3 & 4 Bedroom Apts Avail Fall 19/20
$1800 ‑ $2680 + Utilities
Laundry On Site, Parking Avail
1015 Packard ‑ 734‑996‑1991
Fall 19/20 ‑ 6 Bedroom House
1019 Packard ‑ $3600 + Utilities
Showings scheduled M‑F 10‑3
734‑996‑1991
EFFICIENCY ‑ 1 & 2 Bdrm
apartments Fall 2019/20. Rents range
$875 ‑ $1850. Most include heat and
water. Showings scheduled M‑F 10‑3
734‑996‑1991
WORK ON MACKINAC ISLAND
This Summer – Make lifelong friends.
The
Island
House
Hotel
and
Ryba’s Fudge Shops are seeking help
in all areas: Front Desk, Bell Staff,
Wait Staff, Sales Clerks, Kitchen,
Baristas. Dorm Housing, bonus, and
discounted meals.
(906) 847‑7196.
www.theislandhouse.com
Classifieds
Call: #734-418-4115
Email: dailydisplay@gmail.com
SUMMER EMPLOYMENT
FOR RENT
By Jeffrey Wechsler
©2019 Tribune Content Agency, LLC
01/17/19
Los Angeles Times Daily Crossword Puzzle
Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Nichols Lewis
01/17/19
ANSWER TO PREVIOUS PUZZLE:
Release Date: Thursday, January 17, 2019
ACROSS
1 Fear of spiders,
usually
7 Google Earth
predecessors
14 Aesthetic
feature?
16 Hillary supporters
17 Lumberjack’s
favorite pirate
phrase?
19 Theater award
20 Actor Holm
21 Slender Olive
22 Lumberjack’s
main interest in
naval records?
27 Eero Saarinen’s
father
30 Many Sinatra
recordings
31 Pipe shape
32 Quick cuts
33 Gig gear
35 “__ pinch of ... ”:
recipe words
36 Lumberjack’s
way to punch an
opponent?
39 Reverberate
40 Baltic capital
41 Store __
42 Small matter
43 Toon crime-
fighter __
Possible
44 Check phrase
45 Lumberjack’s
preferred ABC
News reporter?
49 Civil War soldier
50 __ of the woods:
mushroom type
51 Athlete who
wrote a history of
African-American
athletes
55 Lumberjack’s
reaction to an
overly hard
crossword?
60 Track foundation
61 French’s product
62 Bottomless pits
63 Ignore
DOWN
1 Sideways
whisper
2 Crackers once
sold in a red box
3 Actress Lena
4 Quail group
5 Having four
sharps
6 Pertaining to a
heart chamber
7 PEI setting
8 Meteorologist’s
scale: Abbr.
9 Veal piccata
chef’s needs
10 Contrary to
popular belief,
its name is not
derived from
its trademark
sandwich
11 Described in
detail
12 “For all in vain
comes counsel to
his __”: Shak.
13 Old draft org.
15 Jane Hamilton’s
“__ of the World”
18 Med. specialist
22 “__ la vie!”
23 A, as in Athens
24 __ dixit:
unproven claim
25 One who knows
the ropes
26 Tumbler, e.g.
27 13th-century
Norwegian king
28 Sensor that
detects objects
using closely
spaced beams
29 Texter’s modest
intro
32 How things are
going
33 Jungian concept
34 Corp. get-
together
35 Mate’s greeting
37 Bearded flower
38 Burn a bit
43 Food on sticks
44 Repressed
46 Cries out for
47 “Please explain”
48 Cowpoke’s polite
assent
51 Tsp. and oz.
52 Places to
unwind
53 Cilantro, e.g.
54 Watery swirl
55 Nest egg
acronym
56 __ rule
57 Novelist Harper
58 Mormon
initials
59 Mex. neighbor
CHECK OUT OUR COOL
www.michigandaily.com
WEBSITE.
Over the winter break, I was
lucky enough to see “To Kill a
Mockingbird” on Broadway. The
script for this new production,
which opened on Dec. 13, was
written by Aaron Sorkin. It was an
incredibly spellbinding experience,
easily one of the best plays I have
seen all year.
Jeff Daniels’s Atticus Finch
was refreshing, in both ambiguity
and strength, as Daniels managed
to capture Atticus’s flaws and
finer moments in this production
without sounding overly preachy.
Celia
Keenan-Bolger’s
Scout,
furthermore, was quite convincing
— she expertly straddled the
boundary between child and adult,
oscillating
between
adolescent
memory and adult reflection.
As
with
many
Broadway
productions,
especially
those
based on books of this stature, the
production value behind the play
was superb. The sets were great,
the courtroom with empty jurors’
chairs in particular standing out in
my mind. And while the music and
lighting were not much to speak
of, they perfectly underscored the
childish simplicity of the narrative.
A little after attending the play,
however, I began comparing it to the
novel. In doing so, I became aware
of many striking departures Sorkin
took in this production — many of
which seem to rob the story of its
greatness.
Sorkin complicates Atticus, for
example, painting him not as a
perfect figure but as a flawed man
working to do what he believes
to be best. The best example of
this comes in the middle of the
play, as Sorkin adds a tense scene
between Calpurnia and Atticus, two
characters previously described as
having a sibling-like relationship. At
the height of this scene, Calpurnia
accuses
Atticus
of
muttering
“you’re welcome” under his breath
at her after taking on the case.
Atticus’s interactions with Bob
Ewell are also quite different in this
telling of the story. Ewell is now
a virulent racist and anti-Semite.
He claims that Atticus’s work as a
lawyer must be an indication that he
is secretly Jewish, and he criticizes
Atticus among his white peers for
this (alleged) Jewish ancestry.
Later, when Ewell comes to
confront
Atticus,
they
engage
in a brief altercation. Unlike the
Atticus of the movie and the novel,
this Atticus does not refrain from
engaging in this fight, which
eventually culminates in Atticus
pinning Ewell’s hands behind his
back and holding him by his hair.
One of the aspects of Harper
Lee’s novel that I have always found
most compelling is the ambiguity
that she brings to Southern race
relations. Unlike many other novels,
she portrays Southerners as neither
entirely bad nor entirely good.
Scout’s young age further enhances
this narrative, as the reader is forced
to confront early 20th-century
race relations from the point of
view of a naïve adolescent, losing
any stereotypes that they may hold
regarding these issues.
Sorkin, on the other hand,
modifies the story to make it
more acceptable to our Trump-
era left-wing prejudices. These
modifications felt slightly cheap —
unlike Lee’s novel, it felt as though
Sorkin was giving the audience
exactly they wanted, leaving in no
ambiguity and provoking no higher-
level
questioning
surrounding
Southern culture.
Sorkin deflects criticism of the
“white savior” trope, for example,
by
adding
the
confrontation
between Calpurnia and Atticus.
To my great surprise, Atticus
responded to this criticism by
apologizing to Calpurnia — rather
than demonstrating the flaws in this
“white savior” trope, Sorkin takes it
further, portraying Atticus as aware
of his own prejudices though his
actions seem to perpetuate them.
Atticus’s fight with Ewell was
similarly flawed in my view. Though
some may argue that this speaks to
his flaws in terms of his inability
to control his own emotions, I saw
it instead as a cheap attempt at
solidifying Atticus’s masculinity
and strength. This was yet another
instance in which Sorkin’s additions,
rather
than
adding
intriguing
complexities
to
the
narrative,
merely served to create new flaws.
Just as with Atticus’s newfound
introspection, I found Ewell’s anti-
Semitism to be a cheap attempt at
pandering to modern sensibilities. It
served no purpose in the narrative
besides engaging further with
modern audiences — a surprisingly
surface-level
reference
to
the
resurgence of neo-Nazism.
If anything, Sorkin seems to be
grasping for more prejudices that he
can give to Ewell. It almost seems as
though Sorkin thinks that Ewell’s
initial racism wasn’t enough — that
saying the n-word a couple of times
and accusing a Black man of a crime
he did not commit is not enough
to provoke the audiences anger;
that without this addition of anti-
Semitism, the audience might not
despise Ewell to the proper degree.
On
the
other
hand,
Lee’s
controversial
sequel
to
“To
Kill a Mockingbird,” “Go Set a
Watchman,” chose to depict Atticus
not as a slightly introspective savior-
like figure but as a deeply flawed
and hypocritical man, a lawyer who
spends his free time with racist
individuals and engages in racist
discussions even as he voluntarily
defends a Black man in the South’s
racist courts of law.
Though I was initially upset
by this new novel, (as were many
readers), this play served as a
helpful reminder of the frightening
yet powerful message that this book
seems to send: that we all hold racial
prejudices and that even a flawless
pro bono attorney like Atticus can
still hold deep racial prejudices. Lee
destroys the idyllic Atticus in favor
of the flawed, racist Atticus, forcing
the reader to examine their own
prejudices.
Sorkin’s play, however, instead
reminded me of the pitfalls of our
hyper-polarized cultural climate.
We live in the supposedly “post-
racial” era, where a Black man could
be elected to the presidency. Our
entertainment is expected to reflect
these post-racial attitudes, whether
it be the criticism of Atticus or the
addition of Ewell’s anti-Semitic
prejudices. Lost in this climate, I
fear, is the ambiguity and complexity
that gives the performing arts their
thought-provoking qualities.
This is not to say that Sorkin’s
additions are not more culturally
appropriate, or that they might
not reflect a better, less-prejudiced
society. But at the end of the day,
they are not original to the text —
they give the audience what they
want to see instead of what they
might be forced to see. But, as I have
said before, the performing arts are
not meant to comfort us, they are
meant to challenge us. They should
make us slightly uncomfortable.
They should force us to confirm our
prejudices, not confirm to us that
we have overcome other people’s
prejudices. And in this regard,
unfortunately, Sorkin’s “To Kill a
Mockingbird” fell flat.
Aaron Sorkin’s ‘TKAMB’
DAILY COMMUNITY CULTURE COLUMN
SAMMY
SUSSMAN
Is it possible to achieve the
environmental call to action
of
Rachel
Carson’s
“Silent
Spring” in a work of fiction?
Richard Powers is resolved to
find out.
Powers’s “The Overstory,”
which made it onto the 2018
Man
Booker
shortlist,
is
his first attempt at literary
environmentalism;
it
is
reasonably
and
enjoyably
successful. While the novel was
not predicted to transcend the
English prize’s shortlist, “The
Overstory” remained a 2018
favorite. The novel, clocking
in at just over 500 pages,
features a near-overwhelming
eight central characters, the
likes of which range from a
Vietnam War veteran to a
loveable patent attorney
to
an
unruly
college
senior.
The
curvation
of all eight stories are
brought together (or at
least near one another)
over the course of the
novel by trees — which
appear
spiritual
and
conscious, intervening in
the characters’s lives and
thoughts — when they sound a
call to environmentalism.
The
environmentalism
that
all
eight
characters,
through
varying
spouts
of time, succumb to, take
disparate shapes. For Patricia
Westerford, it is scientific
research;
for
Nick
Hoel
and Mimi Ma, it is joining
a
radical
environmentalist
group working desperately to
preserve trees still standing
in the United States. When
a sampling of the characters
break the law in the name of
the environment and things
go unsparingly wrong, they
are forced into shadows. The
intensity of the story slowly
defuses
here.
Implications
ensue for some characters. For
others, less so.
Powers is most heralded for
his ability to capture such a
large narrative arc in a novel.
“He (Powers) would probably
be Herman Melville of ‘Moby
Dick’,”
writes
Margaret
Atwood. “His picture is that
big.” And yes, “The Overstory”
is surely substantial. Not only
does the novel incorporate so
many characters, but Powers
devotes generous prose to
each, allowing for considerable
backstory and development of
psyches. This shines brightly
in the first 150 pages. The
introduction of each character
— with each cast member
consuming about 20 pages —
is well paced, calculated to
appear almost as separate short
stories. Especially striking are
passages about Adam Appich
and Ray Brinkman. Powers
details a blushing love story
and
a
complex
childhood
that bring the novel to life
for readers. These lengthy,
brave introductions make the
characters sticky and easy to
form loving attachments.
This
praised
and
intense
narrative
capacity,
however, is also why “The
Overstory”
stumbles.
Once
the interweaving of the eight
narratives begins, switching
routinely between different
characters’s
perspectives,
readers
are
left
grappling
for a central thesis or story
to
follow.
Unfortunately,
one is not found. It is too
difficult to be moved by one
event
or
character
when
these scenarios are merely
glimpsed at, disregarded as the
narrative flits to another plot.
Thus, while the characters are
well crafted upon exposition,
they are left behind as Powers
takes on too large an idea in
too small a space.
Conceivably the only central
body
in
“The
Overstory”
is
Powers’s
refrain
of
environmentalism. It involves
trees, trees and more trees.
This is certainly an interesting
and narrow selection of plot to
choose as the factor to propel
a reader through a novel. At
times, this environmentalist
focus is interesting. Powers
traces
over
wonderful
descriptions of nature and its
power, scientific prose about
flora’s communicative traits
and, of course, forces readers to
glare head on at deforestation
and,
implicitly,
climate
change. However, there is
little
emotional
investment
here. It is perhaps easier
to be moved by the
activists themselves —
in the small pieces of
them readers see — than
by the destruction of the
environment. If there
is something profound
and new that Powers is
trying to express in his
work, especially with
respect to environmentalism,
it remains behind the curtain.
Despite its shortcomings,
“The
Overstory”
probably
deserved its place among the
other shortlisted novels for
the Booker Prize. The story is
undeniably bold, undertaking
(with
moderate
success)
a
fascinatingly broad narrative
with a well-meaning cast of
characters. Powers’s writing
is clean and consistent, and his
literary environmentalism is
original and intriguing. Still,
these feats subdue potential
character intimacy and the
novel fails to stand by a robust,
explicit thesis. For a paradigm
of these latter features done
well, see the prize-winning
novel, “Milkman.”
‘The Overstory’ trades
intimacy for advocacy
JOHN DECKER
Daily Arts Writer
THE SHORTLISTED
“The Overstory”
Richard Powers
W.W. Norton & Company
Apr. 3, 2018
MUSIC VIDEO: ‘THE SEDUCTION OF KANSAS’
“It’s almost like the version
of Priests that made Nothing
Feels Natural really died,” D.C.-
based trio Priests are quoted
as saying in a preview of their
new album, The Seduction of
Kansas. This death, which was
followed by prompt rebirth,
Jenn Pelly writes, came in part
due to bassist Taylor Mulitz’s
decision to devote himself more
fully to his other project, Flasher.
Priests seized the opportunity
to reimagine themselves in a
more poppy vein, also bringing
in producer John Congleton,
who has worked with artists
ranging from Earl Sweatshirt to
bands like Modest Mouse. The
resulting sound, or at least what’s
hinted at by “The Seduction of
Kansas,” is something that not
all listeners seem particularly
thrilled about it, as evident from
the comments on the YouTube
upload of the music video and
this thread on the r/indieheads
subreddit.
To their credit, Priests
anticipated the divisiveness
of their new material. Back in
Nov., vocalist Katie Alice Greer
tweeted from the band’s account,
“I don’t think these are the songs
some of you will have *wanted*
us to make, especially if you liked
(Nothing Feels Natural) & just
wanted (Nothing Feels Natural)
2.”
In any event, to point to the
band’s reorientation towards
pop as evidence — or, worse,
proof — that they have “sold
out” is to miss the point entirely.
“The Seduction of Kansas” is
accessible but ominous and,
lyrically, just as politically
charged as 2017’s Nothing
Feels Natural, if more vaguely
poetic. In the song’s music
video, Greer, drummer/vocalist
Daniele Daniele and guitarist
G.L. Jaguar dance across various
ballrooms of a Victorian estate,
sometimes pausing for close-ups
in which they caress the busts of
white men whom I presume are
now dead.
We occasionally watch the
video from an additional remove,
as guests in a movie theater,
able to see other seats lined up
before the screen. As a direct
tie-in, the song’s most biting
lyric comes at the end of the first
verse, when Greer sings, “It’s
the last picture show, all the
cowboys they get ready / For a
drawn-out charismatic parody
of what a country thought
it used to be.” It’s a line that
immediately calls to mind every
instance that anyone, from a
powerful politician to a stranger
on Twitter, has said, “This is not
what America stands for!” in
the past two-and-a-half years,
while also addressing the tired
absurdity of it all. America has
been up to all kinds of skeevy
bullshit for as long as it’s been
around, and Priests have always
been — and still are — interested
in putting the mindset that
ignores that fact on blast.
— Sean Lang, Daily Arts Writer
SISTER POLYGON RECORDS
“The Seduction
of Kansas”
Priests
Sister Polygon
Records
6 — Thursday, January 17, 2019
Arts
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com