The Napkin: Absorbent Art for Head and Heart

Husbands and Their Faults – Marriage #6

by Marty Coleman | Oct 9, 2013 | Anonymous, Marriage - 2012/13 | 6 comments

I did a marriage series in 2012 but found some new quotes recently so I decided to add to it.

men and marriage

Faults? What Faults?

This can be taken as anti-wife. The wife as a nag, as a critic, as someone who is always wanting to change the man into her version of who he should be. The faults aren’t real, they are simply things she doesn’t like. Many husbands would say their wives fit this characterization. Without a change the husband is going to withdraw into depression, crack or divorce. They are not happy husbands.

Yes, Your Faults

This can be taken as anti-husband. The husband is an oblivious oaf who has not clue how rude, insensitive, lazy, sexist and unfeeling he is. The faults actually are real and they need to be addressed. Many wives would say their husbands fit this characterization. Without a change the wife is going to withdraw into depression, crack or divorce. They are not happy wives.

Fault Control

In my experience, more wives than husbands tend to think they are indispensable. That if they don’t do it, no one will, especially the husband, and the family will fall apart. If you are that wife, ask yourself this question. What if I died today? Will the world go on? Will your sons and daughters get dressed and go to school without your help or will they stay in their pajamas, unfed, all day long? The answer is, they will get to school. They may have a mismatched set of socks, but they will get to school. Life will suck for a while but there is a very good chance they will recover, your husband will recover, and they will survive. You are close to indispensable, but you are not. Your understanding of control should reflect that reality.

Fault Ego

But are the husbands not responsible in all this? Yes, they are responsible. I often go back and forth between doing what my wife wants me to do (and thinking I am doing it because of that) and doing what I want to do. And what do I find? I find that they really aren’t that far apart at all. So my wife asked me to change the kitty litter. Do I really think if she wasn’t around I wouldn’t ever change the kitty litter? If I am the stunted mental age of a 12 year old maybe. But I, and all other husbands, are not. We are adults. We are going to change the kitty litter. So, if she reminds me or I get to it first, who cares? She is not a nag when she is helping you do what you would do anyway. That person is called a partner.

See the entire series all at one time by clicking this magic word: Marriage
___________________

Drawing by Marty Coleman

Quote is Anonymous

___________________

Makeup as Brand – Makeup #5

by Marty Coleman | Oct 8, 2013 | Women and Makeup - 2013 | 0 comments

It’s over a week late and is bizarre, but it’s the final entry in my Makeup series.

Experiment

On the first day of my ‘Makeup’ series I drew this line drawing. I was just letting the drawing lead the way, without a real idea of what I wanted to do. I titled it ‘Makeup is Brand’ because I had started to think about our presentation of self in the world and how, in marketing and PR parlance, Brand identity is basically defined as what people think of you or your company. But I didn’t really know where to go with it at the time and the line drawing, without color, didn’t connect enough to do anything with it. So I went about drawing the other 4 napkins of the Makeup Series and kept this one off to the side. After I was done and had moved on to the next series I decided I would just play with this image. Just experiment with color and pattern. This is the result.

In the meanwhile, what do you think about the idea of ‘Makeup is Brand’?

_____________________

Drawing and commentary by Marty Coleman

_____________________

Prisoners – Movie Review

by Marty Coleman | Oct 7, 2013 | Movies & Events, Reviews & Sponsored Posts | 0 comments

Prisoners – 2013

How many of us with children have watched a TV news report about a child abduction and not said or thought something along the lines of, “If someone ever did that to my child I would hunt him down and torture him to death.”? If so, this movie is for you. The center of the movie is a torture/revenge fantasy for all those who would like to take action in the face of evil but can’t. It’s angry, it’s violent and it’s hard to watch at times.

It’s hard to watch because of the violence, but for me it was equally hard to watch because we as viewers know it’s premature. But we also feel the panic of the parent, knowing they only have so many hours to find the children or it will probably be too late. We would not and could not choose to do what this parent has done, but we wish we could to some degree.

The laconic, world-weary detective in charge of the case, played by Jake Gyllanhall, thinks the main suspect is creepy and knows he was in the vicinity, but he also has no evidence to hold him and believes he is mentally not really capable of pulling off a kidnapping crime like this. The torturer, a rough-hewn blue collar family man played by Hugh Jackman, is convinced that the guy is the guilty party. After he is let go, he kidnaps him and tortures him to exact information about the whereabouts of his child. It doesn’t work as expected but he does come close to destroying his family and the family of the other abducted girl in the meanwhile.

The film is shot in somber tones of grey and brown in low, natural light. With the outdoor locations shot in either driving rain or heavy dark skies and indoor scenes shot in boring living rooms and abandoned buildings the mood is of unrelenting tension and anxiety. What isn’t shot in those conditions is shot at night with it’s accompanying feeling of being lost and unable to discern what is really there and what is the product of a paranoid, angry mind.

The reason behind the movie’s title is evident as the movie moves along. All the characters, not just the abducted girls, are prisoners (mind you, you don’t know if the abducted girls are alive or dead throughout the movie but the title does suggest it might be the case). The parents and siblings are prisoners of the waiting game and of guilt. The detective, covered in telling tattoos, likely has a gang background of some sort, maybe even was in prison himself at one point. Besides that he is a prisoner of a Captain who is not helping his investigation very much, prisoner of a fatalistic mentality, prisoner of having to go by the book. The suspect is a prisoner, his mother is a prisoner, and even innocent (or not so innocent) bystanders are prisoners as well.

Is it a successful movie? Yes it is. The plot is convoluted but believable. The possible directions the story could go are manifold. The script and characters are believable and compelling, playing off each other’s personalities in intense and unexpected ways.

The main deciding factors in whether you might want to see the movie or not are whether you:

Like intense portrayals of anger and personal violence (not guns, but fists and other close up type violence and torture)
Like police work procedurals with evidence and emotion based hunts for criminals.
Like intense, character and plot driven drama.

Overall I give the movie 3 out of 5 napkins.

__________________

Movie review by Marty Coleman

__________________

Between Too Little and Too Much – Simplicity #5

by Marty Coleman | Oct 4, 2013 | Joshua Reynolds, Simplicity - 2009-2014 | 0 comments

If it’s not too much to ask, I hope you will take a little look at day #5 of Simplicity Week.

between too little and too much

Relative Simplicity

Because simplicity has such a strong definition in people’s minds we tend to forget that it, like many other things, is relative. What is simple for one person is not for another. This is true of clothing and fashion, as I explored yesterday with ‘the little black dress’ idea. It’s also true of food, housing, emotions, science, art, intellectual pursuits, travel, sports and most any other human activity.

Missing Simplicity

Simplicity is missing when whatever you are doing, looking at or feeling is encumbered by distracting and indulgent elements. Simplicity is also missing when you have such a lack and want of substance that you can’t function. If you have too much you can’t see the tree in the forest. If you have too little you don’t have a forest and as a result you have no trees to see either.

Purity

It seems to me that, no matter where your idea of simplicity falls on that relative scale, it is primarily about purity. You can see the beauty if the expressiveness is pure. You can see the equation if the logic is pure. You can see the love when the intent is pure. You can see the culture if the authenticity is pure.

How complex is your simplicity?

_______________

Drawing and commentary by Marty Coleman

Quote is a variation of one by Joshua Reynolds, 1723-1792, English painter.

Joshua Reynolds – Self Portrait, 1747-49

Joshua Reynolds Catalog – The Creation of Celebrity

Reynolds was a very famous painter and used his skill and networking savvy to create reputations for his clients that set off the modern idea of celebrity.

___________________________

The Little Black Dress – Simplicity #4

by Marty Coleman | Oct 3, 2013 | Leonardo Da Vinci, Simplicity - 2009-2014 | 0 comments

It’s here in black and white; day #4 of Simplicity Week.

little black dress - simplicity #4

A Definition

In many people’s estimation, the most visually iconic example of “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication” is ‘The Little Black Dress’. If it is not simple, or at least appear simple to the eye, it will by definition not be a ‘Little Black Dress’. If it is too ornate, overdone, or fussy it might still be a black dress and it might still be little, but it will not be a ‘little black dress’. A little black dress is simple and in it’s simplicity it becomes sophisticated.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s

The quintessential example is, once again, Audrey Hepburn. She starred in ‘Breakfast at Tiffany’s’ in the 1960s and her LBD (Little Black Dress) style became the instant example of contemporary style and sophistication.

Breakfast at Tiffany’s poster – 1961

Audrey Hepburn – Little Black Dress

CC

It didn’t start with Holly Golightly though. The LBD started with Coco Chanel. Before her the ornate, overwrought dresses of the Victorian era still said ‘sophistication’ to the general population. She (and others) changed that by creating dresses that were simple in line and decoration.