Motley Blog

I tried to post a claim on Wikipedia for inventing the Rave. It survived an initial challenge but would later be pulled down. The producing group operated under the name 'Deviant DoubleSpeak', aka the Doctors of Dental Science, DDS. Several events were attempted, only one was funded, 'SpringFire, a Bachnalian Firefest'. The general idea was 'participatory entertainment' with volunteer 'actors' mingling with the crowd with a very loose impromptu oriented 'script'.

Raves are implicitly associated with the drug Ectasy. This event didn't have that connection, however it was within a year or two of when it first started showing up on that Campus, likely one of the first. I think the claim to being the first Rave has some relevance as part of a tradition of partying that includes the Grateful Dead and Warhol type loft events. I actually have never tried that particular drug, a minor regret.

The best evidence of this connection likely comes from an even more memorable event a year later closely following the themes of this one, organized by a participant.

View image

FWIW, I don't think this was the proposal that was funded. I do believe this group did an event themselves, a bit more arts oriented, in the same theme. Very well done.

BTW, Phil and I would probably make a pretty good director/producer team, should anyone have the backing.

Frankly, I have to admit the bullying campaign tactics of Proposition 1 and their ilk have me peeved. This piece is a bit of a rant, and perhaps a pointed gloat at the results from yesterday's election.

Let's start with an example of the type of garbage the Proposition 1 supporters put out - an editorial by Lance Dickie of the Seattle Times.

There are lots and lots of folks who care about transportation who don't like this plan. Dickie evidences what appears to be the final PR strategy of attacking the good citizens of this area who recognize a fatally flawed project when they see one. Calling honest, hard working, folks, no matter what age 'complainers' or 'delusional' is insulting and self-destructive.

There is a reason the project was fatally flawed - it has to do with fatal flaws in the administration of the project. Some folks might blame staff, some the politicians. They certainly have some responsibility - but the lion's share belongs to those who manipulate them - their legal counsel.

That said some recent words I disagree with, but still found worthwhile. The Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Leonard Pitts recently wrote a wordsmith's lingo-centric column on the subject of Political Correctness.

To me political correctness is about actions, not language. But Mr. Pitt's words still shed light on the subject - and are therefore valuable.

Evangelicals may tell you that God is Truth. Let me suggest a contrarian perspective - that it is in fact truth which is god. Words are not reality - they are a way for our species to have conversations about what is real. Those conversations are 'truthful' only if they benefit of the participants - even if it is just one individual talking to him, or her, self.

Truth is found in the living of individual life and the relationships we build. Capitalism and Democracy are useful tools of merging this motley mess into a productive, and respectful, whole.

Anyone who tells tries to tell you otherwise - that there are shortcuts - is dangerous, creepy, and a troublemaker.

Family law is a subject that makes the press regularly these days - it may be gay marriage, domestic violence, or even tax policy. Here, I will argue that perhaps the 'law' does not belong in family situations at all.

I'll illustrate this position by going a bit to the extreme - the answer, which I don't have - is somewhere in the middle. The only thing I will claim is that the current system is broken and to have a sense of the direction in which we should head. Even that direction is subject to debate - something I would consider a success I was to spark such here.

The law as it applies to families is broken. Law makes more problems than it solves in this arena. One could make the case that this is intentional. I will not do that here, but will note that the same question could also be asked in felony arenas as well. Certainly though there have been cases where misapplied family law has actually sparked felonies. These are tragedies to prevent, not merely falling back on a procedure by which the legal system can claim to avoid responsibility.

I believe that the debate over gay marriange and/or civil unions shows us the way to the solution. Marriage is not a matter for the State and the Law to regulate - it is a matter of religious preference and Churches should have the 'authority' over this societal institution.

Religion is a matter of choice - that choice might be a very traditional Catholic, Jewish, or Native American institution. The church choice though could also be something innovative - fo example, a gay embracing offshoot of an established religion, or even something born anew - say the 'Church of Spouse Swappers' - if that was what 'you' wanted.

There are some issues which should be guaranteed by the State - dissolution from a documented abusive relationship would be one, support for a non-working spouse should be another. The rights of 'civil unions' as negotiated by gay activists are probably pretty close to what heterosexual couples deserve as well. No more, no less.

The issue of children in marriage is another area of State involvement - perhaps no more so neglected than in the area of tax policy, even in homosexual discussions. It is my opinion that there are some tax benefits accruing to couples which are, in part, justified on the assumption that Children are present. I would argue that we should be taxing marrieds, without children, at a higher rate and married, with children, at a lower rate. I'm also dubious about assigning retirement benefits to a non-working spouse when there are no children present in the relationship at that particular time. This, if you will, is a functionally 'progressive' tax position.

The resolution of problem marriages should then fall to the 'authority' of each church - forget restraining orders and the like, but do give the Churches some powers in this area - especially in the area of creating a record of evidence documenting a deteriorating relationship.

I'd also go so far as to give the Churches authority to be insurance providers - divorce insurance would be one product, but I see no reason why Churches couldn't be providers of just about any form of the product. The resulting rates,and actuarial tables, cross tabulated by religion, would be a piece of societally relevant 'economic' information.

Lastly, one potential problem - that of a couple who choose to marry but are of different 'traditional' faiths. That too is a matter for the law, allowing those individuals choices in how to handle the situation - say allowing one spouse to accept the marriage standards of another religion without joining it, per se.

I think the best answer to that potential problem is the idea of pre-nuptial agreements. Church marriages could be considered a standard 'pre-nuptial' aggreement concerning the marriage. Individuals would have the opportunity of drafting their own agreements, including modifications of Church practices, if acceptable to that Church.

Does the law belong in the 'regulation' of drugs in society?

Anthropologists have studied the question of drug use in a wide variety of societies, including those that utilize psychedelics. The generally accepted wisdom, correct me if I'm wrong or out of date, is that societies who have older individuals as mentors for younger users are generally healthy and avoid many of the problems of drug abuse. The role of the native 'medicine man' is perhaps the easiest way to understand this position, at least from my lay perspective.

Certainly drug use can be a contributing factor in crime. Here in Pierce County the current stereotypical problem is the unemployable meth addict looking for income to support drug use in the mix of his or her life's priorities. Not so long ago, and still with us to some extent, would be the similar, but manifestly different, heroin junkie.

The biggest societal problem in this regard though is alcohol and violent crime. In history the provision of alcohol as a reward to fighting troops provided a benefit to the commander - a more aggressive fighter, once the hangover wore off. (not a bad timing factor in the conduct of battle either) The history of marijuana use during the Vietnam era in this regard probably merits continuing historical review (marijuana probably lowers the fighting ability of soldiers).

The trend towards medical marijuana, including in California, federal efforts opposing not withstanding is, I believe, the way to go. And not just for marijuana, but for every drug, including alcohol. Our society has 'medicine men' - they are called medical doctors and they have extensive scientifically founded training as well as strong requirements for social capability manifested as 'bedside manner'.

My thought is that alcohol purchases should be regulated - via the medical profession. The 'administrative' way to do this is something that we should be doing regardless of medical oversight. If you look at the back of your Washington State driver's license it has a barcode. It is merely a minor software problem to require the scanning of this barcode with any alcohol purchase. The benefit of preventing sales to minors alone would justify this wise implementation of technology.

Privacy protections on this information should be high - standards in this age that need review - especially in light of current abuses, including within the legal profession itself. Judgement in the use of this information should also be high. Laws should not be so strict that a person is prevented from hosting a private party without being called an alcoholic. There is nothing wrong with a determined person being able to find small workarounds as a price of protecting liberty for us all. Those workarounds though will require a social network, and those sorts of networks will develop their other problems as well - another case for a law enforcement professional with good judgement.

The availability of alcohol purchase records will also be a useful tool for the law enforcement investigator in the course of sorting through persons of interest and conflicting statements.

I'd argue that all products with psychological effects be regulated to some extent - including stimulants such as caffeine and relaxants. I'm not going to say those products require a bar code scan or age restrictions but their management in that context is definitely appropriate.

I do think psychedelics should be medically regulated products as well, but their use should be among the most difficult.

In my opinion one of the ways to understand a drug is how often you can use it before problems start to appear. Alcohol can be used relatively frequently by some without major problems, even daily in smaller doses. ( I would argue though that this is medically undesirable.) 1-2 cups of Coffee a day is nothing to be concerned about at all, though that too might have minor medical disadvantages. 'Desirable' alcohol use is probably in the area of 3-4 total drinks per week.

Marijuana on a daily, or even weekly, basis does become a dangerous drug. Airplane pilots are regulated on the use of alcohol for a nearly a day prior to flight, as I recall. I would argue those same time frame constraints be placed on anyone in a position of responsibility. In the case of marijuana a time frame from use to work, such as with a truck driver, should be on the order of a week. (that's a lay guess, not scientific or medical judgement) I'd also guess that desirable use of Marijuana is on the order of once a month or so, though it would probably be okay if that was an annual average whereby use was concentrated during a summer vacation or the like.

Psychedelics should most likely be used the most infrequently - as a guesstimate I'd say once a year, maybe twice. Higher frequency use might be okay, but again in the context of annual use as an average, with these drugs though that should be spread out over the course of a lifetime.

Although the emergence of universal insurance may make this moot, it still merits mention as a part of the current conversation on insurance. Making medical insurance a requirement for any drug 'use', including alcohol, would do much to encourage the purchase of that product among groups that are both higher medical risk and less likely to act prudently. The resulting actuarial tables should be a core part of the drug discussion, as well as violent and property crime statistics resulting from relatively more accurate data. FWIW I'd bet there are a fair amount of problem alcohol users trying to scapegoat the marijuana users for some of there own 'problems'.

Lastly, a personal observation. If I am so lucky to die in bed, doing so being stoned during my last days might well not be a bad way to go. Call that a living will, if you wish.

If my calendar is correct the UW Regents will be in Tacoma tomorrow.

FYI, as the evidence and their own law indicates, these folks are legally and morally bankrupt, though, unfortunately, not financially so.

No details today, but, FWIW, all I have to is show up tomorrow and and not say a word and your entire credibility will be destroyed as well as that of your associates. That includes your son, Mr. Gates.

Of course it had already happened 15 years ago - even before I attended a meeting of yours quietly, hanging out with David Brewster.

Again, per your law and your actions, just how do you pay back for 15 years of good living when everything should have been taken from you then and you have nothing now, nor will you ever again?

How about you show some responsibility for once and dedicate your genetically defective bodies to science? That would do it for me.

I do realize that you have supporters, and certainly I'll listen to any of them with credibility, but do be aware that anyone who identifies support for you also runs the risk of being accused of conspiracy.

You are, not by my actions but your own, Scum. Scum multiple orders of magnitude worse than a recently released sexual predator. I'll give you one notch over Hitler, at least to date.

If you wish, you can probably kill me to defend yourself. As Clint Eastwood might say to a younger, less dangerous, punk, MAKE MY DAY.

On the occasion of the Dalai Lama's visit to Seattle let met tell my two tibetan stories. I'm not very religious at all, though I do have some sense of faith - call me, if you will, 20% Budhist, 10% Catholic, 10% Protestant and who knows about the rest.

I had the opportunity to visit one of the last pockets of unblemished Tibetan culture - pockets of which exist in northern Nepal, near the Chinese border. I was 18, less than a year out of High School and it was definitely a formative experience. I did the Annapurna Circuit, half of which had only opened to foreigners the previous year. It's a 3 week hike around the Annapurna Massif, best examples of Tibetan villages are Manang and Pisang. That valley is awesome The floor at the lower end is ten thousand feet up and the ridge above is another 15, all in all probably 30 miles or so long, leading to an 18,000 foot pass.

It would take a feature length movie to give the experience it's full due. One interesting story - Tibetan rebels had operated out of the area with CIA funding. Nepal put a stop to it, and still keeps a small military presence in the area. I had the chance to spend an evening with the Commanding Officer in small Inn. He was probably checking me out, but it was well done. I don't remember his name, but he definitely had an influence on me with his stories.

Second story is about the Dalai Lama himself - I had the opportunity to see him in Eugene in the days before that Nepal trip. It was a date with one of my best relationships ever (in hindsight, sigh) - the crowd was probably less than 50. I do remember making eye contact with him, a strange remembrance as one passes his image in the press and films. Perhaps the best of which is Heinrich Harrer's '7 years in Tibet'.

No great conclusions, save perhaps though I do respect the Chinese history they really should step up here and do the right thing.

In reflecting on comments regarding the Dalai Lama I realize I made an ommission about my religious influences - and a great little story.

I worked for a year as a legal messenger - S. King and Pierce County every day - plus legal service in SE Seattle, a large minority area. The biggest thing volume wise were these small claim suits over bounced parking checks. The biggest dollar wise was probably New Hope Baptist church.

New Hope had been burned a few years earlier and the suit was regarding the construction loan to rebuild, which they had defaulted on, or some such. The reverend, Robert Jeffries, is known as an activist type - taking on Nordstrom most notably. Though he might be a bit of a Jeremiah Wright type he also worked closely with the mostly white Church Council of Greater Seattle. I didn't know him well, but we had met, and I liked him.

In order to get ahold of people for the legal service I had to show up just prior to the Sunday Church service. So imagine, if you will, the white boy entering perhaps the most radical successful black church in Washington when the most faithful have already gathered. Key the church choir warming up and the church elders gathered at the Baptism pool. This is where I needed to wait, until that morning's baptisms were completed. The one face I remember was an early teen female getting the fear of god put into her followed by a quick dunk.

I don't know if that writing captures the experience, but it was certainly quite memorable.

**********

Curiously my earliest memory ever is of playing with black children at one of the first Head Start programs, I believe just as that program was getting started. Mom had been a social worker in L.A. County, getting promoted to supervisor just before getting pregnant with me. She volunteered for this Head Start program - perhaps with an eye to a job.

My memory is mixed - I do think there was some sort of an incident - nothing any more significant than any other non-racial playground incident. I remember that vaguely - the two strongest memories are more emotional ones - I remember stopping going and Mom's emotional state as we left. I was sad about leaving, even in spite of the incident. The overwhelming memor was one of curiosity - of having kids to play with that were very different from me and trying to figure out what it all meant.

My four week trip, in part exploring relocation, was coming to an end, a good one. From a slow simmer in SW Colorado, to the full heat of the Great Basin desert, to the cool green of Oregon it had been a western odyssey of personal significance. Capping things off with a traditional Fourth of July visit with Bro and his kids was great.

On that final day coming home, I came back through Tillamook, crossing over to Longview, via the Wilson River and the Trumanesque/Harley Destination of Vernonia, outside of Portland.

I knew a girl from Tillamook once. She tells a story of a life after death experience, crashing into the Devils Fork of the Wilson River, returning from a High School trip to Portland. It was an event that meant a lot to her, and I think I knew her well enough to be able to plug into at least a small portion of that experience. Call it empathy, call it what you will, but it was certainly something.

My particular travels had never taken me down that particular stretch of road, but as a whitewater guy with several Oregon first descents to my credit it was a river definitely on my list. Like all of the Coast Range rivers the Wilson is a rainfall driven creature, and this was not the time to paddle. But I do think I was able indulge myself a bit healthily in making a guess as to the spot.

Not exactly Freudian, but heck, he was a crack head, at least later... I wonder what Mom's opinion would be... :-)

Eating Raoul

Directed by Paul Bartel

Written by Paul Bartel, with Richard Blackburn

1982

Imagine the Wine aficionado couple from the recent movie 'Sideways' (Paul Giamatti and Virginia Madsen) ten years later and you have the start of this movie.

Then put on your bell bottoms and other 'inspired' items from the 1970's, light up some Thai Stick and get ready to swing baby! Or, if you prefer, a glass of Pinot Noir or a Fume Blanc!

FWIW Giamatti and Madsen could probably put together a pretty mean Country Restaraunt, but I'd hope they treated the help better than Bartel and his screen wife.