1. It seems to me from his recent media blitz that one of the problems Chappelle has had with his superstardom is the weight of unrealistic expectations. He's pointed out the fact that he's been burdened by being a savior of comedy, and that the huge weight of those swollen expectations has made that harder for him. And I read a review like this and I think I can understand. I mean look-- the Chappelle Show is great, but it's still hugely overrated. It can't possibly not be, it's simply held in too high regard to ever meet the hype. I have a hard time swallowing hero worship, even when it's someone who's work and integrity I admire. Talking about someone's "magnificently elastic beats" or comparing their delivery to Thelonius Monk is precisely the kind of overheated praise that we don't need if we want to provide critical support for genuine artistic achievement. It's like the British music press-- every time they trumpet a band like the Arctic Monkeys to the ridiculous degrees that they do, they only fuel the inevitable backlash.

which brings me to point two....

2. The fact that hip hop is dominating the pop music world in terms of popularity and cultural capital shouldn't be confused with the idea that hip hop is producing overwhelming music quality. I would argue that the opposite is the case. All the people who are proclaiming a "rap renaissance" do so at a time when (in my subjective opinion) mainstream, popular rap is as bad as its ever been. I really dislike Kanye West, as a producer but much more as an MC. I think he expertly plays the media, by revealing his insecurities, such as they are, and by being "the political rapper" (which in a world with a band as fierce and talented as Dead Prez is a farce). And it really galls me that a rapper as talented as Talib Kweli is commercially and critically ignored compared to West. I just don't see anything to his delivery or lyrics to get excited about. But I at least acknowledge that he has dimensions that, say, Lloyd Banks, Ludacris or the Ying Yang Twins just don't have. (And please don't get me started on Eminem...)

Anyway-- I admit that's all my subjectivity. But my point is that the acts in this movie represent many of the alternatives to the current mainstream (as well as some of the chaff), as opposed to the dominant hip-hop presence that Zacharek suggests.

Two years in a row, one of the most despicably awful movies ever is awarded with a Best Picture Oscar.

I know its cliche to trash the Oscars for sucking, and I know I shouldn't expect anything less. But man.

I have asked this question of vegan and vegetarian people many times, and I haven't yet heard a satisfactory explanation. (Part of the problem is the assumption that I'm being cute or joking.) The general idea seems to be that because plants don't have a conventional sense of consciousness or intelligence, they don't have the same fundamental right to not be eaten that animals enjoy. In other words, the fact that animals are self aware, have some intelligence and sense of self-- and maybe most importantly, that they feel pain-- is what gives them a right to life.

Does anyone else find this unsatisfactory? I mean if self awareness is necessary for a being to have a right to life, doesn't that mean that lobsters, clams, or other animals would fall under the same conditions as plants? And if we're being honest, don't we have to acknowledge that there are degrees of intelligence and self awareness? I mean a cow doesn't have an identical mental makeup to a chicken, or to a salmon or a clam. Is there a scale of right to life? If the fact that animals feel pain a reason for not eating them, would it be moral to genetically engineer animals that don't feel pain? To engineer them without consciousness?

Can someone offer a rational explanation as to why it's moral to eat vegetables and soy and not animals? I'd really like to hear.

please? pleeeeeeeeease?

just one?

please?

"Hate can be concealed in many ways. A lover of animals looks into eyes that want, eyes that are forever grateful for what they receive, eyes that can never judge. Such a person can ultimately be a sadist, a misanthrope, in that his perfect world is a world without other human beings. Everything that anunmals do is glorified precisely because it represents such an animal lover's ideal for Others: consciousness without judgement."

-Lewis Gordon

It really, really pisses me off the way people are casually saying that we don't need to eat meat. First of all, it is difficult and expensive to maintain a healthy meat free diet in this country. Second, the option to not eat meat simply does not exist for a large portion of the world's population. It's typical American myopia to presume that everyone could simply stop eating meat. Tell that to people in impoverished countries.