I still don’t understand why these glamor convention centers are so important
I can perfectly understand why San Diego is rather keen to spend an awful lot money expanding the San Diego Convention Center (largely financed with an enormously controversial hotel tax that has been tied up in legal challenges for years), when over four days San Diego Comic-Con alone has attendance in excess of 130,000.
The rebates for the films cost about the same as (or a little more than) the economic activity they generate, but I don’t think tourism is counted in that.
And Auckland got a notable infrastructure boost as part of the Rugby World Cup (how much economic activity the RWC generated is another matter).
Yeah, but there's still reasonable expectations for a LOT more clarity about the assumptions -- and rather dodgy spin -- involved in economic benefit guess-timates that tend to be quoted in the media as holy writ.
He really wants a safe National seat, doesn’t he?
I'm quite happy to do my bit to make sure he doesn't even get shortlisted for one north of the Harbour Bridge. (Which reminds me I've got to collect some Kate Sheppards from some folks who were a tad over confident that Colin Craig was going to be "gifted" East Coast Bays. Beats working...)
Having said that, there have been a few photographic collections I’ve enjoyed this year..
I’d suggest you pop over to the library website, and put a reserve on their copy of Schirmer/Mosel’s close-as-its-ever-going-to-get-to-complete-in-one-volume reprint of August Sander’s legendary photo-documentary project People of The 20th Century
The son of a carpenter, August Sander was born in 1876, in a farming and mining community east of Cologne. His introduction to photography came while working as a young apprentice in the mines, when a visiting landscape photographer asked the boy to serve as his guide. Despite his provincial background, Sander became involved with many of the avant-garde artistic ideas of his day, among them the Neue Sachlichkeit (New Objectivity), a movement led by his friend, the painter Otto Dix, which advocated a return to realism and social commentary in art.
Around 1922, Sander conceived and embarked on a magnum opus to be called People of the Twentieth Century, intended, as he stated, to be “a physiognomic image of an age,” and a catalogue of “all the characteristics of the universally human.” His portrait images were grouped into seven categories, which, in and of themselves, reveal Sander’s views of the German social order. Sander prefaced the project with a “Portfolio of Archetypes” (Stammappe), which he then expanded to form the first group, the Farmer (Der Bauer); six other categories followed: the Skilled Tradesman (Der Handwerker); the Woman (Die Frau); Classes and Professions (Die Stände); the Artists (Die Künstler); the City (Die Großstadt); and, the last and perhaps most compelling category, the Last People (Die Letzten Menschen), comprising the elderly, the deformed, and the dead.
Sander’s inclusion of these and other marginal elements of German society—gypsies and the unemployed also figured in his work—incurred the disapproval of the National Socialist party. In 1936 the Nazis confiscated his first published version of the project, Face of Our Time (Antlitz der Zeit), and destroyed all the printing plates. Some years later Sander left Cologne and moved to the relative safety of the countryside, taking with him some 10,000 negatives. The remaining 25,000 to 30,000 negatives were destroyed by fire before he was able to transport them to the Westerwald. The project remained incomplete at his death in 1964.
Nah... socks are easy. Tracking down a suitably fugly petroleum-based necktie-and-pocket square combo that will refuse to look appealing in tandem with anything a human being would willingly wear is a true test of resolve and dedication to the dark arts of Christmas shopping. I believe in you, Sacha! I know you can do it!
ah, is that what upset Craig, perhaps? Fair enough. Will delete the line.
Nah, the whole fucking thing upsets me basically, because this is just Slater doing what Slater does and he depends on other people to spread the muck. Same old same old, and honestly I don't think there's anything " un-self-aware" about it. Anyway, can I just have a hideous matching tie and hanky set for Christmas like a normal person? :)
And #dirtypolitics has eaten itself, with Slater now delivering homilies about ethics.
Did that really need to be quoted and linked to here, Sacha? Cameron Slater’s m.o. of conviction by innuendo is hardly a mystery, but he’s got more than enough useful idiots spreading his shit without the help of anyone around here.
or you could tap whichever sympathetic donor paid for Slater’s QC.
Or I guess you could have duelling Kickstarter pages with Hager, and you know what? I think the commie pinko tool would win that one and keep winning it for as long as it would take.
Yes. That’s a deafening silence right there.
A defamation action would inevitably lead to a discovery process and that could/would get very, very messy.
To be fair, Russell, it's also entirely possible that someone calmed Mitchell down and reminded him of the rather sad case of David Lange who got rather litigious towards the end. If you're going to be spraying around defamation suits, it helps if your pockets are as a deep as Colin Craig's not a backbench MPs.
Sorry for forgetting to say this before, but could you take me out of the draw -- already have Russell's book, and four copies of yours (one for keeps and the rest for Christmas giving to the unworthy and ungrateful).