Tuesday, April 1, 2014

An Illustrated Interview With 'Glorkian Warrior Delivers a Pizza' Cartoonist James Kolchaka

Last week First Second Books released The Glorkian Warrior Delivers A Pizza by award winning cartoonist James Kolchaka.



It's an all ages graphic novel about danger, crazy aliens, gigantic talking heads and more importantly, pizza! I was lucky enough to talk to Kolchaka in the best way I could imagine, in a Kolchaka comic!



The Glorkian Warrior Delivers A Pizza is available at most comic stores and book stores now. It is also available via Amazon.



2014-03-31-kolchaka1.jpg



2014-03-31-kolchaka2.jpg



2014-03-31-kolchaka3.jpg



2014-03-31-kolchaka4.jpg





from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1fmolbV

via IFTTT

Frankie Knuckles Dead: 'Godfather' Of House Music Dies At 59 In Chicago

The man credited with pioneering house music not only in Chicago but throughout the world has died.



Frankie Knuckles died unexpectedly on Monday afternoon at the age of 59, the Chicago Tribune's Greg Kot reported Monday. His cause of death had not been officially disclosed as of Tuesday morning, though reports indicate the house music icon died of complications from type II diabetes.



Knuckles was born in the Bronx in New York City, where he first got his start as a DJ. He DJed alongside Larry Levan, a childhood friend, at Continental Baths beginning in 1972.



He moved to Chicago in the late '70s and played regularly at the iconic Warehouse club from 1977 until 1982. The club initially catered to a "predominantly black, predominantly gay" crowd but others soon followed. In 1983, he began playing at his own club, the Power Plant in Chicago, until it closed in 1987.



His sets, Rolling Stone notes, were known for pulling from a wide array of musical genres and "laid the groundwork for electronic dance music culture — all of it."



Watch Knuckles' 2012 interview with FACT Magazine:







His best known tracks include "Your Love," "The Whistle Song," "Tears" and remixes of Michael Jackson, Whitney Houston, Diana Ross, Janet Jackson, Pet Shop Boys, Chaka Khan, Depeche Mode and many others.



"I think dancing is one of the best things anyone can do for themselves. And it doesn’t cost anything," Knuckles once told the Tribune.



Knuckles went on to win a Grammy award in 1997. He had a stretch of Jefferson Street in Chicago -- where the Warehouse once stood -- named after him in 2004 and was inducted into the Dance Music Hall of Fame in 2005.



Barack Obama, then an Illinois state senator, helped declare August 25, 2004, Frankie Knuckles Day in Chicago.












He remained active and played a show just two days before his death at Ministry of Sound in London, the Guardian notes.



Watch Frankie Knuckles' Boiler Room NYC set recorded on Sept. 18, 2013:







from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1mwzRmi

via IFTTT

Surviving the CrossFit Open

"God help me, what have I done?" I thought as I stared down the length of my CrossFit gym. It was the evening of 14.1, the first of the five-part CrossFit Open 2014 competition. An intimidating, symmetrical line of barbells and crash pads faced me. The usually-inviting gym looked like the inside of a torture chamber: metal, ropes, and the smell of sweat and pain. Tonight was the very first night of the CrossFit Open and, heavens have mercy, I was signed up.



For those who are not in the CrossFit cult or are not dating/friends/family, I shall enlighten you. Every year, the CrossFit Games hosts a five-week long competition. It's one workout every Friday. The exercise is posted the night before and performed that weekend; scores for rankings are due by Monday evening. It's open to everyone (hence the name, Open) and the top scores qualify those competitors for Regionals, then the top competitors qualify for the national CrossFit Games.



Now I, probably like most, hear the words "CrossFit competition" and immediately tap out. That's for the super-humanly-fit souls who have mastered their will, overcome the need for sleep beyond the hour of 5 a.m., and probably eat barbells and little yoga practitioners for their post-workout meal. Basically, not me.



So how did I get on the list for this? Easy: peer pressure. Every morning at Brick, the CrossFit box I attend, some gorgeous, marble-statue-fit instructor asked the group who had not yet signed up for the Open. This CrossFit shaming finally broke me (also, news that participants would get a free T-shirt with the word "competitor." Bad-ass!). I felt nervous but, thanks to the soothing sales pitch of "it's open to everyone" and "people of all fitness levels compete," that it would all be okay. I would survive this. I would see what I was made of and would come out of it with goals for next year. This was going to be awesome.



Halfway through the first work out (14.1), I thought that this was anything but awesome. As I gasped for air, heaving large metal plates above my head, I knew that this was insane. Crazy people did this. People who could ignore the red-hot pain searing through their muscles and soldier on through these torturous exercises -- people like Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne in Batman Begins, hauling Ra's al Ghul up over an ice cliff with one arm (YouTube it, because that's basically 14.1).



kimmekismencrossfitphoto2



14.1 was the first of five WODs (Workout of the Day) in the Open. It was a 10-minute AMRAP (As Many Rounds As Possible) of this brutal set: 30 Double Unders and 15 Power Snatches (55 pounds for women). Double Unders... a kiss of death for those unfortunate enough not to have mastered this skill. Jumping into the air and whipping the rope around your head twice usually ends with it biting you in the ass. Your legs, back and arms resemble a whipping post. If you're able to get through 30 of those (flesh still attached), then it's onto the power snatches, where you crouch down to then haul the weighted barbell up over your head. After you do that 15 times, then it's back to those DUs to start another round. Sound like fun? Yeah... that was my response, too.



I entered the Open with no set goals other than to survive it (and perhaps not to completely embarrass myself). I wouldn't say I'm a couch potato, but I'm no competitive athlete. When I took my place with the other competitors and stared across the gym at the line of eager spectators, I was nervous. I was even a little scared. To be faced with a challenge that so blatantly tested you, measured you and could so easily find you wanting was something I hadn't faced in a long time.



When I made it on to the third round, admittedly wheezing a bit, then onto the fourth (with a quick mental groan of "damn it, I have to do it all again"), I was shocked to have made it that far. I hurt. Oh, did I hurt. It felt like there wasn't enough air in the room and that if I tried to lift that stupid barbell above my head one more time, I would drop it on my face. But what surprised me more than that fact that I wasn't unconscious, laying in a pool of my own sweat, was that everyone around me wouldn't let me quit. My judge crouched down on the floor to scream encouragement and the spectators (people I had worked out with and faces that I didn't recognize) kept yelling at me to pick the bar, not to quit, to keep going. I couldn't remember the last time I felt pain like that, or had been so tired it took all my effort to keep from collapsing. Whether I had the physical ability or not, I did have the mental strength to keep going.



Just in the nick of time, I finished my last power clean to complete the fourth round. Completely ignoring any pride, I sat down on the floor in an inelegant tumble. At that point, I tried to pull my thoughts together and take stock of what had just happened to me. I still had (most) all the skin on my hands. There was that sharp, metallic taste of blood in my mouth (apparently, this can happen after an extremely intense work out). I was huffing and puffing like a birthing water buffalo. But I was alive. And I felt amazing. When I thought about the experience on the subway ride home, I was filled with triumph, but also a little disappointment. I realized how much I had been holding myself back every day and how much more I was capable of. That I had been letting myself fall short.



As the weeks progressed, 14.2, 14.3, and 14.4 came with small, personal victories and sobering disappointments. I managed my very first, then second, chest to bar in 14.2, only to be humbled by my modest strength in deadlifts in 14.3 (I only made it to 155 pounds instead of the 185 pounds I wanted). 14.4 was a brutal chipper, CrossFit slang for a long, grueling WOD (you go into it whole, you come out in pieces). It came with modest success; I completed those 50 bloody T2B (toes to bar, which is exactly what it sounds like) when I could barely do one a few weeks ago. However, I didn't make it onto the cleans. For this WOD, I felt as much disappointment as I did success.



The last WOD, 14.5, was announced just this past Thursday evening. I happened to be sitting with friends when a fellow CrossFitter texted me what our grueling, hellish last test would be: 95/65 pounds for men/women of 21/18/15/12/9/6/3 thruster and burpee sets for time. As I collapsed in a ululating pile on the table, I tried to think about how I was going to make it through this WOD. I didn't know if I would. I was sure that 14.5 would break me.



I had a moment of reflection on the entire Open experience after I explained to my bewildered friends what had caused my drastic reaction. My friend, gaping in horror, asked me blankly, "Why do you even do this?" To be honest, even with everything I just shared, I didn't quite know how to answer her. At least, not without sounding trite or overblown. In New York City, a place filled with Type A overachievers, telling someone you want to push your limits receives no more than an understanding nod. It's like feeling good about taking public transportation instead of driving when you're standing on the jam-packed subway platform during rush hour. Everyone seems to do it.



However, I can't help but feel that I went through a significant experience. I hadn't thought about what the Open would be like, much less what I would take away from it. But it's something meaningful. The Open was more than a test, more than a challenge. This was Judgment Day. 14.5 was almost a punishment, but one that forged you. I have never crashed up against the walls of my own limits as during that workout. But in those excruciating moments, I felt like I joined a distinct community of athletes. I do not have the hubris to say that I personally relate to the incredible athletes that inspire Will Smith's motivational quotes, but more that I can relate, on my own level, to Rocky's famous quote in Rocky Balboa: "It ain't about how hard you're hit. It's about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward. How much you can take and keep moving forward."



Grit is what got me through the Open. When I squatted down to grab that bar for yet another thruster, afraid of the pain and afraid that I would fail myself, I found the pure, iron will to make myself do it. Never had I pushed to that place. And this is the why. Why we do this. It's not an original reason, but that's also why it is so powerful. I feel like I have entered the ranks of those who have suffered to that place beyond their prior limits, and that being a part of this community is the greatest reward.



In the same vein, the Open has made me realize how important the CrossFit community is to me. Of course, working out with friends and like-minded people is always a great environment, but I didn't realize how strong a Brick was, nor how much I derived from it until complete strangers got down on their knees to scream at me. We're all personally invested in this journey, whether we know each other or not, because we all face these insane challenges. Challenges that humble us, break us, strengthen us. And though the athlete's journey is often a solitary one, it never felt that way during these five weeks. It felt that I learned more about myself than I have in years and that I did it with others there to watch, bolster, and celebrate with me. I have stood on the sidelines cheering others to that place of grit and determination, just as they pushed me there. It was one of the most moving experiences I've ever had and one for which I will always be immensely grateful to the Open.



But with all that being said, though, 15.1 can take its time coming.



from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1om3Phv

via IFTTT

For Ike Balbus on His 70th Birthday

My dear friend Ike Balbus, a distinguished political theorist who taught at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) for several decades, recently turned 70. I wrote this tribute to him on that occasion.



I vividly recall my first encounter with the name Isaac Balbus. And what a fateful one it was.



It was almost a quarter century ago, in early 1990. I had taken a break from college to study with the anarchist thinker/eco-philosopher Murray Bookchin and got involved with the activist-intellectual scene that had formed around him in Burlington, Vermont. One afternoon in his house, I discovered his collection of back issues of the journal Telos . I was a proverbial kid in a candy shop: Telos was the English-language journal of Critical Theory, and Critical Theory was my life. My heavily marked-up copy of Herbert Marcuse's Eros and Civilization was on me at all times. (I later learned that Salmagundi was the first American journal to publish translations of Adorno and Benjamin, in the mid-1960s, but Telos, which got off the ground in 1968 (the year of my birth), loomed larger in the world of Frankfurt School studies that I inhabited. It became the nerve center of English-language scholarship on the body of ideas known as Western Marxism.)



Realigned Molecules



The Summer 1982 issue carried an article with the title "A Neo-Hegelian, Feminist, Psychoanalytic Perspective on Ecology" by Isaac D. Balbus. This constellation of terms instantly sent my intellectual libido into overdrive. I almost couldn't believe what I was seeing. Psychoanalysis, feminism, Hegel... and ecology? I had an intense interest in Freud and psychoanalytic thought -- my first year of college, Paul Robinson's book The Freudian Left led me to the ideas of Marcuse and Wilhelm Reich, and Erich Fromm had a huge influence on me. I had a strong interest in Hegel -- I was a philosophy major with a focus on 19th and 20th century continental thought. I was deeply intrigued by psychoanalytic feminism -- Paul Robinson's article "Freud and the Feminists" in the Spring 1987 issue of the journal Raritan led me to Juliet Mitchell's Psychoanalysis and Feminism, and beyond. And I was deeply immersed in ecological thought and Green politics. But this was too good to be true -- someone had actually brought these various intellectual strands together!



In writing this tribute, I discovered to my delight that the abstract for the essay is available online:



Marxism cannot withstand the challenge of ecology. The ecological vision of an end to the domination of nature necessarily includes the end to a historical materialism for which this domination has always been an indispensable condition of human liberation. A commitment to objectification as the immutable form of the relationship between humans and (non-human) nature obliges Marx and all those who invoke his name to celebrate the "great civilizing influence" of a capitalism that reduces nature to "simply an object for mankind" and thereby paves the way for a communism that alone will make possible "the advent of real mastery over ... the forces of nature."





I devoured the essay whole. As I read it, I experienced what Christopher Hitchens once described as "the feeling of an epochal shift in which [his] molecules were being realigned in some bizarre Hegelian synthesis." I was blown away -- and inspired. Who in the world was this Isaac Balbus? The journal identified him as the author of Marxism and Domination: A Neo-Hegelian, Feminist, Psychoanalytic Theory of Sexual, Political, and Technological Liberation (try saying that 10 times fast) and a professor of political science at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). This was almost too much: He lived in my home town! I simply had to track him down and get in touch.



This was before the Internet and email. I simply called the UIC switchboard and asked to be transferred to Professor Isaac Balbus in the Department of Political Science. Low and behold, he answered the phone! I introduced myself -- but who was I? An undergraduate student moving in anarchist and Green circles in Vermont, with no institutional affiliation or auspices. All I had was raw enthusiasm for his ideas and the hope that we could connect -- somehow, somewhere, at some point. Ike seemed unfazed by the randomness of the call. He was entirely gracious, and indeed encouraging of my inchoate desire to engage.



And engage we did, for many years to come.



The following year I found myself with auspices under which to engage Ike. I was one of the organizers of the Midwest Radical Scholars and Activists Conference (the now-defunct Chicago version of the Socialist Scholars Conference, now called the Left Forum) and I put together a panel on "The Psychodynamics of Domination" with Ike, Eli Zaretsky (author of Capitalism, the Family and Personal Life), and Joel Kovel (author of The Age of Desire: Case Histories of a Radical Psychoanalyst). It was a Psychoanalytic Left Dream Team! But there were differences. Although the panelists broadly shared a Freudo-leftist perspective, Ike and Joel Kovel were moving in opposite directions: Joel started out as a Freudian psychotherapist and then discovered Marxism -- over time moving further and further away from psychoanalytic ideas (though never entirely abandoning them); Ike, in contrast, had been a Marxist, and through his encounter with psychoanalysis, feminism, and ecology, he developed a trenchant (and to me persuasive) critique of Marxism.



Soon after that stimulating panel, Ike and I discovered another common interest, one that would become a defining passion in our friendship: tennis.



Court Intellectual



I'll never forget the first time we played. It was on Northwestern University's courts. As we hit around, I thought: What kinds of shots are these? I aspired to hit with the silky topspin of Björn Borg, my idol growing up. Ike, a generation my senior (I was born in 1968, when he was marching in the streets), played a pre-Borg style of tennis; he hit half his shots extremely flat and the other half with massive amounts of slice. I had no idea where the hell the ball was going. When his shots landed they stayed very low and skidded, or else jumped violently sideways. I had never seen anything quite like it, and it was infuriating -- not least because he was so good. I arrogantly thought I was the superior player -- my form was more graceful and I was younger. And yet it was incredibly hard to win a point against him, not only because of his unorthodox spins but because he hustled his ass off and got virtually every ball back. It was bloody impressive. And we were evenly matched. A rivalry was born that afternoon, and it lasted a couple of decades.



The tennis court became the main venue for our social encounters. It didn't replace our intellectual encounters, but rather relocated them. The lapses between points were filled with running commentary, a combination of psychoanalytically-inflected trash talk, theory jokes, and one-pun-manship (sorry). Example: Ike strongly preferred playing indoors, whereas I strongly preferred playing outdoors. He complained that the sun and wind messed up his game. I of course attributed this to being alienated from nature (a low blow, since alienation from nature was a major theme in Ike's work) and a compulsive-neurotic need for perfectly-controlled, womb-like conditions. I might have used the phrase "womb with a view" (sorry again). Another example: one time I badly missed a shot just as a strikingly beautiful woman was walking past the court, after which I complained to Ike that I had been "lewdly interrupted" (sorry yet again). His response: "Nice projection, Danny -- making her the subject and yourself the object of the distraction." (I'm paraphrasing, but that was the essence.) And there was plenty of straight-up trash talk about the game itself. This was our version of playing the dozens, our Jewish (or in my case half-Jewish) form of other-deprecating comical jousting and gamesmanship, in a spirit of affection and friendship.



But we maintained off-court intellectual engagements as well. Ike's book Emotional Rescue: The Theory and Practice of a Feminist Father came out at the end of 1997. I interviewed him about the book on the radio show I hosted at the time (in good Freudo-Marxian spirit, the show was called Free Associations). That book struck a deep chord in me, as it did in many others. The feminist philosopher Sandra Bartky (a close mutual friend of mine and Ike's) wrote that the book's...



...bold synthesis of feminist mothering theory, developed by such thinkers are Dinnerstein and Chodorow, with psychoanalytic theories of narcissism developed by Winnicott, Kohut and Masterson, is a major contribution to psychoanalytic feminism. So too is his psychoanalytically informed, simultaneously joyful and sorrowful story of how co-parenting his daughter made this synthesis possible.





Maurice Hamington wrote in the journal Hypatia that the book's...



...interwoven narratives allow the reader to glimpse how the trials and tribulations of a flesh and blood academic impact his theoretical positions. The result is a refreshing dose of epistemologically significant "reality scholarship" that shreds the vaunted veil of the passive voice of academia. Balbus is the protagonist of his own analysis, and that makes for intriguing and insightful reading.





As David Gutterman wrote in the journal Signs:



Endeavoring to bring closure to fourteen years of research and to synthesize two previous attempts to write a critical theory of Western child rearing, Balbus here seeks to examine the enormous impact of Benjamin Spock on families in the United States, analyze his own practice as a father, and answer the Marcusean question of "what it means to be a radical intellectual" by demonstrating the link between "enlightenment" and "embodiment."





(Speaking of Marcusean questions, Ike's essay "The Missing Dimension: Self-Reflexivity and the 'New Sensibility,'" published in the collection Marcuse: From the New Left to the Next Left , is one of the very best things ever written on Marcuse.)



Our interview about Emotional Rescue aired, felicitously enough, on Father's Day of 1998. Ike couldn't hear it at his home, because the signal of the college station that broadcast my show didn't reach that far south. So he drove with his daughter, Shayla, to a location where they could hear the interview and listened to it together in Ike's car. I was deeply moved by that image. Fortunately, the interview found wider circulation when it was transcribed and published in the (now defunct) magazine LiP, of which I was then a contributing editor. (Unfortunately, that interview isn't available online.)



It was only a few months later that I became a father myself. Ike's work on parenting, and our countless conversations about the subject over many years, cast a long shadow over my own experience. His thinking about fatherhood, and his own struggle to maintain his commitment to co-parenting after the demise of his marriage, deeply informed the way I approached fatherhood. Our conversations became a source of enormous support to me as I struggled to find my parental footing under somewhat unusual circumstances. I remain and will always be in Ike's debt for that.



In 2005, when Ike's wonderful essay collection Mourning and Modernity came out, I was programming author events at a small bookstore in Chicago's Edgewater neighborhood, a fabulous agora called Left of Center Books (also now defunct, alas). I was very pleased to organize a reading for Ike late that summer. He read his essay "The Psychodynamics of Racial Reparations," a fascinating attempt to apply the psychoanalyst Melanie Klein's theory of psychological reparation to the debate about whether the United States owes African Americans reparations for the legacy of slavery and racism. (That essay first appeared in the journal Psychoanalysis, Culture & Society.) A marvelously stimulating discussion followed. The philosopher Charles Mills, author of the influential book The Racial Contract , was in the audience (he lived two blocks from the bookstore). Ike was happy that night. And that made me happy.



But I'll always remember that night for another reason: Dimitra. She was a graduate student of Ike's. She arrived with him and his wife, Mary, for the event. The moment he introduced us, I was overcome by an ineffable sense that my life would never quite be the same again. That proved to be exactly the case. Hurricane Dimitra turned my life upside down. It has inhabited and haunted me since.



It seems significant somehow that I met Dimitra that night, in that place, on that occasion, through Ike. Our mutual connection to him brought our orbits into collision and gave us a matrix of ideas, stories and points of reference that were there, from the get-go. There's something lyrical to me about Ike's role in this fateful chapter of my life.



For two and a half decades now, Ike's friendship has meant the world to me. He has been an intellectual inspiration, a political comrade, a personal confidant, a tennis partner, a trader in puns, a kindred spirit. How fortuitous that I should have stumbled upon that issue of Telos that afternoon. My life has been enriched profoundly by Ike's friendship, and I am deeply grateful to him for that.



from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1gl8HcM

via IFTTT

Won't You Please Come to Chicago?: A Conversation With Thomas Dyja on The Third Coast

Thomas Dyja's The Third Coast: When Chicago Built the America Dream (Penguin) is the most important Chicago-focused historical work in recent years. This is not least of all the case because of the argument Dyja effectively makes for the centrality of Chicago's cultural innovations and exports to the entire postwar landscape hat came to be modern America, but because Dyja approaches his historical study with a novelist's sense of character and place.



The Third Coast is more than the story of Ray Kroc's French-fry efficiency or space-jazzman Sun Ra's intergalactic horn sections. The Third Coast is more than the story of Bauhaus refugees Mies van Der Rohe's and László Moholy-Nagy's differing design philosophies, and the book is more than the story Nelson Algren's failures (including that of his torrid affair with Simone de Beauvoir).



Yes, beyond Robert Maynard Hutchins' idea of the Great Books and Hugh Hefner's ideas about great boobs, The Third Coast--with its astounding cast of characters alternately coalescing and repelling to form a violent surge of mid-century energy--is a book that tracks so many planetary bodies that one is bound, upon finishing, to understand not so much why the heavens move in their particular rhythms, but to feel the cosmic wonder embedded in the fact that the heavens simply move.



We are back to Sun Ra for a moment, but make no mistake. The Third Coast moves, and so too does Dyja.



In advance of his April 8 lecture at Lake Forest College as the capstone of our annual Student Symposium, timed to the paperback release of the book, I was able to discuss with Dyja not only the contents of his book but also the methods of the historian.









Davis: You are a Chicago native. Is The Third Coast a homecoming of sorts? How did it start, and how did it come to assume a shape that interleaves these character-based narratives?



Thomas: The Third Coast was a book I guess I was aiming towards my whole life. Even though I left Chicago for college in New York, I always carried my Chicago identity with me. The city may not export the same amount of steel that it once did, but it's exported a lot of people who have changed America with attitudes and approaches that come out of there.



Davis: So the people were the draw?



Thomas: After writing three novels and a biography, I wanted to move to narrative non-fiction and I'd started researching something about Aretha Franklin. But as I was reading all these books about Detroit, I realized that I knew nothing about Detroit. I had no sense of the place; I didn't know the associations and connotations that make up a true knowledge of a place. So the obvious struck me in the face--Chicago.



I was a sickening Chicago chauvinist as a kid. Digging around in some old boxes recently I found an essay I wrote in high school after I saw Studs Terkel on The Dick Cavett Show, back in I'd say 1978 or so. It was five pages of frothing anti-New York propaganda. I used to cut school to walk around downtown and visit the Art Institute, read Carl Sandburg by the lake and all that. So it was ironic that I ended up living in New York, but my family is still in Chicago, and the house my father was born in, so I never lost my connection to it. After thirty years in New York it was time to go home again.



Davis: So, you have the place but how do you find the form to tell the story?



Thomas: As to the book being character-based, there are a few elements to that. I never forgot a book called A Nervous Splendor by Frederic Morton, about fin de siècle Vienna, where all these fascinating, essential people like Klimt and Jung and Freud and Brahms and Hugo Wolf, all the creators of modern consciousness, are living and working and rubbing shoulders. It brought the period alive, really put you in the place and the moment, and that's what I wanted to do--recreate to some small degree the experience and consciousness of the Third Coast era, not just describe it. And to do that, you need eyes to see it through.



Happily, I had a remarkable and wildly diverse cast of people, from Mahalia Jackson to Mies van der Rohe and back, who let me show Chicago from all sorts of angles. Having written fiction, I also was accustomed to writing characters and writing the world from their points of view, so I did enough research on all these people so that I felt I could maybe crawl into their skin, or at least into their heads enough to show their vision of Chicago.



Davis: This sounds like a project requiring significant organization?



Thomas: Weaving the threads together meant creating very large timelines and flow charts, bundling people, events, and information together in ways that advanced the "story." I do think it's possible to write history in a dramatic fashion without compromising the facts. Though I don't agree with Shelby Foote's politics or viewpoint in his massive history of the Civil War, he was a great teacher in how one can push forth the inherent drama, build people and themes and come to resounding climaxes while staying within the lines of honesty. Anything I put in someone's mind is something that I have them on record saying or thinking at some point; I tried to be careful and aware about not imposing myself on them, even as I took my own stylistic liberties.



Davis: The "salon" character of cites such as Vienna, even when the salon is the city itself, seems an idiosyncratic byproduct of rapid industrialization in large cities. Put another way, the massing of people in a rapidly growing place such as Chicago is bound to produce a massing or interesting people at any particular moment. When you tease out the perspectives of a subset of these people--and I applaud your choices in The Third Coast--and deploy novelistic techniques in the narrative that encircles them, are you just compromising the facts in a different way than a more traditional, omniscient historical narrative might? Is your dramatic history as much a creation of Thomas Dyja-the-novelist as the ancient world would have been for Josephus? And if this is high drama of the best kind, has Chicago reached its climax?



Thomas: I don't know if it's "bound" to happen. Was there a Golden Age in Toronto history? Maybe there was, but I've never heard of it. Has there been a massing of interesting people to this degree in Phoenix? Houston? Jacksonville? If so, I look forward to reading about it. When times like these happen in cities, we should document them and discuss them. I do agree that the whole point of cities is density and the exchange that creates, so I don't think it's a byproduct; I think it's the reason they exist. But I don't think all cities are alike in how they've developed and what their impact has been on the nation and the world.



I believe that Chicago during the years I cover in The Third Coast had a remarkable and generally overlooked impact on the American century. Have there been other moments in time like this in other cities? Of course: Berlin, New York, Paris, Los Angeles, London, San Francisco; they've all had periods of rich, multilayered growth and discovery and creation, often more than one. The Third Coast just tries to add Chicago to that list.



Davis: This is history as the narrative of people who compose the character of the city.



Thomas: We're moving here toward an old argument as to whether history is an art or a science. There are empirical facts--things happen--and teasing out the causalities is part of the effort of history. But who's to say the "traditional, omniscient historical narrative" is by definition somehow objective or best suited for that? Historic causality involves movements large and small; individual genius and collective will, events unforeseen; all these happen in and around whatever you're documenting, and they're happening in time. Using "novelistic" methods, I would argue, can shed more light on history by contextualizing all these elements.



I could have done 25 separate chapters about 25 different people, out of time. I could have made the reader go back to the beginning of the time frame in every chapter and try to create the timeline on their own and try to fit the pieces together on their own--yet by pulling the figures through in time, I was able to let events happen in such a way that they illuminated events and choices, and help fill in some of the dark matter of history, which to me has always been the question--What was it really like to live then? Maybe that's a reader's question and not a historian's.



Davis: Well put, and in this case, who is the reader?



Thomas: I'm not an academic and I didn't write this for an academic audience; I wanted general readers. But I do think answering that question can tell us a lot more about why things happened sometimes than just facts in a vacuum. You can write about America's actions after 9/11 in a purely "factual" manner, creating a chain of logic that explains everything in terms of action and reaction. But if you were there in New York that day, if you experienced it and saw how it affected people, you understand why we did what we did on a whole other level than if you're just concerned with policy decisions and news reports.



As to climaxes, it's impossible to fix one on something that hasn't ended yet and Chicago is still kicking. In The Third Coast, the climax is very much 1955, when there's a whole rash of new beginnings and sad endings which change things there forever, from the election of Richard J. Daley to Chuck Berry recording "Maybelline" to the Compass Theater opening in Hyde Park.



Davis: Sun Ra seems worlds (galaxies?) away from Studs, or Nelson Aglren, or Kukla, Fran, and Ollie, and while The Third Coast doesn't minimize difference, does it argue in its subject choices for a certain Chicago school of innovation? If so, is there a shorthand to describe how Chicago made America?



Thomas: Studs Terkel used to say "It's all connected." And my favorite line of literature comes from E.M. Forster's Howard's End--"Only connect." You might see a theme there. As far away as Sun Ra was from Burr Tillstrom, as much entropy as there might be in the world, I wanted to show the gravity, the binding forces in the city. I won't say that documenting things blasting apart is easy, but it's more obvious. What holds us together can be harder to find. Chicago needs a narrative that explains how all the pieces fit together even when--especially when--it's become easier to ignore what's happening outside our own neighborhoods.



What I found was that there were some common elements to Chicago culture--a high value has been given to improvisation there since before World War One; the Compass Theater and Second City didn't invent it, they tapped into it. Experimentation, intimacy, social purpose--these all flourish in Chicago at mid-century even when they're hopelessly out of style on the other coasts. Over it all was a sense of mediation and connection. Chicago was the crossroads of America, the place where America came to meet itself. And through this constant exposure to people from all over the country, Chicago and Chicagoans learned how to distill those qualities into something essential that they expressed in the arts on one hand, but also sold back to America as advertising and other forms of mass marketing. There's a reason why so many call Chicago the American city.



Davis: The search for connection, or the diagnosis of a lack of connection, is what motivates, for me, Ben Hecht's 1001 Afternoons in Chicago, and we so often think of Chicago's most important artists as being keyed in to an explicitly Modernist worldview. Of course, there is all sorts of contemporary energy in the arts at work today in the city, yet you write "Chicago was the crossroads of America, the place where America came to meet..." What will the preface to The Third Coast look like when we get a new edition, in 100 years, 2114?



Thomas: I'm always thrilled to see the energy surrounding so many aspects of Chicago today, and particularly in the arts. But the reality at mid-century was that the city had a different role in the nation's economy and its imagination. All roads, rails and flight plans led to Chicago, until the late Fifties, when the two coasts really got to work on creating a sort of national consciousness dictated by them. Until then, Chicago really was a central meeting place in the way that Las Vegas is now. The city certainly attracts millions of visitors and conventions today, but it doesn't have the pivotal role it once had and I think our nation is less for that.



The 2014 preface will discuss the remarkable citywide conference the mayor held that forced everyone to focus on the massive credit crisis about to swamp Chicago. During that amazing month, the citizens, city workers and business community all came together to agree on a series of collective, short term sacrifices that made the revolutionary overhaul of the public school system possible and attracted millions of good paying jobs.



Davis: In Rachel Shteir's controversial New York Times round up of new Chicago books, The Third Coast comes off the most favorably. Even so, she accuses you of the same boosterism she reads more pejoratively in the other Chicago-focused works. Does Chicago get unfairly slammed for "boosterism"? Is this a branded term that works to Chicago's disadvantage?



Thomas: Chicago has been a city of boosters since it was founded. Selling snake oil has been part of it from the start--remember, The Wizard of Oz was written there! But after the Fire in 1871, it really did expand in a way that no city ever had before; it represented what "City" meant, for better and for worse. When the city's growth stopped, we were left with that superlative identity.



I think it's wonderful that people love the city they live in. They should. And there are aspects of Chicago that exist nowhere else--I mean, I wrote a book about that. But I agree with Rachel in as much as that I don't believe that we should romanticize elements of local culture that hold the city back. Winking at political corruption, for example, isn't good for anyone. And beware when office holders and CEOs start blowing the horn, because they're usually trying to distract you from seeing what's really going on somewhere. Boosterism is only a disadvantage when people spend more time talking than they do on making, changing, building, helping--all those things that Chicago is rightly famous for. Do those things with creativity and drive and the world will come to you.





Davis Schneiderman is Associate Dean of the Faculty and Director of the Center for Chicago Programs at Lake Forest College. His most recent work is the appropriation novel [SIC].



from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1gXTgNK

via IFTTT

Cindy Crawford Recalls Calculus Professor's Snap Judgment About Her Intellect (VIDEO)

When supermodel and entrepreneur Cindy Crawford stepped foot into the first calculus class of her college career, she -- like her fellow students -- expected to learn about mathematical concepts. Instead, she got a memorable life lesson in snap judgments.



Having graduated as valedictorian of her high school, Crawford had earned an academic scholarship to Northwestern University to study chemical engineering. She was well prepared to manage the demanding coursework of her major and was eager to embark on another phase of her education, tuition-free.



"[It was] super exciting," Crawford says of her receiving her scholarship. "There was no way my parents could have afforded to send me to school there."



The first day of calculus, she walked into class and was quickly singled out by the professor.



"For some reason, I caught the professor's eye," Crawford says. "He was like, 'Honey, I think you have the wrong class.'"



Crawford was stunned. "That made me so mad," she remembers. "It was really the first time in my life that I felt judged by the way that I looked."



The incident was a big departure from what Crawford had experienced in her childhood. "I did not grow up feeling that I had to prove that I was as good as boys. I assumed that I was," she says.



That calculus profession's snap judgment left an impact on Crawford that extended beyond the classroom. "It set me on a course of… I've got to prove to the world that I'm not [what he thought]," she explains. "I have relaxed that over the years because you just realize, hey, people are going to make those judgments about me or they're not. But, it was really important to me, especially then, to… represent myself as someone who has a brain."



On Wednesday, April 2, Cindy Crawford joins a special live stream of "Oprah's Lifeclass." Log on to Oprah.com at 3 p.m. ET to see the event live.



from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1gkPDLK

via IFTTT

Nobody Would Eat These Foods If We Called Them By Their Honest Names

The names we actually know these foods by are way more appetizing than their literal and honest descriptions. Bon appétit!



Foie Gras



foiegras



Foie gras -- usually extracted from force-fed ducks or geese -- does literally translate to "fat liver," but it sounds so much fancier in French. But not all foie gras comes from specially fattened birds. Some farms are free range and others let their ducks beef up naturally. (Photo via AP)





Rocky Mountain Oysters



rockymountainoyster



Yep, bovine gonads. Breaded, deep-fried and dipped in sauce. (Photo: jankgo via Flickr)





Caviar



caviar



This delicacy is also known as "roe" and is often used as a spread or garnish. (Photo: Holger Leue via Getty Images)





Blue cheese



bluecheese



We really hope you already knew the blue was mold. And yes, that is how cheese is made. (Photo: John E. Kelly via Getty Images)





Chitterlings



chitlins



They don't always come from a pig -- cultures around the world also eat intestines from sheep and cows -- and sometimes they're fried or baked. Either way, they're still intestines. (Photo: Rawksteadi via Flickr)





Saffron



saffron



This rare and incredibly expensive spice comes from the flowers of the Crocus sativus. Their stigmas and styles, female reproductive organs of flowers, are harvested and dried for use in cooking. (Photo: Kelly Cheng Travel Photography via Getty Images)





Scrapple



scrapple



This classic Pennsylvania Dutch breakfast dish is commonly made by taking unused parts of a pig -- also called offal -- and mixing them with cornmeal or flour to make a loaf shape. Individual pieces are often served after pan-frying. (Photo: voteprime via Flickr)





Capers



capers



These distinctively flavored toppings are actually flower buds from the Capparis spinosa that have been sun-dried and brined or packed in salt. (Photo: Kevandy via Flickr)





Bacon



bacon



Salted, cured, smoked or aged. All delicious, all pig belly. (Photo: skilledmicrowaveuser via Flickr)





Escargot



escargot



The digestive tracts of edible snail species are first typically purged, before being killed, cooked, loaded with butter and garlic, and crammed back in their shells for serving. (Photo: zxvisual via Getty Images)





Tripe



tripe



Stomachs are actually incredibly popular across many cuisines. Beef, pork, sheep, you name it. (Photo: Lluis Gene via Getty Images)





Gelatin



gelatin



Typical gelatin is included in a variety of products and extracted in a number of different ways. Most of them require extraction of natural collagen found in the leftover carcasses of domesticated animals. (Photo: instamatics via Getty Images)





Sweetbread



sweetbread



This innocuous and delicious sounding meal is actually made out of the thymus or pancreas of calves, lambs, pigs or cows. (Photo: Bloomberg via Getty Images)





Head Cheese



headcheese



Take the head of your favorite livestock animal, stew it in a pot with some vegetables and seasoning, then strip the meat off of it and let it sit. Thanks to the natural collagens in the meat, it will turn into a jelly that you can form into a shape. Or not. (Photo: stu_spivack via Flickr)





Haggis



haggis



This traditional Scottish dish is a pudding made from the "pluck" of a sheep -- or its heart, liver and lungs -- mixed together with onions and seasoning and then stuffed into a casing, traditionally from the animal's stomach. (Photo: Holger Leue via Getty Images)





Kombucha



kombucha



First, grab your symbiotic culture of bacteria and yeast, also called a SCOBY. It looks like a slimy mat. Throw it in a container, pour in your tea and wait for it to ferment. The end product will be mildly fizzy (and delicious?). (Photo: Werner Blessing via Getty Images)





Veal



veal



Veal comes from a variety of cows, but almost always from animals that are under a year old, and as young as just a few days old. (Photo: Ariela R. via Flickr)





Hot Dogs



hotdogs



At their core, hot dogs are just casings filled with ground meat. Leftover meat trimmings, fat and sometimes mechanically separated chicken are primarily fillings. (Photo: Matt Carey via Getty Images)





Yogurt



yogurt



Adding specific bacterial cultures to milk results in the fermentation of lactose and the production of lactic acid, which clots the milk and gives it a yogurty tartness. (Photo: James And James via Getty Images)





Steak tartare



steak tartare



This is effectively an uncooked hamburger patty, seasoned and served with some garnishes. To up the raw factor, an egg yolk is often cracked on top. (Photo: Jekaterina Nikitina via Getty Images)





Fish Sauce



fish sauce



This tasty accoutrement is made by packing fresh fish and salt into a box, which is then left to ferment. After a number of months, the fish become hydrolized and their delicious salty fluids float to the top. (Photo: enviromantic via Getty Images)





Cottage cheese



cottage cheese



The process of cheese-making leaves both curds (solids) and whey (liquids). Cottage cheese curds have not been pressed, which means they remain more soupy than many regular cheeses. (Photo: Markus Guhl via Getty Images)





Kimchi



kimchi



This traditional Korean side dish is made by mixing a variety of chopped vegetables and seasonings into jars, where they are left to ferment, giving them a strong and very recognizable flavor. (Photo: Asia Images via Getty Images)



from Chicago - The Huffington Post http://ift.tt/1mvtb8c

via IFTTT