Subscribe via RSS Feed

Author Page for Erik Loomis

rss feed

Visit Erik Loomis's Website

Breillat

[ 15 ] November 23, 2011 | Erik Loomis

I have always wanted to like Catherine Breillat’s films, but never have. I find her a cut-rate Eric Rohmer, trying and failing to equal Rohmer’s dialogue about sex and love and making up for it with shock value. People liked “Fat Girl” and most of it was pretty good but the ending was the kind of bullshit stunt she pulls way too often. Her other movies have see-sawed from incredibly boring (“Sex is Comedy”) to one of the most wretched, loathsome films I have ever seen (“Anatomy of Hell”). That said, I still occasionally sit down to watch one of her films with the hopes that her occasionally good dialogue will combine with her feminism and frank discussions of sex to create a truly good movie.

And last night that paid off when I watched her 2001 film “Brief Crossing,” which works very well. The story of a woman in her late 30s hooking up with a 16 year old boy on an overnight crossing from France to Britain has the potential for the typical Breillat disaster–making us feel uncomfortable instead of delivering us a solid film. But the dialogue works, the story works, the actors are good, and the twist at the end isn’t grotesque like the end of “Fat Girl,” but instead makes a lot of sense within the world of the character.

Paul Motian, RIP

[ 18 ] November 22, 2011 | Erik Loomis

The jazz world and the drumming world weeps tonight.

The French Studio System

[ 59 ] November 22, 2011 | Erik Loomis

Last night I watched “Mesrine”, the 4 hour film on the life of the notorious French gangster of the 60s and 70s, Jacques Mesrine. It was very good, but not great, suffering from some of the problems many bio-pic faces, primarily the need to stuff a lot of different incidents into the movie in order to follow the complexities of a real life. Being far, far better made than your standard Oscar-ready American studio bio-pic, it was still very enjoyable and a fine entry into the gangster film genre.

I have a question though that perhaps readers can help me answer. Like so many big-name French films, it had a huge number of the most prestigious actors in France–Vincent Cassel, Cecile de France, Ludivine Sagnier, Mathieu Amalric, Gerard Depardieu. What, no Juliette Binoche? Sadly, no proper role for a woman of her age or I’m sure she would have made an appearance too.

I’m curious about why most of the prestige films from France with international distribution tend to have the same actors in them. I know the French treat their best actors (and especially actresses) like deities, but is there something institutional about it? Does the French studio system choose a film or two a year and make sure all the A list names are in it?

This is as opposed to the U.S., where George Clooney might headline a film, but the rest of the actors are essentially character actors. The American equivalent would be to have Clooney, Streep, DeNiro, etc., in every American prestigious film. And then also essentially choosing which of the younger generation would be the next Streep. Because de France and Sagnier basically became the chosen next Deneuve and Binoche by the age of 24.

This Day in Labor History: November 22, 1909

[ 20 ] November 22, 2011 | Erik Loomis

On November 22, 1909, approximately 20,000 garment workers in New York City went on strike against the horrendous conditions of their sweatshops. This strike, known as the Uprising of the 20,000, was the largest strike led by women in American history to that time.

New York City was America’s immigrant center in the early twentieth century, but work in the Big Apple was quite different than the big factories we usually identify with American industrialization and immigrant labor. Because land was so expensive in New York, large manufacturing firms set up shop outside of New York in order to create sprawling compounds that would hire thousands of workers. This meant that immigrants in the city tended to work behind the scenes, especially in small operations hidden in the dense urban jungle. Many women workers found jobs in the garment sweatshops. Much of this work was taken over by Jewish immigrant women, a group that quickly obtained a reputation for labor radicalism. In fact, while non-Anglo Saxon employers of the time tended to hire people of their own ethnicity, many Jewish sweatshop owners preferred Italian labor because they were less likely to complain about bad working conditions.

And bad conditions they were indeed. Workweeks started at 65 hours and could reach 75. The work was also not stable; if orders went down, workers could be laid off at any time. Depending on their job and experience, these women could earn anywhere from 3 to 10 dollars a week, which were poverty wages even at the higher level. About half of these women were less than 20 years old, as Jewish women tended to leave the workforce after they married. They were required to supply their own materials such as needles and they could have their pay docked for the slightest infraction. Factory owners tried to control their workers’ movements, including locking doors so they could not sneak outside for breaks and requiring permission to use the usually quite unsanitary bathroom.

Jewish immigrants had already established a strong activist community in New York and so it wasn’t that surprising that the summer and fall of 1909 saw several spontaneous strikes against the sweatshop owners. Among the firms whose workers walked out was the Triangle Shirtwaist Company, which workers accused of all the above indignities along with sexual harassment of the female work force by male supervisors. Of course, two years later, this very place would become infamous as the site of America’s most famous workplace tragedy.

These strikes struggled along for several weeks, suffering from police harassment, less than inspired leadership from the highers up at the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU), and harsh sentences from anti-labor judges when arrested. By late November, the strikes were falling apart. On November 22, Local 25 of the ILG held a meeting of all workers to call for a general strike against the shirtwaist makers for whom most of the workers toiled. At the meeting, New York Progressives and labor leaders, including American Federation of Labor president Samuel Gompers, urged caution. After listening to this for two hours, a sweatshop worker named Clara Lemlich stood up and spoke to the workers in Yiddish, saying “I am a working girl, one of those who are on strike against intolerable conditions. I am tired of listening to speakers who talk in general terms. What we are here to decide is whether we shall or shall not strike. I offer a resolution that a general strike be declared—now.” This is what the angry workers wanted to hear. They pledged to support the strike, which began the next day.

The strikers faced a tough road. Police repression rose. Over 700 women were arrested in the next month, of which 19 were sentenced to a workhouse. Clara Lemlich suffered six broken ribs through an act of police brutality and was arrested 17 times. A 10 year old girl was arrested and sentenced to the workforce for assaulting a scab. But despite this, or perhaps because of it, public opinion turned against the operators. 1909 was at the height of the Progressive Era and there were many middle and upper-class reformers who sympathized with the workers. Wealthy women began joining workers on the picket lines and bailing the arrested women out of jail. Among them were future Secretary of Labor Frances Perkins.

This bad press forced the sweatshop owners to negotiate with the workers. The workers wanted to hold the line at getting the union shop but after 11 weeks without work and with only tepid support for the ILGWU international, they were forced back to work with only minimal gains and without the union shop. Only about 1000 out of the 20,000 were still on the picket lines, succumbing to the greatest enemy of the strike–poverty. That said, the manufactures did agree to some real concessions that made the strike worthwhile, including a 52 hour work week, 4 paid holidays per year, the end of having to buy one’s own work materials, and a general agreement to negotiate pay rates with workers. They also agreed not to discriminate against union members, but this was totally unenforceable and many leaders were blacklisted. Local 25 exploded from 100 members to 10,000. On the other hand, conditions of work did not improve much at all, something that the nation would discover 2 years later at Triangle.

The ILGWU grew rapidly in the years after 1909. Although it took until the mid 1930s for the union to become a consistently powerful force in the industry, the Uprising of the 20,000 became central to its institutional memory, even in its early years. Garment workers remembered 1909 with great pride, producing songs like this:

The Uprising of the Twenty Thousand
Dedicated to the Waistmakers of 1909

In the black of the winter of nineteen nine,
When we froze and bled on the picket line,
We showed the world that women could fight
And we rose and won with women’s might.

Chorus:
Hail the waistmakers of nineteen nine,
Making their stand on the picket line,
Breaking the power of those who reign,
Pointing the way, smashing the chain.

And we gave new courage to the men
Who carried on in nineteen ten
And shoulder to shoulder we’ll win through,
Led by the I.L.G.W.U.

Clara Lemlich

Among the blacklisted workers was Clara Lemlich, who was a committed socialist before immigrating from Russia in 1903. She joined the Communist Party and spent the rest of her life organizing people, beginning with women’s suffrage and then moving onto consumer rights and tenant rights when she became a non-working mother. She opposed the execution of the Rosenbergs and her passport was revoked after a trip to the Soviet Union in 1951. At the end of her life, while in a nursing home, she organized the home’s workers into a union and convinced the institution to honor the United Farm Workers’ grape boycott. She died in 1982 at the age of 96.

This series has previously discussed the Bisbee Deportation of 1917 and the Everett Massacre of 1916.

The 1% and Environmental Destruction

[ 80 ] November 21, 2011 | Erik Loomis

A bit of an older piece now, but Ian Angus and Simon Butler provide some real solid evidence to a point I have made repeatedly–that overpopulation is far from the greatest environmental problem we face:

But most of the 7 billion are not endangering the earth. The majority of the world’s people don’t destroy forests, don’t wipe out endangered species, don’t pollute rivers and oceans, and emit essentially no greenhouse gases.

Even in the rich countries of the Global North, most environmental destruction is caused not by individuals or households, but by mines, factories, and power plants run by corporations that care more about profit than about humanity’s survival.

No reduction in U.S. population would have stopped BP from poisoning the Gulf of Mexico last year.

Lower birthrates won’t shut down Canada’s tar sands, which Bill McKibben has justly called one of the most staggering crimes the world has ever seen.

Universal access to birth control should be a fundamental human right — but it would not have prevented Shell’s massive destruction of ecosystems in the Niger River delta, or the immeasurable damage that Chevron has caused to rainforests in Ecuador.

Ironically, while populationist groups focus attention on the 7 billion, protestors in the worldwide Occupy movement have identified the real source of environmental destruction: not the 7 billion, but the 1%, the handful of millionaires and billionaires who own more, consume more, control more, and destroy more than all the rest of us put together.

Of course, rising consumption rates by a growing middle class in China, India, Brazil, and other developing world nations complicate this narrative, but the larger point stands–population is not the major cause for environmental degradation. Rather, the profit motive and capitalist control over the potential regulatory power of governments are much greater problems.

Petroleum Lies

[ 4 ] November 21, 2011 | Erik Loomis

Who could have guessed that energy companies would wildly exaggerate the economic benefit pipelines bring to local communities!

Here are the tax dollar promises TransCanada promised South Dakota counties and what they are actually paying:

Marshall County: $937,804.50 promised; $286,280.98 actually paid;

Clark County: $1,369,565,98 promised; $359,646.04 paid;

Miner County: $1,140,855.42 promised; $391,047.39 paid;

Hutchinson County: $1,140, 264.64 promised; $424,504.72 paid.

Yankton County: $837,988.68 promised; $247,965.58 paid.

In return, county property owners also received oil leaks and degraded property values near the pipeline.

The Tragedy of Jean Quan

[ 81 ] November 21, 2011 | Erik Loomis

A good Chris Fan piece at Hyphen asking a question that has plagued social movements for a long time–why do solidly progressive politicians end up siding with forces of order when they are elected to powerful positions? In this case, Quan was a longtime progressive activist on Asian-American issues.

Fan’s essay also notes the problematic racial homogeneity of the Occupy movement, which in the context of Oakland led them to rename Frank Ogawa Plaza, one of the few public spaces in the United States named after an Asian-American.

Documentaries

[ 51 ] November 20, 2011 | Erik Loomis

People are complaining that Werner Herzog’s “Into the Abyss” isn’t telling the whole story about the convicted murderers it portrays. Herzog has long eschewed the idea of “truth” in his documentaries and for the better I would say. This bugs people. Says L.V. Anderson at Slate:

Whatever Herzog’s reasons for leaving the existence of a key witness out of Into the Abyss, it’s clear—as it always has been—that Herzog is an artist, not a journalist.

I would argue that a documentary is telling a story based upon something that has happened, but that there are many stories one can tell about an event. Moreover, the most journalistic story might not be the best story. The first rule of a documentary is to be a good film. If it is not well-made, it is not good regardless of its subject. For instance, as an environmental scholar and an environmentalist, I try to keep up with the latest environmental documentaries. Last week, I watched “Food Beware: The French Organic Revolution.” This was pretty awful, despite its message. The film chronicles one French village committing itself to serving organic food, especially in the schools. But almost the entire film is just shots of kids eating organic food in school cafeterias, parents sitting around talking about it, and scenes from a UN conference on food spliced with scary music and graphics telling us what horrible compounds have infected our food supply.

This is an important story, but it’s not a film. It’s just boring.

Of course, most people disagree with me here. I watch a good number of documentaries and it is always interesting to see how my reactions compare to those who, say, write reviews on IMDB. For instance, Jennifer Baichwal’s latest documentary, “Act of God,” chronicles the stories of people struck by lightning. She lets them tell their stories the way they want to tell them. The experimental musician Fred Frith closes the film with a 5 minute improvisational guitar piece, which is his way of telling what happened to him. Baichwal’s films often revolve around difficult art and this was a challenging but fascinating way to think about the subject. But many viewers have disdained this documentary because it doesn’t present the science behind lightning. Some of the reviews at IMDB and other sites are interesting to read for this reaction. People hear “documentary” and they want a TRUE accounting of the events. But the best documentarians challenge the entire idea of truth.

And that’s why Werner Herzog’s documentaries are so great (better than any of his feature films since the early 80s). “Grizzly Man” is the most famous example. There are many unanswered questions. How did Treadwell get all that great equipment? Did Herzog know Treadwell beforehand? What’s with the bizarre editing that makes the coroner’s bit look so staged? Did he really listen to the tape of Treadwell’s death in front of his ex-girlfriend? A lot about this film makes no sense, but it’s glorious for several reasons, including because it so clearly demonstrates its 2 unhinged and opinionated narrators, Treadwell and Herzog.

Will

[ 7 ] November 20, 2011 | Erik Loomis

Lesson: Regardless of his conflict of interest because his wife is a Republican operative, George Will is an equal opportunity hack, promoting all mouthbreathing right-wing ideas with aplomb.

Birth Control

[ 53 ] November 20, 2011 | Erik Loomis

More than a little dispiriting that Obama is creating broad exemptions for religious groups to not provide free birth control in their health insurance plans. Congressional Democrats are rightfully outraged.

In other news, the Catholic Church’s position on birth control is wildly out of touch with reality. As is its position on women.

Twilight Readers=Republican Voters

[ 163 ] November 19, 2011 | Erik Loomis

OK, what the deuce is going on here.

From Yglesias’ twitter feed, where he notes “Evidence that Obama has a shot at winning Wyoming and North Dakota.” Yeah, you wonder. Having not read the Twilight books and being someone who would rather be face a Singapore rattan whip expert after having chewed gum on the subway than actually pick up this dross, what on earth in the connection? Other than Republicans having horrendous taste in literature.

What Are You Doing Alabama? You’ve Got the Rest of the Union to Help You Along

[ 46 ] November 18, 2011 | Erik Loomis

It’s pretty depressing that a law intended to oppress brown people has to affect a white person to make headlines, but that’s America.

A German manager with Mercedes-Benz is free after being arrested for not having a driver’s license with him under Alabama’s new law targeting illegal immigrants, authorities said Friday, in an otherwise routine case that drew the attention of Gov. Robert Bentley.

Tuscaloosa Police Chief Steven Anderson told The Associated Press an officer stopped a rental vehicle for not having a tag Wednesday night and asked the driver for his license. The man only had a German identification card, so he was arrested and taken to police headquarters, Anderson said.

The 46-year-old executive was charged with violating the immigration law for not having proper identification, but he was released after an associate retrieved his passport, visa and German driver’s license from the hotel where he was staying, Anderson said.

I’m sure Germany is very happy about this. No doubt Alabama’s harsh anti-immigration law will spur the foreign investment it seeks……

  • Switch to our mobile site