If I have a favorite quote from the article, and Eggleston provided plenty of good ones to save for the archives, it would be this one regarding critical discussion of his work:

The only thing one can do is really look at the damn things. It’s just not making much sense to talk about them.

We are guilty, far too often, of analyzing both photographs and life to the point that they begin to lose any meaning. We too often need to justify our reasons for either liking or not liking a photograph, or a situation, or even a person. Some of us are color people. Some of us are black and white. And there are many who cross back and forth, constantly wrestling with the emotional and visual exchanges between the two.

I’ve no problem admitting that I am of the latter camp. I find pleasure in both forms of photography and both forms of people. While mixing the two doesn’t always work, I would hate to live in a world where either one fails to exist. What Eggleston’s work teaches us, if anything, is that we need both. One might be more appropriate for a given situation, but fundamentally neither is better than the other. They are, simply, different, and that difference is wonderful.

Life is the same way, is it not? The sooner we accept that both color and monochrome has value, perhaps then we can get on about the business of loving and caring for each other rather than this stupid arguing we’ve been doing. We’ve not been making much sense with our petty picking and fussing. Enjoy the pictures of life. We’ll all be better for it.

Continue Reading

PotD  /  science
Science Says: Eat Chocolate Cake For Breakfast
October 14, 2016
charles i. letbetter - science say: chocolate cake for breakfast is okay

Let’s face it, a nice creamy chocolate cake does a lot for a lot of people; it does for me. —Audrey Hepburn

 

charles i. letbetter - science says: eat chocolate cake for breakfast

Recent studies show that the time of day one eats chocolate matters. So, chocolate cake for breakfast it is!

Whey my boys were small, we had a tradition of saving some of their birthday cake and having it for breakfast the next morning. The same rule applied to their mom and I, so five times a year we were having cake for breakfast and, yes, most of the time it was chocolate. Our reasoning was that the ingredients in chocolate cake (especially if it was homemade) wasn’t all that different from a bowl of cereal. Plenty of protein, grains, dairy, and actually less sugar than is in many kids’ cereals made having chocolate cake for breakfast a lot of fun.

What I never expected back then was for there to be any science supporting what we were doing. Now, there is. Multiple studies, in fact, having been looking at the effectiveness not only of what we eat but when we eat it. As it turns out, much of our weight issues have to do not merely with the content and quantity of our food, but when we are consuming it. If we alter when we eat certain foods, such as chocolate, they can actually help us to lose weight rather than contribute to gaining.

Wait, are we saying that eating chocolate cake for breakfast might help someone lose weight? Well, that could be stretching things just a tiny bit, but ultimately, yes, one piece of chocolate cake in the morning could help curb one’s appetite for sweets the rest of the day, leading to possible weight loss.

The Science Behind It All

Chocolate cake for breakfast. This is one of those pseudo-science things that is easily debunked by real science, right? Next thing I know they’ll be telling us that staring at the sun cures cancer. We can’t really believe this, can we?

Yes, you can believe. The 32-week study was done at Tel Aviv University. They took 193 non-diabetic clinically obese people and divided them into two groups. The first group was given a 300 calorie breakfast and that was it. Good luck, folks. The second group, however, was given a 600-calorie breakfast that included chocolate pudding. Okay, not quite the same as chocolate cake, but damn close. I’m guessing the pudding was a little easier to prepare.

The results? The group that had pudding for breakfast lost, on average, thirty-seven pounds more than those in the group that only had 300 calories. Amazing, isn’t it? Now, why do you suppose that happened?

Basic biology here, boys and girls. Our metabolism runs higher earlier in the day, when we first get up. Therefore, our bodies are better able to process all those complex proteins and carbohydrates. Bonus points: by getting our sugar fix in earlier, we’re less likely to crave additional snacks and sweets during the day. This means going ahead and having a couple of donuts with that cup of coffee in the morning isn’t doing you as much damage as you might have thought.

All Things In Moderation

This is not giving you permission to eat an entire chocolate cake in one setting. The type of chocolate being used makes a difference as well. Dark chocolate, with more than 80% cacao, not only helps squelch the cravings, but is shown to improve cognitive function and enhance reasoning, memory, and focus. Milk chocolate? Not so much. A lot more fat and sugars there. One has to be careful and apply a bit of those smarts that you picked up at school between naps.

Still, what these studies demonstrate is that we don’t necessarily have to starve ourselves in order to achieve and maintain a healthy weight. We don’t need to do all those crazy diets, take a bunch of questionable pills, or any of the other nonsense we submit ourselves to in the name of dieting. This goes right back to exactly the same thing you learned in second-grade health class: balance. What we’re learning now, though, is that in addition to that food pyramid, there’s also a time scale. Chocolate is best in the morning. Bananas, it turns out, are perfect for lunch, when they can really help you get through the rest of your day. Eat one after dinner, though, and it’s more likely to upset your stomach and cause digestive problems.

This whole time-of-day science is really just getting started. I’ve searched for similar studies and, so far, have only found the small-sample early studies used to justify larger studies. Eventually, though, we could end up with a much clearer picture of when we should be eating different foods.

For now, we’re very happy that we have scientific evidence that chocolate cake for breakfast is a good thing. With this news, and the fact that it’s really, really cold here in Indiana this morning, I might just have to bake a fresh cake tonight for breakfast tomorrow. Something tells me the family won’t object.

Continue Reading

Music
Sunday Morning Sing-A-Long
October 9, 2016

Time is important to me because I want to sing long enough to leave a message. I’m used to singing in churches where nobody would dare stop me until the Lord arrives! —Mahalia Jackson

 

charles i. letbetter - sunday morning sing-a-long

Music is something to be shared and the meaning runs deeper when we sing together

Growing up with my butt firmly planted in church on Sunday mornings, it just seems natural that there should be music. Hymns chosen to complement the topic of the morning’s sermon served as emotional preparation for what was to come. When the congregation would sing together, the sound could be glorious — or not, depending on the church.

Whether we’re in church or out, when we sing with other people we are somehow bonded emotionally to them. We may not know their names. We almost certainly don’t know their circumstances. Yet, as we bring our voices together, singing words we know so well, we are filled with a warm sense of belonging. For a moment, we are part of a choir and it doesn’t matter whether we get all the words right or if we miss a note here and there. What matters is that we sing.

After my missive on happiness this morning, it occurs to me that what was missing from my sermon was the music.  Granted, I’m not inclined to lead everyone in a number of hymns. I think a more secular invocation is appropriate for our purposes. When we think about happiness, there are a number of songs that pop to mind.  So, what we’re going to do is give you a group of videos, lyrics included or which you likely know, and let’s all sing together, shall we? I know it’s not church, but I think it will be enjoyable.

https://youtu.be/PGJX9tutZEA

There, is everybody happy now?

Continue Reading

pop culture  /  PotD
Our Obsessive Pursuit Of Happiness Makes Us Sad
October 9, 2016
charles i. letbetter - our happiness obsession makes us sad

Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony. —Mahatma Gandhi

 

charles i. letbetter - our obsessive pursuit of happiness makes us sad

Our relentless pursuit of happiness is very likely the one thing that is making us unhappy

Our little ones regularly tell me that I’m mean. Typically, that accusation comes when I tell them to go to bed, or don’t let them play with knives, or deny them the fourth cookie. In their view, I am impeding their path to happiness. For all their short little lives, other people have been focused on making them happy: grandparents, teachers, babysitters, etc. They are told in a thousand different ways that their happiness is what matters. Then, Kat and I come along and ruin by insisting that they take a bath, or not play in the litter box, or tell them to stop climbing the walls in the hallway (not kidding). We are so very mean.

I’m rather sure that when Thomas Jefferson included that line about the “pursuit of happiness,” he didn’t realize the level of horror he was unleashing on us a little more than two centuries later. We have come to take his words as a mandate: we must pursuit happiness. We think that we are not being fulfilled as individuals if we are not pursuing happiness. Oh, and by the way, it is our own individual happiness that matters. If your pursuit of happiness interferes with my pursuit of happiness then what you are doing is wrong. This is where our current social thought process has taken us.

Could it be that we have become so incredibly focused on being happy that we’ve lost sight of all the other things in life that matter? Does happiness need to be our highest priority or might there be more to life?

America, The Happy

Such obsessiveness over whether we are happy is apparently a uniquely American thing that doesn’t occur in other societies. Ruth Whippman, an English writer, journalist, and documentarian currently living in California, wrote a rather interesting book, AMERICA THE ANXIOUS: How Our Pursuit of Happiness is Creating a Nation of Nervous Wrecks. You can get a taste of her book in this article on Vox. Part of the motivation for writing her book was the experience of coming from a society where happiness isn’t given a second thought and being tossed into the heart of a culture that is wholly obsessed with how happy they are. What she notices is that, as hard as we try, we’re really not any happier. In the Vox article she says:

To an outsider, it can sometimes feel as though the entire population has a nationwide standardized happiness exam to take and everyone is frantically cramming the night before to get a good grade. Like a stony-faced “that’s hilarious” after a joke in place of laughter — another mildly unnerving staple of conversation in this country — it appears that somewhere along the line, the joy has been sucked out of American happiness.

Americans are obsessed with being happy, I am convinced, because we somehow see it as part of our national birthright. We look at our lives and if we don’t think we’re happy then, somehow, our country is letting us down. Certainly, the Republican candidate for President whose slogan is “Make America Great Again,” enjoys such ridiculous appeal despite all that is inappropriate about him because what he’s actually saying is, “Make American Happy Again.” People respond to that desire to be happy, even if it denies happiness to others.

Our Entitlement Philosophy

Because we, as Americans feel entitled to being happy, we give that feeling a priority and refuse to accept any other emotion for very long. Sadness is not acceptable. Depression requires medication, as does anxiety. If we are angry then we “have issues.” One who is overly enthusiastic is “out of touch,” but one who is embarrassed or feeling guilty needs to “get in touch with their inner self.” We look at happiness as our diety-delivered right and refuse to accept anything else.

One of the most ridiculous yet widely followed and often quoted statements in history comes from Ayn Rand:

Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values.

Can you see how that self-centered piece of horseshit is guiding the entitlement philosophy of an entire political party? Rand, and those who blindly follow her, put one’s personal happiness as a moral imperative above things such as being kind, helping others, compassion, caring, and empathy. When we become so singularly focused 0n achieving a state of happiness, when our purpose in life is to please ourselves first, we end up with policies that are anti-women because that infringes on the happiness of the men making the laws. If our integrity hinges on an imaginary emotional state of bliss, then we develop hate toward others whose conditions of poverty make us look bad.  When we depend on the unachievable as proof of our values, we then question and criticize the values of others.

Creating A Happy Culture

I’m sitting here looking at Little Man’s report card for the first term. He’s in second grade. Back in the cultural stone age of when I went to school, second grade was the last year we received the grossly over-generalized grades of S for satisfactory and U for unsatisfactory. Either we understood the material or we didn’t. No gray area. By contrast, the grading scale for Little Man’s class is as follows:

  • 4 = Exceeding Standards
  • 3 = Meeting Standards
  • 2 = Working Towards Standards
  • 1 = Not Meeting Standards

There are a tremendous number of 4s on this report, which pleases Kat. However, as Little Man was going over the report card with me this past week, he wasn’t happy. “Threes aren’t good enough,” he told me. “Threes mean I’m just the same as everyone else. 4s mean I’m better than most the people in my class.”

“So, three isn’t good enough?” I asked.

“I wish there was a 5 to show that I’m the best,” he answered. “That would really make me happy.”

Good god, we’re raising an over-achiever. Yet, this is how Little Man defines whether or not he is happy. S for satisfactory would never be enough for him. Exceeding standards isn’t enough for him. This social culture has convinced him that he needs to be on top, leaving everyone else behind, in order to be happy. The kid is likely in for a world of disappointment. Yet, if he demonstrated any lesser amount of determination then he would be labeled as an underachiever and probably considered uncooperative.

The Curse of Mindful Empowerment

In the world of creating happiness, there are two buzz words that come up a lot. One is empowerment, the other is mindfulness. On their own, both words can have some really positive meaning. Yet, as we’ve taken them to become significant parts of our push to find what makes us happy, we might have taken both words a little too far. I like what Ms. Whippman says about empowerment:

As a rule, “empowerment” appears to be the consolation prize for those of us who will never have any actual power, and you can safely assume that no one in any position of genuine authority will be joining in. Creating a Tumblr of photos of your post–C-section wobbling and scarred naked stomach? Empowering! Creating a Tumblr of photos of your post-prostate surgery rectum? Not so much, senator.

Mindfulness requires being completely focused on whatever one is doing right at this moment. For example, if I was fully mindful, I would be totally consumed with writing the article and probably miss the fact that I have water boiling on the stove. Yet, the Mindfulness movement is so large that it has even made the cover of TIME (January, 2014). Should one make a trip to mindfulness.org, the home base of all things mindful, one sees articles such as The 7 Qualities of Mindfulness Trained in the Body Scan and Take a Mindful Hike. Here, happiness comes through hyper-attentiveness on a specific object or thought, not letting the mind wander, and thereby avoiding all things negative. That sentence is an over-simplification, of course, but again it is pushing one to focus on themselves to the exclusion of other things and other people around them.

I’m not anti-self-help, mind you. Rather, I think that when we improve ourselves it should be so that we are better able to help others and our community. Society only works when we are involved outside ourselves.

Going About This The Wrong Way

Happiness is elusive. To the extent that we spend all our time, all our motivation, in the pursuit of a condition we often cannot even define, we end up making our lives miserable. Gallup does an annual Positive Emotions Survey that essentially matters how happy people are. They poll adults in 140 countries and ask the following questions:

• Did you feel well-rested yesterday?
• Were you treated with respect all day yesterday?
• Did you smile or laugh a lot yesterday?
• Did you learn or do something interesting yesterday?

With all the effort Americans put into being happy, one might be tempted to think that we’re at the top of the list. We’re not. The US isn’t even in the top ten. Want to know who is the happiest? People in these countries, scale based on 100 being the happiest:

Paraguay 84
Guatemala 83
Honduras 83
Uzbekistan 83
Ecuador 83
El Salvador 82
Indonesia 82
Costa Rica 81
Uruguay 81
Colombia 81
Switzerland 81

One doesn’t need to look long to realize that none of the countries listed are likely to be engaged in things like empowerment and mindfulness. They’re not doing yoga and attending seminars on How To Be A Better You. Yet, they are consistent, year after year, happier than we are. We’re still in the top 25, mind you, but that people in lesser industrialized countries with fewer opportunities, higher unemployment, and lower wages would still be happier than we are should give us a hint that we’re probably going about this the wrong way.

Perhaps Happy Isn’t What We Need

One of the lessons I learned from going to church every waking moment of my youth is that no one promises us happiness. In fact, we’re pretty much assured that happiness isn’t going to happen all that often. If Poppa were sitting here with me this morning, and perhaps he is, he would likely use this scripture to make his point:

Philippians 4:11-13New International Version (NIV)

11 I am not saying this because I am in need, for I have learned to be content whatever the circumstances. 12 I know what it is to be in need, and I know what it is to have plenty. I have learned the secret of being content in any and every situation, whether well fed or hungry, whether living in plenty or in want. 13 I can do all this through him who gives me strength. [Holy Bible, New International Version®, NIV® Copyright ©1973, 1978, 1984, 2011 by Biblica, Inc.® Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide.]

Look back up at the questions asked for the Positive Emotions Index. Did you sleep well? The question isn’t whether you slept as long as you want. Neither does it involve the type of bedding on which one sleeps. Simply sleeping well is sufficient and being content with that is more likely to leave us feeling satisfied. Were you treated with respect all day yesterday? That’s going to change from day to day and perhaps even moment to moment.  Yet, to the degree we can find contentedness, not happiness, in our situation, regardless of how others treat us, we are more likely to feel better about ourselves.

Now, look what happens when we focus questions outward. Did you help someone else smile or laugh today?  Chances are, if you helped someone smile, you were probably smiling also. It is easier to feel good when we are helping others feel good. Did you teach someone something new and interesting today? Does not improving someone else’s life not improve your own at the same time? When we are content, we might just increase our happiness because contentedness allows us to focus outward rather than inward.

We Are Not Cocoons

One would think that the pursuit of happiness is a virtue, a positive character trait to be admired. Unfortunately, Americans, in their obsession to find happiness at any cost, have made that pursuit negative. Too often, our happiness comes at the expense of others. We focus so fully on what we think might make us feel better that we lose sight of what we could do to make the world feel better.

If we were some type of larvae that lives in a cocoon with no interaction with or obligation to the outside world, then sure, focusing on our own happiness might be totally appropriate. We do not live in cocoons, though. We are part of a vibrant, loud, emotional, and needy society. When we focus on our own happiness to the exclusion of those around us, we ultimately do harm to the whole.

Instead, perhaps we should work more to find contentedness and focus our intentions and actions on helping others. Something tells me that when we stop pursuing happiness so hard it might just show up on its own.

Continue Reading

Art  /  Behind The Scenes  /  Photography  /  PotD
10 Photos Revived From The Archives (And Why)
October 8, 2016

People, even more than things, have to be restored, renewed, revived, reclaimed, and redeemed; never throw out anyone. —Audrey Hepburn

 

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Every once in a while we need to go back through the archives and revive some photos that were once ignored

This is one of those days where I just couldn’t handle the current topics in my newsfeed. The top five news stories this morning all dealt with the same issue which dominated yesterday’s news. I don’t want to add to that noise. Plus, I’m still tired, recovering from a month of fashion shows and trying to get things in gear for next year. This is typically a quiet time where we don’t shoot as much, but we’re extremely busy with business stuff.

Given all that, today seemed like a good day to show you some pictures we’ve revived from the archive. Rather than put them in a slide show, though, which would be very easy, I want to take you through each of them and explain why they were omitted from their original set’s production. Perhaps this method will be a bit more interesting.

Let’s start with the photo above. This is a picture of downtown Dallas, TX taken from the passenger seat of my brother’s vehicle. I love that Dallas is not afraid of modern architecture. There is a lot to that city that will surprise you, despite the  large number of morons who live there (No, baby brother doesn’t  actually live there). Why was this image not part of the original set? Two reasons. First, the uniqueness of the architecture leaves me uncertain as to where the straight lines are supposed to be. Perspective is a wonderful thing and this image defies it. Second, look in the  bottom right corner and you’ll see my reflection in the snow-covered hi … uhm, I mean, car window.  Rather creepy.

Revived Workout

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Picture: I love the ambiguity of this frame. We see their arms extended upward but have no reason why they are engaged in such a pose. I had only recently met both girls and they were such good sports to be out shooting on a rather cool Sunday morning. What are they actually doing? Pullups.  There’s a bar just above them, hence the reason for their arms being in the position they are.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: The very reason I like this image is why we left it out of the original set: it’s too ambiguous. We were doing an article on fitness, had tons of photos, and this one just muddied the water too much.

A Bit Of Tack

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Picture: Symmetry. This is the tack room at the stables where my niece rides. I was taken first by the color of all the different tack, but as I looked I noticed the symmetry with which they were hung on the wall. I couldn’t resist the photo.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: We were on a family vacation. Do you see any family in this picture? No. This happens every vacation. I take a lot of pictures and then never get around to processing the ones that don’t include family members.

Body Paint

charles i. letbetter- 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: I really love the painting Kelly Oswalt did for this set. Having to cover an entire body in white is a lot more difficult than it sounds. The design she chose was absolutely wonderful and has always been one of my favorites.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: At the time we shot this I was cropping everything to a square orientation and this photo just doesn’t fit. I was also dropping in a substitute background and that didn’t work with this photo, either.

Am I Blue?

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: Color. It’s not often we have a photo with such high contrasting color, especially with any level of nudity in the photo. Here is one of those rare instances where it all comes together and looks best with very little treatment to it at all.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: Originally, this photo was part of a composite image, hence the blue background. The image was heavily blurred and at a reduced opacity so that the bright contrast of the colors was not evident.

Long Sleeves

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: This sleeve is one of the best examples of detailed color ink work I’ve seen. There are a lot of times I don’t like full sleeves like this because, depending on how the arm is bent or what clothes might be worn, the flow of the image is interrupted. This piece works nicely, though, even under blouses that cover most of her arm. Very beautiful work.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: When we first processed this series of photos I really wanted to make sure every image focused on the ink more than a model. I was concerned that the nipple might be distracting because, as the past few hours have demonstrated, the world is full of pigs.

Down On The  Farm

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: Because this is one of those sets where we should have done better. We had been shooting all day outdoors and hadn’t taken enough lights to adequately handle shooting after dark. Not many of these photos are worth saving, but this one is.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: The whole set was largely buried. I only processed three images when we first shot them. As an aside, since these photos were taken, the model returned to college and is now an RN. A lot of people called her a lot of not-so-nice names and refused to work with her. To those people, we say, “Fuck you.”

Eternal Terminal

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: Lines. Look at them. The perspective of the hallway, uniquely shaped by unseen staircases, trailing off into darkness, lends itself to so very many stories. My imagination runs wild when I think of all the adventures that might have had their beginning or ending in this hallway.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: This image is not from a public set. We were doing some location scouting and this was one of the images that convinced me we needed to shoot here. However, I typically don’t process photos from a scouting shoot. In fact, it’s rare I keep them at all. I just couldn’t let this one go.

Almost Anonymous

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: Nothing from this set has ever been processed. They were shot a few years ago, the middle set in a three-set shoot. First set was processed, third set was processed, these were skipped. Since I was going through looking for photos that hadn’t been seen before, this seemed like a pretty good choice.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: I don’t remember exactly, but the set that comes after this is a very popular series involving a pocket watch. Some of you might remember having seen those photos. I think there’s still one in my portfolio. Excitement over that last set most likely led to this set being ignored.

Life Sometimes Sucks

charles i. letbetter - 10 revived photos from the archives

Why I Revived This Photo: This poor young woman has had a rough go of it lately. Every time she turns around, someone she cares about is dying. There are other issues as well. This is one of those moments when life is not being kind and there’s not a helluva lot anyone can do about. So, I’m hoping this photo might bring a smile to her day and remind her that someone cares.

Why This Photo Was Omitted: At the time we processed the other photos from this set, this one didn’t seem to particularly fit the narrative. We’d had a fun shoot. She had a fun shoot. This image seemed a little too serious to match with all the smiles and laughter. The photo feels a lot more poignant by itself.

 

There, ten photos revived from the archive. I hope you’ve enjoyed the stroll. Maybe I’ll  think of something important to write by tomorrow.

Continue Reading

Fashion  /  pop culture  /  PotD
What If Street Style Were A Competitive Sport
October 7, 2016

I’m very driven by what I do. I am certainly very competitive. I like people who represent the best at what they do, and if that turns you into a perfectionist, then maybe I am. —Anna Wintour

 

charles i. letbetter - what if street style were a competitive sport

For some people, dressing stylishly is a requirement but what if how we dress were a competitive sport?

Imagine getting up every morning knowing that what you choose to wear could affect your income for the day. What would you choose? Stylish dress with heels that can’t be ignored? Colorful separates with the new ballet flats that are all the rage? Perhaps a dress suit for that meeting this afternoon.

Among the list of characteristics that one might give Americans, casual and competitive are two that would seem to be at odds with each other. How can one be competitive and any portion of them still be relaxed? The answer, of course, is that we’re not competitive and casual about the same things. We’re competitive about our sports, obviously, and a lot of people are competitive about work. Some are competitive about how much stuff they have and what kind of stuff it is. At the same time, we’re very casual about things such as how we dress, what we wear when we go to the store, and how people perceive us when we’re “off duty.”

Many of our workplaces have dress codes, some of which are driven by safety requirements or a need for uniformity and visual recognition. However, what if you were graded based on how stylish you are? Perhaps even more frightening, what would life be like if your compensation and eligibility for advancement were connected to how on trend you are in your choice of clothing? How would that change your life?

Dressing To Be Seen

There is an interesting article in this past Wednesday’s New York Times that is titled The Situation With Street Style.  Coming at the end of a month’s worth of fashion shows, the article focuses on an aspect of fashion that has not only changed dramatically but become rather competitive.  Before the advent of social media and hordes of street style photographers lingering outside every runway venue, most editors and buyers dressed for anonymity. Part of doing their job was to report on the fashion, not be the fashion. So, they dressed in monochrome outfits that were stylishly boring and reasonably comfortable. Those 14- to 16-hour days can be grueling, so best to dress for the long haul.

However, now there are a number of editors and buyers whose Instagram accounts are followed by hundreds of thousands of people. Being anonymous is no longer an option. Everyone who enters a fashion show, especially those in Europe, is photographed multiple times. Pictures are uploaded to Instagram and other social media almost immediately and those who are recognizable are tagged. For those who once enjoyed anonymity, how they dress has become a liability.

Street style among those who attend Europe’s fashion shows is now competitive. Anna Dello Russo, an editor at large for Vogue Japan, changes her clothes as many as six times a day during fashion weeks so that she’s not continually photographed wearing the same thing as she moves from show to show. For many, dressing stylishly enough to capture the attention of street style photographers isn’t a bonus, but a requirement for the job. They must dress to attract attention which, in turn, drives sales for advertisers.

Taking Competition To The Next Level

Would being competitive about how we dress really be all that bad? In some ways, we are already there. The whole reason many schools have switched to requiring uniforms is because, allegedly, individual style had become so competitive that it was giving rise to theft and bullying. Teenagers can take anything and make it hyper-competitive and sometimes that isn’t a good thing. We also see the same competitiveness in urban cultures where the amount and kind of “bling” one wears is a status symbol. The concept of competitive styling really isn’t that foreign to us.

We tend to push off a lot of the competitiveness as we get older. We’re told to work more as a team and to do that we have to set aside at least a certain portion of our competitive drive. We start dressing similarly to those around us, careful to not dress higher than our status. For example, if one’s immediate supervisor dresses in khaki and cotton button-down shirts, wearing a suit and tie might be seen as an aggressively competitive move. Americans are much more comfortable taking a casual approach to clothing in large part because it feels more friendly.

Competitive dressing could potentially be a good thing, though. Taking our appearance more seriously encourages us to take other things more seriously, especially the work we do. When we put more effort into how we dress, our attitude changes. We tend to act more determined, more focused, and more driven. Women who dress stylishly not only command more attention but also give more attention to their peers. Men who are more attentive to how they dress are generally seen as being more reliable and trustworthy. Being competitive in our everyday style could be a good thing for all of us.

How We Score

Of course, if we’re creating a competition, then we need a scoring system that reflects current trends but doesn’t punish those who can’t afford designer labels. Being able to pull together different pieces to create a unique and attractive look needs to have greater value than merely copying what was on the runway. Taking something simple and turning it into something fabulous would earn bonus points. Companies could have a special employee Instagram account with rewards given for those whose style generates the most likes.

Extreme fashion makes assessing penalties difficult, though. It’s not like one could be dinged for wearing pajamas to work when we’ve seen multiple instances of pajamas on the runway mixed with things like suit jackets and button-down shirts.  Then, there’s the question of how to address the inherent sensuality of some designs. Sheer was huge on the runway this season as was wearing bras outside one’s clothing. Addressing what is appropriate without being unnecessarily inhibitive could be challenging.

Ultimately, though, I think putting more emphasis on how we dress, on styling ourselves to attract attention rather than avoid it, might be just the attitude adjustment we’ve been needing. We need to think more of ourselves rather than trying to hide. Our society and culture shouldn’t be dominated by a handful who happen to dress better than everyone else. Going to the effort of looking good, and let’s face it, looking good takes some serious effort, should be rewarded, not discouraged. Perhaps being compensated for making an effort might encourage more people to make an effort. I see that as being a positive thing.

Competitive street styling, your time has come.

 

Continue Reading

Photography
All The Mistakes Photographers Make
October 6, 2016
charles i. letbetter - all the mistakes photographers make

Experience is simply the name we give our mistakes. —Oscar Wilde

 

charles i. letbetter - all the mistakes photographers make

Photographers make a lot of mistakes. We’re human. So, do we really need to list them all?

I don’t have much time to read while we’re in the middle of covering fashion shows, so I was excited to dive back into the pile of articles and books that have been waiting for me. Okay, so some of my choices might have been mistakes. I really shouldn’t even open an article with a title like: 3 Mistakes Professional Photographers Make That Could Ruin Their Career. I found the article on Modern Lens Magazine, which had copied it from Lightstalking. 

The article very briefly addresses three basic mistakes:

  1. Inability to say no
  2. Not improving
  3. Giving clients too much control

So, address those issues and everything is rosy, right? If those are the biggest problems a professional photographer has then it should be easy to correct and start making money. Hundreds of my would-be colleagues are already thinking how the article might apply to them while simultaneously refusing to admit that they make any mistakes at all. We are a rather silly lot when one gets right down to it.

I don’t have a problem with the actual content of the article. What bothers me is the inference that there are only three mistakes that are ruining our business. Fact is, we’re so error-prone (as a group, not you individually, you’re cool because you’re reading this article), that it is a miracle any of us make a profit at all. Those who do make a decent living aren’t error-free, either. They’ve simply learned how to either work around their mistakes or turn their mistakes into customer benefits; enhanced services if you want to think of it that way. We’re all fallible.

Mistakes We Could Make

I’m not sure there is any real benefit to calling out specific mistakes photographers make and saying, “Hey, you, the guy with the viewfinder imprint permanently etched on his face, stop doing that thing you’re doing.” If we are really that oblivious to our problems then we have significantly larger issues we need to address. Professional counseling is highly recommended. Goofs and foul-ups that we’ve already committed are in the past. What we need to avoid are the things that can really ruin our business in the future. A few things that come to mind are:

  • Calling the client a jackass, even if they are
  • Setting a call time for 6:00 AM but sending an assistant and not showing up yourself until 10
  • Screaming at the President’s security team
  • Drop kicking the client’s yappy Pomeranian
  • Completely destroying the paint job on client’s $250,000 sports car by insisting that the only way to get the perfect shot is to stand on top of the automobile
  • Attempting to take photos on the tarmac of an international airport without permission
  • Bringing your preschool-aged children and letting them eat chocolate as they wander through the racks of designer clothes
  • Telling everyone on set just exactly how you would bang the model if given the opportunity
  • Dragging power cords for you lights through a large puddle in which multiple people are standing
  • Tripping a model because you didn’t like the way she walked
  • Throwing things onto the runway while a fashion show is in progress
  • Eating the lunch that was delivered specifically for your client

Yes, every last one of those this has happened. Yes, in each case the photographer’s career was ruined. You’ve been warned. Don’t do these things.

Mistakes We Should Make

Another reason we probably should be careful about calling out photographers’ mistakes is that there are a few “mistakes” that we actually should make. Sure, they don’t put any money in our wallets, but they put good vibes out into the universe, make people smile, and keep us all from becoming the surly old grouch that I already am. Some of the things that come to mind are:

  • Taking excessive pictures of kittens
  • Taking excessive pictures of kittens with small children
  • Moving a shoot to protect an endangered environment even if there’s no reasonable substitute
  • Giving away pictures to non-profits, without credit, because it helps what they’re doing
  • Getting involved and caring about the lives of the people on your team, especially if you consistently use the same team
  • Going over budget because you paused the shoot to help victims of a nearby traffic accident
  • Taking as many pictures of puppies as you do kittens
  • Going on vacation and not taking your professional camera
  • Feeding the models
  • Trying something new when you already know it probably won’t work
  • Let a rookie use your best camera for a few frames

There are probably other things I could add to this list but I don’t want you thinking I’m getting soft or anything. The point is, any of the things on that list could end in disaster, especially if you ‘re surrounded by people who don’t like kittens and puppies. Of course, I might ask why in the world you tolerate people who don’t like kittens and puppies; that could be a mistake as well.

Perfection Doesn’t Happen

Look, if you’re trying to be the perfect photographer who does everything exactly right, stop. You’re not going to make it. In fact, you’re more likely to kill yourself trying. We all make plenty of mistakes. Do the best that you can and deal with the mistakes as they happen. Learn as you go and share when it makes sense.

However, don’t make the mistake of thinking that just addressing the three or four things on a  list inherently makes you a better photographer. Relax. Be yourself. The person who wrote that article isn’t perfect either.

Continue Reading

Editorial  /  PotD  /  Social Commentary
Regrets, We’ve All Had A Few, But Then—
October 6, 2016
charles i. letbetter - regrets, we've had a few

Regrets? I think everyone has regrets, and people who say they haven’t are either liars… or narcissists. —Lee Radziwill

 

charles i. letbetter - Regrets, we all have a few

Regrets are motivational because we can’t fix them. They are permanent reminders we need to do better.

Does anyone else hear Frank Sinatra in their head? I don’t think there’s any escaping that. His song might be part of the issue here.

We have, I believe, a problem owning up to our regrets. There has been a line of popular philosophy the past several years that thinks we should live life with no regrets, that we learn as we go and whatever happens is exactly what was supposed to happen.  Such thinking is, in my opinion, complete and utter horseshit. There’s a difference between simply making a mistake and doing something we regret. Regrets can’t be fixed. Regrets are forever.

What got me thinking along this line was an article in Marie Claire about women who regret having children. The article caught my eye because I know some of these women. They both became pregnant while on birth control. They never intended to have children. These women knew in advance that they did not have the temperament to be good mothers. Yet, they allowed family, friends, and/or religion to bully them into keeping the kids. Now, they regret having given in. They feel trapped in a life they never wanted, that arguably should never have happened. Consequence after consequence reminds them that their life was meant to be different. These women really understand the inescapability of regrets.

Regrets happen. Ignore them if you want, but there are lessons to be learned here if we take a moment and pay attention. Don’t shove that regret in the back of your mind and forget. Let it guide you.

Regrets Are Different From  Mistakes

Imagine how differently My Way would sound if Frank sang, “Mistakes, I’ve made a few …”  It’s just not the same, is it?

Why? Because there is a fundamental difference between mistakes and regrets: Regrets can’t be fixed. The consequences of your actions or inaction are irreversible. Nothing you do makes up for your error. You’re stuck.

Mistakes, on the other hand, might have difficult and long-term consequences, but you have an ability to make amends for the wrong-doing. Let’s say, for example, that in the haze of a misguided youth one commits an act of vandalism. Sure, what you did was wrong, but there are things one can do to rectify the situation. One might repair or replace what was broken, repay a property or business owner, and clean up any mess that was made. Life moves on, lesson learned. Someone says, “Hey, we all make mistakes,” and we put the event in the back of our minds.

Suppose, however, that in committing that act of vandalism one’s actions resulted in the death of someone else. You didn’t intend for anyone to get hurt, but it happened and it was your fault. Nothing you do will ever bring that person back. Even if you take that person’s place, do their work, take care of their family, behave like a model citizen the rest of your life, nothing replaces the soul your actions terminated. Nothing. Ever. That’s a regret. Regrets never go away.

Hopefully, one gets through life with few regrets. Certainly, most of us don’t have the burden of being responsible for someone else’s death. Those we have, though, we need to address and accept.

Facing A Harsh Reality

What do you really regret? When one is asked that question our tendency is to mull over some of our larger mistakes. Mine would be going through my youth trying to be who I thought my parents wanted me to be rather than being myself. A lot of time and energy and money was wasted on things that I never really wanted. Opportunities were missed.  Yet, over the years I’ve been able to rectify that problem. Who I am now is who I want to be. Sure, I cannot regain my youth, but I am not bound by the errors in judgment I made when I was 15. Do I wish I had done things differently? Sure, but those were mistakes, not regrets.

My biggest regret is not listening to the stories being told, especially those my parents had to tell. Only after they passed did I begin to realize all the questions that we never asked, the lessons we never had  a chance to learn. I can’t get that back. Those stories are all gone, lost to eternity because I wasn’t paying attention. Was the action excusable? No, I knew what I wasn’t doing. We even talked about the need to sit down and record conversations, but we never made the effort for that to actually happen.

Regrets don’t have to be huge, they don’t have to be horrific. Regrets do alter lives, though, and the effects are permanent. Facing them doesn’t give us the ability to change the outcome or make amends. However, accepting our regrets lays the foundation for what we do next with our lives. Our regrets tell us what we must change, what to do differently as we move forward with our lives.

Escaping The Chains

Once we deal with the reality of our regrets, we are then challenged to not become enslaved by them. For the women who regret having children, they struggle to regain their lives, their sense of self-worth. I remember one young woman whose child died at the hands of an abusive husband. For her, the regret of not leaving and protecting her baby was insurmountable and after five years of struggle she committed suicide. Dealing with regrets isn’t always life-altering, but it certainly can be.

What we must understand about regrets is that while lives might be changed by our actions, we are still in control of what happens next. We can’t change the past, but the future we build is our own. Regrets give us the ability to change not only our lives, but perhaps the lives of others.

Each of the women in the Marie Claire article thought they were alone, that they were the only one who ever regretted having children. As they spoke up, though, they discovered that others felt the same way and they all needed help coping with that regret. A community was formed. Books were written. New mothers now have resources to help them because of how others dealt with their regrets.

What we learn and how we respond to our regrets is going to be different for everyone, but the one thing for certain is that we must be willing to move beyond them. Regrets might change our lives but they should never stop them.

Continue Reading

PotD  /  Status
Making The Most Out Of Humpday
October 5, 2016
charles i. letbetter - making the most out of humpday

You don’t have to have a hard-on to bungee jump.—Andrew in Humpday (2009)

 

charles i. letbetter - Making the best out of humpday

Wednesday, aka Humpday, is a marker: your week is half done. You are going to make it.

I have had a Nina Simone song stuck in my head the past few days and it won’t leave. I step outside, look up, and it’s there:

Birds flying high you know how I feel
Sun in the sky you know how I feel
Breeze driftin’ on by you know how I feel.

It’s a new dawn
It’s a new day
It’s a new life for me yeah
… And I’m feeling good.  

It really is a lovely song, but when  you look up and realize that those birds you see flying up there are actually turkey vultures, then you get a slightly uncomfortable feeling that maybe we’re not feeling so good after all.

Happy Humpday. This is the last day of Paris Fashion Week. We’ve already reviewed the new Louis Vuitton collection this morning, which was rather cool. Only one more to go and we’re done until February. We can do this, right?

Oh, wait, the kids are home for fall break. There’s no napping today. Instead, we’ll have to do something creative like bake cookies or draw pictures. They helped me make peach cobbler yesterday, which didn’t go too badly. The results were edible. Fighting over who gets to measure the next ingredient gets a bit tiresome, though. Maybe I can convince them to take a long walk.

I don’t mean that as evil as it sounds.

How do we make the most out of Humpday? I know Kat’s struggling, too. Wednesdays can be really rough. We’re still too far from the weekend. Additional stimulus is necessary if we’re going to avoid killing someone. What ever shall we do?

A Little Bit Of Day Music

How anyone makes it through a Humpday without music I don’t know. When we hit this point in the week it takes some serious sounds to keep me moving. Does it really matter if I dance like a one-legged ostrich? No, not at all. We need some serious sounds in our lives to keep us going. Here are a few suggestions:

Yeah, you know I had to slip that last one in there. It really is a cool song. Just try to not think about the vultures.

A Little Light Reading

You know how Wednesdays can be, sometimes you need to just step away before things get violent. The problem is that you really don’t have the time to get immersed in a good book. Someone has to do all the work that no one else is touching. You’ll also need to fix the fuckups that were left for you. There’s no way you can sneak off for the entire afternoon. What you need is something short and distracting. Do we have suggestions, damn straight we do. These are about as distracting as we could find.

You might start with What Sex Means For World Peace. No, it’s not scandalous. This is real foreign policy talk going on here. If we want world peace we need to focus more on women’s rights.

… the very best predictor of a state’s peacefulness is not its level of wealth, its level of democracy, or its ethno-religious identity; the best predictor of a state’s peacefulness is how well its women are treated. What’s more, democracies with higher levels of violence against women are as insecure and unstable as nondemocracies.

If that doesn’t work for you, then perhaps you can try something a little more provocative such as A Professional Sex Toy Tester’s Guide To Buying A Vibrator. Why? Consider this:

Why, if existing rabbits and dildos are doing such a good job at getting us off, do we need more? “As women become more comfortable with the concept of using toys, the technologies and materials that we might use to create them develop too,” says Jaques. So there’s always room for a new favourite to make its mark. At Lovehoney, they hold regular “gap analysis” meetings,where the boardroom walls are plastered with hundreds of polaroids of their current toy range to identify what’s missing. “We also look to other industries and markets for new ideas,”explains Jaques. “You’d be surprised how many of our toys have been inspired by a power tool or communications device.” 

Now, some of you take Humpday rather literally, so for those of you in that camp, I might suggest 11 Ways to Make Doggy Style Even SEXIER. Nope, I’m not going to comment.

A Little Light Exercise

You don’t want to overdo it, of course, but getting out and taking a walk really isn’t a bad idea. Yeah, there may be a chance of rain late this afternoon, but for most the day the temperature is going to be lovely. Getting out of wherever for a minute or two gives you a chance to step away from the stress and the people causing it and breathe. You don’t need to work up a sweat, mind you. That could make things uncomfortable for the rest of the day.

Again, it’s that  whole going-back-to-the-office thing that you have to keep in mind. A gentle stroll for ten minutes or so, roughly the same amount of time someone else might spend smoking a cigarette, should be just about right. You can then go back in with a clearer head and power through the rest of your Humpday without any serious problems.

Of course, the ultimate experience here might be to walk to the nearest coffee shop and grab a cup. The walk, the caffeine, the fresh air, all sound like the perfect recipe to keep your hands off the throat of that lazy, no-good … uhm, well, you know who.

We Can Do This

We’re strong. We’ve been through weeks worse than this and survived. Only two more days after this one and you have the weekend. Or something. If you don’t have the weekend, there’s surely a break for you out there somewhere. Look for it. Set a goal. You’re getting closer with every passing second.

And if that doesn’t work, I have a shovel. We’ll bury the bodies and pretend nothing ever happened. Happy Humpday.

Continue Reading

Art  /  Fashion  /  PotD
Why A Fashion Show Is Still Important
October 4, 2016

No one has ever found a solution for not doing a fashion show. —Anna Sui

 

charles i. letbetter - WhyA Fashion Show Is Still IMportant

I have more than one reason for covering fashion show after fashion show. They really do matter.

I’m sitting here still somewhat bleary-eyed,  despite being on my third cup of coffee. The Chanel fashion show just ended a few minutes ago in Paris. I’m waiting on still images before I begin writing my review for Pattern. This season is almost over. My body can feel it. Relief, and sleep, is near.

Why do I keep doing this? Twice a year, I completely upend my life and my sleep schedule to cover four weeks of fashion show after fashion show. A couple of years ago, I tried watching them all, over 200, and it nearly killed me. I’ve cut back since then. We will have reviewed about 83 shows this season, having watched roughly 180. That number might seem small compared to the marathon of a couple of years ago. Trust me, though, it is still exhausting.

Why do we do this? Why do I continue to put my body through this torture twice a year? Obviously, there’s nothing in any of these shows that I’m actually going to wear. I’m old, set in my ways, and have a total dad bod. There are only three or four looks that are comfortable on me. That’s not going to change. So, why am I looking at dresses and crop tops and, what the fuck, Karl Lagerfeld opened the show with a couple of robots?

Okay, so on one hand, it’s my job. Not bad work. At the same time, though, there are more important reasons to pay attention to a fashion show. There is a relevance here that is important.

Fashion Is Art

A fashion show is something unique to behold, but what we see on the runway doesn’t just appear out of thin air. Every piece that we see starts with a creative idea on the part of the designer. Many designers, including Lagerfeld, still start with a sketch. They consider shape, color, fabric, form, and function among a number of different influences as they decide how to put together something that is wearable but also interesting.

Once they have a concept, designers then create a pattern and a sample. Often, what one sees in a fashion show is that sample, not yet in production. The sample is the designer’s concept come to life, a chance to see how closely reality can match the idea. Designers deal with issues such as fabric weight and elasticity as they try to pull and pin and tack and sew things into place. Sometimes the concept doesn’t work, the fabric won’t do what the designer wanted. They start over. And over.

The average major-label fashion show contains approximately 45 looks. That’s 45 times the designer has gone through the entire creative process. Of course, large fashion houses have a creative director overseeing large design teams. Without them, the fashion show would never happen. Every step of the way, however, there is artistry in what they do. When art museums display major exhibits of fashion work by leading designers, we begin to see all the creative artistry that is fashion. Seeing the work in a museum always feels a bit too antiseptic for me, though. I’d rather see the fashion show, see the work on the runway, moving, flowing, and being the living art that the designer intended. This is where the excitement is.

Fashion Is Critical To The Economy

Fashion is a $3.3 TRILLION industry. Apparel accounts for a full two percent of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Nearly 60 million people are employed in the manufacture of textiles and clothing alone. That number does not even begin to include all the people employed by the various fashion houses and conglomerates, the retail store employees, or the millions of people involved in behind-the-scene logistics. There is not a country in the industrially developed world that does not depend on fashion as a significant part of its economy.

Stop and think about this: In New York City alone, fashion accounts for some $11 billion dollars in salaries and $2 billion in tax revenue. What do you think would happen if all of a sudden the fashion industry there just up and moved across the border to Toronto? Granted, that’s not likely to happen, but if it did the economic effect on the city of New York would be devastating! Imagine, then, how entire countries such as France and Italy are affected when fashion hits an economic downturn such as it has been experiencing the past two years. The financial scene isn’t pretty.

A fashion show is an indicator not only of how a particular brand is doing, but the overall industry as well. Looking across all the shows we’ve watched this season, we see an industry desperately trying to attract the attention of the world’s largest buying demographic: Millennials. Styles and fabrics have changed. We’ve seen less leather and a lot less fur as Millennials are more likely to care about animal rights. We’ve seen more natural fibers. These are economic decisions as much as they are artistic. We watch a fashion show and we see how global economics affects our lives.

Fashion Is Culture

More than anything else, what we wear expresses who we are. Ask any cultural anthropologist you happen to come across (they’re out there, somewhere) and they’ll tell you that how any given group of people dressed says a lot about their environment, their economy, their values, their level of innovation, their mythologies, and their lifestyles. Fashion isn’t exactly a new invention, after all. From the moment someone figured out that animal hide was good for keeping a body warm, someone was there figuring out how to best shape those hides and then decorating them for various purposes.

What we see in a fashion show is more than a creative vision of one designer. A fashion show puts our entire culture on display. Take, for example, the gradual move we’ve seen over the past few years toward more sexually androgynous looks. As younger generations grapple with the whole concept of gender and its fluidity, their journey is reflected in the clothes they wear. Androgynous fashion reflects a change in traditional concepts of gender roles and expectations. At the same time, we see more designs that are loose-fitting easy to wear, and more accessible to people as their bodies change. Those looks reflect a change in our overall lifestyle and our attitudes about our bodies.

When I watch a fashion show, I’m not picking out a new wardrobe for Kat or styling future photo shoots. I’m looking for trends that represent sometimes subtle and sometimes significant changes in our culture. These changes are important because if we are to relate to each other at all we have to understand that those coming behind us see life quite differently than those of us who are older. They have different values, different expectations, and different goals, all of which is reflected in what they choose to wear.

Looking To The Future

I will be very happy to not wake up at 2:00 AM Thursday morning. As much as I enjoy fashion weeks, the toll it takes on my body is grueling and it doesn’t help my family relationships much either. Kat says I’m especially grouchy when watching a fashion show. Even the little ones are happy when my schedule is back to normal. Yet, come February, we’ll do it all again.

As the face of fashion is constantly changing and the methods and spectacle of putting on a fashion show continue to morph, I fail to see any point in the near future where a fashion show isn’t important. We need that runway. We need to see the artistry, the economics, and the culture. Fashion is important to all of us, to our world, to our lives.

Why would I want to ever not be a part of something so very important?  As long as I can stay awake, we’ll be there. Every season.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  PotD
The Value Of A Well Considered Opinion
October 3, 2016
charles i. letbetter - the value of a well-considered opinion

Opinion is the medium between knowledge and ignorance. —Plato

 

charles i. letbetter -the value of a well considered opinion

When we think we know it all is when the opinion of someone else may matter most.

“You’re never as smart as you think you are. There is always someone who knows more and understands better than you. Pay attention to those people.”

The words of my late father seem more applicable today than ever. I still remember sitting next to him as he warned me about opening my mouth too soon, a bad habit I’ve had since high school.

“Almost everyone knows at least one thing you don’t,” he warned. “Other people’s opinions may seem foolish and uninformed, but dismissing the well-considered opinions of those who are more experienced,  study deeper, and have better access to information only shows your ignorance, not theirs.”

There are days I’m still not sure I’ve adequately learned that lesson. I’m careful about whose opinions I consider. “Consider the source,” is the advice that comes with much of what I read. Of the millions of opinions scattered across the Internet, most leave me skeptical of either their facts or their intentions.

Social media makes it easy to put ourselves in an echo chamber. If we don’t like what someone is saying, we can simply block them, ignoring everything they might have to say. Sometimes that act is necessary in order to avoid constant streams of drivel. When we block someone, though, simply because they have opinions contrary to ours we put our own level of understanding and knowledge at risk. We need the contrasting thought. We need friction against our own opinion.

Knowing Which Opinion To Trust

When one goes to apply for a new job, the prospective employer almost always asks for references. We choose those references based upon the assumption that those people say good things about us when asked. However, have you ever had a reference that wasn’t as positive about your skills as you’d hoped? Maybe you didn’t get the job because someone you trusted mentioned your perpetual habit of being late or not always following through on your promises. Perhaps they even lied.

One of the primary reasons we’ve come to disregard the opinions of others is because too often we find them self-serving, frequently uninformed, and too often void of any truth. The Internet has given everyone a voice, but not every voice needs to be heard on every topic. Does someone sitting in a basement in Queens really understand the political complexities of the ongoing war in Columbia? Can a person who barely managed to graduate high school actually hold a reasonable opinion on the economy?

The answer to both questions is yes, they can. The upside of the Internet is that it allows people to study things and obtain a level of knowledge without having to suffer through traditional means of education. A person who might have nearly flunked out of school because of bad grades in English and History might have a natural affinity for numbers and the nuances of economic theory. The basement dweller has the ability to reach out and talk directly to people on both sides of the equation in Columbia, side-stepping all the political protocols of the State Department. Look below superficial appearances and those opinions we’ve thrown away might actually have merit.

When An Opinion Really Matters

The second challenge of opinions is understanding whose opinion matters when. I could sit here all day and talk about feminism and women’s rights, but the value of my opinion on that topic is limited because I’m not female. I don’t have those experiences that women face on a regular basis, and cannot fully understand what they go through because no one is going to treat me as a female. The same applies to race. I hurt when I see the injustices levied against people of color, but when speaking on the matter my opinion is limited. I might know a lot about a topic, but if I can’t possibly experience what other people experience my opinion loses value.

A well-considered opinion is one that has had those experiences. I respect the opinions of Congressman John Lewis on matters of race because he has been there on the front lines. He felt the spray. He has the scars. Congressman Lewis understands the situation at a level I cannot begin to comprehend. I respect Kat’s opinion on matters of feminism and sexual identity because she has both feet in those arenas right now. She is enduring those experiences and deals with the challenges at a level I can never know for myself. The opinion of someone who has been there is always stronger than that of the person who merely observed.

Equally important, though, are the opinions of those who speak for those who would not be heard. Reporters and advocates for causes and regarding situations where those who endure the experience are not able to speak for themselves. Those who are hungry, homeless, beaten, torn from their homes, left with nothing. Those who go and look, who are hands-on in helping those in need, who immerse themselves in hostile situations, have opinions we need to trust.

Listening To The Chorus

Perhaps most important right now, in this political climate, is listening to the opinions of diverse people who agree on issues even when it does not necessarily serve them well. Climatologists, for example, did not quickly or easily support the concept of global warming. They have an understanding of weather cycles and know that some changes are inevitable. But as more of them take up the cause and warn of the dangers, theirs is a voice we do well to heed.

Perhaps the strongest chorus at the moment is that of newspaper editorial boards regarding the upcoming presidential elections. Most seasons, we expect their endorsements to follow along party lines. Conservative papers endorse the Republican candidate. Liberal papers endorse the Democratic candidate. Independent papers endorse a third party. For as long as I can remember, that has been how endorsements flow. There’s rarely any surprise.

That history does not hold true this season, though. Look at the aggregators and we see headlines like these:

After 148 Years, The San Diego Union-Tribune Endorses A Democrat For President

For The First Time In Its 126-Year History, This Newspaper Endorsed A Democrat

There are dozens of others who have followed suit, newspaper editorial boards who understand the effect of politics on their readers better than anyone. When they all start leaning in the same direction, we need to listen.

We Don’t Know Much

We are fooling ourselves when we think that what we read in our social media newsfeeds constitutes being informed on a subject. Our ignorance runs much deeper than anyone cares to admit. Egos do a great job of making us believe that we’re smart enough, that we don’t need to listen to anyone else’s opinions. We can even find plenty of quotes urging us to ignore the detractors, be our own person, and stand up what we want.

We couldn’t be any more stupid than when we ignore the well-considered opinions of others. Especially right now.

Maybe we should do more than look at headlines as they pass. Perhaps we should give ourselves more time to actually read, and think about what we’re reading.

A well-considered opinion has value that cannot be matched by our own understanding. We would do well to close our own mouths more often and listen.

Continue Reading

PotD  /  Social Commentary
Wake Up, September Is Ending
September 30, 2016

It is always with excitement that I wake up in the morning wondering what my intuition will toss up to me, like gifts from the sea. I work with it and rely on it. It’s my partner. —Jonas Salk

 

charles i. letbetter - wake up, september is here

The end of September signals a time to wake up and realize the year is nearly gone

I hate that stupid Greenday song. Curse Billie Joe Armstrong for having written it. Curse the stupid video which is entirely too long and much too depressing. Of course, I have both the song and images from the video stuck in my head whether I want them there or not. They’re driving me nuts.

Summer has come and passed
The innocent can never last
Wake me up when September ends

Like my fathers come to pass
Seven years has gone so fast
Wake me up when September ends

Here comes the rain again
Falling from the stars
Drenched in my pain again
Becoming who we are

As my memory rests
But never forgets what I lost
Wake me up when September ends

What the fuck am I supposed to do with that? How does this song help me in any way other than as a reminder that, oh yeah, we’re about to enter  the fourth quarter so any goals we had set for the year we either complete now or pretend we never brought them up. Here it is the end of September. Before we know it the snow will be flying. There are things we need to get done.

There Goes The Neighborhood

Looks like the whole planet may be ending its September phase. The news that the atmosphere has surpassed carbon levels of 400 ppm (that’s parts per million for those of you who slept through science class) definitely puts us in that range of being glad I need to pay my AARP dues. While the number really is more symbolic than anything, it is a wake up call that we might want to start looking for alternative places for our grandchildren or great-grandchildren to live. They certainly won’t be hanging out on this planet in a couple hundred years or less.

SpaceX and Tesla CEO and probably the closest thing we have to a real-life Tony Stark, Elon Musk, seems to think colonizing Mars is our best bet. On one hand, I would like to think that if anyone can actually pull off that project it would be Stark, er … Musk. At the same time, though, the difficulty he has had with some of SpaceX’s rockets recently, especially that one mysteriously blowing up on the launchpad, give me a moment’s pause. With all due respect, I don’t want to be heading to a new home and end up having elementary schools named after me. I’m not that hero.

We need to figure out something, though. September is typically the lowest month for atmospheric carbon dioxide. The situation gets worse from here. I know I wouldn’t plan on buying any beachfront property anytime soon unless you’re looking at, oh, maybe Middle Tennessee. Maybe Dollywood can add a beach resort in a few years. That would be fun, wouldn’t it? Yeah, let’s run with that idea.

Arnold Palmer Died, So Did Golf

Actually, the game was on life support before the legendary golfer hit the eternal 19th hole this week. I’ve never been a huge fan of the game largely because I’m not any good at playing it and also because it is one of the most stupid sports to ever be televised. Watching maple sap dripping from a tree trunk would be more exciting and at the end you could make syrup. The Scots were cursing us when they invented golf. That’s the only reasonable explanation.

Major equipment providers are ditching the sport, though, because it’s not “connecting” with Millennials. Rounds of golf played are down. Attendance at tournaments is down. There’s no money to be made there anymore, at least, not like there was when Boomers discovered the sport some 40 years ago. Arnold Palmer was a big part of the golf explosion of the 70s. As he sits down at that eternal watering hole for a round of his favorite drink (lemonade and ice tea carefully prepared and mixed), he’s joined by an entire generation that once thought golf was really cool. They’re all dead now. No one living gives a fuck about the sport.

The question facing club owners now is what to do with all that land full of sand and random holes once no one is interested in wasting whole days standing out there either getting sunburned or avoiding lightening. Might this not only spell the end of golf, but the end of those pretentious members-only clubs that have long been bastions of racism, elitism, and bigotry? More than we could do without the sport, we definitely wouldn’t miss the dismissive attitude. There was a rainbow over Palmer’s home town after his funeral. Maybe that’s a sign.

Good-bye Wonder Woman Fantasies

You know the world has changed when you wake up one morning and find that Wonder Women is definitely queer. Actually, she’s just not that into the entire male gender because they don’t exist in her home of Themyscira. Lead writer for the series, Greg Rucka, confirmed as much in an interview this  week. He explains it this way:

It’s supposed to be paradise. You’re supposed to be able to live happily. You’re supposed to be able — in a context where one can live happily, and part of what an individual needs for that happiness is to have a partner — to have a fulfilling, romantic and sexual relationship. And the only options are women. … But an Amazon doesn’t look at another Amazon and say, ‘You’re gay.’ They don’t. The concept doesn’t exist.

Of course, we know plenty of women who wouldn’t mind if the concept of men didn’t exist. That’s another wake up call we should probably answer at some point. We have also known for sometime, in the back of our minds, that there was no way Wonder Woman could really be that into guys. To come from Themyscira to the US would have to be rather like being condemned to a hell full of mysoginistic, sexist assholes. Our brains know that but our groins haven’t wanted to admit it. Time to wake up from the fantasy, boys. None of this world’s Wonder Women are looking for anyone with a penis. Get used to it.

Time To Move On

The end of September is a sign that we have got to move on, dude. Summer’s frivolities are nice, but they don’t last forever. They shouldn’t last forever. We need to wake up and get some shit done. We both know we need to drop a few pounds before the holiday food binge starts. Don’t tell yourself any more lies, the pumpkin spice cravings are just the first warning sign. Hit the gym now so you can enjoy the guilty pleasures later.

Oh, and if you’re not dating anyone, now’s the time to fix that problem. You know your mom is going to be so very disappointed if you show up at another Thanksgiving with your lame roomate in tow. He burps too loud and his fart jokes aren’t funny. Wake up, download a half-dozen dating apps and get busy. You know you’ll dump whomever by Valentine’s Day anyway. Is it so bad that you take a few months to make your mother happy?

Someone needs to write a new song about September. Eleven years and I am so very sick of this one. Wake up. Let’s get going. We can still turn this year into a win. Maybe. At least save it from being a complete disaster. Not voting Republican helps. Eyes open? Here we go.

Continue Reading

Photography  /  PotD
The Photography Business Just Changed
September 28, 2016
charles i. letbetter- the photography business just changed

There’s not a single business model, and there’s not a single type of electronic content. There are really a lot of opportunities and a lot of options and we just have to discover all of them. —Tim O’Reilly

 

charles i. letebtter - PHotography has a new business model

All it took was one new website to totally change the business model for photography. The bar has been set.

You’re going to want to bookmark this website: miramira.tv . Photographer Mario Testino, a favorite of Vogue US, launched the new site this week after sponsoring a 48-hour hackathon asking students:  “What could the next frontier of visual communications look like?” They told him, and the results are probably not what you’re doing now, but are almost certainly where we all need to go. Fashion website/magazine Business of Fashion featured Mario and the new website in a top-line article this morning. Testino tells them early on:

“The kids don’t have 35 years of experience, but they have hundreds of years of knowledge through access. The mix of that is quite magical. In a way, I’m looking for new ideas, new ways of seeing things, new ways of solving a challenge.”

What he’s saying isn’t that different from how many of us feel. We’re all looking for new ideas, new ways of seeing things. That’s just part of being a photographer. Unlike the rest of us, though, Testino took some serious steps for force a change in his vision: he relied on eyes that are not his and trusted what they saw. The end result of his effort affects us all, though, whether he intended that to happen or not, whether we like it or not.

Testino has hit on something that requires a change in how we do business. Not that we copy exactly what he’s doing, but consider the structure behind the effort.

Open Up Your Archives

Who among us doesn’t have tons of pictures sitting around that no one has ever seen? Both of the photos above fall into that category. We took the pictures for an event that never happened. They’ve been sitting in my archives, untouched, since 2009. Testino’s model is to worry less about copyright infringement and more about making sure the pictures are seen; all the pictures. Granted, his archives are filled with pictures of supermodels like Kate Moss. Not everyone is going to offer that kind of appeal in their archives. Still, the point is to get the pictures out there. Curate yourself in a bolder, more dynamic way.

Manage Your Social Media

We all have social media accounts sitting all over the place. I don’t know about you, but I have multiple accounts that I can’t even remember. A new website comes along, looks good up front, then goes nowhere. Even on the ones that do have staying power, though, such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, our efforts tend to be disjointed, haphazard, and almost accidental. One of the critical aspects of the new website is that it serves as a landing place for all Mario’s social media posts. If he puts a picture on Instagram, it points back to the website. If he puts a video on Facebook, it points back to the website.  Everything is coordinated so that social media followers don’t just see one picture and move on. They click and see more.

Organize Photos By The Stories They Tell

We have projects, we have themes, and we have those shoots that are just out there. Traditionally, we would organize them into portfolios according to genre: fashion, editorial, portrait, wedding, babies, etc. That’s the way mine are organized now. Testino hits on a key change in how people view photos online, however. They look for stories, not genres. They want to see a series that has a beginning, middle, and end. Maybe they’re all from the same shoot. Maybe they’re not. What matters is that when someone looks at them, they see a story line that is recognizable. Save the portfolio approach for lookbooks, whose usefulness is limited. Mario makes a good point here:

“Today, I feel that the books are limited because you can only reach a certain amount of people. Whereas online, you can reach 2 million people in one go. There’s something about sharing that I find very interesting, and very of today. So it makes sense to put it online.”

Develop Relationships

Photographers know they’re supposed to do this, but, as a group, we’re lousy at doing it. We tend to develop relationships based on what they can do for us, not whether we can help each other. Part of what fuels the depth of content coming to this new website are Mario’s relationships with people; not just models, but his assistants, makeup artists, stylists, tour guides, etc. He puts their stories on this new website. He highlights people other than himself. The concept makes perfect sense when one thinks about it. What’s missing for many of us, though, is that concerted effort to create and maintain relationships. I’m horrible at it. That needs to change.

Work In Different Media

On the new website, one not only finds the incredible photographs for which Mario is famous, one finds videos, and podcasts, and stories. Testino isn’t afraid of new and developing media. Instead, he’s mastering it and using it to his advantage. I’ll admit to being frightened by this one. Back when Canon and Nikon first started adding video capability to their DSLRs, I argued that there is a world of difference between video and still photography. There is. But if we stay focused on a singular media the world is going to pass us by. So, maybe we need to take a class or hire a twenty-something kid to show us how it’s done. Staying focused on only still images no longer makes good business sense.

Travel

Yeah, it may cost you a bit, but it needs to happen. Get out of the studio, explore different cultures and environments, meet different people, photograph something that isn’t your own backyard. That doesn’t necessarily mean one has to travel far or expensively. Consider volunteering for a charitable activity that takes you someplace different and take pictures while you’re there. Maybe you explore small towns in your own state. There are many ways to twist this. We don’t all need to winter in Abu Dabi. One trick here is to figure out how to get clients to pay for your travel. Don’t ask me, I don’t know. I am certain it can be done, though.

Get Help

No, I’m not necessarily talking about psychiatric help, though I’m guessing almost all of us could use some.  One of the first things I picked up from the BoF article is that Testino has a CEO, and it’s not him. Suki Larson is the chief executive of Mario Testino+. Mario Testino+ is the business side of everything the photographer does. This is where things are kept organized. There are people who schedule travel, organize photos, manage social media, plus his two photo assistants and others. All this business elements are handled by people who are not the photographer. Sure, most of us don’t have the budgets to hire that many people; maybe not anyone at all. Still, we need to find people who can help us. Perhaps we have to do some creative bartering at first, but photographers are notoriously lousy at business. Maybe we need to let go of that side and find someone who knows what a P&L is and why it’s important.

Position Yourself For The Future

Photographers notoriously look backward and long for the way it used to be. They were doing it 30 years ago and we’re still doing that now.  Stop it. Stop yearning for the days of film. Quit looking at old business models that failed 20 years ago. Instead, now is the time to be exploring things like virtual reality and 3D imagery. No, we’re not there yet on either front, but they are coming in one form or another. Being able to adapt to those new media quickly will keep you at the front of your field. Don’t be afraid. Look ahead.

Keep Doing Stuff

Not everything is going to work for you. Mario is a rare kind of photographer who has a knack for seeing a niche and making it his own. We can’t all be Mario Testino. What we see in his business model, though, is that we have to keep doing stuff. We have to keep taking pictures. We have to keep trying new things in new places with new people.  There is no room for us to sit back and bemoan the fact that no one is knocking on your studio door. Keep moving. Explore what is beyond you. I like what Mario says at the end of the BoF article:

“It’s the doing that makes you get better. Everything has changed, I think I should already be over in a way. I think there is something to be said about staying open to everything and anything. Curiosity is the biggest gift that you have.”

Testino has set an extremely high bar and not many of us are going to reach it. One thing is for sure, though, and that’s the fact that the photography business has already changed around us. We will either adapt, or we will fail.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  pop culture  /  PotD
Excessive Media Erodes Our Trust
September 27, 2016
charles i. letbetter - excessive media erodes our trust

There’s a danger in the internet and social media. The notion that information is enough, that more and more information is enough, that you don’t have to think, you just have to get more information – gets very dangerous. —Edward de Bono

 

charles i. letbetter - excessive media erodes our trust

If you don’t trust media it might be because you’re using too much of it.

CAUTION: YOU ARE CONSUMING MEDIA. PROCEED WITH CAUTION.

We changed brands of dog food this morning. We felt the dog wasn’t getting enough from his previous brand, so we did a little bit of research and switched. This morning, I didn’t feel we’d done enough research. The dog normally comes in from our morning walk, eats a little, then falls fast asleep because 4:00 AM is early even for a dog. Except this morning, after inhaling the new food, he didn’t go to sleep. He’s been bouncing around all over the place, terrifying the cats, and getting himself into trouble. So, I hit the brand’s website to double-check the ingredients. I needed specific information and found it on the brand’s website. That makes the dog food company a media provider.

A number of my friends in journalism were sharing this article from the Washington Post decrying how that there really is no such thing as “the media” and, if there is, WaPo certainly isn’t part of it. The argument author Paul Farhi attempts to make is that the term “the media” is too broad to be defining. If one defines “the media” according to the constraints given by The Oxford Dictionary, then practically everything around you is, technically “the media.” Here’s the definition:

(the media)
the main means of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing, and the Internet), regarded collectively
See the problem? If “the media” is the vehicle for all communication, all communication is “the media.”

Not Your Grandfather’s Newspaper

When I first woke up this morning, I knew that the headlines would be dominated by spin on last night’s presidential debate. Among the myriad of headlines was this one: The Media Calls Debate For Clinton. I’d link you to the article, but it has since been removed (apparently an editor woke up). My point is that the article was a case of one information source blamed another information source for communicating information. Seems rather silly, doesn’t it?

When one puts something on the Internet, whether it’s a Facebook status or a tweet or your grandmother’s cookie recipe, there is one underlying purpose: to communicate. When one puts something on the Internet, one is engaging in the digital form of publishing. That makes you part of “the media” and a consumer of media at the same time. Therefore, taking this circular logic all the way around, when one criticizes “the media” online, they are ultimately criticizing themselves.

Yeah, stop and let that sink in for a moment. Hurts the brain a little, doesn’t it?

Believe it or not, all these media sources are less than 100 years old. Only newspapers and printed leaflets existed in 1916. Even the first talking movie, The Jazz Singer, was over a decade away. With so few choices for information, trust in those sources ran high. Chances are, in most areas, your grandparents or great-grandparents knew who published the local newspaper. They probably went to the same church, were members of the same civic groups. Few people would have thought of publishing their own paper or printing their own leaflets. Information needed to be important if it was going to be distributed.

Contrast that to current standards where “if you think it then you must tweet it,” or something like that.

What We Say

Gallup released a poll earlier this month with the headline: American’s Trust In Mass Media Sinks To New Low. Here’s the actual question and how the long-term graph looks:

Notice that Gallup attempts some nebulous framing of the question by adding the qualifier “mass” to “media,” so as to restrict opinions to what might once have been regarded as “legitimate” news sources—the ones your grandparents would have trusted. Given the overwhelming number of “news” sites, especially when one includes aggregators such as Huffington Post and Breitbart, Gallup’s question is still too broad to have any real, definitive meaning. If the survey tells us anything, and that point would certainly be arguable, it is that we only trust a limited number of the information sources we access.

Similarly, Hart Research, acting on behalf of NBC News and The Wall Street Journal, asked half the respondents of a 1,000-person survey to “rate your feelings” toward “several public figures, groups, and organizations.” In the total list, “the news media” ranked toward the bottom with only a 19% positive response, between Donald Trump (28% positive response) and Vladimir Putin (6% positive response). However, once again, the lack of a narrow definition calls the results into question. Some people might consider satire sights such as The Onion part of the news media. Others might consider aggregators part of the news media. Neither is there any delineation between sources that provide a majority of reporter-based editorial content and those that are merely an omnibus of collected opinion. 

What We Mean

What is generally considered “news” in this Internet-driven age is a far cry from the traditional expectations of journalism. There are millions of websites that distribute information related to current topics. For many people, that makes those sources “news.” Never mind the fact that they’re opinions we’ve written ourselves, largely to amuse ourselves. By the broad contemporary definition, this website might, at least on some days, considered a news source. That scares me because, despite the sometimes excessive amount of research we put into an article, it is never our intent to provide anything more than an opinion.

Perhaps even more frightening is how frequently people refer to social media, specifically Facebook and Twitter, as part of the news media. Neither site has reporters or editors controlling what you see or don’t see. All the information flowing through those sites is curated by one person: you. You decide what is “news” and what is “information” and what is “entertainment.”  What’s telling is that a very large number of people make absolutely no distinction between those categories. They simply toss everything under the general heading of “the media.”

And they don’t trust it. Which, again, using that circular logic, means we don’t trust ourselves. We probably shouldn’t. We don’t know what we’re doing. We’ve proven that we’re not terribly judicious in the media we consume. If we were, debunking sites like Snopes wouldn’t get nearly as much traffic. On any given day, we publish more false information through our own social media accounts than all the newspapers and news networks combined. We distrust “the media” because we know, secretly, that we are complicit in spreading rumor more than fact.

A Difficult Diet

Like a person whose health deteriorates from eating only fast food, the solution to our media loathing starts with a very harsh reality: we need to cut back. Continuing the fast food metaphor, we need to pay more attention to the source of what we’re consuming. Sure, there are days when ordering pizza makes sense for our schedule, but that doesn’t happen every day. Most days we’re more conscientious about what we consume. The same is true of media. Some days I need the smile I get from a video on Funny Or Die. Making that my source for breaking news and information, though, is just silly. I’m going to check my local paper, then local television news, then national news sources if applicable. I’m damn sure not going to rely on Facebook or Twitter.

We have a preponderance of choice. Media surrounds us already and as the Internet of Things grows the amount of media being thrown at us is going to get worse. We need to start making those tough choices now. Back off the Buzzfeeds and TMZs, limiting them to inconsequential topics that we probably shouldn’t care about in the first place. Pay more attention to the source of our information. Hint: anytime you see an article tagged as “sponsored,” know that it was written by someone, or on behalf of someone, who has a vested financial interest in the topic. Therefore, it’s not news. Recognise opinion for what it is: someone else’s viewpoint, not news.

If we don’t trust media it’s because both the media we create and our choice of media to consume are not trustworthy. The problem is us. We’ve gotten fat on easily available, always accessible media. Saying we distrust “the media” is like saying we don’t like mac & cheese while a fresh bowl sits in front of us. We need to put ourselves on a media diet and see just how much our opinions change.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  PotD
Hello, Human. Today You Get To Die
September 26, 2016
charles i. letbetter - hello human, today you get to die

The fear of death follows from the fear of life. A man who lives fully is prepared to die at any time. —Mark Twain

 

 

charles i. letbetter - hello, today you get to die

We rarely get to choose when we die. If your day was today, would you be ready?

Looking at the headlines this morning was a bit depressing. Golfing great Arnold Palmer died at age 87. Miami Marlin’s ace pitcher Jose Fernandez was killed in a boating accident.  Mylan Hicks, currently a defensive back in the Canadian Football League and formerly of the San Francisco 49ers, was killed in a Calgary nightclub shooting. While I had no personal connection with any of them, I certainly respect their accomplishments and the impact their deaths have on their respective sports. We’ve mentioned multiple times that this is being a lousy year, but the past couple of weeks have been especially brutal it seems. Two friends have lost their fathers in the past two weeks. Other friends have lost childhood playmates way too early in their lives.

Death surrounds us all the time. We are subconsciously aware of that fact, but there are times when it seems to get too close for comfort. When we see so many die around us we start to feel uncomfortable. Dealing with the reality of our own mortality is not easy. No one really wants to die, especially not right now. Yet, there are so many ways in which death can sneak up and take us unexpectedly.

China lost control of a space station and it could crash into a US city. Imagine driving to work one morning and a chunk of space station falls out of the clear blue sky and you die. This is the reality in which we now live.

Mitigating The Risk

Before walking the dog each morning, I’m careful to check the weather. Regardless of what the forecast might have said the night before, weather has a nasty habit of changing. This morning, there were storms in the area. Lightning struck less than a mile away. So, we watched radar and timed our walk to minimize the risk of getting fried on the sidewalk. That wouldn’t be a good way to start the morning.

We know the potential for dying is out there. We all have those preventative actions we take to mitigate the risk that we might die on any given day. Eating veggies is one of those things we know pushes death out a little bit. Same goes for driving safely and crossing the street at the crosswalk with the light. Most people try to not do stupid things that have a high-risk factor for ending up dead. Even when doing something silly like jumping out of a perfectly good airplane, we take the precaution of using a reasonably good parachute packed by someone we trust.

Yet, no matter how many precautions we might take, death sometimes has a way of finding us at the least expected and most inconvenient moments. Be sure, Jose Fernandez didn’t think the risks were too great when he got on that boat.  None of us see all the risks. No matter what we do, sometimes death just shows up and says, “Hey, you’re coming with me now.” We don’t get any choice in the matter.

Being Ready To Die

If all the recent deaths around me have done anything, they have reminded me that I need to go ahead and get some kind of burial insurance. Sounds morbid, doesn’t it? Yet, all of my experience tells me it’s a smart move. My parents had burial insurance. They bought it when they were in their 30s. They were able to pre-pay for their funerals, including the caskets, so that when that time inevitably came for them my brother and I didn’t have to worry about the cost or wondering what they might have wanted. That act alone was one of the kindest things they ever did. When you have a parent die, the details of paying for and planning a funeral are not where you want to spend your time.

There’s something about actually making such a purchase, though, that feels uncomfortable, as though we’re tempting fate. In my mind, I know that my parents lived another 40 years after pre-paying for their arrangements. Yet, there’s this nagging feeling that if I take the same precaution it’s like thumbing my nose at death, taunting it to come and get me.  The same applies to life insurance. Both make the lives of our families so much easier, especially if our death is unexpected. Still, there’s no getting around that icky feeling that if you make that purchase you’re tempting fate.

Being ready to die is as much an attitude as anything, though. We have to be comfortable with death, okay with the concept of no longer existing in this world. I no longer think that we need to know what happens next. If we were meant to know the universe would provide a reliable, believable way of telling us. It hasn’t. We’ve made up our own myths over the millions of years, but when we get down to it, we have to be okay with just going. Period. Let whatever comes next, if anything, take care of itself.

Remembering to Live

Like the Mark Twain quote at the top of this page, being satisfied with our life makes it easier to be okay with the inevitability of death. No one should obsess over their own death; it’s not only unhealthy, it prevents  one from making the most of life. I’m not talking about being happy, mind you. Happiness is a temporal state and in that moment when some jackass cuts you off in traffic “happy” isn’t exactly the emotion one feels at the time. Rather, contentedness is more what I’m going for; that sense that my life isn’t perfect and I’m okay with that.

Are we content? I’m not, not really. There are still things I want to be doing, not bucket list things like winning a Pulitzer and such, but everyday things such as finding the next great supermodel and teaching my youngest son to drive and regaining some fluency in French and Italian. I have in my mind a level of activity that I’ve let slip. Having been there once, I know it can be achieved. I let go, though. I want that contentedness back.

What about you? If a chunk of that Chinese space station were to fall on you today (don’t worry, it won’t … yet) you’d certainly be disappointed that you didn’t have more warning, but would you be content with where your life is right now? What would it take to get you to that point in your life?

I fully expect to live long enough to be a pain in the ass to my grandchildren, assuming at least one of my sons gets around to providing some. I’m not expecting to die.

But then, not many people ever are.  Perhaps we all need to do better prep work. Try to not die today, okay? I think our quota is full for the rest of the year.

Continue Reading

Current Issues  /  PotD  /  science
10 Horrible Deaths Awaiting Offspring Of Anti-Vaxxers
September 25, 2016
charles i. letbetter - 10 horrible deaths awaiting children of anti-vaxxers

No cause justifies the deaths of innocent people. —Albert Camus

 

10 Horrible Deaths Await Offspring of Anti-Vazzers

Those who fail to vaccinate their children sentence the innocent to the most horrible of deaths for which there is no justification

We do not enter this conversation lightly. My words may well anger some. I don’t expect to persuade those who are already committed, but to those who are still questioning, who have not yet made up their minds, heed my words: Those who do not vaccinate their children hold the blood of the deaths of innocents on their hands. Not only is refusing to vaccinate children one of the most stupid and ill-conceived acts of selfishness ever devised, it is morally criminal for it effects not those making the decision, but those innocents doomed to endure the results.

I have not wanted to tackle this issue as it is off topic for our normal discussions. I realized, however, that I needed to get my hands dirty, metaphorically speaking, and address the matter when I snapped at Kat while she was reading aloud an especially ridiculous comment from someone so horribly ignorant, so fully deceived by all the lies and nonsense, that they didn’t even recognize the basic science of germ theory. Granted, it was still early in the morning and I only had three cups of coffee in me, but the level of nonsense being spewed by this person in a public forum was so intense my temper got the best of me. I barked at Kat to stop reading to me anything written by someone who has ceded use of their brain.

If a topic has gotten under my skin to the point that I’m being unkind to someone I love, then obviously I need to address that matter head-on and be done with it.

All Natural Was A Good Idea

“All natural.” The phrase started becoming dominant in the popular lexicon of the 1960s, when the anti-establishment movement started considering the possibility that everything we were ingesting, wearing, breathing, and eating might not be working in our favor. Back then, there was practically no regulation on the use of chemicals in the creation and development of other products. Neither was anyone watching what was being dumped into waterways. Only when the pollution began to accumulate to a point that it began directly interfering with our lives did Government intervene and pass laws limiting and prohibiting certain chemicals.

The movement was necessary and helped save the lives of millions of people. However, what is important to realize is that the “all natural” proponents of the time used science to make their point. They didn’t rely on conjecture, hearsay, or popular mythology in an attempt to make their point. Studies were done. Samples were taken. Scientific method was used to prove things such as the dangerous levels of lead and mercury in water and other products.

The “all natural” movement today has evolved into an anti-science, anti-medicine group that mistakenly thinks that nature has the solution to everything that sickens us. They are convinced that  the more we become holistic and natural in our approach to life, the better our lives will be. So, they decry genetically modified organisms, refuse to drink municipal treated water, and deny their children the safety of vaccines.

Nature Doesn’t Like Us

As it turns out, nature doesn’t like us as much as we like it. Raw milk, the non-pasteurised, non-homogenized stuff that comes directly from a cow’s udder, contains bacteria that, prior to 1864, wiped out entire tribes and cities. The same applies to less natural drinks such as beer and wine. All that alcohol actually gives bacteria a nice resting place rather than destroying it. The all-natural stuff rather sucks.

Many other food sources have similar challenges. Has anyone noticed all the recalls of organically grown leafy vegetables? Ta-da! They need some science in order to survive the process of being packaged, shipped, refrigerated, not refrigerated, and the ride home from the store. Otherwise, they develop nasty things that can KILL YOU if you ingest them. Seriously, all-natural isn’t what it’s cracked up to be!

Jeffrey Kruger, science writer for TIME magazine, wrote in an opinion piece in 2014:

“Messing with nature” is the whole point of medicine, given that it’s nature that cooked up every disease that ever existed. You want pure nature? OK, die young.

As brusque as the statement is, we have the longest life span in over 3,000 years because of science and medicine. Nature will kill you.

No One Wants To Keep You Sick

I’ve heard all the “big pharma” horseshit and I’m not buying it. No one’s best interest is served by intentionally keeping people sick. If we would take a moment to understand how numbers work, we’d see the mathematical fallacy in such a concept. There is no conspiracy. No one is trying to “keep you down.”

Instead, just a few days ago, Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg and his wife DoctorPriscilla Chan (a pediatrician who had her own daughter vaccinated), pledged $3 billion to the eradication of all disease. In explaining the reasoning behind the commitment, Dr. Chan stated:

We are the limit of what we understand about science and disease. We want to push back that boundary. By investing in science today, we hope to build a future in which all of our children can live long and rewarding lives.

Funny, that doesn’t sound much like a conspiracy to keep everyone sick, does it? Oh, and while we’re at it, please don’t miss the fact that the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has already spent over $2 billion fighting malaria and have committed another $1.6 billion to fight the spread of AIDS.

Wait, we’re not done. Viacom/CBS CEO and an all-around frequently unlikable guy, Sumner Redstone, donated $1.5 million to help eradicate polio, a disease that would have been gone already if everyone would vaccinate their children. So, let’s just put to rest that ridiculously insane notion that “big pharma” wants to do you harm.

Science Is Your Friend

I fail to understand this unreasonable concept that science and nature are at odds with each other. Science looks at nature, discovers what’s under the covers, how it works, why things respond well to certain stimuli and not others, not because it keeps them out of the bars and brothels (which are already full of politicians and lobbyist) but because doing so helps us to get along better with nature and use nature to our benefit.

For example, it is science that tells us we really need bees for something other than honey. Many of the very vaccinations and cures against which the ignorant rail have their source in a better understanding of nature. Nature is a partner in better health when we pair it with well-studied matters of science. We can all get along.

When we refuse to do so, when people start believing a ridiculous 12-person study that has been thoroughly debunked by the very doctors who participated as well as  multiple independent studies then we have a problem. Vaccinations do not cause autism and I can quite comfortably sit here and say without any bad feeling that those who claim otherwise are utter morons and a danger to society.

Yes, some people have allergies to certain medicines. Kat is allergic to penicillin, which is a damned pain when she gets sick, but you don’t find her campaigning against the medicine. I’m deathly allergic to bee stings, too, but you don’t see me out spraying the yard to kill the little buggers.

Anti-Vaxxers Are Vile People

Those who refuse to vaccinate their children are vile people because they are not the ones who ultimately suffer the consequences. Rather, they doom innocent children, theirs and others with whom they come into contact, with the possibility that they could die quite horribly from diseases that are totally preventable. This is not a judgment call. This has nothing to do with race, social standing, educational level obtained, levels of pseudo-fame, religion, national origin, gender, sexuality, or anything else over which one has no control. People who fail to vaccinate their children are making a deliberate choice to put their children at risk.

We have laws that require putting children in specialized safety seats when traveling in vehicles. We have laws about the non-flammability of children’s clothing. There are even laws about how old a child has to be before they can stand at the bus stop by themselves. Our society values our children, yet we are, for reasons I cannot begin to comprehend, tolerating these utter morons who not only put their children at risk, but yours and mine as well because they believe some garbage about vaccines causing autism or some other shit.

No, these people are dooming children to DIE just as surely as did the Nazis who stripped Jewish children naked and marched them to the showers. If anything, the risk at which anti-vaxxers are putting their children is worse because these diseases, against which they should be immunized, may not strike until they’re older. Or they might even be passed on to a subsequent generation that would be born with a fatal disease. Death from these diseases is not quick, but lingers, putting a child through unspeakable pain.

Let’s Get Real About The Danger

There are ten major diseases that can doom a child to a horrible death; diseases that are wholly preventable with vaccinations. This is the risk imposed upon your children. Sure, there’s a chance your child could grow up just fine without any medical issues. There’s also a chance that a two-year-old can make it across a busy four-lane highway without getting hit, but do we really want to take that chance? These are our children we’re talking about!

Here, let’s take a look at just what can happen without the vaccinations that can stop disease.

Measles

Measles, interestingly enough, is a lung disease. If someone who has it, even if they’ve not yet developed a rash, coughs or sneezes in your vicinity and you’re  not immunized, there’s a 90 percent chance you’ll catch the disease.  Or maybe you weren’t there at all. You thought you were being careful. Walking into the room, though, where that person coughed or sneezed, you touch something on which the saliva from that cough or sneeze landed less than two hours ago, and you’ve caught the disease. Measles is just that easy to catch.

Before these idiotic anti-vaxxers became a problem, measles was all but eradicated. It was extremely rare to hear of a case in the US. Why? BECAUSE PEOPLE HAD THEIR KIDS VACCINATED. Are you understanding this? Prior to the anti-vaxx movement, measles was GONE from the United States! Stupid people brought it back, though, and that’s a danger. Prior to the vaccine, approximately 3-4 million people got the disease each year. 48,000 were hospitalized. 400-500 DIED.

The numbers outside the US, however, where the measles vaccine isn’t available, get really ugly really fast. According to numbers released by the World Health Organization, the number of deaths on the continent of Africa in 2012 was 41,000.  Within the Eastern Mediterranean, 25,800. Southeast Asia was hit with 52,000 measles deaths. While the numbers here have yet to exceed a hundred, consider the fact that in the year 2000 there were ZERO deaths from Measles in the US. The fact that we have ANY now is directly attributable to the carelessness and selfishness of anti-vaxxers and the people dying ARE CHILDREN. Feel good about that, do you? Do you kick puppies, too?

Whooping Cough (Pertussis)

This one sneaks up on you. Another lung disease spread by being near someone who has the disease, the cough is the primary symptom. We all cough. Coughing is our body’s way of getting bad things out of our lungs. Perfectly healthy people cough. That’s why we don’t pay too much attention when someone starts coughing, even if it’s a baby. But then, the cough continues. Normal remedies don’t make it go away. Two weeks later the cough is still there and it is much worse. The hacking is so bad and so violent that it has caused people to break ribs. As it continues, the cough causes seizures, interrupts one’s ability to breathe.

Even at this point, the dangers for adults are not too severe, unless you have asthma. For infants less than a year old  the danger is very real, though. Babies lack the ability to get their breath back on their own. They cough. They choke. They stop breathing. THEY DIE.

Whooping cough is perhaps the greatest threat to mortality among infants. Even with the vaccine, there were still a handful of deaths every year. Most of those were because parents didn’t realize their child has something more than a normal cough until it was too late. Incidents of Whooping Cough have increased, however. In 2014, there were 20 pertussis-related deaths in the US, the most since 1955.  While the number may not sound large, consider that there haven’t been that many deaths since 1955! That’s  60 years ago! Anti-vaxxers are KILLING babies.

Flu

Flu numbers are scary even with the ever-changing immunizations. Some years, supplies of the vaccine run low or isn’t as accurate and we immediately see a spike in the number of flu-related deaths. Without the vaccine at all, though, those numbers would be significantly higher.

The flu is a viral infection of the nose, throat, and lungs. Once again, being around someone who has the disease and coughs is what spreads the germs. As the flu morphs and changes each year, our body’s natural immune system has difficulty keeping up. If it were the same ol’ flu every year, it might not be a problem. But it’s not. Every year, some 49,000 people in the US die from the flu. The very old and the very young are hardest hit. That’s with vaccinations.

What happens if no one takes the vaccination? By one estimate, an H5N1 avian influenza could affect 80 million people in the US. Assuming a 20 percent mortality rate, 16 million people would die.  Stop and think about that for a moment. Sixteen million people.  More than just a health crisis, this would be a homeland security crisis, an economic crisis. Not only would people in your family die, everyone around you would have someone in their family die. Are you beginning to see the problem?

Polio

THIS DISEASE SHOULD BE GONE ALREADY! This is the disease that proved vaccines work. Throughout the early part of the 20th century, polio was the scourge of the United States. In the summer of 1916, it took the lives of 2,700 children in New York alone. An interesting thing happened, though. The vaccine developed by Dr. Jonas Salk was approved in 1955 and you’ll never believe what happened: THE DISEASE WENT AWAY! Are you understanding the relevance here? People who got the polio vaccine DID NOT GET POLIO!

Not only did the polio vaccine work, it worked quickly. By the year 2000, all of North America was polio free! NO ONE IN NORTH AMERICA HAD POLIO! Then, along came anti-vaxxers who refused to give their children one of the most vital immunizations in human history. Care to guess what happened? POLIO IS BACK. Sure, the numbers aren’t big, yet, but the fact that a disease that had been eradicated from the entire continent has returned is reason enough for alarm.

Understand, you can get polio at any time in your life. 90% of people carrying the disease show no symptoms. While the disease can be stopped with the vaccine, once you get it, there is no cure! YOU WILL DIE and not nearly as quickly as you would like. There will be pain. There will be suffering. The World Health Organization considers a single case of polio an epidemic, it is just that frightening. Almost everyone reading this is too young to remember scenes like this:

10 horrible deaths awaiting children of anti-vaxxers

In the 1940s and 1950s, people with bulbar polio were immobilized inside “iron lungs” – huge metal cylinders that operated like a pair of bellows to regulate their breathing and keep them alive.

So yeah, skip this vaccine and you’re dooming your child to, at the least, a very miserable life, and in the end one of the most painful deaths ever. Happy now?

Pneumococcal Disease

The doctor tells you that you have pneumonia. Not a big deal, right? Stay home, drink plenty of fluids, maybe take a few doses of penicillin. Unless you don’t take the medicine and haven’t been vaccinated. With pneumococcal disease, pneumonia might be the least of your worries. Only 5 out of 100 die of pneumococcal pneumonia. The same bacteria, however, causes Bacteremia, a blood disease that is especially fatal in children under age 5. 1 out of 100 children who contract pneumococcal bacteremia die from the disease.

Then, there’s meningitis. I should mention that we’re going to see meningitis pop up more than once because there is more than one bacteria that can cause the disease. Pneumococcal meningitis kills 1 in 15 children under the age of 5. ONE IN FIFTEEN CHILDREN DIE. Even those who don’t die are likely to have life-long limitations such as hearing loss and learning disabilities. The mortality numbers run even higher among the elderly. That’s right, your vaccination decision can kill your great-grandmother.

Isn’t it wonderful to give a breeding ground to a bacteria that has THREE DIFFERENT WAYS TO KILL PEOPLE? There are vaccines available that can kill the pneumococcal bacteria quickly and easily. There’s no need for ANY child to ever suffer through this kind of death, with high fever, pain, and stiffness. Yet, when parents refuse to have their children vaccinated, this is yet another easily contracted way for children to die. None of this is necessary. All of it can be prevented. Unfortunately, anti-vaxxers are TOO FUCKING STUPID TO DO WHAT IS RIGHT.

Tetanus

When I was a child, perhaps one of the most frequently ignored dangers in our region of Oklahoma was rusty barbed wire. The stuff was everywhere and was we would be running and playing and crawling through fences, getting a scratch and tearing our clothes was inevitable. Most the time, the biggest danger was Mom finding out you’d torn another pair of jeans. Every once in a while, though, someone would get a really bad cut on the barbed wire, or step on a rusty nail in an old barn. Our parents never hesitated a second. Off to the hospital we’d go for a tetanus shot, unless we’d just had one, in which case we were still good.

Tetanus shots today are good for ten years. I remember my last one clearly, just over three years ago. Yes, those suckers hurt a bit. This is not a fun shot to get. Yet, the vaccine is infinitely better than the symptoms that come with tetanus. Get a load of this:

  • Headache
  • Jaw cramping (lockjaw)
  • Sudden, involuntary muscle tightening – often in the stomach (muscle spasms)
  • Painful muscle stiffness all over the body
  • Trouble swallowing
  • Jerking or staring (seizures)
  • Fever and sweating
  • High blood pressure and fast heart rate

Oh, and did I forget to mention that, at the end of all that suffering, YOU CAN DIE? 10-20% of tetanus cases are fatal. WOULD YOU REALLY DO THAT TO YOUR CHILD? If you would, you deserve to have very bad things happen to you.

Meningococcal Disease

Remember a few hundred words back when I said we would see meningitis pop up again? Well, here it is. In this form, it is most commonly known as “the kissing disease” because the bacteria lives in the back of the throat and is easily spread through kissing. Public schools are frequently affected. Once the disease is present, the natural amorous activities of teenagers do a frighteningly good job of spreading the disease.

Oh, but you don’t have to kiss someone to get meningitis. All you have to do is live with someone who has it. This disease is highly communicable to the point of often requiring whole families to be quarantined. There are three primary strains of meningococcal disease, referred to as serogroups B, C, and Y and there are vaccines readily available to treat all three groups. This is a reportable disease and outbreaks are frequently listed on the CDC website.

If you have an 11-12-year-old child, they need this vaccine. If you are a first-year college student living in a dormitory, you need this vaccine. If you are a military recruit, you probably weren’t given a choice. You’ve had this vaccine. There are only two reasons for not getting the appropriate meningococcal vaccine: 1. you’re pregnant, which is generally a bad time to be getting vaccinated at all. 2. You have severe allergies. If you’re concerned that you might be allergic to some of the vaccine’s ingredients, consult your doctor. Latex allergies seem to present a common problem.

However, if  you are neither pregnant nor allergic, then GET THE DAMN VACCINE. THIS DISEASE KILLS STUPID PEOPLE. Or the children of stupid people. Don’t be stupid.

Hepatitis B

Hey, here’s a nice disease you’ve heard about because there are plenty of sleazy celebrities running around with this Hepatitis B and they’re not dead yet, so it much not be all that bad, right?

Hey, stupid, those celebrities aren’t dead because they’re taking more drugs than are available at your local CVS. Had they not taken all the shots and the medicine their doctors prescribed, we wouldn’t be subjected to their continual parades of nonsense in the press.

Here’s what you need to know: Hepatitis B is 100 times more infectious than HIV, the disease that causes AIDS. While the most common means of transmission are through sex or sharing a needle, it is also very possible for a pregnant woman who has the disease to pass it on to her baby.

Hepatitis B attacks the liver. Chronic conditions (those lasting more than six months) may cause cirrhosis and lead to liver failure. Some people might qualify for liver transplant, but not everyone will. Because this is a disease that spreads primarily through voluntary risky behavior, don’t expect a lot of sympathy if you get it. The vaccine that can reduce the effect of some of the worst symptoms must be received within 24 hours of coming into contact with the disease. Next month doesn’t help you any.

Mothers who pass the disease along to their children start them off in life with a severe handicap. DO NOT DENY THESE CHILDREN VACCINATIONS. You’ve already fucked up by giving them Hepatitis B. Don’t make the situation any worse.

Mumps

I had the mumps as a child. It would seem that I survived. The first mumps vaccine wasn’t available until I was already in school. By then, I’d had the disease and was doing well. I was fortunate, though. My case wasn’t all that severe. A couple of weeks of careful care from our family doctor (I remember more than one shot being involved) and a liquid diet left me cranky but alive.

The danger of mumps is not just the only cause of parotitis, which is bad enough on its own, just look at this wonderful list of other diseases it can cause:

  • Aseptic meningitis/encephalitis
  • Sensorineural hearing loss/deafness
  • Transverse myelitis
  • Polyneuritis
  • Guillain-Barré syndrome
  • Cerebellar ataxia (with encephalitis)
  • Keratouveitis
  • Thyroiditis
  • Myocarditis
  • Mastitis
  • Pneumonia
  • Pancreatitis
  • Nephritis
  • Orchitis
  • Oophoritis
  • Arthritis
  • Thrombocytopenia purpura

Oh, and if that’s not enough, it can make adolescent boys sterile for the rest of their lives. Sounds fun, doesn’t it? So many different horrible ways to DIE all wrapped up in what too many people think of as a harmless childhood disease. Still want to put  off getting those shots?

Hib (Haemophilus Influenzae Type B)

There is a very good chance you’ve never heard of Hib. Know why? Since the development of a vaccine, incidents of Hib dropped 99%. It’s not quite completely gone, but almost. The only reason it hasn’t disappeared is anti-vaxxers.  Since they don’t see it occurring often in the general population, they don’t consider Hib a threat.

However, prior to the development of the vaccine, Hib was the number one cause of bacterial meningitis (yeah, that lovely disease again) among children under the age of 5. Before the vaccine, Hib infected approximately 20,000 children in the US each year. Of those, roughly 1,200 of them DIED.   That means this vaccine is saving the lives of approximately 1,200 children a year. Because of this vaccine, more children live to start kindergarten, learn to read, tell silly jokes, and give us snaggle-toothed smiles when their baby teeth fall out.

People who don’t vaccinate their children run the risk of missing all that. Without this vaccination, the incidence of Hib will increase. As we see the disease increase, so will the deaths. Who is responsible for those deaths? THE IDIOTIC PARENTS WHO DIDN’T GET THEIR KIDS VACCINATED!

Manslaughter Is Too Nice A Word

There you go: ten horrible ways to die. We shouldn’t have to worry about any of them because WE HAVE VACCINES THAT PREVENT THESE DISEASES! There is absolutely no excuse at all for not vaccinating your children. This isn’t a choice you’re giving them like whether to go to church or believe in a deity or what flavor of ice cream to have after dinner. No, when you refuse to have your children vaccinated, you leave them vulnerable. Even worse, you’re not leaving them vulnerable to one disease, you’re leaving them wide open TO ALL TEN DEADLY DISEASES. Every last one of them. YOUR child could get Whooping Cough AND the flu AND meningitis AND polio all in one fell swoop! Their little bodies were never meant to have immune systems developed enough to stop all these diseases. GIVE THEM THE FUCKING SHOTS ALREADY!

You know as well as I do that there is a lot of horseshit on the Internet. Unfortunately, there are a lot of really stupid people who believe everything that comes from the mouth of anyone who is on television, or used to be on television, or looks like they could be on television, or might possibly own a television. People who can look past the MOUNTAINS of prevailing evidence, scientific and medical research, clinical studies by REPUTABLE doctors with THOUSANDS of subjects (not just 12), and still choose to believe the OUTRIGHT LIES that come from the anti-vaccination community ARE COMPLETE MORONS.

I want you to get this straight because I’m tired of hearing it come out of your filthy little mouths or seeing it typed by your filthy little fingers:

VACCINES DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM!

NICO LaHOOD IS STILL WRONG!

Both of those headlines are links. Click them and pay attention to the evidence for once in your miserable life!

People who do not vaccinate their children are a threat to national security. When your children become ill with one of the ten diseases we’ve listed, they weaken the herd immunity of the entire country. A nation that loses its immunity against infectious and fatal disease is not a secure nation. We all are at risk because of YOUR behavior.

ARE YOU LISTENING TO ME?

YOUR behavior has ramifications well outside yourself. That’s why you don’t get to make this choice. No, it’s not yours to make. You don’t get to make a choice that puts me and my children, and the children in our neighborhood, and the children in the school my children attend, all at risk because YOUR ARE A FUCKING MORON WHO DOESN’T WANT TO BELIEVE THE  SCIENCE RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.

Yes, I’m yelling at you because you’re fucking stupid. You are a danger to humanity and a direct threat to the safety and well-being of your own children. Should any of your children die from one of the horrible diseases we’ve listed here, you are not merely guilty of neglect or manslaughter. You are guilty of PREMEDITATED MURDER because you willfully choose to make the WRONG choice and PUT YOUR CHILDREN AT RISK despite the preponderance of evidence literally being shoved in your face.

I have no patience with nor sympathy for those who are so incredibly ignorant as to continue down this path of anti-vaccination. I don’t care if what I say hurts your feelings. Your feelings are not the issue. The issue is the safety and longevity of children, WHICH YOU ARE PUTTING IN DANGER BECAUSE YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO GET THEM THEIR VACCINATIONS. THEIR DEATHS ARE YOUR FAULT!

There Are Two Solutions To This  Problem

Obviously, were everyone to decide to stop being stupid and have their children immunized, this whole problem goes away and everyone has a chance to live a reasonably happy life.

Yeah, that’s not going to happen.

So, let’s do this: everyone who doesn’t want to live in a vaccinated world gets to move to a lovely island somewhere in the South Pacific where there isn’t anyone else around for you to infect. You and your family get to move there, away from all the GMOs and the HMOs and the Oreos, and live completely natural lives without any interruption from anyone else. You stay there, where you can’t infect the rest of us. In 20 years, we’ll send out some folks wearing hazmat suits to collect and respectfully dispose of your remains in a manner that prevents any lingering disease from contaminating the rest of us.  You get to live the way you want, and the rest of us get to live.

How does that sound? We don’t expect anything from you. You sit there on your island, soaking up the sun, enjoying the waves, the  jellyfish stings, the spider bites, the infected fruit, maybe a wild animal or two. We won’t bother you with our modern medicine and vaccinations. You get to live your life all natural. Your deaths will be on your own terms: all natural—and likely painful.

I can get behind that idea. I’d even offer to help you pack but I’m afraid I might catch something.

So, good-bye,. Good riddance. Get the fuck out of here.

Let us know when you come to your senses. You’ll understand if I don’t hold my breath.

Continue Reading

Page 13 of 38