|
Recently we have been the victim of vicious attacks made by some very nasty individuals, ironically calling themselves "disinterested," but seem hell bent on only finding fault with Movement. I felt it necessary to detail some points about us to our readers that they may not know about Movement.
We know the magazine is plagued with type-O's. Movement has no editor. Regardless though, these people, disinterested or not, have become a part of and made Movement what it is meant to be. A site to draw people together into discussion. They came to the site and for better or worse and posted their feelings. Unfortunately they choose to express themselves with rude and vainly attempted insults. As well as being critical of my grammar while simultaneously making grammatical errors in their own critique.
What is it that those in glass houses should not throw?
Movement is a very small organization run by artists, not literary scholars. We have no official editor. We tell the people we interview that we are not "journalists" just simply artists who have created a vehicle to help support other artists. We are just trying to say what we have to say, for the most part it gets across just fine to those who can objectively read the articles and not have to give a weak grammar lesson to us. Collectively we look over what we can and correct as much as we can find before the magazine goes to print or an article is uploaded to the web.
I'm sure we are seemingly picked on more because the people who do attack us usually have personal problems with me and instead of dealing with me directly they prefer to attack through the magazine itself. Shamefully they hide behind false identities and attack from the safety of their anonymity.
But if they were being simply critical for critics sake they would realize that hey could not pick up a copy of FOLIO or the TIMES UNION and not find a mistake. They are publications with big staffs and people who are supposed to catch these things. There hasn't been a paper out there that isn't cursed with it. Former publications I have worked with were nearly famous for the gross amount of mistakes, and with no control over that side of it I just enjoyed it for what it was. I was not so critical of the mistakes. It goes with the territory. Many articles, and editorials are written quickly and shipped off to meet deadlines. We have always asked our readers to be conscious of that and most do not care, and do not care to judge us. They simply read what is there and enjoy it for what it is without critical dissection.
To the further evolution of the Movement
March on...
_Max Michaels
a new hope
by MAX MICHAELS
There has been quite a bit of changes over the past few
weeks in 5 Points. New faces and revamped spaces. Here is the low down
on a few of the changes:
This September marks a great moment in the history of
nightlife in Jacksonville. The cities longest running night spot, the
ever controversial Club 5, was purchased not long ago from former
manager turned owner, the infamous Bruce Chambers. The new owner has
closed the doors of the legendary night spot to reinvent the interior
and give the building the facelift it so desperately needed and
deserves. The fact is, Club 5 is no more. While many will still call it
by it’s former moniker, when the doors swing open this September the
venue will be known as The Marquee.
For many years now myself and my friends have found the best times of
our lives in Club 5, and we are just as excited to be a part of the new
vision of The Marquee. More lavish and detailed performances will be
dazzling at the grand opening of “The Gallery” on Saturday September
15th, the kick off night of improv theatre and cabaret, great drink
specials, dancers and great music. It’s not Seduction, it is something
all new, but don’t fear... there are plans in the works to re unite
the gang from Seduction again for a couple of annual parties. Check the
Movement web site for details.
Another gem in the Five Points facade is Milo Shoes (yes,
this is more of a hey check this cool stuff out rather than an
editorial, but I actually have nothing to bitch about!*) I picked up a
pair of Bacco Bucci boots a couple of months ago and they are the most
comfortable shoes I’ve ever had.
Sadly 5 points independent record shop Stripmine closed
abruptly but on the up side it was quickly replaced with Alva’s Needle
Fetish body piercing studio. Earth Gifts has moved across from Wendy’s
next to Smoothie King. Which means we will be seeing a new tenant soon
in their former location in the heart of the 5 Point shopping district.
Patronize your local businesses, and support your local
music scene.
*That however is until we were taking the magazine to the printer and on
NPR they were talking about theatres that were participating in an FBI
program putting wanted posters on movie screens to catch criminals. I
don't know about you, but I know they are already pushing the line by
letting the NAVY run it's recruting commercial before some films. I pay
to go see a movie to be entertained and escape from the world outside.
That is what movie going is all about. I don't feel like paying to be
captive to military recruitment propaganda of any kind or be subjected
to the faces of men wanted so badly by the FBI that they feel it
nessessary to project them on a fourty foot screen. Doesn't the FBI have
the most sofisticated spy equipment available? Must they resort to
shattering the fantacy of the movie going environment before it even
really begins? I don't want it in my theatres. Why don't they just go
ahead and make The Running Man a reality? It looks like a sad, sad
future.
A RESPONSE FROM A READER:
VIA WEB
I recently read your editorial on the Movement Magazine web site, and was
frankly, rather astonished at the post scripting at the end which indicated
that you were upset at the fact that the FBI and theatres were joining
efforts to catch particularly wanted criminals. You also stated that you
did not enjoy the fact that the Navy used the medium for its advertising as
well. This is vaguely amusing to me for several reasons. Firstly, let it be known that we are all entitled to our own opinions, after all you did write an editorial, and I am certainly not knocking you for having done so.
Is it the fact that it’s the Navy that’s doing the advertising, or is it just the advertising itself that irritates you? If it’s the Navy, what have you against the Navy that you don’t want to see recruiting advertisements before your movie? And if it’s the advertising, what’s the difference between an advertisement for the Navy and an advertisement for other movies?
How do you decipher one ad from another? Being an avid moviegoer myself,
in recent months I have noticed increasing advertisements for non-movie
related products. I go to the movies once a week and continually saw the
same advertisement for a particular brand of dishwasher. Now I constantly
see the same ad for Coca-Cola products. I personally am not annoyed by the
ads, because I know that a country that spends is a country that thrives.
In order to spend, you have to know. And the only way to know is through advertising. As long as they don’t interrupt my movie for it, I could honestly care less. But I have a feeling your animosity is more directed at the Navy, rather than the advertising. I’d be interested in knowing your opinion on that.
But what I really wanted to discuss was your aversion to the FBI posting ‘wanted’ signs on theatre screens. You never really did say why you
were against this except some feeble excuse about escapism from the real
world. Your argument is almost laughable. You wrote, “Doesn't the FBI have
the most sofisticated spy equipment available?” Well, of course they have
soPHisticated spy equipment. But take a step back from that ridiculous
statement for a moment: If the FBI resorted to using this spy equipment,
editorialists across America would be crying about lack of privacy. Already
American privacy is being violated, why further it with ‘sophisticated spy
equipment?’ More importantly, wouldn’t you want to aid in the capture of a
criminal? America is demoralized enough by criminals of all types and it’s
the silence of the people that often let these types run free. In my
opinion, I’d rather the FBI employ any means necessary, so long as it was
ethical, to capture criminals that don’t deserve the right to walk the
streets. I am not annoyed by a few advertisements and public service
announcements before my movie. We are subjected to far more when we watch
television or listen to the radio. I also wonder, would you be of the same
opinion if, let’s say, CPS advertised missing and endangered children before
a movie? And just some FYI, the movie Running Man was not based on
the advertisement of criminals, it was based on the exploitation of
criminals.
Cordially,
:A:
P.S. It might also help your argument if you spell-checked before running to print.
EDITOR'S REPLY:
":A:"
I am pleased and delighted that I could vaguely astonish and amuse you. To answer your questions, your feelings toward my opinion are a bit twisted, it is certainly not the NAVY I have a problem with. We need our military in all of it's facets to protect our collective interests. There is no difference between the NAVY's ads and the other ads. What I have a problem with is the overkill. The fact that no matter where we go we are constantly bombarded by advertisements. Everywhere you look there is a logo in our face. And every day advertising agencies are looking for more and more spaces and places to further jam their products down our throats. It's nothing against the art of advertising itself, we at Movement depend on it solely, however we do not slap it onto every product we can find.
You mentioned that we are subjected to it more by TV and radio, which is precisely why I don't listen to radio (with the exception of NPR) and limit my TV viewing. My point, which you seemed so quick to criticize that you missed, was that there is a time and a place for all advertising and there is a time and a place for all commercials. I for one, in my very singular opinion, believe that there also has to be a time and a place for entertainment. Entertainment free of the commercial mudslide. Sadly though more and more movies themselves are becoming a landscape of product placement. So if I choose to pay for that film, then I guess I will have to put up with it. But I do not pay to see dishwasher ads, or Coca-Cola ads. Neither of which I care to see since I am not in the market for a dishwasher and I do not drink beverages that are carbonated. I feel exactly the same way about paying to rent a movie from Blockbuster and being subjected to having to watch or fast forward through military propaganda or other product or career advertisements. I'd be just as upset if it was an ITT Tech commercial inviting me to change my life by taking their course. If I really wanted that I'd just turn on my TV.
As for as the "wanted posters," I did explain why I was against it but will further detail that here, with shows like COPS and America's Most Wanted, Court TV and the countless other shows and networks out there inundating the media and commercializing the search for these demoralizing criminals it is turning out to be more of a game show (which is why I used the Running Man example) rather than the desperate social issue that needs to be addressed in a very serious light, sans the flashy computer generated intros and theme music. I don't discount it's merits, I'm just quite sure there could be a much better and effective way without having to subject someone to it against their will. When I pay to go to a movie to be entertained I expect just that. Putting me face to face with wanted murderers, rapists and thugs forty feet high only serves as a depressing reminder as to how bad off our society really is. Not only that but how might it effect an impressionable child whose parents take him or her to the newest candy coated Disney flick and they are subjected to the same outside horror that their parents are trying to protect them from. There are reasons why Disney doesn't erect 50ft billboards with wanted posers on them in their parks. Because people don't go there to see that. They go there to be entertained and escape the outside world. No matter how "feeble" that excuse may sound it generates billions for dollars for Disney. That sounds like a spending and thriving environment to me. How about to you? It would be equally depressing if it were a CPS advertisement for missing and endangered children. I see it on my milk carton, I get it almost every day in my mailbox. Why should I have to also pay to see it? The fact alone that we have to resort to those means is the problem at it's core.
Through out the whole thing however I was simple expressing an opinion. I won't be out side the theaters with a picket sign any time soon so don't worry you will be free to see an abundance of useless advertising to fill your time before your movie starts.
On a side note, if you are so naive to think that the FBI is not already using such equipment then I suggest you lift up the rock you are living under and take a look around. Because they are. There was a recent case on the news where they secretly installed a chip into a suspects computer in New Jersey to monitor his every key stroke. And yes, that is a clear invasion of privacy, but the fact remains that they do have and are using that technology. Regardless, what I was really saying with that statement was more of a rhetorical jab, rather than an actual question for the reader to ponder.
I hope that I have made my point, regardless of the spelling errors. We are a very small independent media outlet with a volunteer staff so if you'd rather take action than being one of those silent individuals you are more than welcome to volunteer to edit the magazine for us.
I can't thank you enough for your response. It is what we love here most at Movement. We appreciate you readership and encourage your further commentary.
_Max Michaels
P.S.-It might help your argument if you signed you name to your opinion!
FURTHER RESPONSE FROM READER:
Max Michaels,
Upon receipt of your response, I immediately set out and began typing my own
reply, and then realised that as most arguments go, neither party will
concede to being persuaded. So I deleted it and wrote this instead: My
opinions are not twisted and I did not criticize you. Based on your
previous editorial and your latest response, I still think there is more
than meets the eye in your opinion. You are obviously upset about the FBI
and the Navy, not just the advertisements. Had it been just the
advertisements, you would have stated thus. Reality is a fact of life.
While you are holed up in a theatre ‘escaping’ for two hours, it’s still
going on outside. There is no escape. There can be no entertainment
without commercialism. There can be nothing without commercialism.
You are subjected to only what you allow yourself to be subjected to.
I can not believe that you missed my thinly veiled sarcasm about
sophisticated spy equipment. I am not so naïve to think that the FBI is not
already using such equipment. I am a law-abiding citizen so I have nothing
to hide. I doubt the FBI is spying on me. And if I ever did do anything to
the point where I need to be clandestinely monitored than I probably deserve
it.
You don’t need me to come edit the magazine for you. When you finish typing
your document you hit Shift F7 in Windows Word 3.x and higher and it automatically spell and grammar checks for you. If you don’t work in Word,
then you simply copy and paste and when it’s done correcting, copy and paste
back to your program. Voila! It is done.
I prefer my anonymity. It is like a warm blanket. Mainly because I am
outspoken against Movement Magazine, the Imperial and just about everything
affiliated with both ‘organizations.’ When I wrote my response, I didn’t do
it to criticize or attack you or anyone else affiliated with the magazine
and club. I just wanted to know. I still dislike Movement Magazine and the Imperial. I doubt that will ever change.
As for signing my name, what for? If I told you my name it would mean less
than nothing because we have never met, though we see each other every Saturday night at the Imperial. But if you truly wanted to know who I am
the answer is staring you right in the face. The best hiding place is often
right in the open.
:A:
EDITOR'S RESPONSE:
:A:
It would seem that since you "dislike" or are outspoken against Movement and the Imperial but seem to frequent both, staring me in the face every Saturday and going online to read my editorial just hours after it went up, it would seem you have a few deep seeded issues that from the beginning would have never let this discussion be fruitful. Though I have apparently seen you, but do not know you either, I do know that it is your type of attitude that has kept Jacksonville so far behind. So willing to criticize and to be as outspoken as your anonymity will allow against things you don't understand because you won't straightforwardly deal with them.
I realized that nothing of any consequence will likely come of this since at the onset of your letter you called it an "argument." Up for a fight from the very start. Though I am not really sure when you believe we began arguing. I was only responding. It is a discussion. I state my opinion, you state yours, etc. I am not arguing any point. That would be an endless battle. You believe that there can be no entertainment without commercialization, I know from experience that there have been many entertaining events, films and music that do not require commercialization. They are usually much more enjoyable than the same events and products that are commercialized. But we have both had different experiences, and different lives. You don't mind "wanted" ads in the theater, I would. But you had some very valid points, but you also believe in something different than I do. That's what makes humanity diverse. We can believe in more than just one opinion. I respect yours, though I lack the same feeling for your attitude and methods. I am as open to other opinions and other points of view of everyone I know (and don't know for that matter) and respect them as such. That doesn't mean I have to agree with them. Just as you don't have to agree with me.
I hope at some point in the future you will get out from under that blanket and confront things more directly. I am only out there trying to help make Jacksonville a better place to live with Movement, the Imperial and the many other things we have going on and it takes everyone else to help accomplish that. Since you have a problem with what I am involved in you should be detailing that in a letter to me rather than discussing some editorial add on. Either you help or you hurt.
Thank you again for your letters. They have been most enjoyable.
Be well my friend.
Max
BTW - You said "My opinions are not twisted and I did not criticize you." I hate to disagree with you again, but when you said "I have a feeling your animosity is more directed at the Navy" that is a twisted opinion, though your opinion, and statements like "Your argument is almost laughable." is a criticism.
|
