Announcing OLD GARDEN
I have a new song, "Old Garden", which is a work-in-progress, and is the second version as a work-in-progress is what it is, and I'm nevertheless awfully proud no matter what nobody says:
http://www.archive.org/details/OldGarden2work-in-progress3.12.11
In the first part I took where I first sang the song into a cheap $30 recorder, process it, then I return later with more words and also add electric guitar throughout, and finally, some sound editing all around. Bingo, my vegetables au gratin are done, that is, they're done enough to be a work-in-progress, at least as far as my tastes are concerned. Is this song in limbo then? I do not even know, it may be done, in a sense anyway.
Unfortunately, the song has an earthquake reference among its few lyrics, purely coincidental, so already it's born with ten strikes against it for sounding like pandering to the tragedy of the moment. Or, I have the delightful alternative of representing myself as having come up with this half-an-hour before the Japanese earthquake, which appears to be the situation, or at the very least, I was not aware of any earthquake when I came up with it. I think there was an ad about how long some product retains its usefulness, so I had to sing about the earth outliving its usefulness, which led me to the part where the ground shakes as an example. Oh yeah, I wanna be saddled with selling the idea that I was first, ahead of the actual earthquake. Probably I'll come back to this after the dust has settled, no one is thinking about earthquakes, you know, then I'll refine the song a bit, kind of slide it over to Paul (M) and/or Eric (C), they can grab something off it, the rest will be history. Nothing new to me - just scan these here blogs. I know what's happening, baby.
A Bleep Is As Good As A Bloip To A Deaf Horse
Do you remember that movie, "After The Fox," specifically, the scene where Peter Sellers is talking to a beautiful woman while the voice of a cigar-smoking fat man seems to come out of her, because a cigar-smoking fat man is at the next table, his back turned and so disguising the fact that he is speaking with Sellers, meanwhile the beautiful woman somehow knowing exactly how to lip sync to the words of the cigar smoker even when responding to Sellers' questions? Well, anyway, that may perhaps be a partial explanation of why I think I might be in some kind of strange communication to some degree with some kind of cigar-smoking Peter Sellers or two, or, no, I think I'm Peter Sellers in this one. Once again, I shall keep further details apart from the world, and not feel a drop of guilt as you're busy anyway and it wouldn't be worth it.
Showing posts with label McCartney. Show all posts
Showing posts with label McCartney. Show all posts
Monday, March 14, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
All The News That's Fit To Make You Think I'm Nuts
The Telephone Game
For quite some time now, I have "felt" myself to be in the sites of people involved with "Ripley's Believe It Or Not".... I'm somehow "getting" that they want me to come up with a "Believe It Or Not" dance.... they need me to express in this dance the idea, "you ain't gonna believe this unless you take all kinds of trouble to research how I'm not a liar but worthy of your having great belief in me"..... that I should go through life with many of the important things I might need to say being tinged with a feeling of, "believe it or not". Someday I hope to prove in a soundbite how this feeling has been given to me, and is not of my own device. I just know I can prove it all in a soundbite.
Sorry, I just need to say the kind of stuff contained in the preceding paragraph every now and then. Should you read on, you may possibly see the relevancy for this being one of those every now and then occasions.
I Shot The Walnut
So yesterday I'm on my way to the nut house again (the Somis Nut House in Somis, California, where I get my almonds and walnuts, however, my readers may recall that I prefer to provide my detractors the chance to go, "Yeah, he belongs in the nut house!" at every possible opportunity, thus, I choose my words in a way that helps set up such remarks, it's the least I can do). And I'm right at that stretch where Paul McCartney drove by for my benefit once (see my August 8, 2010 blog, "Stuck In Traffic, Not"). I believe I reported that incident as hard to believe in most respects - it meant McCartney, on whom I have been a huge influence over the years, ran to California all the way from Canada for a day or so, in relation to my email to someone. Not like the new Clapton song about running back to someone's side, rather, more like a billionaire flying in a super-luxury version of first class so why really care about where you're flying to anyway, it's gonna be a fun time. Or so goes the theory. In fact, it was in that same blog that I expressed how I looked up on the Internet where on the globe McCartney was supposed to be, in order to help me evaluate whether I could actually have seen him then. And at some point after that I did a blog article about seeing someone who looked like another person I've been an influence on, Eric Clapton, after which I looked up his whereabouts on the Internet, at which point I learned the siting coincided with the day of Clapton's announcement of his first album in five years - as if someone knew the siting would cause me to look him up on the Internet that one day in five years.
One would also have to read other things I've written about Clapton, in order to more properly appreciate how I would construe this siting (and others) as having been specifically intended for me.
So there is Jerry Seinfeld driving by in his car talking on a cell phone, right in Paul McCartney's spot. Should I add in the fact that the person to whom I had sent that email that led to the August 2010 moment happens to be among those connected in a certain way with when Michael Richards of "Seinfeld" attended my school (CalArts)? Or that Seinfeld on a talk show appearance once talked and talked about introducing McCartney at an Obama thing? Another thing that should also be regarded as related: my Oct. 25, 2009 and Nov. 29, 2009 blogs, which essentially prove my major influence on the "Seinfeld" reunion on "Curb Your Enthusiasm". I've also mentioned in previous blogs how the entire last season of "Seinfeld" was seriously influenced by me as well.
What does it mean? Nothing. It's Seinfeld, it's not supposed to mean anything. The guy who played Uncle Leo on "Seinfeld" just died in Burbank, 50 miles from where I saw Seinfeld, he has a funeral to attend. That's the only sense most people need to make of this stuff.
Head of the Hats
I have often referred to my influence on "Smallville". Without going into detail, recently, shortly after a certain famous person drove by me/looked at me while she was wearing a certain hat, which I construed at the time as having been for my benefit for reasons I also won't go into, an episode of "Smallville" (Feb. 18th) featured the same type hat as serving to keep Green Arrow's identity secret. This episode in general related to Clark Kent coming up with something to wear to keep his identity secret.
I Follow You, Clapton
A recent news story went into a degree of detail regarding the great interest Kim Jong Il's son has in Eric Clapton. (This fact goes into storage until Ahmadinejad and his Steinhoff-mania can be tied in.)
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Most Are Unaware Of The Evidence
For those who recall my August 8th blog article ("Stuck In Traffic, Not"), I have a minor addendum, unless one considers it to be very important in relation to Paul McCartney, in which case it might seem disrespectful to use the word "minor". Whether it is a minor or a major addendum, that is something for history to decide. Perhaps I shouldn't have even brought this question to the table. I have an addendum, I shall simply leave it at that, yes, that would be best. Oh yes, and as the title of this blog article states, most of you are unaware of any evidence for what I describe. You'll just have to total up the times I have been able to provide in my blog articles evidence in matters of this nature, calculate an assessment of my character and intelligence, and stare in astonishment at the results!
Minor Addendum (Preface)
In the above-referenced August 8th blog article, I described a message I sent someone that related to a video I made at CalArts in 1978, "How Did The Future Learn to Play Monopoly," a video which was a significant influence on many people's work, including Paul McCartney's work, particularly his movie, "Give My Regards To Broad Street". I also described in that article how that recent message was responded to, by way of Paul McCartney driving by me the following day on a road that resembled something out of his "Regards" movie, a beginning scene in that movie that directly related to a section I had influenced.
Yesterday I received a direct response from the person to whom I had sent the message. This may have been a reaction on this person's part to the very last paragraph of my Sept. 5th blog article, about emailed responses to phone calls or phone call responses to emails, and how this could generate the appearance of zero responses in the eyes of those presuming what form the responses must take for proper protocol to be involved. The response I received yesterday may additionally (as some actions are designed to serve multiple purposes) have related to the TV premiere (as an "Early Premiere" on Cinemax) of the Robert Downey Jr./Guy Ritchie movie, "Sherlock Holmes".
Follow Me, Watson
When I was in England for the first time, May 13, 1983, several days following my arrival McCartney and myself were nearly alone at the Baker Street Underground Station in London (facing platforms separated by the train tracks). Baker Street is, of course, very related to the Holmes mythology. When McCartney's "Regards" movie came out the following year, Rathbone Inc. (Rathbone Industries?) were the bad guys. At one time the actor Basil Rathbone was synonymous with Holmes (he played Holmes often). Also related is the fact that "Regards" includs a scene meant to evoke a Holmes-esque hunt for a criminal in 19th century London.
I Didn't Say I Was Finished Yet, Watson
I have previously been an influence on works that involved Holmes' Downey and Ritchie. One instance was Downey's "The Soloist", which made inside-reference to my 1993 video, "Mall Man" (posted at Archive.Org). For this and other reasons, I believe there are the right number of reasons for me to regard as deliberate the similarity between Downey's characterization of Holmes and my characterization of Mall Man. Not to mention the moment when Holmes discards a garment from his coach bearing a similarity to Mall Man discarding the socks.
We're Almost There
(I Thought I Told You To Use The Bathroom Before We Left)
Tonight was the TV premiere of "Everybody's Fine," a movie that features a McCartney song written for the movie. Traditionally, movies that feature songs created by McCartney for the movie have invariably contained inside-reference to me/my material. I therefore would first want to state, I hope that the scene in that movie in the train station with the guy who destroyed De Niro's medicine was not that reference (by the way, I would be remiss not to mention that I have also been an influence on De Niro). I would never do something like that, and if McCartney's recollection of what happened at Baker Street remains accurate, I think he would have to agree. I just pointed him out on the near-empty platform to the guy strangely dressed like Sherlock Holmes sitting next to me, who clearly should have observed it for himself, and was therefore obviously putting me on (not just in terms of the fact that he wasn't the actual Sherlock Holmes). Did that person at Baker Street dressed like Holmes destroy anybody's medicine? No. We were both well behaved. Therefore: The only possible connection I was able to find in "Everybody's Fine" that might possibly have been put there for me to identify is the fact that the song title, "I Wanna Come Home" has the word "Home" in it. However, this song title's spelling of "Home" is different, and uses the singular rather than the plural, "Holmes". Furthermore, it would have been scientifically impossible for them to have arranged the TV premieres of these two movies to coincide one day after the other. I suspect magic may have been involved, if anything.
Minor Addendum (Preface)
In the above-referenced August 8th blog article, I described a message I sent someone that related to a video I made at CalArts in 1978, "How Did The Future Learn to Play Monopoly," a video which was a significant influence on many people's work, including Paul McCartney's work, particularly his movie, "Give My Regards To Broad Street". I also described in that article how that recent message was responded to, by way of Paul McCartney driving by me the following day on a road that resembled something out of his "Regards" movie, a beginning scene in that movie that directly related to a section I had influenced.
Yesterday I received a direct response from the person to whom I had sent the message. This may have been a reaction on this person's part to the very last paragraph of my Sept. 5th blog article, about emailed responses to phone calls or phone call responses to emails, and how this could generate the appearance of zero responses in the eyes of those presuming what form the responses must take for proper protocol to be involved. The response I received yesterday may additionally (as some actions are designed to serve multiple purposes) have related to the TV premiere (as an "Early Premiere" on Cinemax) of the Robert Downey Jr./Guy Ritchie movie, "Sherlock Holmes".
Follow Me, Watson
When I was in England for the first time, May 13, 1983, several days following my arrival McCartney and myself were nearly alone at the Baker Street Underground Station in London (facing platforms separated by the train tracks). Baker Street is, of course, very related to the Holmes mythology. When McCartney's "Regards" movie came out the following year, Rathbone Inc. (Rathbone Industries?) were the bad guys. At one time the actor Basil Rathbone was synonymous with Holmes (he played Holmes often). Also related is the fact that "Regards" includs a scene meant to evoke a Holmes-esque hunt for a criminal in 19th century London.
I Didn't Say I Was Finished Yet, Watson
I have previously been an influence on works that involved Holmes' Downey and Ritchie. One instance was Downey's "The Soloist", which made inside-reference to my 1993 video, "Mall Man" (posted at Archive.Org). For this and other reasons, I believe there are the right number of reasons for me to regard as deliberate the similarity between Downey's characterization of Holmes and my characterization of Mall Man. Not to mention the moment when Holmes discards a garment from his coach bearing a similarity to Mall Man discarding the socks.
We're Almost There
(I Thought I Told You To Use The Bathroom Before We Left)
Tonight was the TV premiere of "Everybody's Fine," a movie that features a McCartney song written for the movie. Traditionally, movies that feature songs created by McCartney for the movie have invariably contained inside-reference to me/my material. I therefore would first want to state, I hope that the scene in that movie in the train station with the guy who destroyed De Niro's medicine was not that reference (by the way, I would be remiss not to mention that I have also been an influence on De Niro). I would never do something like that, and if McCartney's recollection of what happened at Baker Street remains accurate, I think he would have to agree. I just pointed him out on the near-empty platform to the guy strangely dressed like Sherlock Holmes sitting next to me, who clearly should have observed it for himself, and was therefore obviously putting me on (not just in terms of the fact that he wasn't the actual Sherlock Holmes). Did that person at Baker Street dressed like Holmes destroy anybody's medicine? No. We were both well behaved. Therefore: The only possible connection I was able to find in "Everybody's Fine" that might possibly have been put there for me to identify is the fact that the song title, "I Wanna Come Home" has the word "Home" in it. However, this song title's spelling of "Home" is different, and uses the singular rather than the plural, "Holmes". Furthermore, it would have been scientifically impossible for them to have arranged the TV premieres of these two movies to coincide one day after the other. I suspect magic may have been involved, if anything.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Attaching Weight Can Be Fun
Yesterday I believe I was face to face with Sean Daniel, the first person from whom I learned of CalArts, the college I attended. Sean is a good friend of Steven Spielberg and Paul McCartney, and has played an important role in my being a significant influence on both, and on many others as well (that is, from what I can tell Sean has been in this role, although he could be getting his instructions in these matters from McCartney or the Kremlin or the ghost of Abraham Lincoln or whoever). Sean is also one of the co-producers of the Mummy movies (Jim Jacks, one of my Facebook friends, being the other). Sean and I were in our cars and less than half a block from the "Mummies of the World" billboard in Hollywood, the proximity to this being something I discovered after I recognized him. He appeared extremely concerned about something, and I would have to wonder whether my previous blog article on Iran's president might have been a contributing factor. Depending on how much weight one attaches to it, that particular article could be quite a source of serious concern, therefore, you may want to make light of it for that reason alone, as life is too short, etc.
I also saw Jon Stewart yesterday. I may also have seen Rachel Maddow, however, I'm not sure on that. I have at various times been quite a significant influence on both. As a Facebook friend had just posted something about Maddow's MSNBC buddy Keith Olberman, my mentioning this Maddow moment could easily sound contrived to some for that reason alone (I'm sure no one has ever been out to make me sound contrived, and I must accept full responsibility for all the times my words have sounded contrived, it must be something I like to do!).
Relevant to this latest instance of my sounding contrived, I have recently found evidence that some person or persons behind the scenes has been coordinating certain actions of certain Facebook friends of mine, people who presumably have nothing to do with one another. This has on occasion become additionally complicated to the point where it has involved the coordinating of certain Facebook friends of certain Facebook friends to post things, which in turn provide my Facebook friends the opportunity to comment on or like certain postings that were actually made for me to see. For example, a Facebook friend of mine (someone I knew at CalArts) who is connected with Eric Clapton had the opportunity to like a posting his Facebook friend made, causing me to see his Facebook friend's posting. That Facebook friend of a Facebook friend posting happened to use words that are identical to words contained in a song I once did, and the timing of when they made their Facebook postings coincided perfectly with a matter going on in relation to my video for that song (I will not go into further detail, sorry). That Facebook friend of my Facebook friend is himself the Facebook friend of a woman (not my Facebook friend) who is herself the Facebook friend of another one of my Facebook friends (from when I was in high school in Princeon), and this woman did something similar in relation to that Princeton Facebook friend of mine (who is not in the least connected to the Facebook friend person I knew at CalArts). So, a situation involving two of my Facebook friends who aren't connected to one another, and one of each of their Facebook friends who themselves are Facebook friends with each other, all doing things aimed at me (again, I will not go into further detail, sorry again).
As I have mentioned before (e.g., my Sept. 6, 2008 blog article), this type of stuff is nothing new to me. The unfortunate thing for me in this Facebook instance is that, if I keep seeing postings people are aiming at me, I would nevertheless be seen as initiating things without invitation were I to react in any way, as if I'm someone who speaks when not spoken to (ooh, I must be imagining it all). Someday there will be two people, one who telephones the other but never emails him, and the other will be someone who always emails that other person but never telephones him. And a third person will be perfectly able to make the case that one is continuing to send emails to someone who has never sent an email back. And that the other is continuing to phone someone who has never phoned him back. Persona non gratis, I think it's called. A hell of a thing to do to the person in the middle of this U.S. entertainment industry/Iranian President stuff, that is, if you've been attaching any weight to the evidence.
I also saw Jon Stewart yesterday. I may also have seen Rachel Maddow, however, I'm not sure on that. I have at various times been quite a significant influence on both. As a Facebook friend had just posted something about Maddow's MSNBC buddy Keith Olberman, my mentioning this Maddow moment could easily sound contrived to some for that reason alone (I'm sure no one has ever been out to make me sound contrived, and I must accept full responsibility for all the times my words have sounded contrived, it must be something I like to do!).
Relevant to this latest instance of my sounding contrived, I have recently found evidence that some person or persons behind the scenes has been coordinating certain actions of certain Facebook friends of mine, people who presumably have nothing to do with one another. This has on occasion become additionally complicated to the point where it has involved the coordinating of certain Facebook friends of certain Facebook friends to post things, which in turn provide my Facebook friends the opportunity to comment on or like certain postings that were actually made for me to see. For example, a Facebook friend of mine (someone I knew at CalArts) who is connected with Eric Clapton had the opportunity to like a posting his Facebook friend made, causing me to see his Facebook friend's posting. That Facebook friend of a Facebook friend posting happened to use words that are identical to words contained in a song I once did, and the timing of when they made their Facebook postings coincided perfectly with a matter going on in relation to my video for that song (I will not go into further detail, sorry). That Facebook friend of my Facebook friend is himself the Facebook friend of a woman (not my Facebook friend) who is herself the Facebook friend of another one of my Facebook friends (from when I was in high school in Princeon), and this woman did something similar in relation to that Princeton Facebook friend of mine (who is not in the least connected to the Facebook friend person I knew at CalArts). So, a situation involving two of my Facebook friends who aren't connected to one another, and one of each of their Facebook friends who themselves are Facebook friends with each other, all doing things aimed at me (again, I will not go into further detail, sorry again).
As I have mentioned before (e.g., my Sept. 6, 2008 blog article), this type of stuff is nothing new to me. The unfortunate thing for me in this Facebook instance is that, if I keep seeing postings people are aiming at me, I would nevertheless be seen as initiating things without invitation were I to react in any way, as if I'm someone who speaks when not spoken to (ooh, I must be imagining it all). Someday there will be two people, one who telephones the other but never emails him, and the other will be someone who always emails that other person but never telephones him. And a third person will be perfectly able to make the case that one is continuing to send emails to someone who has never sent an email back. And that the other is continuing to phone someone who has never phoned him back. Persona non gratis, I think it's called. A hell of a thing to do to the person in the middle of this U.S. entertainment industry/Iranian President stuff, that is, if you've been attaching any weight to the evidence.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
I've Got The Key To The Highway Merge Ramp
This one may be of particular interest to those who appreciate that I don't make things up. It will also likely make me look like a desperate attention demanding liar to others. I don't exactly consider that any kind of a break-even, but the day I confine the things I choose to describe in order to avoid being, etc., etc. etc.
Our story begins with a subject I would prefer to avoid for various reasons: Once upon a time, the last time I'm aware of seeing a particular woman I once knew whose photograph was on the dark corkboard inside sleeve of Clapton's "Slowhand" album on account of me, I was on the 134 near the 210. And George Harrison (close Clapton friend) was expected to die inside of a week. He did. The previous time to that, this woman was in a car next to the one I was in as I was on my way to being driven past Clapton's Florida home (my being a Clapton tourist or something, I suppose; I'm also an influence on Clapton).
Yesterday, I noticed a Facebook friend had a Facebook conversation with her, so this is in that continuity - it was the first direct sign I've seen that she's still alive since the just-described two previous occurrences, though indirect signs of her still being alive are out there as well.
This morning, while I was on my way to work, nearly there, about to exit the 134 near the 210, there's a car in the entry/exit lane driving next to me, going too fast for me to exit in front of him, causing me to do a major slow down to let him enter the freeway in front of me, and to let me exit the freeway (which is good, it's always nice to have someone takeover for you on the freeway, lest it become too empty and boring, then they tear up the concrete and build a park on it or something).
[For more on this, go to http://www.wikihow.com/Merge-Onto-the-Highway-Without-Crashing]
I feel inclined, in consequence of this which-one-of-us-is-gonna-slow-down negotiation, to take a good look at the driver. We weren't actually in a game of chicken, neither one of us was really on the brink of death at any point, but it was just unusual enough. And I do always have to be slightly suspicious of the unusual things that happen to me. People parade things around me for my benefit at times, being the secretly super-important person that I am. It comes with the territory. You may or may not be interested in the details.
I find, in this brief moment, that the other driver is either Eric Clapton or a look-alike. I have on various occasions described how I have to occasionally consider that I might be getting dispatched at me a look-alike, i.e., someone I am meant to think is a particular person when it isn't, rather than their simply being some random person I happen to think is some particular other person. For example, if it's the day Jennifer Aniston is marrying Brad Pitt, and someone who looks like David Schwimmer is driving next to me, I know it doesn't have to be David Schwimmer. But I'm certainly expected to believe it is.
I go to the Internet shortly thereafter, to see where Clapton might be in the world today, in case I might be able to resolve it then and there, as when Paul McCartney drove by me several weeks ago (see my blog article from among the blog articles I wrote several weeks ago). I found, in an article dateline Los Angeles, that TODAY Eric Clapton announced his first album in FIVE YEARS. Sheryl Crow will be on it. I should add to this, that my July 21st blog ("All Roads Lead To Memphis And France") described something done on Letterman for my benefit that was specifically in conjunction with Sheryl Crow being a guest. I believe there is evidence to support that assertion, and I believe that evidence is apparent if you are intelligent and inclined to spend the time examining when what happened.
I am now, therefore, absolutely convinced, given the importance of today with regard to Eric Clapton, that I "encountered" either a Clapton look-alike, or Clapton himself. As to whether Paul McCartney might have been behind it, or.... whether the three of us will ever be in the studio together (I've already proven I have the ability to drive there).... or whether I will later be able to describe being inside-referenced on the upcoming Clapton release (as has happened on other Clapton releases).... or whether I have made myself appear like a child crying for attention by making things up (opportunities to undermine how seriously people take me are not sneezed at by those who see the chessboard a certain way).... all of these are thoughts that float about unobstructed. The main thing is, it's about the music.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Maybe You Should First Explain To Me What Being The Ninth Beatle Will Entail
Hail, Hail, Chicago's All Here
I stated in my May 1st, 2010 blog (readable on this site, and also to be found in Volume 3 of my blogs published/copyrighted in May 2010 at Archive.Org):
"In The Future All My Troubles Seem So Far Away
"A new event has occurred in connection with my observations that someone behind-the-scenes at the Huffington Post website is very much 'on' to my secret super-importance (or partially on?)...."
Something not unrelated to this observation about Huffington Post occurred today. Ariana Huffington printed an article entitled, "'Third World America' Excerpt: Michigan Father Commutes To Chicago For Work". Here is what I find particularly interesting about that article (not counting the article itself) - just two days ago, in my August 8th blog, I stated:
How many movies are there where the guy with the private airplane shocks someone by saying, "Hey, let's have dinner in Chicago!"
So, if you put two days ago together with today, and sprinkle in some May 1st, you might have to see something, I would think. I wouldn't assume that the Mayor of Los Angeles, who is one of my few "fans" at Huffington Post (they have fans for when you comment on an article - I comment as either JonathanDS or JonathanDS2U), has a proper vantage point for putting these things together to see the composite whole I'm drawing, but that's the lot of those who are fans of my comments at Huffington Post without being fans of my own blog articles. I only regret that there is little or nothing I can do for these sad unfortunates. Maybe I should direct people to these blogs sometime when I'm commenting on a Huffington Post article. Let's see, how about, "I too am concerned about the economy, in fact, I'm the 9th Beatle, I believe, with no hope of ever becoming the 5th Beatle."
Yes I'm Gonna Be A Person Who Remembers Not To Run Out of Gas Next Time
Also possibly in relation to my blog article of two days ago, on my way to work today I saw an uninhabited car pulled over onto the shoulder of the road, and found the car seemed to very much resemble the car I saw that guy driving, that guy I mentioned in my two days ago blog article. I don't know if there was anything to read from that, though today's car did have some sort of very small sign, like a large post-it note, taped to a side window (I didn't stop to read it). If I were better at identifying fancy black sports cars I might have something more definite to offer here, however, ignorance about cars remains one of my few guilty pleasures and I don't see this changing much in the future.
I suspect this could be one of those bits where first Paul McCartney shows up somewhere for my benefit (as described in my August 8th blog article), then someone takes over from there - I'm supposed to attach something to whatever his assigned delegate puts in front of me. Oh look, let's put a car like the one Paul drove behind him when he's on his way to the mountains. Now let's put the car in front of him when he's on his way to the supermarket. Don't even need to put McCartney in the car. Gee, this is fun, are you keeping close track of the look on his face when he sees it's not a Beatle?
I once knew a girl who knew/knows Paul McCartney. Her photograph was "once" on the inside album sleeve of Clapton's "Slowhand" on account of me (I was the only one given in the CalArts dorm that year whose room that had a brown corkboard bulletin board, and the inside Clapton album sleeve featured photos apparently tacked to a brown corkboard bulletin board; the previous year I had the dorm room with the different looking carpet because Amy Wexler, the daughter of Jerry Wexler, the head of Clapton's record company, had destroyed the carpet the year it was her room, etc., etc. - I've explained all this before in earlier blogs). God forbid the "Slowhand" girl should be the McCartney assigned delegate who gets to leave cars on road shoulders for me to make things out of. A conversation I once had with her led to Tom Hanks' TV sitcom, "Bosom Buddies" (also something I've described before), and yet she has never come forward and vouched for my assertion that I'm secretly super-important, or done anything about it. Would Mary Tyler Moore behave this way? I wonder if this is the sort of thing McCartney and Spielberg laugh about together in the Hamptons, where they're reportedly next-door neighbors.
Earl Gray Area
Nothing happened in connection with me on tonight's "Memphis Beat", which in itself is worth noting. I do have an observation, nevertheless, just in case they thought they were doing something that I would find worth noticing. Can't leave them hanging if that was the case, but I emphasize, I expect it never happened, is just a coincidence if even that, yet just the same, I have to take into account the possibility:
In my August 4th blog, in the section entitled, "His World", I pointed out a moment in one of my major little videos, "Gosk 2" by including a videoclip excerpt, as it was in connection with something or another (read it/view it). In that same "Gosk 2" scene, one of the characters from the planet Klug finds that his girl is all taken by the music being played by an Earthling, and he is not delighted. One finds a certain correlation made in "Gosk" to racial tension vs. embracing racial differences. [If one takes the trouble to read my entire 1993 full-length screenplay that I've posted at Archive.Org, one will in fact find a very positive message on that subject, where things culminates in all the people of Earth and all the people of Klug feeling great love for one another. It's really heartwarming, someone should make this movie, though surprisingly it gets treated more like a car by the side of the road with parts worth stealing.]
And so in tonight's "Memphis Beat", a white character is not too delighted that his former girl is all taken by the music played to her by a black character. We suspect race might have contributed to his killing his former girl and framing the black guy, though thankfully they are always careful never to take us too far into the deep, underlying motivations of a killer, lest it transform us all into killers (some of us even feel the need to stay away from people who enjoy mimicking Jack Nicholson's "Here's Johnny!" from "The Shining", not to mention the Barney song, but I digress).
Also on tonight's "Memphis Beat" we find a snow globe. In the scene in "Gosk 2" that immediately precedes the "Gosk 2" scene to which I've just referred, one of the characters observes, with regard to little white flakes floating around, "I think I know where all these little white flakes come from". However, in truth, "Gosk 2" is not set inside a snow globe, which is only one of the places where the correlation falls apart.
I stated in my May 1st, 2010 blog (readable on this site, and also to be found in Volume 3 of my blogs published/copyrighted in May 2010 at Archive.Org):
"In The Future All My Troubles Seem So Far Away
"A new event has occurred in connection with my observations that someone behind-the-scenes at the Huffington Post website is very much 'on' to my secret super-importance (or partially on?)...."
Something not unrelated to this observation about Huffington Post occurred today. Ariana Huffington printed an article entitled, "'Third World America' Excerpt: Michigan Father Commutes To Chicago For Work". Here is what I find particularly interesting about that article (not counting the article itself) - just two days ago, in my August 8th blog, I stated:
How many movies are there where the guy with the private airplane shocks someone by saying, "Hey, let's have dinner in Chicago!"
So, if you put two days ago together with today, and sprinkle in some May 1st, you might have to see something, I would think. I wouldn't assume that the Mayor of Los Angeles, who is one of my few "fans" at Huffington Post (they have fans for when you comment on an article - I comment as either JonathanDS or JonathanDS2U), has a proper vantage point for putting these things together to see the composite whole I'm drawing, but that's the lot of those who are fans of my comments at Huffington Post without being fans of my own blog articles. I only regret that there is little or nothing I can do for these sad unfortunates. Maybe I should direct people to these blogs sometime when I'm commenting on a Huffington Post article. Let's see, how about, "I too am concerned about the economy, in fact, I'm the 9th Beatle, I believe, with no hope of ever becoming the 5th Beatle."
Yes I'm Gonna Be A Person Who Remembers Not To Run Out of Gas Next Time
Also possibly in relation to my blog article of two days ago, on my way to work today I saw an uninhabited car pulled over onto the shoulder of the road, and found the car seemed to very much resemble the car I saw that guy driving, that guy I mentioned in my two days ago blog article. I don't know if there was anything to read from that, though today's car did have some sort of very small sign, like a large post-it note, taped to a side window (I didn't stop to read it). If I were better at identifying fancy black sports cars I might have something more definite to offer here, however, ignorance about cars remains one of my few guilty pleasures and I don't see this changing much in the future.
I suspect this could be one of those bits where first Paul McCartney shows up somewhere for my benefit (as described in my August 8th blog article), then someone takes over from there - I'm supposed to attach something to whatever his assigned delegate puts in front of me. Oh look, let's put a car like the one Paul drove behind him when he's on his way to the mountains. Now let's put the car in front of him when he's on his way to the supermarket. Don't even need to put McCartney in the car. Gee, this is fun, are you keeping close track of the look on his face when he sees it's not a Beatle?
I once knew a girl who knew/knows Paul McCartney. Her photograph was "once" on the inside album sleeve of Clapton's "Slowhand" on account of me (I was the only one given in the CalArts dorm that year whose room that had a brown corkboard bulletin board, and the inside Clapton album sleeve featured photos apparently tacked to a brown corkboard bulletin board; the previous year I had the dorm room with the different looking carpet because Amy Wexler, the daughter of Jerry Wexler, the head of Clapton's record company, had destroyed the carpet the year it was her room, etc., etc. - I've explained all this before in earlier blogs). God forbid the "Slowhand" girl should be the McCartney assigned delegate who gets to leave cars on road shoulders for me to make things out of. A conversation I once had with her led to Tom Hanks' TV sitcom, "Bosom Buddies" (also something I've described before), and yet she has never come forward and vouched for my assertion that I'm secretly super-important, or done anything about it. Would Mary Tyler Moore behave this way? I wonder if this is the sort of thing McCartney and Spielberg laugh about together in the Hamptons, where they're reportedly next-door neighbors.
Earl Gray Area
Nothing happened in connection with me on tonight's "Memphis Beat", which in itself is worth noting. I do have an observation, nevertheless, just in case they thought they were doing something that I would find worth noticing. Can't leave them hanging if that was the case, but I emphasize, I expect it never happened, is just a coincidence if even that, yet just the same, I have to take into account the possibility:
In my August 4th blog, in the section entitled, "His World", I pointed out a moment in one of my major little videos, "Gosk 2" by including a videoclip excerpt, as it was in connection with something or another (read it/view it). In that same "Gosk 2" scene, one of the characters from the planet Klug finds that his girl is all taken by the music being played by an Earthling, and he is not delighted. One finds a certain correlation made in "Gosk" to racial tension vs. embracing racial differences. [If one takes the trouble to read my entire 1993 full-length screenplay that I've posted at Archive.Org, one will in fact find a very positive message on that subject, where things culminates in all the people of Earth and all the people of Klug feeling great love for one another. It's really heartwarming, someone should make this movie, though surprisingly it gets treated more like a car by the side of the road with parts worth stealing.]
And so in tonight's "Memphis Beat", a white character is not too delighted that his former girl is all taken by the music played to her by a black character. We suspect race might have contributed to his killing his former girl and framing the black guy, though thankfully they are always careful never to take us too far into the deep, underlying motivations of a killer, lest it transform us all into killers (some of us even feel the need to stay away from people who enjoy mimicking Jack Nicholson's "Here's Johnny!" from "The Shining", not to mention the Barney song, but I digress).
Also on tonight's "Memphis Beat" we find a snow globe. In the scene in "Gosk 2" that immediately precedes the "Gosk 2" scene to which I've just referred, one of the characters observes, with regard to little white flakes floating around, "I think I know where all these little white flakes come from". However, in truth, "Gosk 2" is not set inside a snow globe, which is only one of the places where the correlation falls apart.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Special Thanks To Washington, Obama And McCartney
Unreal Dream
My July 23rd blog ended with my stating:
"I'm sure that, whatever specific elements might someday get glued together through the development of this concept, those elements will eventually find some way to unglue themselves from it."
My July 25th blog began with:
The image of the sword in the stone (Excalibur), which was followed in that blog by an allusion to the legend regarding it, which is about only one person being able to remove the sword from the stone (King Arthur).
So on the one hand (7/23), elements that, though they might one day become glued together, someday they will find a way to unglue themselves from each other. On the other hand (7/25), two things bonded together that only one person can separate.
I shall now bring together things that should unglue simply by breathing on them, or sneezing on them, or chewing on them, or whatever you feel like doing to them. I do so for your amusement, and also on the strange, remote offchance that it has been dictated to me to do so, by Paul McCartney and/or President Obama, via things regarding tonight's fantastic broadcast of McCartney being honored at the White House. And may I take this opportunity to say, that broadcast was a golden moment, and I have no desire to pull apart what came together there. I have nothing but thanks for their having done this. I would give them both an award to go with the Gershwin Award McCartney was given by the President, if I had one, not that I could do more to make that moment hold together than what has already been done. The specialness of the evening was remarkable.
I won't be backing up any of the following statements which, combined, comprise my theory that I might have been meant to see a connection in this McCartney/Obama event to my "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'". So many of my previous blogs already go on at length to prove to the intelligent that I am a secretly super-important person to whom things happen that are far beyond normal experience, if you put pieces of puzzles together left by people who don't wish to speak too loud. I know this must appear to a newcomer as totally audacious, crazy, etc. Did I say "newcomer"? You could imagine yourself to be well familiar with what I have contended in the past, however, if you never bothered to follow the details, for lack of intelligence, inclination, ulterior motives regarding certain powerful situations, etc., then that which I do in these here type things will always be new/unfamiliar to you.
1. Paul McCartney has on innumerable occasions said and done things intended to be in relation to me. I have known many who know him, and I have been a very significant influence on him over the years, going back to the '60s and continuing to the present day. On my first few days ever in London in 1983, had I run across the train tracks at Baker Street Underground Station to be on the same platform as he, when we both were nearly the only ones in that station, we may even have shaken hands. Several days following our not shaking hands, I was invited to a dinner party by his next-door neighbor during the '70s. Unconnected events, perhaps....
2. A number of years ago, a song McCartney wrote with Elvis Costello (who appeared in tonight's broadcast of McCartney being honored by the President at the White House) contained a line, "She wants to shout at the back of his head." I interpreted the origin of that lyric as coming from something I came up with for my video, "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'", wherein a character hallucinates that a woman is shouting at the back of his head.
3. A recent interview with McCartney about playing at the White House had him choosing to characterize the experience as being very comfortable, where one felt one could say anything, like when one is speaking to a cousin. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, a character is specially advised not to feel free to say anything when in the presence of a particular important individual. My cousin and his wife appeared in my "Uncle's Dream" video.
4. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, there are many references to the power someone has over a most important person due to her playing music before him. The nature of this idea is not totally unrelated to the nature of tonight's McCartney/Obama broadcast. (I certainly do not mean to infer anything, I am simply making an objective statement.)
5. When President W had that whole front-page episode over putting his hand on the shoulder of the German Chancellor and her responding with apparent revulsion, the incident occurred one day following my having emphasized the significance of an identical act (as described in my "Back To The Political Future" pdf at Archive.Org) that occurs in my "Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'" video being used on a "Monk" episode (almost all episodes of "Monk" made inside-references to my material, which I attribute to my having once known the former President of USA, which made "Monk", having some kind of hand in it, it seems to me. He's always doing stuff like that in relation to me, seems to me. And at some point after that W incident, when W stated that his reading tastes were very epileptic, I believed this related to that previous situation, in that Dostoyevsky is one of the world's most well known epileptics, despite it obviously seeming to be that W meant to use the word, "eclectic". Paul McCartney was widely quoted as having said, while at the White House, that it was nice to now have a president who knows what a library is (PBS today defended not editing that into tonight's broadcast). This was McCartney touching on the subject of W's reading.
6. There was a moment in tonight's broadcast when Stevie Wonder appeared to respond negatively to McCartney putting his hand on his shoulder by pulling his hand off (as if it was overdoing it, as it followed McCartney kissing Wonder's head).
6. Once many years ago when McCartney was a guest on Saturday Night Live, he played a butler character who did a few things relating to the butler character in my "Uncle's Dream" video.
7. The female star of my "Uncle's Dream" video, my friend Sandra Church (former Broadway star and Brando's wife in a movie), once mentioned to me going to Thanksgiving Dinner at Judy Collins'. Judy Collins was a very close friend of Linda McCartney.
8. Tonight on a separate show, a nightly news comments show, someone appeared with comments whom I've never seen before, and I've seen this nightly news comments show a lot. She had the same, somewhat uncommon last name as a person I know who is a friend of Obama from Chicago. Obviously not connected to the other person with the same last name, yet interesting that this person should be there to bring the other person to mind today of all days.
9. I have occasionally noticed my influence on things said by the President the day following my putting something out. This was also true of W and Clinton.
10. Now unglue everything in items 1-9 for future use elsewhere in other contexts. But do me a favor and find some place to store these elements in the meantime. You could rearrange the letters, I think they could all write out something from Shakespeare (though you may need to add or subtract a few punctuation marks). I promise not to sign the above with anything other than a pencil, so it should all be simple to unglue.
From Last To First
In my previous blog I referred to something I wrote 30 years ago, "Two Hours In The Life Of George Washington". I have since then posted a pdf of it at Archive.Org.
Doesn't Count
Nothing to report regarding any influence from me on Tuesday's "Memphis Beat", unlike most of their other episodes (which I proved/demonstrated in previous blogs).
[Unless you count the fact that Tuesday's episode showed the influence of "My Name Is Earl", an earlier Jason Lee TV show that first originated from something I had sent to someone I once knew, who was the producer of the first movie Jason Lee starred in. "Earl" references on "Memphis Beat" shouldn't really count, though, as "Memphis Beat" stars Jason Lee, so if his references to his own earlier show have to be thought of as automatically coming back to me, all of our lists of who we might owe credit to would be endless.]
My July 23rd blog ended with my stating:
"I'm sure that, whatever specific elements might someday get glued together through the development of this concept, those elements will eventually find some way to unglue themselves from it."
My July 25th blog began with:
The image of the sword in the stone (Excalibur), which was followed in that blog by an allusion to the legend regarding it, which is about only one person being able to remove the sword from the stone (King Arthur).
So on the one hand (7/23), elements that, though they might one day become glued together, someday they will find a way to unglue themselves from each other. On the other hand (7/25), two things bonded together that only one person can separate.
I shall now bring together things that should unglue simply by breathing on them, or sneezing on them, or chewing on them, or whatever you feel like doing to them. I do so for your amusement, and also on the strange, remote offchance that it has been dictated to me to do so, by Paul McCartney and/or President Obama, via things regarding tonight's fantastic broadcast of McCartney being honored at the White House. And may I take this opportunity to say, that broadcast was a golden moment, and I have no desire to pull apart what came together there. I have nothing but thanks for their having done this. I would give them both an award to go with the Gershwin Award McCartney was given by the President, if I had one, not that I could do more to make that moment hold together than what has already been done. The specialness of the evening was remarkable.
I won't be backing up any of the following statements which, combined, comprise my theory that I might have been meant to see a connection in this McCartney/Obama event to my "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'". So many of my previous blogs already go on at length to prove to the intelligent that I am a secretly super-important person to whom things happen that are far beyond normal experience, if you put pieces of puzzles together left by people who don't wish to speak too loud. I know this must appear to a newcomer as totally audacious, crazy, etc. Did I say "newcomer"? You could imagine yourself to be well familiar with what I have contended in the past, however, if you never bothered to follow the details, for lack of intelligence, inclination, ulterior motives regarding certain powerful situations, etc., then that which I do in these here type things will always be new/unfamiliar to you.
1. Paul McCartney has on innumerable occasions said and done things intended to be in relation to me. I have known many who know him, and I have been a very significant influence on him over the years, going back to the '60s and continuing to the present day. On my first few days ever in London in 1983, had I run across the train tracks at Baker Street Underground Station to be on the same platform as he, when we both were nearly the only ones in that station, we may even have shaken hands. Several days following our not shaking hands, I was invited to a dinner party by his next-door neighbor during the '70s. Unconnected events, perhaps....
2. A number of years ago, a song McCartney wrote with Elvis Costello (who appeared in tonight's broadcast of McCartney being honored by the President at the White House) contained a line, "She wants to shout at the back of his head." I interpreted the origin of that lyric as coming from something I came up with for my video, "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'", wherein a character hallucinates that a woman is shouting at the back of his head.
3. A recent interview with McCartney about playing at the White House had him choosing to characterize the experience as being very comfortable, where one felt one could say anything, like when one is speaking to a cousin. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, a character is specially advised not to feel free to say anything when in the presence of a particular important individual. My cousin and his wife appeared in my "Uncle's Dream" video.
4. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, there are many references to the power someone has over a most important person due to her playing music before him. The nature of this idea is not totally unrelated to the nature of tonight's McCartney/Obama broadcast. (I certainly do not mean to infer anything, I am simply making an objective statement.)
5. When President W had that whole front-page episode over putting his hand on the shoulder of the German Chancellor and her responding with apparent revulsion, the incident occurred one day following my having emphasized the significance of an identical act (as described in my "Back To The Political Future" pdf at Archive.Org) that occurs in my "Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'" video being used on a "Monk" episode (almost all episodes of "Monk" made inside-references to my material, which I attribute to my having once known the former President of USA, which made "Monk", having some kind of hand in it, it seems to me. He's always doing stuff like that in relation to me, seems to me. And at some point after that W incident, when W stated that his reading tastes were very epileptic, I believed this related to that previous situation, in that Dostoyevsky is one of the world's most well known epileptics, despite it obviously seeming to be that W meant to use the word, "eclectic". Paul McCartney was widely quoted as having said, while at the White House, that it was nice to now have a president who knows what a library is (PBS today defended not editing that into tonight's broadcast). This was McCartney touching on the subject of W's reading.
6. There was a moment in tonight's broadcast when Stevie Wonder appeared to respond negatively to McCartney putting his hand on his shoulder by pulling his hand off (as if it was overdoing it, as it followed McCartney kissing Wonder's head).
6. Once many years ago when McCartney was a guest on Saturday Night Live, he played a butler character who did a few things relating to the butler character in my "Uncle's Dream" video.
7. The female star of my "Uncle's Dream" video, my friend Sandra Church (former Broadway star and Brando's wife in a movie), once mentioned to me going to Thanksgiving Dinner at Judy Collins'. Judy Collins was a very close friend of Linda McCartney.
8. Tonight on a separate show, a nightly news comments show, someone appeared with comments whom I've never seen before, and I've seen this nightly news comments show a lot. She had the same, somewhat uncommon last name as a person I know who is a friend of Obama from Chicago. Obviously not connected to the other person with the same last name, yet interesting that this person should be there to bring the other person to mind today of all days.
9. I have occasionally noticed my influence on things said by the President the day following my putting something out. This was also true of W and Clinton.
10. Now unglue everything in items 1-9 for future use elsewhere in other contexts. But do me a favor and find some place to store these elements in the meantime. You could rearrange the letters, I think they could all write out something from Shakespeare (though you may need to add or subtract a few punctuation marks). I promise not to sign the above with anything other than a pencil, so it should all be simple to unglue.
From Last To First
In my previous blog I referred to something I wrote 30 years ago, "Two Hours In The Life Of George Washington". I have since then posted a pdf of it at Archive.Org.
Doesn't Count
Nothing to report regarding any influence from me on Tuesday's "Memphis Beat", unlike most of their other episodes (which I proved/demonstrated in previous blogs).
[Unless you count the fact that Tuesday's episode showed the influence of "My Name Is Earl", an earlier Jason Lee TV show that first originated from something I had sent to someone I once knew, who was the producer of the first movie Jason Lee starred in. "Earl" references on "Memphis Beat" shouldn't really count, though, as "Memphis Beat" stars Jason Lee, so if his references to his own earlier show have to be thought of as automatically coming back to me, all of our lists of who we might owe credit to would be endless.]
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Follow This And That
Several things to whisper about, ranging from scarcely audible whispering to jumping up and down on the table whispering:
Smallville, Mediumville, Steinhoffville
Once again, I am pleased to say the Smallville season finale (5.14.10) has found a home for me, or, something for me, or, I've found something for them, or, we're in some strange no man's land with these little interconnections between what they're doing and what I've done, Medium being in there/out there somewhere as well. [Note- I posted my videoclip showing what I'm trying to say at YouTube (where I'm Zoomsteinhoff), however they removed it, so I've revisited this blog after its initial posting to include it here.]
Been There, Done That
I neglected to mention last time that the May 8th Saturday Night Live, in having another installment of their recurring sketch about the juvenile delinquents, was thereby doing something that originated with me. I ask you to do a search for "Bowery Boys" in the text of my earlier blogs posted at archive.org (I've posted "Jonathan D. Steinhoff's Sometimes Blog" Volumes 1, 2 and 3 there), should you be interested in what this statement is based on.
The season finale of SNL last night may or may not have been influenced by me, more specifically, my comedy sketch idea, "Beaver and Wally, The Flying Invisible Time Travelers" (posted at archive.org). In my idea, as we watch a single conversation, various changes to the present resulting from time travel continually manifest, generating aberrations to basic assumptions about the present, as the participants continue to speak in a state of total obliviousness. Same thing in last night's "Timecrowave" sketch with Alec Bladwin and Kristin Wigi.
See Where I'm Pointing, My Dear Watson
As I've described numerous times to numerous people, the first time I went to London, back in 1983, I hadn't been there one week before it's five to eleven at night and Paul McCartney and I are in the same underground station, opposite platforms (this is not my whole point, however). There was scarcely anyone else there, and sitting next me was someone dressed like Sherlock Holmes. It was the Baker Street station, Baker Street being something commonly associated with Holmes (as is Basil Rathbone, though Rathbone could also be associated as the name of the evil corporation in McCartney's "Give My Regards To Broad Street", which was released a certain number of months later). That is not my whole point either. So I turned to the Sherlock Holmes looking guy and said, "Isn't that Paul McCartney?" He needed more information. "Where?" he asked. So pretending my pointing finger was a searchlight beam, I moved my pointing finger along the near-empty opposite platform, then suddenly came to a stop on Paul McCartney. I paused a moment, then stated, "There." "Oh yes," he said, or something to that effect. It was May 13th, 1983, and I was already secretly super-important in relation to McCartney, as I am now, and would be invited in several days to a dinner party by an old friend of an old family friend, who lived next to McCartney during the '70s - so it was small surprise. This also is not my whole point. Several weeks ago, on the very same day that a news item was circulating that Steve Carell would be leaving "The Office", I somehow happened to drive by Steve Carell, who smiled at me. "The Office" people have done just this sort of thing to me before, possibly put up to it by Stuart Cornfeld (do another search) - so it was small surprise. And then, on the May 13th, 2010 episode of "The Office" (the 27th anniversary of that other stuff), this happened:
That is my point: from what I can tell, person or persons involved with "The Office" heard of my 1983 experience, including the date it happened, and did something about it. Even Sherlock Holmes himself would have been unable to imagine how something such as this could have come about. I am still arguing with myself over what might have happened.
And while this does not prove the point made in those news items about Steve Carell leaving "The Office" (let's wait and see), I, on the other hand, do plan to leave the office where I work, i.e., I am currently looking for a new job. The one where Spielberg and McCartney don't pay me anything and meanwhile terrorists leave stuff on my doorstep because of my "secret" super-importance, yet no one investigates, and people "above" me at work act REAL above me.... isn't working.
Smallville, Mediumville, Steinhoffville
Once again, I am pleased to say the Smallville season finale (5.14.10) has found a home for me, or, something for me, or, I've found something for them, or, we're in some strange no man's land with these little interconnections between what they're doing and what I've done, Medium being in there/out there somewhere as well. [Note- I posted my videoclip showing what I'm trying to say at YouTube (where I'm Zoomsteinhoff), however they removed it, so I've revisited this blog after its initial posting to include it here.]
Been There, Done That
I neglected to mention last time that the May 8th Saturday Night Live, in having another installment of their recurring sketch about the juvenile delinquents, was thereby doing something that originated with me. I ask you to do a search for "Bowery Boys" in the text of my earlier blogs posted at archive.org (I've posted "Jonathan D. Steinhoff's Sometimes Blog" Volumes 1, 2 and 3 there), should you be interested in what this statement is based on.
The season finale of SNL last night may or may not have been influenced by me, more specifically, my comedy sketch idea, "Beaver and Wally, The Flying Invisible Time Travelers" (posted at archive.org). In my idea, as we watch a single conversation, various changes to the present resulting from time travel continually manifest, generating aberrations to basic assumptions about the present, as the participants continue to speak in a state of total obliviousness. Same thing in last night's "Timecrowave" sketch with Alec Bladwin and Kristin Wigi.
See Where I'm Pointing, My Dear Watson
As I've described numerous times to numerous people, the first time I went to London, back in 1983, I hadn't been there one week before it's five to eleven at night and Paul McCartney and I are in the same underground station, opposite platforms (this is not my whole point, however). There was scarcely anyone else there, and sitting next me was someone dressed like Sherlock Holmes. It was the Baker Street station, Baker Street being something commonly associated with Holmes (as is Basil Rathbone, though Rathbone could also be associated as the name of the evil corporation in McCartney's "Give My Regards To Broad Street", which was released a certain number of months later). That is not my whole point either. So I turned to the Sherlock Holmes looking guy and said, "Isn't that Paul McCartney?" He needed more information. "Where?" he asked. So pretending my pointing finger was a searchlight beam, I moved my pointing finger along the near-empty opposite platform, then suddenly came to a stop on Paul McCartney. I paused a moment, then stated, "There." "Oh yes," he said, or something to that effect. It was May 13th, 1983, and I was already secretly super-important in relation to McCartney, as I am now, and would be invited in several days to a dinner party by an old friend of an old family friend, who lived next to McCartney during the '70s - so it was small surprise. This also is not my whole point. Several weeks ago, on the very same day that a news item was circulating that Steve Carell would be leaving "The Office", I somehow happened to drive by Steve Carell, who smiled at me. "The Office" people have done just this sort of thing to me before, possibly put up to it by Stuart Cornfeld (do another search) - so it was small surprise. And then, on the May 13th, 2010 episode of "The Office" (the 27th anniversary of that other stuff), this happened:
That is my point: from what I can tell, person or persons involved with "The Office" heard of my 1983 experience, including the date it happened, and did something about it. Even Sherlock Holmes himself would have been unable to imagine how something such as this could have come about. I am still arguing with myself over what might have happened.
And while this does not prove the point made in those news items about Steve Carell leaving "The Office" (let's wait and see), I, on the other hand, do plan to leave the office where I work, i.e., I am currently looking for a new job. The one where Spielberg and McCartney don't pay me anything and meanwhile terrorists leave stuff on my doorstep because of my "secret" super-importance, yet no one investigates, and people "above" me at work act REAL above me.... isn't working.
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Dear Letter
Something To Stew Over
I am pleased to announce the posting of my latest video on YouTube, "Come On, French Stewart, You Owe Me!"
I would be even more pleased if this video wasn't connected with my numerous entries into the sweepstakes to see which of my muffled screams will succeed in drawing the necessary attention to the fact that I have been singled out by the Iranian President for including inside-references whenever he has a major statement regarding his nuclear situation. Which the Iranian President is doing because of my secret super-importance in relation to the most prominent living Jewish man, Steven Spielberg (please see my "Steven Spielberg and the 'Mall Man' Factor" video at archive.org).
Oh well, what difference could that make? By the way, the work of mine to which I refer in this new Stewart video in connection with the final episode of "3rd Rock From The Sun" is "Gosk", both the 1993 screenplay and the shooting script for the unfilmed, "Gosk 3".
In The Future All My Troubles Seem So Far Away
A new event has occurred in connection with my observations that someone behind-the-scenes at the Huffington Post website is very much "on" to my secret super-importance (or partially on?):
Wheel Of Making Me Look Like I'm Piecing Together Sentences That Aren't There
ONLY because "Smallville" has very recently included inside-references to my few music videos (as I've described in previous blogs), I believe I might have seen something in yesterday's episode, in this context, that could be seen cumulatively as part of this. However, please first permit me a moment to once again attempt to get across the cumulative concept:
If John Lennon wears a T-shirt in Los Angeles that only has the letter "M" on it; and Paul McCartney wears a T-shirt the next day in London that only has the letter "I" on it; and George Harrison wears a T-shirt the day following that in San Francisco that only has the letter "C" on it; and Ringo Starr a week or two or even three later in Ann Arbor, Michigan wears a T-shirt that only has the letter "K" on it, and you are in on the fact that John, Paul, George and Ringo were once in a group together, you could surmise that the context exists in which Ringo's "K" could be seen as part of a deliberate effort to spell the word "Mick", even though "K" all by itself contains no such implication. And if someone took the basis of your surmisal out of context, and said, "How does 'K' have to necessarily be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "How does 'I' and 'K' necessarily have to be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "Why do you think of The Beatles at the same time as the Stones when their music is not really all that similar?", the person saying these things about your surmisal might be out to make you sound like an i-d-i-o-t, or themselves be less smart than a non-idiot.
Back to "Smallville": There were things in last night's episode - the manner of flying; the turning of a wall into fragments (when a chemical was applied to make it shatter-able); a mystery regarding whatever happened to a woman who was taken away - that may possibly have been designed to bring to mind my music video, "Whatever Happened".
Numb With Excitement
Immediately following a recent email I sent to someone I never email, which made mention of Jon Stewart, an inside-reference was made on "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" to someone who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. And when I followed up that email with another email to that same person to point this out, this time around including mention of Stephen Colbert, "The Colbert Report" immediately made an inside-reference to my email's recipient, as well as an inside-reference to another person who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. More specifically, Colbert was causing me to think of the few times people have pushed me into the position of bringing in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade someone from using violence. As my recent emails were written on the subject of the above-mentioned matter regarding the Iranian President (nuclear weapons and inside-references to me), I suppose these were meant to be regarded as contributions towards my efforts.
This may possibly lead the "discussion" to this question: Do people naively expect that, once Iran has nuclear weapons, we can then just hang the fate of humanity on our ability to bring in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade? To still be that young and idealistic! It is my belief that such idealism in such an instance as we now find ourselves can only hasten the end of humanity. It is very near to the point where a realistic action to halt Iran from nuclear weapons capability should replace endless efforts to dissuade.
I am pleased to announce the posting of my latest video on YouTube, "Come On, French Stewart, You Owe Me!"
I would be even more pleased if this video wasn't connected with my numerous entries into the sweepstakes to see which of my muffled screams will succeed in drawing the necessary attention to the fact that I have been singled out by the Iranian President for including inside-references whenever he has a major statement regarding his nuclear situation. Which the Iranian President is doing because of my secret super-importance in relation to the most prominent living Jewish man, Steven Spielberg (please see my "Steven Spielberg and the 'Mall Man' Factor" video at archive.org).
Oh well, what difference could that make? By the way, the work of mine to which I refer in this new Stewart video in connection with the final episode of "3rd Rock From The Sun" is "Gosk", both the 1993 screenplay and the shooting script for the unfilmed, "Gosk 3".
In The Future All My Troubles Seem So Far Away
A new event has occurred in connection with my observations that someone behind-the-scenes at the Huffington Post website is very much "on" to my secret super-importance (or partially on?):
- My April 25th blog was titled, "See It In A Different Light".
- My April 26th blog mentioned that this April 25th blog title was from a Paul McCartney song upon which I am/was a major influence.
- On April 29th, 2:49pm, I made a comment (as JonathanDS) to a HuffingtonPost article, "Donald Trump Defends Arizona's Immigration Law". My 2:49pm comment was not actually approved/posted by HuffingtonPost for another ten minutes, yet a few minutes before my comment was posted to the world, at 2:53pm, someone posted a comment that included the words, "look into the future". These words are from this exact same Paul McCartney song.
Wheel Of Making Me Look Like I'm Piecing Together Sentences That Aren't There
ONLY because "Smallville" has very recently included inside-references to my few music videos (as I've described in previous blogs), I believe I might have seen something in yesterday's episode, in this context, that could be seen cumulatively as part of this. However, please first permit me a moment to once again attempt to get across the cumulative concept:
If John Lennon wears a T-shirt in Los Angeles that only has the letter "M" on it; and Paul McCartney wears a T-shirt the next day in London that only has the letter "I" on it; and George Harrison wears a T-shirt the day following that in San Francisco that only has the letter "C" on it; and Ringo Starr a week or two or even three later in Ann Arbor, Michigan wears a T-shirt that only has the letter "K" on it, and you are in on the fact that John, Paul, George and Ringo were once in a group together, you could surmise that the context exists in which Ringo's "K" could be seen as part of a deliberate effort to spell the word "Mick", even though "K" all by itself contains no such implication. And if someone took the basis of your surmisal out of context, and said, "How does 'K' have to necessarily be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "How does 'I' and 'K' necessarily have to be part of spelling 'Mick'?", or "Why do you think of The Beatles at the same time as the Stones when their music is not really all that similar?", the person saying these things about your surmisal might be out to make you sound like an i-d-i-o-t, or themselves be less smart than a non-idiot.
Back to "Smallville": There were things in last night's episode - the manner of flying; the turning of a wall into fragments (when a chemical was applied to make it shatter-able); a mystery regarding whatever happened to a woman who was taken away - that may possibly have been designed to bring to mind my music video, "Whatever Happened".
Numb With Excitement
Immediately following a recent email I sent to someone I never email, which made mention of Jon Stewart, an inside-reference was made on "The Daily Show With Jon Stewart" to someone who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. And when I followed up that email with another email to that same person to point this out, this time around including mention of Stephen Colbert, "The Colbert Report" immediately made an inside-reference to my email's recipient, as well as an inside-reference to another person who automatically brought to mind my email's recipient. More specifically, Colbert was causing me to think of the few times people have pushed me into the position of bringing in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade someone from using violence. As my recent emails were written on the subject of the above-mentioned matter regarding the Iranian President (nuclear weapons and inside-references to me), I suppose these were meant to be regarded as contributions towards my efforts.
This may possibly lead the "discussion" to this question: Do people naively expect that, once Iran has nuclear weapons, we can then just hang the fate of humanity on our ability to bring in emotion as part of an effort to dissuade? To still be that young and idealistic! It is my belief that such idealism in such an instance as we now find ourselves can only hasten the end of humanity. It is very near to the point where a realistic action to halt Iran from nuclear weapons capability should replace endless efforts to dissuade.
Sunday, January 10, 2010
Balls Rolling, Wheels On Fire
I had hoped that my blog entry to follow my previous blog entry might somehow keep the ball rolling, significance-wise, as that blog contained the ball-rolling announcement that I had completed my video, "Steven Spielberg And The 'Mall Man' Factor". Unfortunately, it does not. And yet for some the things I will be reporting this time around are no less significant:
YESTERDAY
We all know of the interesting situation at NBC involving Jay and Conan, and their dream of recapturing the days of "Must See TV", which was mainly their "Friends" and "Seinfeld" sitcom lineup on Thursdays when you get right down to it. And a few of us know that the NBC show that took over the timeslot of "Friends", "My Name Is Earl," which starred Jason Lee, grew out of an idea, "The Fun Guy", which I sent to Sean Daniel, the producer of the movie that featured Jason Lee's first big role, "Mallrats". Sean Daniel was the first person from whom I had learned of the college I attended, CalArts. He produced "Mallrats" two years after my "Mall Man" video, it being that Sean Daniel movies tend to contain things regarding my work, in this case the title.
So I naturally felt totally responsible personally for the problem Conan is now experiencing, as all things in the NBC universe are interconnected (though of course the NBC universe has been disconnected from the actual universe, in order to insulate their important energy). I therefore phoned Sean Daniel, not in connection with my just-released Spielberg video (which includes a reference to Daniel of no small significance), but with an idea for a new NBC show. Sean could not come to the phone because he was busy driving past someone in an automobile or truck (I may be wildly conjecturing here), but someone representing himself as his Director of Development who decided to pick up the phone himself did speak to me.
I explained how it was I who had given to Sean that which led to "My Name Is Earl," through Sean's involvement. I mentioned the significance of this fact in light of the current NBC situation, and then described how to find my idea for a new NBC show: it is called "Time Colonies" and posted at Archive.Org, just search for it there.
The next day (aka Saturday, aka yesterday) someone who looked enough like Sean Daniel to actually be Sean Daniel drove by me as I drove down some random-enough Los Angeles boulevard.
What happened next is something nobody in the world could have seen coming! I turned my car around! My strange, bizarre thinking was that, if Sean had arranged to drive by me, he might have someone watching my reaction to this (as the producer of the "Mummy" movies, I figure Sean must make about $11.30 an hour, and so if he went without dessert for a few months he could probably save up enough money to pay someone to occupy the position of a "report-his-reaction-to-me" person, an important position in Hollywood to which many aspire).
Though I had turned my car around, I knew that it would be impossible for me to actually catch up with him to ask about his wife and kids and Spielberg and Earl and the weather. An instant later I came upon a strip mall, and this strip mall had a store called, "Timeland". Who could have seen this coming when Sean Daniel drove by me? It would have been better if Sean had arranged to drive past me nearby to a store called "My Name Is" or "Time Colonies", but under the circumstances.... of course, who could have guessed that I would have turned my car around? Nobody! Why would I?
At the strip mall, someone who looked enough like Rosanna Arquette to actually be Rosanna Arquette walked by. I now refer you to my November 22, 2008 blog entry with relation to its Rosanna Arquette reference.
I then left the strip mall and continued on, and eventually Courteney Cox Arquette almost definitely drove by me. Possibly also David Arquette. Possibly also CCA's BFF, Jennifer Aniston. Definitely Lisa Kudrow drove by at some point.
Also the guy who plays Ryan on "The Office". Also, a car from out of state with the word "Ryan" in the license plate drove in front of me for blocks and blocks. Out of state plates are often called upon by people who do these types of things, to expand the options when available California plates don't serve the purpose.
The Ryan stuff was likely in relation to Stuart Cornfeld (like Sean, Stuart is often referred to in my blogs), as I had just left a message for Stuart regarding Steven Spielberg. In my previous blog I state that "The Colbert Report" referenced my Spielberg video when it was a mere work-in-progress (they join in on Steinhoff things over there at Colbert from time to time, see previous blogs). This time it was "The Daily Show" (companion to "The Colbert Report") that came into it: the night following the message to Stuart, Jon Stewart (who I hope never has children or grandchildren given the first name of Stuart, out of concern that future generations will already have their hands full) interviewed Maggie Gyllenhaal, during which I recognized inside-reference to something specifically contained in my message. I occasionally encounter such cross-pollination between Cornfeld/"The Office"/"The Daily Show"-"The Colbert Report". One would tend to ascribe this to the fact that two "Office" cast members are "Daily Show" alum; Cornfeld starred "Office" star Jenna Fischer in "Blades of Glory"; other stuff.
DECEMBER 31
On December 31st I believe I drove by Jennifer Aniston, and then David Arquette, and then Jennifer Aniston, and Tim Robbins. Robbins was in "War of the Worlds," a movie I refer to in my Spielberg video. I certainly do not mention him here in relation to his role in "The Player", at least not at this time, and hopefully never in relation to my situation, Stuart and Sean love me, haven't spoken to either in years and years and years, but, well anyway, one sees how I might feel called upon to address "The Player" here.... Robbins was in "IQ" as well, which also contained something put there because of its relation to me. However, now I am clearly and stupidly deviating from any train of thought, or any that I am anywhere near to at the moment).
THE PRESIDENT, TERRORISM AND BABY OIL?
(or The Intersection Of Robert Johnson And Johnson & Johnson)
THE PRESIDENT
As is not unusual for me, Obama has lately been including things in speeches within 24 hours from when I put them forward. Huffington Post is back to not printing my comments from time to time but then something in the same comment shows up coming from someone on TV such as Bill Maher or the president within 24 hours, which says to me that they are guarding against the liability that would have resulted from my being able to point at it. Yes, I am aware that sometimes people do naturally have the same idea at the same time, especially if it's a likely and relevant surmisal. No, my experience and intelligence tells me this ain't that.
BABY OIL
On January 4th, I found on my desk an article of mail from Johnson & Johnson that was postmarked December 30th. Mail from Johnson & Johnson in my area is akin to the idea of a big bright red envelope amidst nothing but grey envelopes - it sticks out, a lot. The article of mail was meant for someone named "Jill Uhle" (pronounced "Yule", as in Christmas, as in Underpants Bomber), however, they had put "Jill Bacon" as her last name. The media-grabbing death of the Johnson & Johnson heiress occurred between December 30th and January 4th, i.e., between when the article of mail was posted and when it was received.
TERRORISM?
In my blog of 9.13.09, I refer to this how-could-they-have-known postmarking as something that happened in relation to a 911 clue I received. In my experience, which is not anything you're likely to find in the experience of most other people, this is potential reason for concern.
Perhaps: Obama, following what I described in my 9.13.09 blog, wanted to see my reaction to receiving an apparently similar clue - he could have used his authority to gain the December 30th postmark illegitimately after-the-fact. "Let's test him" might just be the kind of phrase they say from time to time out there where the president sits. Or: perhaps some sickos in organized crime wanted to kill a super rich woman (and by so doing intimidate other rich people) while threading my desk into it, through also copying an MO (modus operandi) I had described. Or: perhaps terrorists are doing something, suggested by the Yule/911 MO references? Can one totally ignore that possibility, after all that one has experienced from one being secretly super-important?
If so, what would Bacon, the last name they chose to use, mean here? Six degrees of Kevin Bacon? There is only one thing in the lexicon of all things Steinhoff (a lexicon that has frequently come into these matters, leading to the assumption of a database somewhere) that Bacon brings to mind: the famous artist, Francis Bacon, was very much in connection with Hugh Davies, the brother of a good friend of mine was I was growing up in Princeton, New Jersey, Phil. Hugh was practically his agent, did a book about him, did art shows starring him. As things first began happening between The Beatles and myself around when I first met Hugh's brother, Phil, in 1966 when I was ten, and as Phil's family is English, I have subsequently conjectured that there is a possibility of a connection to be made, that I have been led to think this in view of Phil's English background. There also exists a connection, from an earlier day, between Paul McCartney and Francis Bacon.
A few years ago, I sent something to Hugh to pass along to his brother Phil, which included a reference to the Beatles song, "Paperback Writer". Two days later McCartney discussed "Paperback Writer" with an interviewer. This is not the song that normally comes up every time McCartney does an interview.
Also Princeton-related is the fact that Johnson & Johnson's headquarters was in Princeton, as was conspicuous to those of us who lived there - one would periodically drive by their enormous, fenced off grounds, upon which one saw the giant "Johnson & Johnson" sign on the lawn, on Rosedale (which always brings to mind the Cream song, only not in this instance).
YESTERDAY
We all know of the interesting situation at NBC involving Jay and Conan, and their dream of recapturing the days of "Must See TV", which was mainly their "Friends" and "Seinfeld" sitcom lineup on Thursdays when you get right down to it. And a few of us know that the NBC show that took over the timeslot of "Friends", "My Name Is Earl," which starred Jason Lee, grew out of an idea, "The Fun Guy", which I sent to Sean Daniel, the producer of the movie that featured Jason Lee's first big role, "Mallrats". Sean Daniel was the first person from whom I had learned of the college I attended, CalArts. He produced "Mallrats" two years after my "Mall Man" video, it being that Sean Daniel movies tend to contain things regarding my work, in this case the title.
So I naturally felt totally responsible personally for the problem Conan is now experiencing, as all things in the NBC universe are interconnected (though of course the NBC universe has been disconnected from the actual universe, in order to insulate their important energy). I therefore phoned Sean Daniel, not in connection with my just-released Spielberg video (which includes a reference to Daniel of no small significance), but with an idea for a new NBC show. Sean could not come to the phone because he was busy driving past someone in an automobile or truck (I may be wildly conjecturing here), but someone representing himself as his Director of Development who decided to pick up the phone himself did speak to me.
I explained how it was I who had given to Sean that which led to "My Name Is Earl," through Sean's involvement. I mentioned the significance of this fact in light of the current NBC situation, and then described how to find my idea for a new NBC show: it is called "Time Colonies" and posted at Archive.Org, just search for it there.
The next day (aka Saturday, aka yesterday) someone who looked enough like Sean Daniel to actually be Sean Daniel drove by me as I drove down some random-enough Los Angeles boulevard.
What happened next is something nobody in the world could have seen coming! I turned my car around! My strange, bizarre thinking was that, if Sean had arranged to drive by me, he might have someone watching my reaction to this (as the producer of the "Mummy" movies, I figure Sean must make about $11.30 an hour, and so if he went without dessert for a few months he could probably save up enough money to pay someone to occupy the position of a "report-his-reaction-to-me" person, an important position in Hollywood to which many aspire).
Though I had turned my car around, I knew that it would be impossible for me to actually catch up with him to ask about his wife and kids and Spielberg and Earl and the weather. An instant later I came upon a strip mall, and this strip mall had a store called, "Timeland". Who could have seen this coming when Sean Daniel drove by me? It would have been better if Sean had arranged to drive past me nearby to a store called "My Name Is" or "Time Colonies", but under the circumstances.... of course, who could have guessed that I would have turned my car around? Nobody! Why would I?
At the strip mall, someone who looked enough like Rosanna Arquette to actually be Rosanna Arquette walked by. I now refer you to my November 22, 2008 blog entry with relation to its Rosanna Arquette reference.
I then left the strip mall and continued on, and eventually Courteney Cox Arquette almost definitely drove by me. Possibly also David Arquette. Possibly also CCA's BFF, Jennifer Aniston. Definitely Lisa Kudrow drove by at some point.
Also the guy who plays Ryan on "The Office". Also, a car from out of state with the word "Ryan" in the license plate drove in front of me for blocks and blocks. Out of state plates are often called upon by people who do these types of things, to expand the options when available California plates don't serve the purpose.
The Ryan stuff was likely in relation to Stuart Cornfeld (like Sean, Stuart is often referred to in my blogs), as I had just left a message for Stuart regarding Steven Spielberg. In my previous blog I state that "The Colbert Report" referenced my Spielberg video when it was a mere work-in-progress (they join in on Steinhoff things over there at Colbert from time to time, see previous blogs). This time it was "The Daily Show" (companion to "The Colbert Report") that came into it: the night following the message to Stuart, Jon Stewart (who I hope never has children or grandchildren given the first name of Stuart, out of concern that future generations will already have their hands full) interviewed Maggie Gyllenhaal, during which I recognized inside-reference to something specifically contained in my message. I occasionally encounter such cross-pollination between Cornfeld/"The Office"/"The Daily Show"-"The Colbert Report". One would tend to ascribe this to the fact that two "Office" cast members are "Daily Show" alum; Cornfeld starred "Office" star Jenna Fischer in "Blades of Glory"; other stuff.
DECEMBER 31
On December 31st I believe I drove by Jennifer Aniston, and then David Arquette, and then Jennifer Aniston, and Tim Robbins. Robbins was in "War of the Worlds," a movie I refer to in my Spielberg video. I certainly do not mention him here in relation to his role in "The Player", at least not at this time, and hopefully never in relation to my situation, Stuart and Sean love me, haven't spoken to either in years and years and years, but, well anyway, one sees how I might feel called upon to address "The Player" here.... Robbins was in "IQ" as well, which also contained something put there because of its relation to me. However, now I am clearly and stupidly deviating from any train of thought, or any that I am anywhere near to at the moment).
THE PRESIDENT, TERRORISM AND BABY OIL?
(or The Intersection Of Robert Johnson And Johnson & Johnson)
THE PRESIDENT
As is not unusual for me, Obama has lately been including things in speeches within 24 hours from when I put them forward. Huffington Post is back to not printing my comments from time to time but then something in the same comment shows up coming from someone on TV such as Bill Maher or the president within 24 hours, which says to me that they are guarding against the liability that would have resulted from my being able to point at it. Yes, I am aware that sometimes people do naturally have the same idea at the same time, especially if it's a likely and relevant surmisal. No, my experience and intelligence tells me this ain't that.
BABY OIL
On January 4th, I found on my desk an article of mail from Johnson & Johnson that was postmarked December 30th. Mail from Johnson & Johnson in my area is akin to the idea of a big bright red envelope amidst nothing but grey envelopes - it sticks out, a lot. The article of mail was meant for someone named "Jill Uhle" (pronounced "Yule", as in Christmas, as in Underpants Bomber), however, they had put "Jill Bacon" as her last name. The media-grabbing death of the Johnson & Johnson heiress occurred between December 30th and January 4th, i.e., between when the article of mail was posted and when it was received.
TERRORISM?
In my blog of 9.13.09, I refer to this how-could-they-have-known postmarking as something that happened in relation to a 911 clue I received. In my experience, which is not anything you're likely to find in the experience of most other people, this is potential reason for concern.
Perhaps: Obama, following what I described in my 9.13.09 blog, wanted to see my reaction to receiving an apparently similar clue - he could have used his authority to gain the December 30th postmark illegitimately after-the-fact. "Let's test him" might just be the kind of phrase they say from time to time out there where the president sits. Or: perhaps some sickos in organized crime wanted to kill a super rich woman (and by so doing intimidate other rich people) while threading my desk into it, through also copying an MO (modus operandi) I had described. Or: perhaps terrorists are doing something, suggested by the Yule/911 MO references? Can one totally ignore that possibility, after all that one has experienced from one being secretly super-important?
If so, what would Bacon, the last name they chose to use, mean here? Six degrees of Kevin Bacon? There is only one thing in the lexicon of all things Steinhoff (a lexicon that has frequently come into these matters, leading to the assumption of a database somewhere) that Bacon brings to mind: the famous artist, Francis Bacon, was very much in connection with Hugh Davies, the brother of a good friend of mine was I was growing up in Princeton, New Jersey, Phil. Hugh was practically his agent, did a book about him, did art shows starring him. As things first began happening between The Beatles and myself around when I first met Hugh's brother, Phil, in 1966 when I was ten, and as Phil's family is English, I have subsequently conjectured that there is a possibility of a connection to be made, that I have been led to think this in view of Phil's English background. There also exists a connection, from an earlier day, between Paul McCartney and Francis Bacon.
A few years ago, I sent something to Hugh to pass along to his brother Phil, which included a reference to the Beatles song, "Paperback Writer". Two days later McCartney discussed "Paperback Writer" with an interviewer. This is not the song that normally comes up every time McCartney does an interview.
Also Princeton-related is the fact that Johnson & Johnson's headquarters was in Princeton, as was conspicuous to those of us who lived there - one would periodically drive by their enormous, fenced off grounds, upon which one saw the giant "Johnson & Johnson" sign on the lawn, on Rosedale (which always brings to mind the Cream song, only not in this instance).
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Beyond Say-ing
Can anyone who knows how secretly important I am seriously ignore the possibility that Kenya West's (subsequently super-soundbited) debating of who should have won an MTV Music Awards was apropos of my blog earlier that day (my previous blog, Sept. 13th)? Wherein I specifically referred to the ending of my "Teddy Tinyfingers" sketch idea, the part where the concept of winning is the focus? Where I refer to how this winning reference at the end of my sketch idea was several days later picked up by President Obama his first week in office, "giving the media their soundbite" (quoted from my blog of Sept. 13th)?
Bravo, Kanye, for giving the media their soundbite (which I believe subtly serves to embarrass the Republicans for not even beginning to accept Obama as the a legitimate victor of the last election). And bravo, the strange magic by which President Obama became part of it - presumably by being "inadvertently" quoted off the record as referring to Kenya as a "jackass". Some of us adults have learned that certain things that supposedly happen "inadvertently" may or may not actually be all that incredibly inadvertent.
A September 6th article about Lennon for the most part focused on John Lennon's ongoing professional relationship with a reporter who crafted articles about him over the years. This was one of the first times that I can remember, in the entire history of The Beatles (I've followed them a bit), in which anyone has really put the focus on Lennon in relation to a reporter (not counting Lennon discussing the interview that contained his controversial statement that The Beatles were super-popular; or the interview style of the song, "With A Little Help From My Friends"; or the Village Voice columnist Howard Smith - for whom I worked in 1974 - and Lennon publicizing their friendship, Howard being Lennon's guide when he and Yoko moved to NYC in 1972). I actually felt baited (I held my tongue at the time) by this September 6th article, to tie it in with my July 5th blogged comments about Paul McCartney working things out with reporters:
It is additionally relevant here to make mention that is has become my surmisal that there are certain articles about McCartney wherein he has played a major part in the putting together of the article, beyond just being the reporter's subject: this includes exact release time of the article, insertion of certain key elements without it being left to chance as to whether the reporter would prefer that such elements be included, article titles, etc. I'm sure no one sees anything intrinsically wrong with a person of his stature taking steps to avoid being left wide open to everyone to whom he grants an interview.
I believe it could have happened with Obama's interview in which he was quoted "inadvertently" in relation to Kenya.
I also would add that, earlier in the day of Obama's recent speech before Congress, I emailed someone at work about the approaching room reservation "season". Obama likewise transplanted the word "season" that day, in his speech. I know neither of us are the first to transplant this word, but I note that this happened on the same day. I pre-anticipated the possibility of Obama incorporating my words into this speech, as he has done before. I also pre-anticipated that there would be something big at the MTV award show tying in with me, as this is something I have observed regarding their award shows many times before. Allow me also to draw your attention to the fact that one of my two dozen co-workers remains friends with Obama, having lived down the street from him in Chicago a certain number of years back.
Exactly how could my previous blog have contained something that would lead to a possible indirect involvement by the President of the United States? Re-read it. One word atta time. At a single bound.
Bravo, Kanye, for giving the media their soundbite (which I believe subtly serves to embarrass the Republicans for not even beginning to accept Obama as the a legitimate victor of the last election). And bravo, the strange magic by which President Obama became part of it - presumably by being "inadvertently" quoted off the record as referring to Kenya as a "jackass". Some of us adults have learned that certain things that supposedly happen "inadvertently" may or may not actually be all that incredibly inadvertent.
A September 6th article about Lennon for the most part focused on John Lennon's ongoing professional relationship with a reporter who crafted articles about him over the years. This was one of the first times that I can remember, in the entire history of The Beatles (I've followed them a bit), in which anyone has really put the focus on Lennon in relation to a reporter (not counting Lennon discussing the interview that contained his controversial statement that The Beatles were super-popular; or the interview style of the song, "With A Little Help From My Friends"; or the Village Voice columnist Howard Smith - for whom I worked in 1974 - and Lennon publicizing their friendship, Howard being Lennon's guide when he and Yoko moved to NYC in 1972). I actually felt baited (I held my tongue at the time) by this September 6th article, to tie it in with my July 5th blogged comments about Paul McCartney working things out with reporters:
It is additionally relevant here to make mention that is has become my surmisal that there are certain articles about McCartney wherein he has played a major part in the putting together of the article, beyond just being the reporter's subject: this includes exact release time of the article, insertion of certain key elements without it being left to chance as to whether the reporter would prefer that such elements be included, article titles, etc. I'm sure no one sees anything intrinsically wrong with a person of his stature taking steps to avoid being left wide open to everyone to whom he grants an interview.
I believe it could have happened with Obama's interview in which he was quoted "inadvertently" in relation to Kenya.
I also would add that, earlier in the day of Obama's recent speech before Congress, I emailed someone at work about the approaching room reservation "season". Obama likewise transplanted the word "season" that day, in his speech. I know neither of us are the first to transplant this word, but I note that this happened on the same day. I pre-anticipated the possibility of Obama incorporating my words into this speech, as he has done before. I also pre-anticipated that there would be something big at the MTV award show tying in with me, as this is something I have observed regarding their award shows many times before. Allow me also to draw your attention to the fact that one of my two dozen co-workers remains friends with Obama, having lived down the street from him in Chicago a certain number of years back.
Exactly how could my previous blog have contained something that would lead to a possible indirect involvement by the President of the United States? Re-read it. One word atta time. At a single bound.
Monday, March 23, 2009
I Read The Clues Today
When I saw the following bit on the March 16th Daily Show I immediately thought of Mind Helmets:
While I was attending my last two years of high school in New York City from 1971 to 1973 at a small school called Elisabeth Irwin High School, I wrote something for a creative writing assignment. It was a make-believe newspaper editorial, addressing a future world where superstition/paganism had taken over. In this world, technology was as sophisticated as could be imagined, but most people called it magic. The editorial defended the unpopular idea that, though some called it magic, those new things everyone was talking about, Mind Helmets, might actually be a product of science.
Over time I have accumulated good reason to believe that, contrary to the official version of how it came about, this story of mine had a lot to do with the creation of “Mind Games,” the title song of the John Lennon album that followed “Imagine”. Both this story and “Steinhoff’s Monster”, a 16mm film I started on at CalArts in 1973. There were people at my very small (25 boys, 25 girls in my grade) high school who would go to Lennon's secret Bank Street home after school, having met Lennon through a mutual friend of Lennon's, David Peel (in 1974 I would work for Howard Smith, the person who introduced Lennon to Peel). I was actually told that this story of mine would appear in the 1973 school yearbook, though it was pulled at the last minute.
Two things happened during the afternoon of March 16th prior to the Daily Show videoclip included here:
What might have been prevented, what can still be prevented, what exactly is at stake, I feel very much in the dark here. What is it that someone wants us to see, what guilt would they wish to assign, that may be more apparent. Oh, if only I hadn't printed the words, "Zig Ski". And oh, do no such thing again. Perhaps this is like some poker game, where a player would seek to bluff us into believing that "Zig Ski" is/remains a great clue, when it is in fact an easy opportunity to mislead. The driver of the "Zig Ski" car may have innocently done nothing more than drive from Point A to Point B on cue, expecting he was enroute to seeing the Martians land or Ringo Starr dancing the cha-cha-cha. But who cued him? Can it lead back to a more genuine clue?
Could this be an effort to guilt Spielberg for the death of Richardson, because I had to divulge the clue in a blog instead of being able to provide it directly to someone who would follow-up? Someone who would follow-up, because they would accept that I am secretly important and would thusly be more likely to receive such a clue "on my doorstep"? Could dumping guilt on people like Spielberg and McCartney be the kind of thing an enemy of the Western world would endeavor to accomplish, with me as their pawn? As for me, I recognize how complex issues might surround matters of this kind in ways beyond that which I presently know of, thus justifying a decision by Spielberg and McCartney to avoid publicizing my importance. As I lead a far more reclusive existence than most, it could seem to people like Spielberg and McCartney that I am far more vulnerable.
I do not let the kind of sick people who would kill Princess Diana and Natasha Richardson direct my mind in how to look at these things. I read the news today, but I did not see the same thing as everyone else in so doing.
And finally, I've written another sketch comedy idea, "Timeout", available at archive.org. I hope you see something good in it.
While I was attending my last two years of high school in New York City from 1971 to 1973 at a small school called Elisabeth Irwin High School, I wrote something for a creative writing assignment. It was a make-believe newspaper editorial, addressing a future world where superstition/paganism had taken over. In this world, technology was as sophisticated as could be imagined, but most people called it magic. The editorial defended the unpopular idea that, though some called it magic, those new things everyone was talking about, Mind Helmets, might actually be a product of science.
Over time I have accumulated good reason to believe that, contrary to the official version of how it came about, this story of mine had a lot to do with the creation of “Mind Games,” the title song of the John Lennon album that followed “Imagine”. Both this story and “Steinhoff’s Monster”, a 16mm film I started on at CalArts in 1973. There were people at my very small (25 boys, 25 girls in my grade) high school who would go to Lennon's secret Bank Street home after school, having met Lennon through a mutual friend of Lennon's, David Peel (in 1974 I would work for Howard Smith, the person who introduced Lennon to Peel). I was actually told that this story of mine would appear in the 1973 school yearbook, though it was pulled at the last minute.
Two things happened during the afternoon of March 16th prior to the Daily Show videoclip included here:
- I received an emailed Facebook communication from someone I hadn’t heard from since the early ‘70s, a person I knew at Elisabeth Irwin
- The Mind of Natasha Richardson, whose husband, Liam Neeson, is working with Steven Spielberg on a movie about Lincoln, was damaged, presumably because she skied without a Helmet.
What might have been prevented, what can still be prevented, what exactly is at stake, I feel very much in the dark here. What is it that someone wants us to see, what guilt would they wish to assign, that may be more apparent. Oh, if only I hadn't printed the words, "Zig Ski". And oh, do no such thing again. Perhaps this is like some poker game, where a player would seek to bluff us into believing that "Zig Ski" is/remains a great clue, when it is in fact an easy opportunity to mislead. The driver of the "Zig Ski" car may have innocently done nothing more than drive from Point A to Point B on cue, expecting he was enroute to seeing the Martians land or Ringo Starr dancing the cha-cha-cha. But who cued him? Can it lead back to a more genuine clue?
Could this be an effort to guilt Spielberg for the death of Richardson, because I had to divulge the clue in a blog instead of being able to provide it directly to someone who would follow-up? Someone who would follow-up, because they would accept that I am secretly important and would thusly be more likely to receive such a clue "on my doorstep"? Could dumping guilt on people like Spielberg and McCartney be the kind of thing an enemy of the Western world would endeavor to accomplish, with me as their pawn? As for me, I recognize how complex issues might surround matters of this kind in ways beyond that which I presently know of, thus justifying a decision by Spielberg and McCartney to avoid publicizing my importance. As I lead a far more reclusive existence than most, it could seem to people like Spielberg and McCartney that I am far more vulnerable.
I do not let the kind of sick people who would kill Princess Diana and Natasha Richardson direct my mind in how to look at these things. I read the news today, but I did not see the same thing as everyone else in so doing.
And finally, I've written another sketch comedy idea, "Timeout", available at archive.org. I hope you see something good in it.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
How McCartney Can Solve The Whole iTunes Puzzle
We all know the story of King Solomon and how two women each claimed a baby to be theirs. How King Solomon, to determine the identity of the true mother, said he would therefore cut the baby in two and give each woman half. How this was intended to provoke the true mother to change her story and deny that the baby was hers. How this would reveal the true mother, who would be willing to give her baby to the other woman, if this was the only way to keep her baby from being cut in half.
This does not perfectly correlate to my solution to a problem currently faced by Paul McCartney regarding Beatles songs and iTunes, nevertheless, follow me, or Paul McCartney, follow me.
If Beatles songs become available on iTunes in the normal manner, what will happen to the artistic wholeness of Beatles albums? The songs on Beatle albums are not just packaged together as so much Beatles product; and Beatles albums are not merely artifacts of ways in which the songs were once packaged. They are artistic creations.
To strengthen the glue that holds these songs together as parts of specific Beatles albums, after the songs have been released into an iTunes song - at - a - time world, it may require more than a money incentive approach, a cheaper - by - the - dozen/ cheaper - if - you - get- all - of - the - songs - on - a - particular - Beatles - album approach.
I have an unusual plan for eliciting appropriate respect among the masses for the artistic wholeness that the Beatles albums possess. I do not know if Paul McCartney or iTunes are ready for my idea - in fact, I'm sure there are those for whom even the King Solomon story is considered profane (try pitching a movie where a major moment involves the idea of sawing a baby in half).
Sell Beatle songs on iTunes by the half-song. Each half-song would cost half as much as the whole song. From this there would emerge an ethic, a mentality of "You only bought half of that Beatles song???!!! What a ___ you are!" Song samples are one thing, where you know you aren't legitimately experiencing the entire work, but the idea of Beatles half-songs will touch so deep a nerve, provoke so extreme a reaction from those who respect the artistic wholeness of the entire Beatles song, that this disposition would emerge as a basic ethic. People would inwardly rejoice when they learn that, despite the option of purchasing half-songs, invariably the same number of both halves (i.e., whole songs) would be purchased (this is my prediction, as is the idea that this statistic would receive much attention).
I believe this new, basic ethic would have a ripple effect, reinforcing the glue holding together the sense that these songs are parts of whole Beatles albums. It could even become the foundation of a more widespread respect for artistic autonomy.
This does not perfectly correlate to my solution to a problem currently faced by Paul McCartney regarding Beatles songs and iTunes, nevertheless, follow me, or Paul McCartney, follow me.
If Beatles songs become available on iTunes in the normal manner, what will happen to the artistic wholeness of Beatles albums? The songs on Beatle albums are not just packaged together as so much Beatles product; and Beatles albums are not merely artifacts of ways in which the songs were once packaged. They are artistic creations.
To strengthen the glue that holds these songs together as parts of specific Beatles albums, after the songs have been released into an iTunes song - at - a - time world, it may require more than a money incentive approach, a cheaper - by - the - dozen/ cheaper - if - you - get- all - of - the - songs - on - a - particular - Beatles - album approach.
I have an unusual plan for eliciting appropriate respect among the masses for the artistic wholeness that the Beatles albums possess. I do not know if Paul McCartney or iTunes are ready for my idea - in fact, I'm sure there are those for whom even the King Solomon story is considered profane (try pitching a movie where a major moment involves the idea of sawing a baby in half).
Sell Beatle songs on iTunes by the half-song. Each half-song would cost half as much as the whole song. From this there would emerge an ethic, a mentality of "You only bought half of that Beatles song???!!! What a ___ you are!" Song samples are one thing, where you know you aren't legitimately experiencing the entire work, but the idea of Beatles half-songs will touch so deep a nerve, provoke so extreme a reaction from those who respect the artistic wholeness of the entire Beatles song, that this disposition would emerge as a basic ethic. People would inwardly rejoice when they learn that, despite the option of purchasing half-songs, invariably the same number of both halves (i.e., whole songs) would be purchased (this is my prediction, as is the idea that this statistic would receive much attention).
I believe this new, basic ethic would have a ripple effect, reinforcing the glue holding together the sense that these songs are parts of whole Beatles albums. It could even become the foundation of a more widespread respect for artistic autonomy.
Saturday, November 22, 2008
The Fireman Theory, or Cheerio
In the past few weeks there has been quite a set of things hurling me into the center of it all sort of kind of, not one of which do I care to discuss at this time, and so on to other matters.
Sir Paul McCartney has an unknown (Whatever that word means: if 500 people know something that no one else knows are they outnumbered, thereby not knowing? Or if 501 people disagree, believing that the thing cannot actually be said to be known, do they win?) history of doing things of secret significance when it comes to me. The absurd/crazy sound of that has played no small part in maintaining the unknown-ness of these actions.
For me to continue from my McCartney premise, it would therefore seem that I must throw the pupils in my Beginners class to the side of the road. I will then ask the people in my Intermediate class to keep them company, patch up their bruises (we were traveling at about 40 mph when we threw the Beginners class to the side of the road, so I expect there to be some bruises, not to mention screams of "Lunatic!" that I would rather not hear. Have you Intermediates any gags on you?). And so on this one I can only proceed with my Advanced class.
Now this is just a theory, based on tendencies and facts:
When I did the title song of my "The Gravity" CD in 2002 (not to be confused with my "Gravity" cassette from the late '80s, early '90s, different song, different stage of my musical development), and I made reference to the breakfast cereal Cheerios, ("I just want to go out into that world that I used to see on my box of Cheerios when I was young"), I knew something would be made of it by the Cheerios people. I did not include a reference to Cheerios for that reason, however, my experience informed me that there was an excellent chance it would get picked up on in some way by Cheerios. Sure enough, Cheerios shortly thereafter did a TV commercial of two trucks, one carrying Cheerios and the other carrying their new thing to combine with Cheerios. Now before the Beginners class insists there is nothing contained in this fact (I know you Beginners are still there), I hasten to describe how I had once created a thing where there was a lobster truck and a spilled truck with butter. I was sure to see in the Cheerios commercial an idea I had used, and though others might have independently come up with the same idea, how is it that it was Cheerios, which I already expected to do something. In addition to this, Cheerios did another TV commercial where a little boy refers to his heart as making a "clerp" sound. Clerp is the name of one of the central characters in my "Gosk" videos. And let us not forget the scene (though we may try) in "Ready To Rumble", where a truck carrying toilet paper collides with a truck carrying filled port-o-johns. David Arquette, the star of "Ready To Rumble", is part of a group that includes a star of my "Gosk" video, Robbie, who at one point was also going to star Rosanna Arquette in his Anita O'Day movie (he ended up doing an Anita O'Day documentary instead, starring Anita O'Day). Robbie also once introduced me to David Arquette's assistant, Whitney. Paul McCartney, it has been well publicized, is a good friend of Rosanna Arquette (particularly publicized after his split from Heather Mills, in fact, Rosanna Arquette was one of the only names associated with McCartney in the media during that period). Those who accept these facts as known may or may not feel inclined to allow me to do a tad less hastening in my explanation, yet the rest, well, they like to make me hasten. I must hasten to add this, hasten to add that, not fair, really.
Paul McCartney's newest release is "Electric Arguments" by The Fireman (a two-man group, McCartney and Youth), due out in a day or two. Based on the above-referenced unknown history of Paul McCartney, I had to see if there was anything of mine to correlate with his new CD (one can hear it on MySpace, courtesy of McCartney, and view the cover all over the place). All that I could come up with was a correlation between his "The Fireman" CD cover and my "The Gravity" CD video cover (see images above). Now anyone in the world could win the argument that for two people to each draw a circle does not imply a relationship. An intelligent person would be required to defend that, depending on the specific context, such an implication certainly could exist. Even half-circles, even quarter circles, even a one-inch line. Context is everything.
When I think of the name, "The Fireman", I hear a few possible things, one of which is what I heard repeated throughout this week's "Life On Mars" TV episode: the cliche of what a kid (Youth?) wants to be when he grows up - a fireman. On "Life On Mars" the kid wanted to be an astronaut or a policeman, but it comes to the same thing. This is the week of the new Fireman release, and in that cliche of wanting to be a fireman, I also hear the line from my "The Gravity": "I just want to go out into that world that I used to see on my box of Cheerios when I was young". A child's perspective on the world and one's future place in the world.
So this is my theory of where McCartney might be pointing. And if he is, because I am only 78% certain, it isn't something my Beginners or even my Intermediates can accept. And if you lousy Beginners and Intermediates think I leave it to you to tell me my true role in the world, you'd better finish your Wheaties.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
"How To Endorse Obama If You Are Paul McCartney" Instruction Guide
In my previous blog I introduced an idea that may need no real introduction: that Paul McCartney should endorse Obama as an appropriate rechanneling of the optimism about the world generated by "The Beatles Movement" (Or was the term "Beatlemania"? I recall the adult establishment back then, via the media, found the term "Beatlemania" the acceptable way of framing things, as much for its non-authenticating of the seriousness of The Beatles as for any other reason). This time, a blog in which I will provide a "How To Endorse Obama If You Are Paul McCartney" Instruction Guide. A few related things first.
It is worth making note here of the fact that I was personally responsible the last time Paul McCartney made a (surprise) appearance on Saturday Night Live. Eight days before that "surprise" sketch about poison in which Paul McCartney appeared with Martin Short and Steve Martin, I emailed my Paul McCartney intermediary that Paul should do a comedy sketch based on my "Recipe For Fun". And so, an SNL sketch about poison featuring Paul McCartney was born. Without going into too many details about what prompted me to make that suggestion, I will say that it had something to do with a matter related to John Kerry (incidentally, it was Kerry who chose Obama to deliver the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, which was the moment credited with bringing Obama onto the national "stage").
When I made that suggestion to Paul McCartney, I seriously expected something to result, based on previous experience. In this case, however, I appreciate that I am not asking of Paul the same kind of thing, and I have never let my power to make suggestions that are given serious consideration turn me into a bossy "now stand on your head" kind of person. I do not even know if Paul McCartney knows how to stand on his head. There are innumerable photos of McCartney doing different things, yet I do not recall seeing even one in which he stands on his head. By the way, I do not believe asking him to endorse Obama is in any way like asking him to stand on his head. Yet perhaps I digress.
During last year's SNL TV season, as well as during the TV season the year before, every single Saturday Night Live included references to sketch ideas I had submitted for each show. I submitted my ideas to two very SNL-connected movie producers, who I had first met well before they were big producers, Sean Daniel and Stuart Cornfeld, and each idea found its way, in some miniscule form, to the show for which it was intended. The exception was the show for which I intended my sketch idea, "In Orders We Trust":
http://www.angelfire.com/blog2/jonathandsteinhoff/page15.html
I later found what I consider to be the explanation: someone later wrote a book based on that sketch idea of mine, then sold it to Stuart Cornfeld's company, Red Hour, for development as a TV show. My surmisal is that a few extra steps were taken to bury Red Hour's association with my idea, by not forwarding my idea to SNL. I also wonder if an inclination to bury this trail is responsible for their having ceased to open my emails (according to my email opening detection technology, they stopped reading my emails in May, although there are also ways to avoid detection with this particular technology).
The season premier of SNL on September 13, 2008 reinforces what is indicated by the email opening detection technology: they did not include in any form my sketch idea for a show for the first time in two years (not counting the exception I've noted here).
The comedy sketch idea I submitted for September 13th, entitled "Beaver And Wally, The Flying Invisible Time Travelers", can be read at:
http://www.archive.org/details/BeaverAndWallyTheFlyingInvisibleTimeTravelers
And so, now my idea for how Paul McCartney can go about making known his suport of Obama. Obama was initially going to appear on the September 13th season premier of SNL, however, he changed his mind because Hurricane Ike was going on, and so it was deemed inappropriate for him to make an appearance on SNL at this time. When he does appear on SNL, Paul McCartney can make a surprise appearance on the same show. He can play Ward Cleaver in my above-referenced sketch idea - the role would work because it is so opposite to how one sees Paul McCartney, unless one imagines that aging has transformed him into a calm, pipe-smoking, paternal figure (that reminds me of the time I provided him with something he used on the opening track on "Flaming Pie", but that's another story).
At the end of the show in which Paul and Barrack appear, as everyone who appeared that night stands together on the stage, Paul uses hand gestures we've seen him use before with perfect finesse: Paul pats Barrack on the back, smiles at the audience, and while pointing at Barrack, does a "thumbs up" and head nod. It will unmistakably communicate an endorsement; it will avoid doing so in a stiff, excessively self-important manner; it will be rebroadcast on news shows everywhere so it won't matter how many people stay up to watch the last moment of the show. The coolness of the manner of endorsement will electrify it. The only thing wrong with the idea is that it could be traced back to this blog. Well, that's life when you're trying to save the world.
It is worth making note here of the fact that I was personally responsible the last time Paul McCartney made a (surprise) appearance on Saturday Night Live. Eight days before that "surprise" sketch about poison in which Paul McCartney appeared with Martin Short and Steve Martin, I emailed my Paul McCartney intermediary that Paul should do a comedy sketch based on my "Recipe For Fun". And so, an SNL sketch about poison featuring Paul McCartney was born. Without going into too many details about what prompted me to make that suggestion, I will say that it had something to do with a matter related to John Kerry (incidentally, it was Kerry who chose Obama to deliver the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, which was the moment credited with bringing Obama onto the national "stage").
When I made that suggestion to Paul McCartney, I seriously expected something to result, based on previous experience. In this case, however, I appreciate that I am not asking of Paul the same kind of thing, and I have never let my power to make suggestions that are given serious consideration turn me into a bossy "now stand on your head" kind of person. I do not even know if Paul McCartney knows how to stand on his head. There are innumerable photos of McCartney doing different things, yet I do not recall seeing even one in which he stands on his head. By the way, I do not believe asking him to endorse Obama is in any way like asking him to stand on his head. Yet perhaps I digress.
During last year's SNL TV season, as well as during the TV season the year before, every single Saturday Night Live included references to sketch ideas I had submitted for each show. I submitted my ideas to two very SNL-connected movie producers, who I had first met well before they were big producers, Sean Daniel and Stuart Cornfeld, and each idea found its way, in some miniscule form, to the show for which it was intended. The exception was the show for which I intended my sketch idea, "In Orders We Trust":
http://www.angelfire.com/blog2/jonathandsteinhoff/page15.html
I later found what I consider to be the explanation: someone later wrote a book based on that sketch idea of mine, then sold it to Stuart Cornfeld's company, Red Hour, for development as a TV show. My surmisal is that a few extra steps were taken to bury Red Hour's association with my idea, by not forwarding my idea to SNL. I also wonder if an inclination to bury this trail is responsible for their having ceased to open my emails (according to my email opening detection technology, they stopped reading my emails in May, although there are also ways to avoid detection with this particular technology).
The season premier of SNL on September 13, 2008 reinforces what is indicated by the email opening detection technology: they did not include in any form my sketch idea for a show for the first time in two years (not counting the exception I've noted here).
The comedy sketch idea I submitted for September 13th, entitled "Beaver And Wally, The Flying Invisible Time Travelers", can be read at:
http://www.archive.org/details/BeaverAndWallyTheFlyingInvisibleTimeTravelers
And so, now my idea for how Paul McCartney can go about making known his suport of Obama. Obama was initially going to appear on the September 13th season premier of SNL, however, he changed his mind because Hurricane Ike was going on, and so it was deemed inappropriate for him to make an appearance on SNL at this time. When he does appear on SNL, Paul McCartney can make a surprise appearance on the same show. He can play Ward Cleaver in my above-referenced sketch idea - the role would work because it is so opposite to how one sees Paul McCartney, unless one imagines that aging has transformed him into a calm, pipe-smoking, paternal figure (that reminds me of the time I provided him with something he used on the opening track on "Flaming Pie", but that's another story).
At the end of the show in which Paul and Barrack appear, as everyone who appeared that night stands together on the stage, Paul uses hand gestures we've seen him use before with perfect finesse: Paul pats Barrack on the back, smiles at the audience, and while pointing at Barrack, does a "thumbs up" and head nod. It will unmistakably communicate an endorsement; it will avoid doing so in a stiff, excessively self-important manner; it will be rebroadcast on news shows everywhere so it won't matter how many people stay up to watch the last moment of the show. The coolness of the manner of endorsement will electrify it. The only thing wrong with the idea is that it could be traced back to this blog. Well, that's life when you're trying to save the world.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
