man & nature # 147 ~ or ...

18th green & fairway at the Lake Placid Club • click to embiggen ... we could talk about the wonderful world of golf.

The greens and fairways are coming in great. The weather has been more good than not. What's not to like?

ku # 602 ~ but then again ...

Au Sable River gorge • click to embiggen... this a photography blog, right?

I mean, I've posted 65 pictures in the last 30 days. Maybe we can talk about some them for awhile?

man & nature # 146 ~ jumping to conclusions

A few bad apples • click to embiggenHey, listen up. Read my words and stop jumping to conclusions.

Some cases in point -

a) I did not suggest that either I or Dylan think that legislating morality is a good idea. I what I wrote was that "... there's even more than hint of the notion of actually codifying, aka - legislating, morality in those words ..." which I then went on to explain that what that could mean is "stating rules and principles in a systematic form or code".

Just in case anyone in the audience doesn't make the connection, we live in a society governed by laws and conventions, AKA - rules and principles. Some of these rules and principles could be said to share some common ground with religious ("moral") rules and principles, others are more secular (ethics) in origin . In either case, the rules and principles are codified. Breaking the rules is grounds for civil punishment. Breaking with principles is often grounds for distain and indignation in the public square.

IMO, a society that does not have a codified set of "right" and "wrong" that is both commonly accepted / shared and easy to understand will cease to be (if it ever was) a civilized society.

b) What that does not mean is that the rules and principles are immutable "absolutes". I have never stated a personal belief in "absolutes". What I have opined about is "truth"(s) and "the real" - especially as they apply to the medium of photography - and what those notions most commonly engender is comments that those are "concepts" that are "all relative" - that as long as someone (or a crowd of someones) understands and accepts something as being true, well, it is true, albeit for them and not for others. No problem. After all, it's all good, right?

OK. Swell. But, because they believe it to be "true" does not, by any stretch of the imagination, mean that their belief / truth is not wrong - does the fact that quite a number of men in the Middle East believe that women should be treated as chattel make that belief right? Should American men and women be fighting and dying to defend that "truth"?

c) I have never stated that relativists are "evil" or that they "make things up as we go along". But, constantly responding to conversations about truth and the real with near pavlovian responses of "it's all relative" seems to me to be more of a recipe to avoid making sometimes difficult decisions about one thing or another than it is for getting things done - a fine bit of "mathematical and scientific" fiddling while Rome burns.

I would also like to make it perfectly clear that I do not believe that a big chunk of our world has has consciously adopted the tenets of "classic" Relativism" - I am not arguing / discussing theory or ideology here. But what has happened, especially so in the US of A, is that "anything goes" has been codified as the rule of the land. Don't tread on me, I live in the Land of the Free-To-Do-Anything I want as long as it's good for me.

"Special interest" has become code for "screw everybody else" - it's all about what I want. The notion of "consensus" has been consigned to domain of quaint sing-alongs around the campfire. The notion that it takes a village to raise a child is ridiculed as a socialist evil. Hey, every man is an island. Sink or swim all by yourself. Don't give me any of that kumbaya crap.

All of that said, I will not make any apologies for thinking and stating that now is the time to stand up and take a stand. My stand is that I emphatically believe that it is time to have a national conversation about rules and principles, truth and what's real. A conversation that is as free from dogma of all types as it can be. We need to arrive at a pragmatic consensus regarding "probable" (pick a name, any name, just get on with it) truths before its too late to function as a civil society.

As for the loopy idea that "codifying rules and principles (call it "morality", call it "ethics", call it "chocolate cream pie") in a systematic form or code" is a proposition to lay down with the sheep and lambs of the Far Right, well, that's just plain loopy. If as a nation, a civil society, or a tribe, we do not have guiding rules and principles by which we steer the ship of state, then we are just making it up as we go along - something that I think is a kissing cousin to a cluster fuck.

man & nature # 145 ~ it's all good

Dandelion shadows • click to embiggenThe Resident Contrarian has struck once again.

Relative to Monday's entry, man & nature # 139, wherein I opined that it pleased me no end that "Bob Dylan, on his latest album, takes a rather unsubtle (for him) swipe at the relativists in the crowd ... [I]n his song, It’s all good ...", the Resident Contrarian parried with:

What truly baffles me, though, is Mark’s assertion that this is an “unsubtle swipe at the relativists in the crowd”. Huh? Are we looking at the same words? If Dylan is indeed doing that, it’s not exactly what I’d call an in – your – face indictment. It may, in fact, represent one of the most subtle uses of language in the history of songwriting. That is, if that’s the message he’s trying to convey.

Most certainly, reasonable people might disagree about Dylan's message / meaning in this song. However, thoughtful and curious people might have a leg up, message / meaning-wise, on those who only hear it as a stand-alone bit of word-smithing.

Now it should be stated that, while I do not consider myself to be a Dylanologist, not by a long shot - although I have been to a fair number of his concerts, own most of his recordings, and have a few of his published writings, I must admit to having made a rather continuous effort to read as many interviews with the man as I can get my hands on. It is also worth noting that IMO and that of many others, Mr. Tambourine Man has become quite a bit more lucid of late when speaking with the press. Maybe it's all part of that late-in-life desire to "set the record straight" that many engage in, or, maybe not.

Whatever. Nevertheless, Dylan has been engaged in a great deal of "straight talk" recently. In this month's Rolling Stone interview, he makes a pretty clear case regarding his thoughts and feeling regarding "relativism" when he talks about the American film director John Ford (he considers him to be a great American artist):

I like his old films. He was a man's man, and he thought that way ... (he) put courage and bravery, redemption and a particular mix of agony and ecstasy on the screen in a dramatic manner. His movies were easy to understand.

He also added:

Some say you can't legislate morality. Well, maybe not. But morality has gotten a bad rap.

Now, without a doubt, one could parse those words from here to hell and back. However, it seems pretty damn clear to me that Dylan is advocating both "morality" and a morality that's "easy to understand" at that. Hell, there's even more than hint of the notion of actually codifying, aka - legislating, morality in those words - that is to say, stating rules and principles in a systematic form or code - just in case the relativists don't find them "easy to understand".

So, here's what I'm suggesting re: Dylan's message / meaning in it's All Good - when one looks at the author of that song in a wholistic manner and then applies that knowledge - some might call it "insight" - to the work in question, it requires only the smallest of leaps - if any are needed at all - to deduce that Dylan is not a fellow traveler with the devotees of relativism.

As for the Resident Contrarian's view that I wouldn't "know a 'Relativist' if one came up and bit him in the ass", let me just say that I'd be around the corner and halfway out of town long before a relativist could figure out - if he/she could ever come to a firm conclusion - exactly what "bit" or "ass" actually means.

Update on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 10:50AM by gravitas et nugalis

PS I forgot to mention one reviewer's opinion of It's All Good (relative to the RC's notion that it's "... it’s not exactly what I’d call an in – your – face indictment. It may, in fact, represent one of the most subtle uses of language in the history of songwriting." -

The word "caustic" takes on a whole new meaning in Together through Life's final cut, the sure-to-be-canonical "It's All Good." Dylan belittles all those arrogant narcissists who constantly say it all good, even when the world crumbles around them. Drums and guitar rumble in a mad-attic rush of grunge blues while Dylan spits out sarcasm with such lines as "Big politicians telling lies / Restaurant kitchens all full of flies / Don't make a bit of difference / Don't see why it should ... it's all good." It's a raucous affair. ~ Douglas Brinkley

down to earth

man & nature # 140 • ALL PICTURES - click to embiggen
man & nature # 141
man & nature # 142
man & nature # 143
man & nature # 144Recently I have become quite intrigued with looking down. As a matter of fact, not to long ago (ku # 593) I mentioned that I was pining for a very expensive 20' tall "tripod" with which I could picture the ground.

Well, I've decided to start "small" and, I might add, close to home - in my yard. Eventually, my plan is to purchase a painter's scaffold - 2 ladders and a plank - that can be hauled around in my car and assembled in the forest, bog, swamp, field, etc. But, for now, I'm going to stick to picturing my yard.

Update on Wednesday, May 13, 2009 at 10:25AM by gravitas et nugalis

Featured Comment: Anil Rao wrote: "This is an interesting idea, i.e. looking straight down, and I think it can provide a unique perspective on things. However, from looking at today's pictures, it doesn't appear that your (straight-down) view offers a lot beyond what one would get from the oblique angle of typical eye-level shots. So, can you kindly elaborate on why you felt that a straight-down view was necessary for these (particular) pictures?

my response: it's simple really - looking straight down is, in fact, a unique perspective that creates a "slightly-off" visual sense of looking / seeing precisely because is does differ ever so subtly from the "standard" oblique angle with which most of us view the world. Add to that the idea that these pictures will be exhibited flat on the floor where they will be viewed at an oblique angle and you might begin to see where I'm going with this.

man & nature # 139 ~ kid & nature

Hugo feels the water • click to embiggenIt pleases me no end that Bob Dylan, on his latest album, takes a rather unsubtle (for him) swipe at the relativists in the crowd. In his song, It's all good, he sings:

Big politician telling lies;
Restaurant kitchen all full of flies.
Don't make a bit of difference; don't see why it should.
But it's alright, cause its all good.
Its all good.
Its all good.

All good.
Said it's all good.

People in the country, People on the land.
Some of them so sick they can hardly stand.
Everybody would move away if they could
Its hard to believe but its all good.
Yeah... [chuckles]

Well widows cry; the orphans plea.
Everywhere you look there's more misery.
Come along with me babe, I wish you would.
You know what I'm sayin', it's all good.

All good.
I said it's all good.
All good.

Cold blooded killer stomp into town
Cop car's blinkin', something bad goin' down.
Buildings are crumblin, in the neighborhood.
But there's nothing to worry about, cause it's all good.
It's all good.
I say it's all good.

Dylan is going on a US Summer tour where all of the shows are in minor-league baseball stadiums. There's a show scheduled in Syracuse just after my birthday. The wife is already campaigning for her birthday present - a tree - so I don't think that is too soon to start dropping hints for mine.

'twas a sunny day

Au Sable River eddy foam/froth • ALL PICTURES - click to embiggen
Small riverside shaded glen
Small Au Sable River island

Leaves, moss, erratics on the forest floor
Au Sable River fallsThis past Friday, unlike Thursday (see below - singing and dancing in the rain), was a near Summer-like day so Hugo and I took a little hike along the West Branch of the Au Sable River to enjoy the afternoon.

What a difference a day makes.

singing and dancing in the rain

man & nature # 136 • ALL PICTURES - click to embiggen

man & nature # 137
ku # 594
ku # 595
ku # 596
ku # 597
man & nature # 138Yesterday's weather - a brooding gray overcast and a light misty rain - at times heavy and wind-driven, albeit very fine raindrops, gave me cause to get out and play a round of golf. So I donned a black turtleneck shirt, black pants, and black socks (to match the mood) and off I went with a bottle of water, a big chocolate cookie, a banana, my golf gear, and (as always) my camera stuff.

The golf was great and, surprise, surprise, I had the course all to myself. That said, I nearly didn't make to the course because it was very picture-rific everywhere I looked.

What amazes me about a day like yesterday is how dramatically the landscape is transformed by rain. As I mentioned a short while back, for me, the rain is like a "natural" Hue & Saturation slider. Stuff that I see everyday seems almost to literally rearrange itself and present my eyes with a never-before-seen "arrangement".

I am fairly certain that this realignment is due to the fact that the landscape becomes much more colorful in the rain. As some colors become more saturated and/or dark, they do, in fact, create different tonal / color relationships amongst the various elements of the natural world which is the subject of my camera's gaze. To my eye and sensibilities, things just look different than they "normally" appear (and are not "catching my eye").

Do any of you like to get out and picture in the rain?