An Unrepentant Realist: Rackstraw Downes

Perhaps the most interesting name amongst the list of MacArthur Fellows — aka official geniuses — announced today is the realist painter Rackstraw Downes, known for his exacting portrayal of unbeautiful landscapes.

Interesting to yours truly because if art is about opening our eyes to see afresh, what better means that to show us exactly what we see but refuse to look at?

Peter Schjeldahl has a typically brilliant and unusually effusive review available, fortunately, through the New Yorker site here. The whole piece is recommended, but here's the first paragraph:

Rackstraw Downes, the veteran painter of landscapes and urban places, is
a realist esteemed by people, including me, who normally have scant use
for realism in art. His current show, of work from 1999 to 2004, at the
new Betty Cuningham Gallery, is powerful in quiet, stubborn ways. The
subjects include a viaduct in Harlem, a flood-monitoring station on the
Rio Grande, a Texas desert, electrical substations in that desert, and
metal ductwork in a large, dark attic. The look of the pictures, most
of them panoramas, is luminous but taciturn: just the facts. Their
surfaces are fine crusts of dry, oil-starved pigment, applied in sober
little strokes and patches. The tonality is so uniform that the color,
though extremely varied, turns almost monochrome in memory. “I want to
paint exactly the way something is,” Downes said to me recently. “If
that means dulling down the green, then dull it down. Find the beauty
in that.” The pressure of scrutiny in his pictures yields a revelation
not only of how the world looks but of how the eye—unaided by
photography, which Downes pointedly never uses—toils to behold it.

And here's a painting called "In the High Island oil field, late afternoon, March."

In the High Island oil field by rackstraw downes

Animal Logic — Photos by Another Darn Genius

Having six billion plus humans on the planet creates some problems, but also has some advantages. Surely there are more geniuses amongst us now than ever before. And thanks to the Internet, we can experience their work a little more easily than back in Da Vinci's day.

Well, Richard Barnes may not have Da Vinci's range of brilliance, but he's a photographer who brings a uniquely architectural understanding to the natural world. And a heck of a shooter, to boot.

Here's his latest project, called Murmur.

Now, what are those birds in the sky up to? Does anyone really know? 

Murmur01 

a tip of the hat to Metafilter

The Global Warming Debate in Real Life

From the great Overheard in New York:

Boyfriend: Can you believe they're saying the temperature is gonna rise, like, 5 degrees over the next 100 years?
Girlfriend: Yeah, but it's all based on scientist's predictions and computer models.
Boyfriend: Predictions and computer models? C'mon!
Girlfriend: How do you think they predict anything?
Boyfriend: But to force public policy upon us based on these predictions and models is a mistake!
Girlfriend: Force public policy upon us? What are you talking about? Nobody's forcing you to do anything.
Boyfriend: Hillary Clinton taking oil company profits. There you go.
Girlfriend: (looks puzzled)
Boyfriend: Booyah!

–Pool, 79th St

If the gf's not careful, she may find herself married to one of The Marching Morons

Battle of the Headlines: “World’s Ocean Temps Warmest Ever Recorded” vs. “Arctic Sea Ice Is Again on the Rise”

The first headline for USA Today, atop veteran science writer Seth Borenstein's story for the AP, was inspired by world-wide records from the National Climactic Data Center. As the story said:

WASHINGTON — The world's oceans this summer are the warmest on record.

The National Climatic Data Center, the
government agency that keeps weather records, says the average global
ocean temperature in July was 62.6 degrees. It is the hottest since
record-keeping began in 1880. The previous record was set in 1998.

Meteorologists blame a combination of a natural
El Nino weather pattern on top of worsening manmade global warming. The
warmer water could add to the melting of sea ice and possibly
strengthen some hurricanes.

The second headline, atop the entertaining denier site Watts Up With That, leads to a post from Anthony Watts that begins:

Yesterday I looked at JAXA data and ventured that:

“Arctic sea ice melt appears to have turned the corner for 2009″

The Sept 15th JAXA Arctic Sea Ice extent graph was published this evening
about 8PM PST (and updated overnight which is the image now shown) and
shows an increase in sea ice for the second day in a row. It seems
clear that Arctic sea ice is now on the rise.

Read with a modicum of attention, and it's quickly apparent why sea ice in the Arctic is on the rise…winter is coming, and fall is nearly here!

So — ignore the long-term trend!

Oy. Could a more obvious, flat-footed way to avoid facing the truth about global warming be imagined? Ignore that man behind the curtain — winter is coming! 

For those who want a little reporting with their facts, Dot Earth helpfully labels a graphic from NOAA:

Adds Andrew Revkin, dead of climate reporting, adds pointedly:

Variations in polar sea ice on short time scales, up or down, are
essentially meaningless, my contacts studying the cryosphere always
stress.

The Age of Stupid — A Documentary About Us. (Hey, Wait as Minute…)

Gotta admire the wit of English filmmaker Franny Armstrong. Instead of warning us of climate change disasters to come, she mocks our thick-headed inability to listen to these warnings from from the distant future.

It's a clever way to make a point.

Her film, bluntly called "The Age of Stupid," is built around the idea that we humans are — as friend Andy Lipkis of TreePeople likes to say — "denial machines," far better at avoiding the truth than facing it.

To dramatize this, she imagines a future with a rare survivor, looking sardonically back on our era.

Could she be right?

(Well, experts say our species is not facing extinction — unlike many others. But life as we know it might be changing faster than our ability to adapt. What will that feel like? And is it nitpicking to point out that we may suffer greatly, with millions upon millions dying, but still survive as a species?) 

Maybe that's the big question. Can we cope with an unprecedented challenge from the planet itself?

Here's the trailer…

Don’t Waste Your Dreams — Recycle Them

Rebecca Solnit, one of today's great thinkers, wrote recently in her book A Field Guide to Getting Lost:

It is in the nature of things to be lost and not otherwise. Think of how little has been salvaged from the compost of time of the hundreds of billions of dreams dreamt since the language to describe them emerged, how few names, how few wishes, how few languages even, how we don't know what tongues the people who erected the standing stones of Britain and Ireland spoke or what the stones meant, don't know much of the language of the Gabrielanos of Los Angeles or the Miwoks of Marin, don't know how or why they drew the giant pictures on the desert floor in Nazca, Perus, don't know much even about Shakespeare or Li Po. It is as though we make the exception the rule, believe that we should have rather than that we will generally lose. 

True, but it's a problem for which the great bard of the radio, Jean Shepherd, had a solution. As recounted on Prof. Al Filreis's poetry site, it's a Dream Collection Day: 

Dream collection day

A  way to recycle dreams, to keep them alive…beautiful.

In Wildness, Truth. In Wildness, Life…

From an essay by Jay Griffiths in Drunken Boat:

What is wild cannot be bought or sold, borrowed or copied.  It is
Unmistakable, unforgettable, unshameable, elemental as earth and water
and fire.  Don’t waste your wildness: it is precious and necessary.  In
wildness, truth.  In wildness, life.  And, for the human spirit as for
any other wild creature, wildness smoulders in the groin, thighs
slippery with juice.  Proud, anarchic, the raw core of our human spirit
is still untamed, eloquent, complex, kinetic and fleetly wild.

Max500x500

A Scientist Who Can Write, Thank God

A lot of scientists — not all, but a good number, I must say — see to regard the English language as a mortal enemy which must be evaded with jargon, neutered with utterly emotionless prose, and crushed under heavy statistical arguments. Often I find that the graphics are the only legible part of a climatological paper. 

It's puzzling, because in conversation as often as not scientists are charming, self-deprecating, and immensely informative. Why the disconnect?

But whatever the reason — and no one seems to know the answer — everyone agrees that a great exception to the rule is Bill Patzert, a climatologist and oceanographer at the Jet Propulsion Lab, a friend to reporters everywhere, and a good writer himself.

Here's the opening to a column he wrote for a paper in his neck of the woods last week:

I'm stressed out and exhausted. My Sierra Madre
neighborhood has been blanketed by ash and smoke. We've closed up
everything and set the air conditioner at 80 degrees, but the smoke
smells have seeped in and my sleep has been restless. My nerves and I'm
sure many others, are on edge. But, driving into JPL one morning last
week, I took a deep breath … cough, cough … and realized how much
worse all this could have been. Yep, I might not be driving into JPL,
if Santa Ana winds had propelled this mammoth fire out of the Angeles
National Forest and into the crowded foothill neighborhoods.
Wind-driven and out of control, this immense fire would have been a
full-blown disaster.

An important truth, memorably expressed. Thanks Bill! Please write more often…

John Fleck chips in with a good graph, showing what rainfall in SoCal looks like in recent years…

PrecipinSoCalrecently