Ken Jacobs Day

 

‘A pioneer of the American film avant-garde of the 1960s and ’70s, Ken Jacobs is a central figure in post-war experimental cinema. From his first films of the late 1950s to his recent experiments with digital video, his investigations and innovations have influenced countless artists.

‘A New Yorker by birth, Jacobs graduated from City University to find himself in the midst of the downtown art scene of the 1960s, which included artists Robert Rauschenberg and Andy Warhol, beat writers Allen Ginsberg and Jack Kerouac; and the experimental theater troupes of Trisha Brown and Yvonne Rainer. Although Jacobs had studied painting with Hans Hoffman, he quickly gravitated to film, finding kindred spirits in radical filmmakers such as Jonas Mekas and Hollis Frampton. An early friendship with Jack Smith yielded several collaborations, including the seminal underground films Blonde Cobra (which Jonas Mekas dubbed “the masterpiece of Baudelairean cinema”) and Little Stabs at Happiness, as well as a Provincetown beach-based live show, The Human Wreckage Review.

‘Jacobs has long been a cinema activist. He was an integral part of Manhattan’s burgeoning alternative film scene, which included venues such as the Film-Makers’ Cooperative and The Bleecker Street Cinema (which notoriously premiered Blonde Cobra with Smith’s Flaming Creatures) as well as his own loft, where the Kuchar brothers first screened their 8mm work. In 1966, he and his wife Flo founded Millennium Film Workshop, and he was a cofounder of one of the country’s earliest departments of cinema, at Binghamton University.

‘Jacobs has always been interested primarily in the act of viewing, rather than in textual decoding or analysis. As he points out, “my work is experiential, not conceptual. I want to work with experiences all the time.” In this respect, his breakthrough was Tom, Tom the Piper’s Son (1969-71). A landmark work of appropriation, the film takes as its source material a ten-minute short from 1905. During the course of Jacobs’ two-hour film, this fragment from the dawn of cinema is subjected to extensive and varied re-photography, including manipulations of speed, light, and motion, as well as the minute examination of abstractly enlarged areas of the frame. A masterpiece of cinematic deconstruction, Tom, Tom the Piper’s Son is, in its total concentration on the formal and material properties of the medium, perhaps the quintessential work of 1970s structuralist filmmaking. It was also an indication of the direction in which Jacobs would proceed, wherein actors and narrative would fall away, replaced by a concentration on the rigorous pleasures of the cinematic unconscious. As he has suggested, “there’s already so much film. Let’s draw some of it out for a deeper look, toy with it, take it into a new light with inventive and expressive projection. Freud would suggest doing so as a way to look into our minds.”

‘In later films such as Perfect Film (1986) and Opening the Nineteenth Century: 1896 (1990), Jacobs continued to explore his pioneering appropriation strategies. His interest in performance has never waned, however, as evidenced by Nervous System, a live show incorporating two film projectors, a propeller, and individual filters through which audience members view the double image. Writes Jacobs: “The throbbing flickering is necessary to create ‘eternalisms’: unfrozen slices of time, sustained movements going nowhere and unlike anything in life.” Jacobs’ recent video work, such as Flo Rounds A Corner (1999), have successfully transferred the “eternalisms” effect to the digital realm.

‘Jacobs’ insistence on cinema as a “development of mind” can be seen, despite his protestations to the contrary, as a conceptual approach to art-making practice, one that has yielded groundbreaking work across media. In his activism, film, performance, and video, he has consistently expanded the practice of the avant-garde moving image. Whether undertaking archaeological journeys to the birth of cinema, or scrutinizing the interstices of new digital technologies, Jacobs’ work investigates, provokes, and draws power from the mysteries of the nature of human vision.

‘Ken Jacobs was born in 1933 in Brooklyn, New York. He has received numerous awards, including the Maya Deren Award, a John Simon Guggenheim Fellowship, as well as grants from the National Endowment for the Arts, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the New York State Council on the Arts. In 1969, with the help of Larry Gottheim and Gottheim’s students (one of whom was J. Hoberman,  senior film critic for the Village Voice), Jacobs began the Cinema Department at SUNY Binghamton and taught there until 2002. His films, videos and performances have received international venues such as the Berlin Film Festival, the London Film Festival, the Hong Kong Film Festival, the New York Film Festival, the American Museum of the Moving Image, Astoria, New York; the Whitney Museum of American Art, New York; and The Museum of Modern Art, New York. He was a featured filmmaker at the International Film Festival Rotterdam in 2004.’ — Electronic Arts Intermix

 

____
Stills

 

______
Further

Ken Jacobs @ IMDb
Ken Jacobs on Vimeo
Ken Jacobs @ Filmmakers Cooperative
Ken Jacobs @ Ubuweb
Ken Jacobs @ Lightcone
Ken Jacobs on The Polar Express, 3D, and Religion
Interview with Ken and Flo Jacobs. Part 1: Interruptions
KEN JACOBS: THE DEMIURGO OF THE MOVING IMAGE
Tony Pipolo on Ken Jacobs’s The Guests
Star Spangled To Death Site
Paracinéma, Flicker et 3D : entretien avec Ken Jacobs
Ken Jacobs @ PENNSOUND
Ken Jacobs and the Perverted Archival Image
An Interview with Ken Jacobs
NOT EVEN ACTING WITH KEN JACOBS
A PRIMER ON EXPERIMENTAL FILM LEGEND KEN JACOBS
KEN JACOBS IN 3 DIMENSIONS!
Ken Jacobs @ Senses of Cinema
Ken Jacobs @ mubi
Artifact Bonfire: Ken Jacobs and Reichstag 9/11
Paracinema, Flicker and 3D. Interview with Ken Jacobs
The Nervous Art of Ken Jacobs
Ken Jacobs: Digital Revelationist
Optic Antics: The Cinema of Ken Jacobs
Ken Jacobs: A Matter of Life and Depth
“Movies are All People Know” An Interview With Ken Jacobs
AN INTERVIEW WITH KEN JACOBS
KEN JACOBS / An Email About Jack Smith (and the Cheap Shoes)
Three essays by Ken Jacobs

 

____
Extras

Ken Jacobs: A Pioneer of Avant-Garde Film

Jonas Mekas on Ken Jacobs

Conversations with History: Ken Jacobs

 

______
Interview

 

Julie Hampton: How do you see your films as being different from what we have come to expect from cinema?

Ken Jacobs: Well, most films are about problems. They don’t pose problems. They’re not immediate experience. They’re vicarious experience. Well, that’s not entirely true . There are lots of films that are designed to offer you very strong immediate experiences and at the same time they occupy you with what’s going to happen to somebody else we are identifying with.

JH: Yes. We’re living through them.

KJ: But there’s a lot of work that exists other than mine where you’re having the immediate experience. You’re confronting something. You’re going into the temple of doom.

JH: In cinema?

KJ: No, I mean in art. When we talk about film we mostly consider the movies. We mostly consider photoplay film theater with actors. There are a lot of other things where you meet up with the problem of the work and you surmount it and hopefully you are rewarded with a new way of receiving pleasure.

I should go back to the beginning and tell you that initially I was torn between the formal development of art and film and needing to do something effective socially. And I only released myself from this second obligation a few years ago.

JH: Is this the beginning of your Nervous Systems work then?

KJ: Yes I think it is. I think that Bi-temporal Vision: The Sea is the clearly in the realm of the abstract. That’s not to say it is without meaning for me. It absolutely is a film about crises. It’s absolutely about “to be or not to be” for me. These words abstract are really not satisfying for me because they sound utterly cerebral which these works are not.

JH: As intangible.

KJ: When we talk about abstract we talk about a kind of removal from the immediate but these works are all very, very experiential. They’re very involved in the immediate for me. They really rise out of crises. As in …Did you see The Marriage of Heaven and Hell ?

JH: Yes. It was very beautiful.

KJ: I was very unhappy with the number of lights that were left on in the auditorium. Energy is very central to my work, energy excited by pounding extremes: black/white, light/no light. Using the flicker elicits energy. In painting when you try to paint absolute polarities of light and dark in the world, the only way to get close to that with paint is by placing black next to white to make the white seem whiter and visa versa. Compared to actual black and actual white in the world they’re jokes. They’re somewhere in the middle of the gray scale. So one exacerbates and creates an optical mental impression of much more light and vibrancy by smashing the polarities together. So because of this and for other reasons I need a black room and a bright reflective screen which I didn’t get at that auditorium.

JH: It was a bit hard to see in some ways. Is this what you mean?

KJ: No. The work goes through sections of very low light levels and it builds at certain points a rich effulgence of light. The moving along and lowering and lifting of light levels is very, very important in this piece. The screen was very light absorbent so I lost a lot of light in that screen. I had to use low light levels so where before it demands the audience to make an effort to see and reach across to really see what’s going on, I’m afraid that it might have just submerged because of all the other light competition.

JH: The fact that I was seeing figures that were dissolving into each other depends on the nature of the light?

KJ: In this particular incidence the low light levels change the temperature of the projection bulbs. And when they change the temperature they change the color. So these very elusive strange shiftings of color take place in normally what would be called black and white film. I’m making use of different color temperatures coming from the bulbs. So it’s very, very subtle. Using the low light levels changes the character of the relief. A whole array of changes take place by adjusting the light level. There is no way of getting away from it if I want to do this piece.

JH: What does it mean that the brain is registering , while viewing your work, phantom chroma? Is this chroma that we think we are seeing that is really temperature?

KJ: I think it’s partly that. Instead of having local color you have color fields and they are not identical color fields coming from the two projectors which in turn set up reciprocating complementary colors in the brain which you wouldn’t be able to see if it was local color with everything brightly lit and everything separated by it’s own color. Oranges looking orange etc. So the overall color sets up complementary colors that the brain supplies. Then they begin working with the colors that are there.

JH: That’s great. It’s quite an amazing depth that you are involving the viewer in.  How long have you been working with these kinds of techniques?

KJ: Well, I always have. What’s new for me is rejecting the obligation to answer to social problems. I always was involved with making a formal work.

JH: By formal you don’t mean conceptual, do you?

KJ: No my work is experiential, not conceptual. I want to work with experiences all the time. I don’t even understand most conceptual work. I don’t get it. In that way I do relate to the movies that want to offer you some kind of visual experience. Except you’re the protagonist. You’re entering the temple of doom; a new kind of growth. You have to find out what is in this thing for yourself and I’m offering it. What happened for me three years ago was a heart bypass operation. I haven’t done works of social comment or inquiry since. Even though these works were about what was going on they were always enfolded in a formal development and offered experience, they were never posterized. I never sacrificed the idea to make a musical work of some sort of cinematic development.

JH: So you were always working on that and now you’re thinking about your life and trying to get the most out of it while you are here.

KJ: That’s right…life/death. I’m not in argument with it. I’m not Captain Ahab fighting the white whale. I’m just confronting it.

 

_____________
18 of Ken Jacobs’s 42 films

_____________
Little Stabs at Happiness (1959)
‘Material was cut in as it came out of the camera, embarrassing moments intact. 100′ rolls timed well with music on old 78’s. I was interested in immediacy, a sense of ease, and an art where suffering was acknowledged but not trivialized with dramatics. Whimsy was our achievement, as well as breaking out of step.’ — Ken Jacobs

the entire film

 

_______________
Blonde Cobra (1963)
‘This legendary film features artist Jack Smith in what Jacobs calls “a look in on an exploding life, on a man of imagination suffering pre-fashionable lower East Side deprivation and consumed with American 1950’s, 40’s, 30s disgust. Jacobs did little of the shooting himself, instead drawing on two unfinished films shot by Bob Fleischner. With its dissociative editing strategies, wild costumes, and scraps of music and voiceover, this baroque portrait deserves Jonas Mekas’ recommendation as “the masterpiece of Baudelairean cinema.’ — Manufacturing Intellect

the entire film

 

_______________
Windows (1964)
‘The moving camera shapes the screen image with great purposefulness, using the frame of a window as fulcrum upon which to wheel about the exterior scene. The zoom lens rips, pulling depth planes apart and slapping them together, contracting and expanding in concurrence with camera movements to impart a terrific apparent-motion to the complex of the object-forms pictured on the horizontal-vertical screen, its axis steadied by the audience’s sense of gravity. The camera’s movements in being transferred to objects tend also to be greatly magnified (instead of the camera the adjacent building turns). About four years of studying the window-complex preceded the afternoon of actual shooting (a true instance of cinematic action-painting). The film exists as it came out of the camera barring one mechanically necessary mid-reel splice.’ — K. J.

the entire film

 

_________________
Tom, Tom, the Pipers Son (1969)
‘Cinematography ass’t., Jordan Meyers. Negative-matching assistance by Judy Dauterman. Original 1905 film shot and probably directed by G. W. ‘Billy’ Bitzer, rescued by Kemp Niver via a paper print filed for copyright purposes with the Library of Congress. Reverently examined here, a new movie almost incidentally comes into being. Ghosts! Cine-recordings of the vivacious doings of persons long dead. The preservation of their memory ceases at the edges of the frame (a 1905 hand happened to stick into the frame. . . it’s preserved, recorded in a spray of emulsion grains). One face passes ‘behind’ another on the two-dimensional screen. The staging and cutting is pre-Griffith. Seven infinitely complex cine-tapestries comprise the original film and the style is not primitive, not uncinematic, but an inspired indication of a path of cinematic development whose value has only recently been rediscovered. My camera closes in only to better ascertian the infinite richness (playing with fate, taking advantage of the loop-character of all movies, recalling and varying some visual complexes again and again for particular savoring), searching out incongruities in the story-telling (a person, confused, suddenly looks out of an actor’s face), delighting in the whole bizarre human phenomena of story-telling itself and this within the fantasy of reading any bygone time out of the visual crudities of film: dream within a dream! And then I wanted to show the actual present of film, just begin to indicate its energy. A train of images passes like enough and different enough to imply to the mind that its eyes are seeing an arm lift, or a door close: I wanted to ‘bring to the surface’ that multi-rhythmic collision-contesting of dark and light two-dimensional force-areas struggling edge to edge for identity of shape. . . to get into the amoebic grain pattern itself-a chemical disdispersion pattern unique to each frame, each cold still. . . stirred to life by a successive 16-24 f. p. s pattering on our retinas, the teeming energies elicited ( the grains! the grains!) then collaborating, unknowling and ironically, for form the always-poignant-because-always-past illusion. Important: this film MUST be projected BIG and BRIGHT and IN FOCUS’. — K. J

the entire film

 

________________
Perfect Film (1986)
‘The story goes that Ken Jacobs‘ 1986 work Perfect Film is literally a found film: the experimental filmmaker came upon the reels at a shop, bought them, made a print, tweaked the volume, and released the piece as a raw untouched document (consisting of—in this case—footage of news interviews following the death of Malcolm X). A possibly satisfactory example of that always suspicious term “pure cinema”, Perfect Film is Jacobs’ humbled gesture towards the integrity of the cinematographic image, resurrecting a discarded arbitrary artifact to not simply present what it was…but to establish what it is and what it can be.’ — The Seventh Art

the entire film

 

_______________
The Georgetown Loop (1996)
‘First screened as part of Jacobs’ “Nervous System” film performance, The Georgetown Loop is based on an archival film from 1903, which Jacobs pairs with its mirror double to produce a kaleidoscopic two-screen projection. The original film depicts a journey shot from the cab of a train passing through the Colorado Rockies, and, in this hypnotic new form, comes to suggest the movement of consciousness itself. Writes Jacobs: “I’ve called it the first landscape film deserving of an X-rating, and that it is, yet its secret subtitle is — I must whisper — (Celestial Railway).”‘ — EAI

the entire film

 

________________
Disorient Express (1996)
‘This is not formalist cinema; order interests me only to the extent that it can provide experience. Watch the flat screen give way to some kind of 3-D thrust, look for impossible depth inversions, for jeweled splendor, for CATscans of the brain. I’m banking on this film reviving a yen for expanded consciousness.’ — K. J.

the entire film

 

________________
Circling Zero: We See Absence (2002)
‘Jacobs offers a stream of silent, digitally simplified shots of the collapsing towers and the surrounding metropolitan area—a far cry from the counterpointing sound clips in his previous treatment of September 11, Circling Zero: We See Absence.’ — Reverse Shot

the entire film

 

________________
Star Spangled to Death (2004)
‘Almost 50 years in the making — filming began in 1956 — Ken Jacobs’s 440-minute avant-garde epic was named the best film of 2004 by J. Hoberman of The Village Voice. A history of 20th-century politics and culture communicated through a crazy quilt of found film, including a dancelike performance by Jack Smith (Flaming Creatures) as The Spirit of Life but Not of Living and sustained rants by the downtown character Jerry Sims as Suffering, it’s the ultimate underground movie, subversive and frequently hilarious.’ — The New York Times

Excerpt

 

_______________
Celestial Subway Lines / Salvaging Noise (2005)
‘Celestial Subway Lines/Salvaging Noise, the DVD version of a live multi-media collaboration between Jacobs and musicians John Zorn and Ikue Mori, strives for the aesthetic purity and symbiotic balance that Bute describes, although it does so independent of the film medium. For the visual component of the work (patched together from four separate performances at the Anthology Film Archives in New York), Jacobs utilizes a modified version of the 19th century Magic Lantern, a device used to project still images like the modern slide projector. By spinning the shutter (as opposed to moving a strip of celluloid), Jacobs creates a phantasmagoric effect as bizarre and fantastic as the filmic manipulations he achieved in works like Tom, Tom, the Piper’s Son. And unlike experimental filmmakers as divergent as Stan Brakhage and Ernie Gehr, Jacobs does not value the primacy of image over sound. “Vast spaces ache to be inhabited, for sound to enter,” says Jacobs. “Indeed, for this transcendent Lower East Side-imbued ramble, they call specifically for Zorn and Ikue.’ — Manufacturing Intellect

the entire film

 

________________
Two Wrenching Departures (2006)
‘Jack Smith tumbling, a scene from (the original Nervous System performance) TWO WRENCHING DEPARTURES. 90″. It utilized my early filming from 1956-57.’ — K.J.

the entire film

 

_______________
Ontic Antics Starring Laurel and Hardy: Bye, Molly (2005)
‘Hardy walked a thin line between playing heavy and playing fatty. Laurel adopted a retarded squint, with suggestions of idiot savant. Their characters were at sea, clinging to each other as industrial capitalism was breaking up and sinking. Beautiful losers, they kept it funny, buoying our spirits. Laurel and Hardy… forever. Laurel and Hardy, 1929, enter into a further phase of enchantment in this cine-pyrotechnic Freudian send-up, its coda in a unique 3-D.’ — EAI

the entire film

 

_______________
Capitalism: Child Labor (2006)
‘In Capitalism: Child Labor Jacobs digitally animates a Victorian stereoscopic photograph of a 19th-century factory floor, crowded with machinery and child workers. Jacobs isolates the faces of individuals and details of the image, as if searching out the human and the particular within this mechanized field of mass production. Space appears to fold in on itself as Jacobs activates the stereograph; the agitated image flickers and stutters, but the motion never, in fact, progresses.’ — letterboxd

the entire film

 

_______________
Razzle Dazzle: The Lost World (2007)
‘RAZZLE DAZZLE The Lost World is an early Edison shot cut off at its head and tail and along its four sides from the continuity of events like any camera-shot from a bygone day; no, like any camera-shot, immediately producing an abstraction. Duration 92″, 8″‘ — K.J.

Excerpt

 

________________
Return to the Scene of the Crime (2008)
‘At its most immediate and thrilling level, Ken Jacob’s new video Return to the Scene of the Crime is engaged in cinematic archeology. With a great deal of embarrassment I admit that I don’t know what Tom, Tom, the Piper’s Son, the filmmaker’s 1969 film using the same 1905 silent short as its source material, did with its over 60 year-old subject. But now 103 years after it was originally made, Jacobs digs the short up again from silent cinema’s treasure trove of forgotten and unseen films for us to bask in its multitudinous sense of life, drama, theater, humanity, crime, and cinema itself.’ — mubi

Excerpt

 

_______________
Seeking the Monkey King (2011)
‘Suggestion: Please see ‘Another Occupation’ before ‘Seeking the Monkey King’ WARNING: contains flicker like many of my works; avoid if you have epilepsy or other unusual brain conditions. Music: JG Thirlwell’. — K.J.

the entire film

 

________________
The Green Wave (2011)
‘3D film, does not require spectacles.’ — K.J.

Excerpt

 

________________
The Guests (2014)
‘Ken Jacobs has been concerned with the exploration of stereoscopic phenomena since the mid 1960s. He has experimented with a number of 3D techniques, and has developed ways to infuse his 2D work with heightened illusions of depth. The Guests, which has existed previously as a slide installation and an anaglyph video, will be presented tonight in its final incarnation: as a digital 3D spectacle. Continuing the work started with Tom, Tom the Piper’s Son, Ken Jacobs revisits an early Lumière Brothers film, Entree d’une noce à l’église (1896). As we watch the congregation mounting the steps of a Parisian church, our attention is drawn to the smallest of details: from the grain of the image to the facial gestures of the long-dead guests to the city landscape behind them. Ken Jacobs does more than extend the time (and space) of the original footage: he invites us to see in a way that we have never seen before.’ — LA Film Forum

the entire film

 

 

*

p.s. Hey. ** Corey Heiferman, Hi. My weekend … should be okay. Going out to the burbs to look at some art (Michael Heizer) today and visit the proximate Air and Space Museum, which is killer even if, like me, you’re not overly or especially into air and space. See a movie, I think. Skype conference call about a project. Stuff. You? I think the actor who did/was Hal died a few weeks ago. No, I’m sure I’ve had fungus things in the thematic posts, but it hasn’t owned a post. I’d have to think of a weird angle. Let me try. Enjoy your aerial view on your former funk. ** Dynomoose, Hi, D! So sweet to see you! Cool. Me too. I don’t think I’ve worn a piece of jewelry in my life. Oh, maybe a couple of rings. And hippie beads when I was 15 years old if they count. You good? Lots of love. ** David Ehrenstein, Thank you adding the great multimedia to the jewelry thang. Ah, you weighed in on the Kevin Hart kerfuffle. I think I can guess what your opinion is on that, but I will go find out. Everyone, Mr. Ehrenstein has updated his FaBlog with a thing about the Kevin Hart controversy. You can look and listen here. ** Bill, Hi. I think Blake is working on his new tome. And he’s the editor — or one of the, editors — of the Fanzine site. Oh, wow, I really, really wish I could see that Berlin show, damn. Oh, and I think the PGL screening in SF got a date change and is now happening on the 10th (and I think maybe also on the 11th). I’ll know for sure in a day or two. ** Rokeatons, I’m going to the outer space museum today. Well, the space museum, but outer is part of it. It’s out in the burbs. It’s weirdly good. You’re a jewelry guy, interesting. I’m not at all. Nothing against the stuff, my body just doesn’t magnetise it for some reason. No tattoos or piercings either. My corpse is going to be clean. If the mirror says  go for it, go. That’s a golden rule? ** Dominik, Hi, Dominik! Oh, cool, happy the post locked into your pre-existing interests. Yeah, very anxious to finish the film script asap, and it is very peaceful to not have the fucking TV script constantly open my desktop. Until January 14th at least. That’s when it restarts apparently. I wanted to pop over too London on my birthday, but we have a big PGL meeting about the upcoming French theater release that day, so maybe the day before my birthday. I have to figure it out right away. Good, good, that the part time work situation is totally tolerable. I’m pretty good. The big happiness this past week was that we finally got the just aforementioned theater release of PGL in France set in stone. First week of May. We’ve been waiting and fretting abbot that for months, so now we’re all set and excited. Snow, you’re so lucky! Yes, do astral project some flakes to Paris if your mental powers can manage it. Have a really great weekend in the snow or not. ** JM, Hi, man. Thanks. Yeah, that was a hardcore thing. I think it’s real. I made the post 8 years ago or something so I forget, but I think it is. Very nice about your man friend. Cool. Yeah, I only know about fashion due to fashion-interested friends passing along tidbits. Thanks a lot for getting those books of mine. Your book collection sounds pretty ace. Where all over the place do you think you’ll be moving? I’m good, thanks. Yes, big encouragement on the ‘you writing’ front, obviously. So excited for your book coning out. It’s not too long from now, right? I will treat Paris well. I’m a pretty respectful tromper. Have a swell weekend. ** _Black_Acrylic, You’re home! Actually, I knew you were home because on FB you checked into some place in Dundee yesterday. Some place with an indecipherable name. That’s very interesting about your dad’s history with jewelry. My dad had a period where he was obsessed with geodes. He had rock tumbler equipment in our basement, and he was always putting rocks in there in hopes that they’d reveal their geode interiors. ** Steve Erickson, Hi. Like I said up above, I made that post 8 years ago, so I don’t remember totally but I think the blood bridge thing was real, yes. I’m so-so about Harriet Tubman, but I’ll listen further. I’ve been very interested to hear the Angel Bat Dawid, and I didn’t know it was out. Thanks, I’ll chase it down. ** Misanthrope, I don’t have any either. Oh, wait, I found a weird ring on the street about a year ago, and I picked it up and put it in my pocket, and I decided it was good luck for some reason, so I still have it in my pocket. Hollywood tends to want a lot more than inevitability in its endings, so the movie version of your book is probably doomed, or, hey, who knows? We worked very hard and carefully to make sure the ending of PGL wasn’t sad. Mm, I think if you ever see PGL again and look at his friends’ faces, you’ll see there’s a lot more than resignation going on there. ** Sypha, Hi! Oh, it’s great, the post. Oh, now that I have you, the post will launch on Saturday the 19th if that works for you. Yuck on the cold, man. I hope the weekend cleans you out. ** Okay. I ask you to spend your local weekend considering the films of the great Ken Jacobs. See you on Monday.