Showing posts with label playing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label playing. Show all posts

Sunday, March 16, 2014

Russia-Ukraine Agree “Truce” Until March 21st; White House Warns Putin Stop Playing “Russian Roulette”


Embedded image permalinkZero Hedge – by Tyler Durden


President Putin has started a game of Russian roulette and I think the United States and the West have to be very clear in their response,” states Sen. Foreign Relations Committed Chair Robert Menendez among a slew of Sunday morning talk-show rhetoric from US politicians with the White House’s Dan Pfeiffer adding “President Putin has a choice about what he’s going to do here. Is he going to continue to further isolate himself, further hurt his economy, further diminish Russian influence in the world, or is he going to do the right thing?” As the “sham referendum” continues, Reuters, however, reports that Ukraine’s acting defense minister believes Russia and Ukraine have agree a truce until March 21st.  


Sunday Morning Talk-Show Rhetoric… (via AP)


If Russian President Vladimir Putin doesn’t back down in Crimea, he will face penalties from the West that will hurt the Russian economy and diminish Moscow’s influence in the world, the White House said Sunday.


White House senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer said the Obama administration’s top priority is supporting the new Ukrainian government “in every way possible.” He also said the United States would not recognize the results of a referendum taking place in Crimea Sunday on whether it should become part of Russia.


Pfeiffer said everything that Russia has done in Crimea has been a violation of international law and bad for stability in the region.


President Putin has a choice about what he’s going to do here. Is he going to continue to further isolate himself, further hurt his economy, further diminish Russian influence in the world, or is he going to do the right thing?” Pfeiffer said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”



President Putin has started a game of Russian roulette and I think the United States and the West have to be very clear in their response because he will calculate about how far he can go,” said Sen. Robert Menendez, the Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Menendez appeared on Fox News Sunday along with the ranking Republican on the Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee. Corker said the U.S. and Europe were entering a “defining moment” in their relationship with Russia.


Putin will continue to do this. He did it in Georgia a few years ago. He’s moved into Crimea and he will move into other places unless we show that long-term resolve.”


Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut returned early Sunday from meetings in Ukraine.He called an annexation vote taking place in Crimea a “sham referendum.” He said that Ukrainians he talked to, both inside the government and outside, said war could occur if Russia attempts to annex more territory. They indicated that “If Russia really does decide to move beyond Crimea it’s going to be bloody and the fight may be long,” he said on ABC’s “This Week.”



But it appears truce has been reached for now…


The defense ministries of Ukraine and Russia have agreed on a truce in Crimea until March 21, Ukraine’s acting defense minister said on Sunday.


An agreement has been reached with (Russia’s) Black Sea Fleet and the Russian Defense Ministry on a truce in Crimea until March 21,” Ihor Tenyukh told journalists on the sidelines of a cabinet meeting.


No measures will be taken against our military facilities in Crimea during that time. Our military sites are therefore proceeding with a replenishment of reserves.



As Ukrainian armed forces appear resigned to the loss:


No confirmation as yet from the Russian authorities… which, it would appear, merely gives Putin more time to arrange his military pieces since for sure he shows no signs of backing down… as the tanks keep rolling


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-16/russia-ukraine-agree-truce-until-march-21st-white-house-warns-putin-stop-playing-rus






Russia-Ukraine Agree “Truce” Until March 21st; White House Warns Putin Stop Playing “Russian Roulette”

Sunday, March 9, 2014

Hillary Clinton: Playing a Dog-Eared “Hitler” Card



U.S. political leaders" comparisons of overseas adversaries to Hitler have a long history of fueling momentum for war.








The frontrunner to become the next president of the United States is playing an old and dangerous political game — comparing a foreign leader to Adolf Hitler.


At a private charity event on Tuesday, in comments preserved on audio, Hillary Clinton talked about actions by Russia’s President Vladimir Putin in the Crimea. “Now if this sounds familiar, it’s what Hitler did back in the ’30s,” she said.


The next day, Clinton gave the inflammatory story more oxygen when speaking at UCLA. She “largely stood by the remarks,” the Washington Post reported. Clinton said “she was merely noting parallels between Putin’s claim that he was protecting Russian-speaking minorities in Crimea and Hitler’s moves into Poland, Czechoslovakia and other parts of Europe to protect German minorities.”


Clinton denied that she was comparing Putin with Hitler even while she persisted in comparing Putin with Hitler. “I just want people to have a little historic perspective,” she said. “I’m not making a comparison certainly, but I am recommending that we perhaps can learn from this tactic that has been used before.”


Yes indeed. Let’s learn from this tactic that has been used before – the tactic of comparing overseas adversaries to Hitler. Such comparisons by U.S. political leaders have a long history of fueling momentum for war.


“Surrender in Vietnam” would not bring peace, President Lyndon Johnson said at a news conference on July 28, 1965 as he tried to justify escalating the war, “because we learned from Hitler at Munich that success only feeds the appetite of aggression.”


After Ho Chi Minh was gone, the Hitler analogy went to other leaders of countries in U.S. crosshairs. The tag was also useful when attached to governments facing U.S.-backed armies.


Three decades ago, while Washington funded the contra forces in Nicaragua, absurd efforts to smear the elected left-wing Sandinistas knew no rhetorical bounds. Secretary of State George Shultz said on February 15, 1984, at a speech in Boston: “I’ve had good friends who experienced Germany in the 1930s go there and come back and say, ‘I’ve visited many communist countries, but Nicaragua doesn’t feel like that. It feels like Nazi Germany.’”


Washington embraced Panama’s Gen. Manuel Noriega as an ally, and for a while he was a CIA collaborator. But there was a falling out, and tension spiked in the summer of 1989. Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger said that drug trafficking by Noriega “is aggression as surely as Adolf Hitler’s invasion of Poland 50 years ago was aggression.” A U.S. invasion overthrew Noriega in December 1989.


In early August 1990, the sudden Iraqi invasion of Kuwait abruptly ended cordial relations between Washington and Baghdad. The two governments had a history of close cooperation during the 1980s. But President George H. W. Bush proclaimed that Saddam Hussein was “a little Hitler.” In January 1991, the U.S. government launched the Gulf War.


Near the end of the decade, Hillary Clinton got a close look at how useful it can be to conflate a foreign leader with Hitler, as President Bill Clinton and top aides repeatedly drew the parallel against Serbia’s president, Slobodan Milosevic. In late March 1999, the day before the bombing of Kosovo and Serbia began, President Clinton said in a speech: “And so I want to talk to you about Kosovo today but just remember this — it’s about our values. What if someone had listened to Winston Churchill and stood up to Adolf Hitler earlier?”


As the U.S.-led NATO bombing intensified, so did efforts to justify it with references to Hitler. “Clinton and his senior advisers harked repeatedly back to images of World War II and Nazism to give moral weight to the bombing,” the Washington Post reported. Vice President Al Gore chimed in for the war chorus, calling Milosevic “one of these junior-league Hitler types.”


Just a few years later, the George W. Bush administration cranked up a revival of Saddam-Hitler comparisons. They became commonplace.


Five months before the invasion of Iraq, it was nothing extraordinary when a leading congressional Democrat pulled out all the stops. “Had Hitler’s regime been taken out in a timely fashion,” said Rep. Tom Lantos, “the 51 million innocent people who lost their lives during the Second World War would have been able to finish their normal life cycles. Mr. Chairman, if we appease Saddam Hussein, we will stand humiliated before both humanity and history.”


From the Vietnam War to the Iraq War, facile and wildly inaccurate comparisons between foreign adversaries and Adolf Hitler have served the interests of politicians hell-bent on propelling the United States into war. Often, those politicians succeeded. The carnage and the endless suffering have been vast.


Now, Hillary Clinton is ratcheting up her own Hitler analogies. She knows as well as anyone the power they can generate for demonizing a targeted leader.


With the largest nuclear arsenals on the planet, the United States and Russia have the entire world on a horrific knife’s edge. Nuclear saber-rattling is implicit in what the prospective President Hillary Clinton has done in recent days, going out of her way to tar Russia’s president with a Hitler brush. Her eagerness to heighten tensions with Russia indicates that she is willing to risk war — and even nuclear holocaust — for the benefit of her political ambitions.


 

Related Stories


AlterNet.org Main RSS Feed



Hillary Clinton: Playing a Dog-Eared “Hitler” Card

Friday, February 28, 2014

Creating a Level Playing Field

At Alternate Viewpoint, the privacy of our visitors is of extreme importance to us (See this article to learn more about Privacy Policies.). This privacy policy document outlines the types of personal information is received and collected by Alternate Viewpoint and how it is used.


Log Files


Like many other Web sites, Alternate Viewpoint makes use of log files. The information inside the log files includes internet protocol (IP) addresses, type of browser, Internet Service Provider (ISP), date/time stamp, referring/exit pages, and number of clicks to analyze trends, administer the site, track user"s movement around the site, and gather demographic information. IP addresses, and other such information are not linked to any information that is personally identifiable.


Cookies and Web Beacons


Alternate Viewpoint does use cookies to store information about visitors preferences, record user-specific information on which pages the user access or visit, customize Web page content based on visitors browser type or other information that the visitor sends via their browser.


DoubleClick DART Cookie


  • Google, as a third party vendor, uses cookies to serve ads on Alternate Viewpoint.

  • Google"s use of the DART cookie enables it to serve ads to users based on their visit to Alternate Viewpoint and other sites on the Internet.

  • Users may opt out of the use of the DART cookie by visiting the Google ad and content network privacy policy at the following URL - http://www.google.com/privacy_ads.html.

These third-party ad servers or ad networks use technology to the advertisements and links that appear on Alternate Viewpoint send directly to your browsers. They automatically receive your IP address when this occurs. Other technologies ( such as cookies, JavaScript, or Web Beacons ) may also be used by the third-party ad networks to measure the effectiveness of their advertisements and / or to personalize the advertising content that you see.


Alternate Viewpoint has no access to or control over these cookies that are used by third-party advertisers.


You should consult the respective privacy policies of these third-party ad servers for more detailed information on their practices as well as for instructions about how to opt-out of certain practices. Alternate Viewpoint"s privacy policy does not apply to, and we cannot control the activities of, such other advertisers or web sites.


If you wish to disable cookies, you may do so through your individual browser options. More detailed information about cookie management with specific web browsers can be found at the browser"s respective websites.



Creating a Level Playing Field

Monday, December 16, 2013

GOP Makes Tech Gains But Still Playing Catch-Up



Earlier this year, the Republican National Committee released a political autopsy titled “Growth and Opportunity Project.” The much-discussed report touched on the wide array of perceived party shortcomings — from poor messaging to the lengthy presidential primary — that presumably hampered the GOP in the last two (losing) presidential elections.


The most conspicuous points in the 100-page report focus on Republican attempts at “rebranding” and improving the party’s standing among young, female and minority voters. Whenever Republicans make a messaging misstep — such as when the RNC tweeted praise for Rosa Parks and “her role in ending racism” earlier this month — opponents gleefully point to the gaffe as evidence that the rebranding efforts have failed.


But the longest section of “Growth and Opportunity Project” focuses on the less exciting topic of campaign mechanics. The report conceded that “Democrats had the clear edge on new media and ground game, in terms of both reach and effectiveness.”


The authors offered several recommendations for how Republicans could improve their campaigns. And since its release, the RNC said it has made strides in building the 21st-century infrastructure needed to win elections. The committee is now attempting to become “the most technologically advanced organization in politics,” according to RNC spokesman Raffi Williams.


The digital revamp is inextricably tied to the party’s pursuit of a “permanent ground game,” the committee announced in an October memo.


In the memo, RNC Communications Director Sean Spicer wrote that the organization would shift away from its strategy of stockpiling cash and spending heavily in the three months before an election. Instead, it has begun investing in technology and staff to maintain a permanent presence in communities throughout the country. Permanent ground-game staffers are continuously collecting data on voters to improve turnout and increase the efficiency of spending.


Currently, the GOP has more people in the field than at the RNC’s Capitol Hill headquarters.


“We’re in roughly 30 states,” said Williams. “The 2014 states are being built out first and most include state directors, field staff, minority directors and field staff and data directors.” He added that the party, looking to 2016, has started investing in all 50 states.


In the past, the RNC would survey potential voters once and then contact them with information about issues that those voters cared about. The once-successful strategy is now outdated, as Democrats have shown their ability to continually follow-up with voters and better tailor their messaging to individuals.


Investing in a permanent ground game allows the RNC to do what Democrats have already been doing for years. Williams said that the spending will enable the RNC “to build real relationships with voters and will allow our relationships to be more individualized.”


DNC spokesman Mike Czin told RealClearPolitics that though he has “no doubt that Republicans are making investments and really spending time trying to figure out how to do this,” they are still lagging behind.


Czin pointed to the Virginia gubernatorial race as proof that GOP investments in this effort have not yet paid off. A few weeks before the election, Republican Ken Cuccinelli’s campaign sent out an e-mail asking those interested in volunteering to reach out again because “sometimes things fall through the cracks.”


“That tells me that whatever investments they’re making weren’t being used by the biggest targeted, competitive race of the year,” Czin said of the contest won by Democrat Terry McAuliffe.


Toward the end of the October memo, Spicer noted that the change of strategy wasn’t “about one candidate or one campaign or one election year. … It’s about building a lasting foundation.” That could be perceived as a reference to the divide between the Democratic National Committee and Organizing for Action, the president’s permanent political presence.


Following the 2008 presidential election, Obama’s campaign became part of the DNC and was renamed Organizing for America. OFA was charged with helping implement the president’s agenda. At the time, the organization focused on energizing the vast grassroots network that helped elect Obama in 2008 in order to help pass the Affordable Care Act.


This January, however, Organizing for America broke from the DNC and became a non-profit called Organizing for Action. Its mission mirrors that of the party — the new OFA has spent 2013 advocating for gun control and immigration reform — but it works independently from the DNC.


The separation has caused some tension. Although the two organizations ostensibly advocate for the same things, they now compete for donor dollars. 2013 has been a lackluster season for fundraising at the DNC, which has been outraised by the RNC for most of the year.


While the Obama campaign masterminded the Democrats’ technological leaps, it mostly focused on advancing one cause: the re-election of President Obama. It was unclear for most of this year whether the campaign would share data from its much-praised Project Narwhal. (Narwhal contains massive amounts of voter data information.) In November, following complaints from Democrats who wanted access to 2012 Obama data, news broke that the former campaign would give most of its voter information to the DNC’s master voter file. But it would rent out its e-mail list to OFA, party committees and other groups.


For its part, the RNC hopes to avoid the awkward divides — perceived or actual — that have defined the relationship between the overlapping DNC, OFA, and Obama campaign infrastructures. Republicans will have their work cut out for them. Currently, their data are possibly more fragmented than those on the Democratic side. Several organizations have data platforms designed for Republicans, and the RNC is working on consolidation.


Williams said that the RNC is “building something that can be used for cycles to come” that will help elect Republicans at every level. And he argued that the best place to build a data center is at the RNC.


“Doing it together ensures we have the most quality data points we can as a party,” he said. “There are strategic advantages to having the RNC do this and not a candidate — no other organization has the ability to coordinate and share with candidates and state parties the way the RNC can.”


To that end, the RNC is working to become a one-stop data shop for Republican candidates throughout the country. A “data warehouse” with decades’ worth of information is being amassed for the benefit of Republicans ranging from city council candidates to aspiring presidents.


Still, the RNC can only do so much to help Republicans get elected. Publicly and privately, Republicans concede the Democrats’ point that technology isn’t panacea for GOP woes. “Their biggest shortcoming and their biggest failing is their message,” said Czin. “That’s what alienated voters and that’s what drove voters away.”


Regardless, maintaining a significant edge with data collection will be critical in the upcoming cycle’s closer contests.


Republicans may catch up or even pass Democrats in terms of technological infrastructure. But it could take longer for them to reorient the culture of their organization and effectively train their staff and volunteers to use that infrastructure. And the true test of whether Republicans have created the right synergy between technology and culture won’t come until Election Day 2014. 




RealClearPolitics – Articles



GOP Makes Tech Gains But Still Playing Catch-Up

Saturday, November 9, 2013

US, France playing good cop-bad cop in Iran talks



Published time: November 09, 2013 17:44



Secretary-General of the United Nations Ban Ki-moon (3R) and members of the P5+1 group (L-R) British Foreign Secretary William Hague, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Foreign Minister of the People’s Republic of China Wang Yi pose for photographers before the start of a meeting during the annual U.N. General Assembly on September 25, 2013 in New York City (AFP Photo)



Download video (29.32 MB)



America and France are playing ‘good cop-bad cop’ in the P5 + 1 talks with Iran over its nuclear program, so that Washington’s position would sound more reasonable, Robert Harneis, a journalist and political analyst has told RT.


Six major world powers and Iran are holding negotiations in Geneva over Tehran’s highly-disputed nuclear program.


RT: France seems to be the most skeptical of the negotiating nations about the outcome of the talks. What’s behind its skepticism?


Robert Harneis: It is always a little difficult to understand the position of the French here. They seem to take an extreme position all the time. There are a number of reasons for this. The first is that they are playing ‘good cop-bad cop’ with the Americans. Obama is suddenly being much more reasonable in his attitude with the Iranians, and the French are out there on the flank saying “Oh, you mustn’t agree too easily, Israel must be protected,” and so on. In a sense that’s, if you like, playing the game of the Americans so that they can sound more reasonable, the French sound more unreasonable.


There is another factor, which is that everybody knows the enormous pressure of the Israeli lobby in America. It’s not quite so well-known that it’s pretty considerable in France as well.


RT: The French Foreign Minister said Israel’s position must be taken into consideration. Why such concern for Israel when even Washington called Netanyahu’s condemnation of the deal ‘premature’?


RH: Yes, it’s interesting, isn’t it, that Mr. Netanyahu has said that the deal had been concluded. Everybody else is saying it hasn’t. At any rate, the position of the French, I think, is to say things that the Americans don’t want to say at the moment. I think that’s at the bottom of it, because frankly this posturing by the French President and the French Foreign Minister makes France look pretty ridiculous on the domestic front. There is a great deal of mockery of Laurent Fabius and his very aggressive statements internally in France.


RT: We’re used to the US being one of Tehran’s harshest opponents. Do you feel that Washington’s stance is genuinely changing?


RH: Well, one would like to hope – let’s put it this way – that this is a real diplomatic revolution. The Americans ever since 1979, when the embassy drama took place in Iran, have had this slightly ridiculous, slightly vengeful obsession about dealing with the Iranian nuclear threat.


As far as anybody can tell and as far as the American security services themselves say, there is no Iranian nuclear threat. The Israelis, on the other hand, have 300 nuclear weapons. So the situation is a trifle absurd as it often is with western foreign policies.


And there are signs Obama is trying to put American foreign policy on a more sensible track. Why not have sensible relations with Iran – this is being asked in the US after all. For years, with the threat of the Soviet Union, they had no difficulty negotiating with [Mikhail] Gorbachev and men a lot more difficult than him. So, why can’t we negotiate with Iranians? Why do we have to take this ridiculous attitude that they cannot have what France, Britain, the US have – which is nuclear protection. And the Iranians say they don’t want it anyway.


So, it’s a difficult one to quite work out. But it could be that there is a real revolution taking place and the Americans are going to change their stance because they need to do business with Iran really.


RT:  Finally, what are your personal predictions? Will the sides involved manage to overcome their disagreements and strike a deal in the near future?


RH: Well, if I had to take my reputation as profit on the line, I would say that there is going to be a deal. Because they are, after all, talking only about a six-month deal, as far as we can understand it. A suspended sentence, so to speak. With the problems of gas pipelines from Iran to Europe, which Europe needs badly for its Nabucco pipeline – which has no gas without the Iranians – I think there is a very strong probability. And they’d just love to get in there and have all the contracts for rebuilding Iran. So, I hope it’s a real revolution.




RT – Op-Edge



US, France playing good cop-bad cop in Iran talks

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women

Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women
http://isbigbrotherwatchingyou.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/23ec9__16607?ns=guardian&pageName=Article3Aonline-dating-positives-negatives-gender-equality3A1985640&ch=Comment+is+free&c3=GU.co.uk&c4=Online+dating2CGender+28News292CDating+28Life+and+style292CTechnology2CInternet2CSocial+media&c5=Unclassified2CNot+commercially+useful2CMedia+Weekly2CTechnology+Gadgets2CFamily+and+Relationships&c6=Jill+Filipovic&c7=20132F102F23+043A24&c8=1985640&c9=Blog&c10=Comment&c13=Jill+Filipovic3A+On+gender+and+other+agendas&c19=GUK&c25=Comment+is+free&c47=UK&c64=US&c65=Online+dating+levels+the+romantic+playing+field+for+women&c66=Comment+is+free&c67=nextgen-compatible&c72=&c73=&c74=&c75=&h2=GU2FComment+is+free2FComment+is+free2FOnline+dating


Old rules of dating put men in charge. Online dating offers an increasingly gender-equal and progressive world of romance


Online dating isn’t the future of romance, it’s the present. According to new Pew findings, one-in-ten Americans and nearly 40% of singles on the romantic hunt have used an online dating site or app. It seems to be working: nearly a quarter of online daters have met a long-term partner or spouse through the sites.


While many folks still hold a low opinion of internet daters, the cultural tides are turning, and romances kindled online are increasingly mainstream. There are, of course, downsides to meeting people online, just as there are to meeting people in any other venue. But for better or worse, internet dating is revolutionizing how we find partners – and it’s making the dating process an increasingly gender-equal and progressive one.


Old rules of dating put men in charge. Men did the asking, the planning of the date, the paying, and the asking-out-again. Women waited, made ourselves presentable, and hoped flirtations with the object of our interest would lead to an ask-out. There have always been a small handful of women who would pursue men directly, but traditionally, dating has been led by the male of the species.


And women, not wanting to appear rude, have for decades accepted invitations for dates we simply were not interested in going on. It’s a well-documented social phenomenon that women are expected to be nice and accommodating, especially to men, including the ones who ask us out. It puts women in an awkward situation, it makes men feel resentful and it wastes everyone’s time.


Online dating upends that to various degrees. It’s just as acceptable in an online space for a woman to message a man she thinks is cute as it is for a man to reach out to a woman. Most sites also have a variety of functions to show your interest if you’re not quite ready to send a full message. You can “favorite” a person’s profile, for example, letting them see that you’re interested and encouraging them to go from there.


You can also reject someone politely and efficiently with no (or at least few) hard feelings. While there are folks who get bent of out shape when their message goes unanswered – newsflash: there are crazy people on the internet – most online daters recognize that every message is a shot in the dark, and no one is obligated to respond unless they’re similarly interested. For a lot of women, the ability to avoid unwanted dates without risking offense or breaking social norms is an incredible relief. And men benefit too, by going into a date with relative certainty that the person he’s going out with at least finds him attractive on “paper” and in pictures.


Online dating also cuts through some of the unnecessary confusion in “normal” dating. Critics argue that finding a mate online removes serendipity and organic connection. That’s true, sort of – you do need to interact with someone in person to really evaluate a connection or a physical attraction. But you don’t need to meet someone in the subway or at a bar to discern a connection.


Initial offline meetings come with their own set of perils: meet someone through a friend and you’re more likely to think they’re a good person who shares your general interests and perspectives, which simply might not be true at all. It’s easy to disrupt your social group if you go out with someone a few times and then one of you loses interest while the other feels a connection.


More troubling is connecting, dating and developing real feelings before realizing you aren’t fundamentally compatible based on factors that would have been deal-breakers if you read about your partner on paper – maybe common ones like religion, politics and life goals, or specific interests like needing someone who will tolerate your playing video games for eight hours a day.


By contrast, being clear in your own dating profile can filter out fundamentally incompatible mates. Are you, say, a liberal feminist Brooklynite who would never have sex with a Republican, considers dating someone in Queens a long-distance relationship and has actual nightmares about waking up in a suburban house with a Range Rover in the driveway? That can all be specified.


Up-front disclosure helps to find someone who fits your needs, whether you want to date someone who shares your religious values, or if you have a particular fetish that you may not want to mention on a first date but that you won’t be satisfied without. Perhaps most crucially, a dating website opens up a new universe of people to meet – far more than you’ll see out at the bar down the street.


Meeting dates online, just like meeting them off, comes with negatives. The most obvious is that people lie in ways large and small. My online dating profile says I’m 5’3″ when I’m actually five-two-and-a-half, indicates I’d date anyone in the New York region when, in fact, wild horses couldn’t drag me to Staten Island and fails to disclose that in terms of hours watched, Say Yes To The Dress might qualify as one of my favorite shows.


There is also the lack of agreed-upon rules and social conventions. After how many dates with someone do you both take down your profiles? How much information is too much? It took a week for that guy to message me back – is it because I’m a hideous beast, or is he just busy? With the seemingly endless supply of internet singles and without the accountability of overlapping social groups, it’s easy for a post-date week to consist of one party going on half a dozen new dates while the other sits home waiting for a call to be returned.


And for each person who seems great, there’s a sea of other possibilities just a click away. You may get along with the person in front of you, but maybe there’s someone else out there who shares your dedication to Crossfit or your penchant for Italian cinema, or who’s just a little bit taller, or has a more interesting job. It can be overwhelming, and too tempting to resist.


What’s most heartening about the Pew poll, though, is the recognition that the internet plays a crucial role in our “real” lives, and there isn’t such a clear dividing line between how we live digitally and how we live in the world. We do our activism online, signing petitions and emailing our politicians. We do our learning online, having access to many more opinion and news pieces than we did in the pre-digital age, and even taking college courses. We’re even able to interact directly with writers, thought leaders and fellow interested citizens on platforms like Twitter and Tumblr just as we can remain connected to our family and friends near and far, seeing their pictures and updates on Facebook. We can keep in regular contact with our closest confidants, g-chatting throughout the work day or texting to make plans.


It makes sense that dating is part of that new world too. We can start romances through dating sites, get laid with apps like Grindr or Tinder, and flirt with our romantic interests or our long-time loves by sending racy Snapchats, or sexy texts. Or we can at least attempt to make our exes jealous by posting enviable Instagrams.


Is there something lost in this new world of dating? Of course. Is it often terrifying to tread new territory without the clear romantic rules our grandmothers knew? Yes. Is this universe with its dizzying array of options and increasingly equal playing field far better than the old model, even with the attendant fear of choosing the wrong thing? You bet.





theguardian.com © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds









Comment is free | theguardian.com


Read more about Online dating levels the romantic playing field for women and other interesting subjects concerning Internet Spying and Secrecy at TheDailyNewsReport.com

Wednesday, October 16, 2013

Murkowski: House playing politics


The GOP women senators behind a bipartisan deal on the government shutdown and debt ceiling are making the rounds on morning TV on Wednesday, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski saying the fight in the lower chamber shouldn’t “be about someone’s speakership.”


Flanked by fellow Republicans Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), the Alaska senator on NBC’s “Today” responded to a question about House Speaker John Boehner and the choice he faces in bringing a Senate deal to the House floor.







“This should not be about someone’s speakership. This should not be about the next election. This should be about, really, the future of our country,” Murkowski said. “It ought not be about the politics of the game or whether or not someone keeps their leadership. I want to support John Boehner in any way that I can, but we need to be pragmatic. This is not going to be a Republican solution or a Democrat solution. This is going to be a solution that is good for the country.”


Collins, who also appeared on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” and Ayotte, who is scheduled to appear on CNN’s “New Day,” also advocated for moving forward beyond a partisan debate, saying though none of them support Obamacare, neither did any of them support the strategy to defund it that led to the shutdown.


“Let’s face it, the government shut down and the Obamacare exchange is open. What we need is problem solving. That’s why I’m proud to be here with Susan and Lisa to get this resolved for the country,” Ayotte said.


“It was an ill-conceived strategy from the beginning, not a winning strategy,” Ayotte reiterated on CNN. “I don’t think it was worth it.”


As the Senate moves toward a deal, Ayotte said she hoped Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) wouldn’t stand in the way and hold up a vote.


“It’s up to him. I would hope that he wouldn’t. I mean in the Senate, obviously, in terms of certain time frames, senators can cause you to run out the clock, but what’s he trying to gain at this point?” Ayotte said on CNN. “I would hope that whatever comes forward, that we would allow a vote on it as soon as possible because we are coming against this deadline.”




POLITICO – Congress



Murkowski: House playing politics

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

INEQUALITY FOR ALL now playing. Check your local listings. Great...

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

INEQUALITY FOR ALL now playing. Check your local listings. Great reviews (91% on “rotten tomatoes”). And given what the radical Republicans are doing to our democracy and our economy, more important than ever.



Share



Robert Reich



INEQUALITY FOR ALL now playing. Check your local listings. Great...

Thursday, September 5, 2013

Sunday, August 18, 2013

“The obsessive, delusional side of fantasy role-playing”: From Dungeons and Dragons to live-action role playing

For a long time, [my friend] Morgan had been talking up something called Otherworld, an “adventure weekend” held every fall at a 4-H camp in Connecticut. Attendees dress up like wizards and warriors and spend three days trying to complete a heroic quest; Morgan discovered the event through a friend and loved it so much he joined the staff.


I begged off. While I’d become less self-conscious about my geeky pursuits, I wasn’t ready to put on a costume and run around in the woods. I could justify spending one night a week pretending to be a cleric, since it’s not that different from attending a poker game or bowling night. But nobody dresses up like ten-pin legend Walter “Deadeye” Williams before they head down to Barney’s Bowlarama.


Besides, Otherworld sounded awfully like something I’d grown to fear and revile: a live-action role-playing game, or LARP. The very first LARP may have been Dagorhir, a medieval battle first organized in Maryland in 1977 by a Tolkien fan named Bryan Weise. Flying high on fantasy after reading “The Lord of the Rings” and watching the Sean Connery film “Robin and Marian,” he placed an ad on a local radio station soliciting anyone who wanted “to fight in Hobbit Wars with padded weapons.”


It sounds harmless enough, but to many geeks, LARPs represent the obsessive, delusional side of fantasy role-playing—the actual freaks who make the rest of us look like freaks. There’s an infamous video on YouTube of a LARPer running around in the woods, dressed up as a wizard, and shouting “Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!” Each one of its 3.6 million views has added to the perception that D&D is weird and that I spend my Tuesdays letting grown men whack me with foam swords.


Since I’d never actually tried a LARP, this bias against LARPing was completely hypocritical and uninformed. And Morgan insisted Otherworld wasn’t a LARP, anyway—the emphasis, he said, is on storytelling, not rules. He argued that many of the attendees were “normal” people, role-playing naïfs approaching the experience like some sort of Outward Bound self-improvement weekend. And he made it sound like it could be fun.


I knew I was going to have to try a LARP—or something like it—if I was truly going to understand the world of fantasy role-playing. So with the convenient excuse of “reporting” wrapped around me like a Cloak of Resistance,* I signed up.



And I started getting into it. A few weeks before Otherworld, a packet arrived in the mail containing the participant handbook and a letter printed in a faux-medieval font on parchment paper. It explained that I’d be playing a mage from Keer, “a medium-sized island in the Talian sea . . . the most wonderful and most terrible place in the whole of the kingdom.” The author, the Duchess of Keer, explained that the island was under attack from a sea monster, a leviathan that was sinking ships and proving beyond her means to defeat. I was to travel to the mainland, to the town of World’s Edge, in order to locate the legendary “Knights of the Golden Circle” and beg them for help.


To do that, the handbook explained, I’d join five other participants in an adventuring party; we’d face a series of challenges that would be resolved through role-playing, puzzle solving, and yes, foam-sword combat. Aside from a short briefing on Friday night, we’d inhabit a fantasy world until Sunday evening; for just under forty-eight hours, I’d stop being ordinary Dave and become “a heroic version” of myself. In other words: I’d be running around in the woods, dressed up as a wizard, and shouting, “Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!”


As self-loathing began to rise, I constructed my character. Otherworld participants aren’t assigned a PC; they rely on their own attributes and skills, not numbers on a character sheet. But they are expected to integrate into the story, and that requires a costume, a character name, and a background for your heroic self.


I decided my mage was a scholar of magic, detached and intellectual—a character choice clearly driven by psychological defense mechanisms. I named my wizard Dewey, after the library classification system. The fact that I thought this indicated winking ironic detachment—instead of providing proof I was already the world’s biggest nerd—shows my level of delusion.


For a costume, I’d wear brown cargo pants and a dark blue henley shirt, topped by a dramatic ankle-length black fleece cloak. At $ 200, the handmade item (ordered from a costume shop specializing in LARPs and historical reenactments) represented a level of financial commitment that might signify I was taking this seriously. So I told Kara and the few friends who knew where I was going that the purchase was a dodge, allowing me to wear normal clothes underneath. (Secretly, I was pretty damn stoked: I challenge any even slightly geeky person to put on a real, high-quality cloak and not imagine they’re Gandalf, Dumbledore, and/or Luke Skywalker.) A hand-bound leather journal completed the ensemble—my “spell book,” doubling as reporter’s notebook.


The Otherworld Adventure was held that year on the first weekend in October at the Windham-Tolland 4-H Camp in Pomfret, Connecticut. It’s a lovely spot in the rolling hills about 150 miles northeast of Manhattan, a three-hour drive unless you’re dumb enough to leave your Fifth Avenue office right before rush hour, in which case it takes six hours. When I finally arrived, the only light in the camp came from a two-story lodge, built into a hill so its basement opened onto the parking lot.


As I entered, I realized I was the last one there. Seven groups of six people perched on wooden benches turned, laughed, and gave me an ovation. I smiled gamely, grabbed the nearest open seat, and tried to score a 20 on my Hide roll.


Kristi Hayes, one of Otherworld’s founders and its current writer and director, stood at the front of the room, giving final directions. Only rogues may disarm traps, she warned us. Stay hydrated. Don’t hit people on the head with your sword.


The demographic breakdown of the participants was my first surprise of the weekend. Nearly half of them were women, and while twenty- and thirty-year-olds did constitute the single largest group, there was a decent number of adults outside that age range.


The six adventurers from Keer were no exception. Three of them, young women from Austin, Texas, had come to Otherworld as part of a thirtieth-birthday celebration. Jen, the birthday girl, would play our bard, “Kinkaid.” She wore fashionable large-frame glasses, a stud in her lip, and sparkly tights under a knee-length green cloak. Summer (a rogue called “Pearl”) bore a resemblance to Ally Sheedy in The Breakfast Club; her costume included a blue and gold jacket that looked like it was designed by John Galliano for a pirate-themed fashion show, lost at the Milan airport, and rediscovered years later in a Texarkana thrift store. She got compliments on it all weekend long. Elaine (a ranger, “Merrick”) was tall and thin and slightly boyish—or at least that was the effect of the overalls and flannel she wore for a costume. Charron was also female, but older, probably north of sixty. She was local and, like me, had a friend on the Otherworld staff. She’d play “Willow,” our cleric. The final member of the party was comfortably familiar: Phil, from Boston, a tall thirtyish white guy, quiet and a little nerdy. He told me he’d be playing a paladin named “Sure, Swift Justice” . . . but I could call him “Justice.”


There was also a fifth member of our party. Chris, a six-year veteran of the Otherworld staff, would be our companion for the weekend. A combination of a camp counselor and a fixer, a companion is charged with keeping their team from breaking anything important—including bones, the rules, and the story line. Chris grew up on Long Island and seemed familiar to me, perhaps because he fell into a common Suffolk County archetype: an upper-middle-class joe, fond of boating or lacrosse, inevitably described as “a good guy.” He was slightly short, with an athletic build, a healthy tan, and hair cut close to hide where it was thinning and receding.


Chris’s first duty was to lead us outside, and to our combat training. Since the ultimate goal of an event like Otherworld is to immerse yourself in fantasy, these games eschew dice-rolling in favor of actual—though carefully mediated—physical confrontation. LARP battle rules can get quite complex; at Otherworld they keep things simple. Each character gets a set number of “free hits” (hit points, basically) and each time you get touched with a sword, you lose one. When you’re down to zero, a hit on a limb means you must stop using that limb; a hit to the torso knocks you unconscious. When that happens, you fall down and quietly count to fifty; if no one comes to your aid before you finish, you’re dead.


As a mage, I had just one free hit, making me the weakest member of the party. I could get hit at most three times (anywhere, limb, anywhere) or as little as two times (anywhere, then torso) and be killed stone dead. Fortunately, as Ganubi has demonstrated, death is rarely permanent in fantasy role-playing games. At Otherworld, getting killed means you become a ghost, and you take a piece of cheesecloth out of your pocket and drape it over your head like a Scooby-Doo villain. You’re not allowed to speak or physically interact with people, and you must remain that way until resurrected by a cleric’s spell or magic potion.


A friendly staffer handed us each our “boffers”—three-foot-long swords built on a rigid core, but padded all over with thick black foam. They’re light and easy to wield, and when you’re hit with one, it hurts about as much as getting tagged in a pillow fight. My compatriots were all issued swords that were about three feet long; as the mage, I received a dirk, about a foot shorter but otherwise identical. I couldn’t help myself: “It’s not the size of the sword, but how you use it,” I told them.


We then squared off against six staffers for a brief bit of sparring. I’m no fencing expert—my knowledge doesn’t extend much beyond en garde and touché—but I think our performance would be classified as manger la merde. Sword fighting is complicated even when your health isn’t on the line, and when you’re in actual group combat, with enemies coming at you from all sides, it’s incredibly difficult.


Once we were trained and equipped, Chris wished us good luck and pointed toward a man standing near the corner of the lodge, where a path wound uphill and around the building to its as-yet-unseen main entrance. “The Storyteller will walk you up to the tavern,” he told us. “I’ll see you later.” He turned and walked back into the basement.


I glanced over to Jen, looking for someone to take charge, but her eyes reflected my own sudden panic. I was hoping that Chris would provide a buffer between me and them, that he’d be my ambassador to Otherworld and allow me to maintain emotional and intellectual distance. But now he was gone, and the members of my party seemed no more ready to commit to the fantasy than I was. I took a breath, successfully rolled an internal Will save, and walked forward.


Fortunately, the Storyteller didn’t cut an imposing figure. His round body was wrapped in a professorial tweed jacket, complete with leather patches; at his neck, a faded yellow scarf was tied in an ascot knot. His thick head of brown curly hair made me think of Bilbo Baggins.


The Storyteller held a leather-bound book in front of him, and as we approached, he looked down and began to read.


“Once upon a time, in the kingdom of Lyria, six travelers embarked on a dangerous expedition,” he said. “They were asked to leave their homes and families to travel all the way to World’s Edge, a tiny village situated at the far border of the civilized lands. It would be a perilous journey, they knew, but the need in their homeland was very great, and so the travelers shouldered their packs and began the trip.


“They marched for days and days, not daring to tarry in any given place for very long. Every day they delayed increased the chances they would be unable to complete their mission in time, and though they spoke little of this, the knowledge weighed heavy upon them all.”


He turned and began leading us up the path, still reading from his book. We left the training area behind us and stepped into the unknown.


“Upon reaching the border of Moreth, the westernmost duchy in Lyria, all the travelers looked around themselves in anticipation. Moreth was renowned as a land of strange magical energies, and inexplicable phenomena were said to be commonplace there.


“The danger they encountered on their first night in Moreth, however, was of the nonmagical variety: While the group slept, their camp was set upon by a gang of bandits. The party of travelers escaped with their lives, but the bandits absconded with most of the coins they had carried.


“Still, the adventurers’ spirits were raised as they neared their destination. The autumn days were pleasant for walking, and the countryside and woodlands of Moreth were very beautiful.”


At the top of the hill, all was wildness and moonlight. A lake appeared at our right, shimmering and tranquil, undisturbed but for a few wisps of fog. Beyond it, hills and forest extended to the horizon, no lights, no cars, the trees interrupted only by a few indistinct dark shadows. Cabins, probably, but perhaps something stranger.


“Night had fallen dark and silent around them by the time they reached their goal. Coming down the wooded trail, they saw lights shining from a building.” To our left, the lodge had been transformed: Flickering candlelight spilled out of the windows, and the faint sounds of tavern life: a low hum of voices, clinking glasses, indecipherable fragments of conversation. The Storyteller stopped at the threshold.


“They had reached their destination at last. The six stepped up to the door and entered the Inn at World’s Edge.”


I recall those last few steps to the tavern in vivid detail. Self-conscious, nervous, and worried about what lay ahead, I’d been an easy target for simple theatrics and gently hypnotized by the Storyteller’s tale. The other members of my party seemed similarly affected. We pushed open the doors and walked inside.


The Inn at World’s Edge was a welcome sight after a long journey from Keer, warm, cozy, and safe. Small groups of strangers huddled in the dim light, dressed in simple tunics, vests, hose, and cloaks. They leaned forward and talked in low voices, as if a word spoken too loudly might wake them from a dream.


Our party took seats at a table covered with dark cloth and set with eight heavy pewter plates. A lantern and small candles flickered at the center. On the wall to our right, a royal-blue banner emblazoned with a sunburst hung above a stone fireplace—the crest of Baron Valerius, the noble who governs World’s Edge.


After a few moments, a woman in a plain cloth dress with a lace-up bodice approached the table and bid us welcome. She handed us heavy ceramic mugs, stepped away for a moment, and returned with a pitcher of wine and a charger covered with grapes, cheese, and chunks of cured meat. Famished, we fell on it with gusto.


A few minutes later, we were joined by the final member of our party. A man stood at the head of our table, wearing a loose blue tunic. He seemed familiar to me . . . slightly short, with an athletic build, a healthy tan, and hair cut close to hide where it was thinning and receding.


“My name is Kint,” he said, smiling. “May I join you?” He took a seat at our table. “What brings you to World’s Edge?”



Otherworld is a little bit like “Fight Club”: There’s brawling, there are secret missions, and you’re not supposed to talk about it. Participants—who may only attend once—are asked to keep the plot a secret; I’m risking a boffer sword up my backside over the few details I’ve already shared.


The code of silence isn’t a by-product of Project Mayhem–style brainwashing, despite the hugely dedicated staff. (Otherworld is run by former participants like Morgan who return year after year to share the experience; their level of devotion may border on cultlike, but it lacks any of the creepy implications.) Instead, it’s all about spoilers. The Otherworld weekend is really a massive piece of interactive theater, with a script, a cast of characters, and a set of plotlines, some of which repeat year after year. Being a participant feels something like if you climbed up on the stage during the final act of Hamlet and kicked Laertes in the crotch . . . and the actors responded by working you into the story and reciting dialogue the Bard had written in case this sort of thing happened.


Otherworld was founded in 1991 by four members of Quest, a Connecticut-based LARPing group. Several months after completing a particularly challenging adventure, they received a letter from one of the participants.


“It was from a woman who’d attended, and she started by saying, ‘You’re going to think I’m crazy, but the event you ran changed my life,’” says Kristi Hayes. “She was working in a dead-end job she hated, and she was living with her boyfriend, who from the sound of it was really treating her pretty badly. She’d sort of accepted that . . . this was probably about the best she could expect from life.


“And then, she said, she came and spent the weekend having all these adventures and doing all these challenging things. She was particularly afraid of any sort of public speaking, but at one point during the event, the story line took a dark turn and she had an idea about how to fix things, so she stood up in a crowded room and told everyone about it. People listened to her and followed her idea, and as it turned out, doing so saved the day.


“She told us that for a long while after coming home from the event, she continued on with her normal less-than-stellar routine but often thought about the weekend. She thought about the person she’d been there, the one who’d stood up in front of all those people, even though she was afraid, and convinced them to listen to her. And I will never forget what she wrote about that . . . ‘She would never put up with crap like this. She would find a way to fix things . . . if I can do heroic things when I’m running around in the woods, why can’t I do them here at home?’


“And then she did. She went out and got herself a better job and she ditched the lousy boyfriend. She’d made those changes and built herself a better life, and she felt like she needed to write to us and thank us for it. That was just amazing to me, that we’d been able to help someone reach that point. And we started thinking, ‘Gosh, if this event did all that, when really our only goal going into it was for everyone to have fun, well, what would happen if we ran events where we tried to give people these opportunities?’”


Because Otherworld deliberately courts non-LARPer participants, it does away with many of the rules typically found in those games. There are no skill points or attributes, and even though you adopt a fantasy name, you remain yourself; you’re not role-playing a character with its own personality.


“I’m always hesitant to use the word ‘role-playing’ to describe what you’re doing at Otherworld, because it so often makes people think they’ll be pretending to be someone other than themselves,” says Hayes. “Still, having said that, we’ve certainly borrowed plenty of ideas from D&D and other role-playing games. We’ve also borrowed ideas from experience-based educational groups like Outward Bound, and then mixed them up together to make something related to both but its own separate thing.”


Otherworld also simplifies the rules for activities like spell casting. In many LARPs, if you want to shoot a lightning bolt at an enemy, you have to hit them with a thrown beanbag while calling out the name of the spell (“Lightning bolt! Lightning bolt!”). At Otherworld, you blow a whistle, everyone freezes in place, and you read from a script that tells everyone exactly how to react:


“I, [name], a mage of Fire, do cast the spell of Lightning Bolt upon [select one target]. I now call down from the sky a mighty bolt of lightning, which will strike your [specify one limb of your target].”


Otherworld focuses on story, not game play; it’s trying to impart an experience. In many LARPs the plot is utilitarian—“The red army and the blue army are at war” or “You’ve been hired to kill an evil lich.”**  At Otherworld, there’s a fully developed narrative, a central shared conflict, and dozens of party-specific subplots.


Kint was so moved by our tale of the leviathan and Keer’s desperate need for help that he offered to serve as our companion. He had a house not far from the tavern where we could spend our nights and promised to introduce us to locals who might help with our quest: Solomon, the innkeeper; Serendipity Bostwich, a scholar and scientist; and Obsidian, a cleric rumored to be among the most powerful in the kingdom.


We were discussing our first steps when the doors of the tavern opened and a man entered whose presence silenced all conversation. Tall and handsome, he was dressed in a scarlet tailcoat and wore a black top hat, which he tipped from his head and tucked in the crook of his arm.


“Ladies and gentlemen,” he called to the crowd, “I am Maximilian Von Horn, ringmaster of the Circus Eternal.” The troupe, he told us, had set up camp on the edge of town and for the next two weeks would hold nightly performances. We would have a chance to witness some of the finest traveling entertainers in the kingdom: acrobats, jugglers, a strongman, even a fire dancer.


The pronouncement was met with cheers from the crowd. “Do you have any clowns?” a woman yelled from a table across the room.


Von Horn scowled at the thought. “Clowns, my dear, are an unfortunate side effect of circuses.”



My weekend in Connecticut saw the second and final performance of The Circus Eternal, a story told over the entire weekend, starring most of the staff and every Otherworld participant. (Each party also has its own subplot, drawn from a pool of frequently repeated conflicts—we were not the first travelers from Keer with a nasty leviathan problem.)


Sometimes the story advanced through a form of dinner theater: When our party visited the tavern for meals, staff members (in character as residents of World’s Edge) would stand to make pronouncements or act out scripted conflicts. At other times the actors used a kind of directed improvisation: while walking across town, our party might run into Bumble the Wizard or Professor Chuttlesworth, who just happened to mention a suspicious crime that had occurred the week before last.


Typically, Hayes writes a new story every two years. They’re meant to entertain using elements of traditional theater (The Circus Eternal even included a musical number) but also to encourage participation. Each story places the village in some sort of peril and requires the participants to work toward its salvation.


It’s a surprisingly effective technique. Sure, you might lose yourself in the drama if you sit in a theater and watch a play about a village in peril. But when you sit in the village and the actors come up to you, take your hand, and beg for your help, it’s wholly engrossing.


“As a human, I think it’s only natural for me to be really interested in myself,” says Hayes. “So a story in which I personally play a key part? That’s a story I’m going to find very compelling . . . and when I have the opportunity to do incredible things and amaze even myself with what I accomplish, seeing the story unfold is going to have a really powerful effect.


“It’s like when you watch a feel-good movie and you cheer at the end, because the hero triumphs over adversity and you’re left with this warm glow inside. This kind of story has all that, but the person who triumphs over adversity is you. That’s really powerful.”


I am not a fan of audience participation; when I’m in a theater and the performers step offstage, I tend to shrink in my chair and pray they’ll pick the sucker sitting next to me. But Otherworld is designed from the ground up to pull people out of their seat and into the action, and it’s so smartly scripted you can’t help but be drawn in.


“Each staff handbook I write is about four hundred to four hundred fifty pages long,” says Hayes. “It’s not a true script, of course, in that I rarely tell our eighty-plus staff people exactly what to say. Instead, I tell them about all of their characters—each Otherworld story line has about one hundred characters, not including monsters and encounters of that sort—and the backstory and then also about the rough timeline of the weekend.”


My favorite moments were when a seemingly improvised comment turned out to be a crucial element of the story. For instance, as the plot of The Circus Eternal played out, it became clear that Maximilian Von Horn’s traveling show was more than it appeared to be. A full day after his introduction in the tavern, several parties were ambushed and killed by strange monsters in the woods—evil creatures in creepy harlequin makeup, carrying massive swords. It turned out clowns really were “an unfortunate side effect of circuses.”


Successfully executing those plot twists requires tight scripting, but Otherworld also requires improvisation and flexibility, so players can make their own decisions. They need to feel like they’re achieving something, instead of just watching, and that’s where the companions come in.


Embedded into our party as Kint, Chris was able to gently nudge us the way we needed to go while maintaining an illusion of free will. He’d offer suggestions and advice, but since they came from a member of the group, it didn’t feel like we were being railroaded.


In one task, we discovered we needed to enter the realm of Death to obtain a magic item, but the local portal to the underworld was kept closed by Bumble the Wizard, who cast a spell each morning sealing the way. Bumble—a genial but forgetful fellow, his brain lightly fried by arcane forces—wore a string tied around his finger to remind him of this responsibility. So our party decided our best plan was to wait until Bumble was alone, sneak up behind him, and bash him on the head. We’d steal the string and run off, ensuring that he’d forget his duties, the portal would open, and we’d gain access.


It was a fine plan, except for the fact that the weekend’s story hinged on a totally different way to open the portal; doing so early would destroy the plot and the weekend—and we’d all be wanted criminals once Bumble woke up and reported how we’d assaulted and robbed him.


Chris initially tried to warn us off gently (“Maybe there’s another way?”). When we couldn’t come up with a better idea, he made an emotional appeal (“Bumble’s a nice guy, do you really want to hurt him?”). When we revealed ourselves as unfeeling brutes, he succeeded through misdirection (“Since you guys can’t decide, why don’t we do something else and come back to this later?”). Of course, we had decided, but he was able to make his own reservations feel like they were shared. When we tried to return to our ill-considered plan later, he found ways to put us off until the situation resolved itself as planned (“Hey, who’s hungry?”).


Other staff members face their own challenges. Only companions play a single character over the course of a weekend; most staffers play multiple roles, hiding behind monster masks or makeup. They have to make quick changes and move rapidly from one area of the camp to another. In the staff area of the main lodge there’s a massive spreadsheet hung on the walls, stretching from floor to ceiling, easily sixty feet long. It describes where each and every person needs to be at each moment, and in which costume, over the course of the entire weekend. It looks like something you might have found in George Patton’s command center during the North African campaigns.


Chris also carried an iPhone in his pocket all weekend, running a staff-designed application that used the phone’s GPS antenna to track our party’s movements. Organizers planned to analyze the data after the fact to determine common routes around the camp and when attendees tend to do different activities. Ultimately, it will help make the weekend’s planning even more precise.


The stagecraft is immensely detailed, too. Otherworld’s props, sets, and costumes may be constructed by amateurs, but they’re convincing enough. When I first walked into the Inn at World’s Edge, I didn’t see a 4-H camp mess hall—I saw something straight out of Tolkien. It might as well have been the Prancing Pony, where Frodo and his friends met the ranger Strider.


“One of my goals, and one of the ways that the stories I’m writing are different from most other authors’, is that I’m really looking to create scenes we can bring to life with a reasonably high degree of realism,” says Hayes. “I won’t write a story that’s set in a castle, because as much as I love to read novels set in castles, we don’t have a castle at our disposal, and I don’t want to settle for a room with cardboard rocks taped to the wall and a ‘pretend this is a castle’ sign. That’s why, at Otherworld, you won’t meet anyone who can fly.”


By Saturday night, when the rising action hit a fever pitch, I’d been completely drawn into the adventure. Living in a ubiquitous fiction—one made of not just words but physical objects and real people—made me realize how stupid it was to be self-conscious, and I began to truly enjoy the adventure. When a crisis arose that required all eight parties to team up and tackle three simultaneous battles, I committed wholeheartedly—and fought tooth and nail with a dozen strangers, swinging my foam sword like it was Excalibur.


When the adventurers from Keer all returned to our shared cabin—tired, dirty, and triumphant—we were completely sold on the idea we were heroes. As we settled into bed, we swapped tales of our victories; Jen offered a well-deserved victory speech. “Other people went out drinking for their thirtieth birthday,” she said. “I slayed a fucking banshee.”


*


I had a great weekend, but something was amiss. As the event concluded on Sunday, I heard other participants describe their adventure in terms like “life-changing” and “best thing I’ve ever done”—and I couldn’t reciprocate. Sure, it was fun . . . but not profound. I wondered why I didn’t share that experience.


It’s possible my initial fears and prejudices kept me from fully enjoying the event, but I doubt it. I’m sure everyone else started out nervous, but before long we were all fully engaged. Instead, I think the people affected most strongly by Otherworld lack my regular access to fantasy. Sure, they might watch “Game of Thrones” or play World of Warcraft, but that’s observation, not participation. Their personal day-to-day existence is mundane: expected, explainable. We all live in the muggle world, and only a few of us are lucky enough to get a peek into Hogwarts.


I’m no wizard—but once a week, I feel like I am. Role-playing games allow me to experience the fantastic, and even though it’s make-believe, the catharsis is real. My life isn’t wanting for magic, because I’ve got Dungeons & Dragons.



* “These garments offer magic protection in the form of a +1 to +5 resistance bonus on all saving throws (Fortitude, Reflex and Will).” Dungeon Master’s Guide, page 252.


**“An undead spellcaster, usually a wizard or sorcerer but sometimes a cleric or other spellcaster, who has used its magical powers to unnaturally extend its life.” Monster Manual, page 166.


Excerpted from Of Dice and Men by David M. Ewalt. Copyright © 2013 by David M. Ewalt. Reprinted by permission of Scribner, a Division of Simon & Schuster, Inc.





Salon.com



“The obsessive, delusional side of fantasy role-playing”: From Dungeons and Dragons to live-action role playing

Saturday, August 3, 2013

James Marsden on playing JFK


Photo courtesy the Weinstein Co.





Actor James Marsden had less than two weeks to prepare for his role as JFK  in “The Butler,” he told New York Magazine:


Since you were a last-minute add, how much time did you have to prep?
It was a week and a half, which is not a lot of time to go in and play John Kennedy. So I immersed myself in whatever book I could read, I listened to his speeches over and over again, because the first thing that popped up in my mind was, “Don’t screw up the accent!” So I had my sights set on that. And it wasn’t a long shoot — it was like a week — so I let that kind of be my guide. I knew some stuff about Kennedy, my father is a big Kennedy buff, so he helped fill me in as well. Definitely a crash course, but it was great…



What kind of direction did [director] Lee [Daniels] give?
Lee said, “We’ve seen the Kennedys be gallant and composed, and seen him be the smartest guy in the room. We’ve seen the movie stars and we know about the infidelity, but what have we not seen?” And he allowed Minka [Kelly] and I, with him and the writers as well, to explore: What would their arguments be like? The two of them in the bedroom in the White House, what would they be arguing about? What would that look like?



“The Butler” hits theatres on Aug. 16.


Read more about:




POLITICO – CLICK – Full Blog



James Marsden on playing JFK