June 14, 2011
The Great Cancer Hoax: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down...
Go to Dr. Mercola's website for Sat. 6/11 and hit 'The great cancer hoax' and then watch the movie for free through 6/20. The title is 'Burzynski: The movie'. Tell everyone you know about it. http://vimeo.com/24821365
Burzynski the Movie tells the story of Polish doctor Stanislaw Burzynski, who developed the gene-targeted cancer treatment method using antineoplastons.
April 30, 2011
King Lear
April 09, 2011
Putin: Freedom Fighter
I, for one, hope that the rebels in Libya prevail and that Gaddafi, his sons, and all his supporters are totally eliminated. I don’t, for a second, believe in an afterlife, but if there were one, I would passionately hope that Gaddafi and his forenamed brothers in horrors find a special, reserved place. We can dream, can’t we?
March 19, 2011
UN Action on Libya. Finally.
Amazing. Even Russia and China, who never saw a situation that justified foreign intervention, abstained but did not vote against it.
Finally we can act by principle and not some feel good barometer and not by a balance sheet consideration. This is the chance for the US to fundamentally reorder, at last, its relations with key Arab states.
We have the chance to support both the government and the democratic movements erupting throughout the Middle East. We have the chance, for the first time, to change the narrative, fundamentally, throughout this area and hopefully throughout Africa. Perhaps we can show, finally, that we can practice what we preach.
Even Al Jazeera and the Arab League (another first) support a no-fly zone and arms for the rebels. There are many who say the slaughter of the rebels is very unfortunate but we must be purely objective. To that I say, “Never at the expense of being human.” If we lose our humanity what do we possibly have left of any value?
“Responsibility to protect”, adopted by the UN in 2005 and affirmed by the Obama administration stresses the responsibility of the international community to protect people threatened with mass atrocities including by their own government.
Remember, we’re not talking about troops on the ground, we’re talking about a no-fly zone and, if they keep on attacking (and there has, as yet, been no let up) the destruction of all government armed vehicles.
Some of the arguments against it are: “If a civilian population takes up arms they should no longer be considered civilians. Gaddafi has every right to reign his country back in.” This is nonsense. Civilians took up arms only after many were killed by Gaddafi’s thugs.
“Intervention will violate Libya’s sovereignty. As soon as intervention begins the Libyan people will start to lost control of their own county and future.” That sacred word of the non-interventionists: Sovereignty. Totally flawed reasoning. When you threaten and kill your own people then you have given up the right to call this your country. The whole point is the Libyan people don’t have control of their own country. That control rests with Gaddafi and his hired killers. The Libyan people want to take it away from them. Human life trumps sovereignty.
“No-fly zones and supplying arms will not be able to halt the conflict and will lead to more bloodshed, not less.” The fact is, one of the key reasons the rebels have been losing this war is the air supremacy of Gaddafi. It is ludicrous to think that a no-fly zone will lead to the loss of more life that allowing Gaddafi a free hand would. If he prevails by using jets, tanks and gunships, there will be a terrible settling of scores. He has sworn that he will exterminate every single rebel fighter and supporter.
If you don’t believe it, you haven’t’ followed Gaddafi’s past actions (one of the biggest supporters of international terrorism, Lockerbie bombing, etc. Or you’ve been living in a cave for the past 41 years.)
“We have no obligation nor owe anything to the rebels opposing Gaddafi.” Dead wrong. We helped (along with Europe) to enable this monster, Gaddafi, over the past 41 years. So we cannot just avert our gaze and wash our hands.
“A justly motivated revolutionary movement doesn’t need outside assistance to prevail.” Oh, really. Without Frances’s help it is highly unlikely we would have prevailed against the British.
“This is like the invasion of Iraq repeating itself.” Wrong. That was an illegal bombing and an illegal invasion. Here, the international community has spoken and through the UN Security Council a no-fly zone is clearly what is wanted by the majority of rebel fighters and the Libyan people. Therefore no self-determination issue exists.
In the 90s, when the Rwanda massacre was on the verge of beginning, Clinton, Annan and the UN and Europe did nothing and after the massacre started, still did nothing. Like today, there were many people who said we shouldn’t get involved. Of course, after the numbers were released, 800,000 to one million murdered, they became very quiet. When the slaughter started in Bosnia and Croatia, the same protest against involvement. And of course, most recently, Darfur. Over 350,000 killed by Bashir and his thugs. I spent four years working for the “Save Darfur” movement and we tried desperately to enact, at the least, a no-fly zone, all to no avail. Many of the same people are against the no-fly zone in Libya. They were wrong then and they are wrong now. I am convinced they will never change.
The Libyan people are demanding the right to choose their own destiny. They do not want foreign troops on their soil. They just want us to level the playing field. Without this their struggle is doomed. If we don’t act to stop the killing in Libya, how can the US and Europe credibly encourage the Egyptian military to hold free and fair elections, push for commitments for non-violence by new political parties and convince the Arab autocrats to reform? Inaction is a statement to all brutal regimes.
March 15, 2011
Black Leaders: Their Romance With Qaddafi and Other Dictators
Join the 2011 Boycott to Save Seals
March 08, 2011
The Tracer
February 07, 2011
Egyptian Heroine
>
January 17, 2011
December 21, 2010
A Sense of Outrage
December 20, 2010
No danger from Wikileaks
Cross-posted to Salon.com
December 06, 2010
The Eyes of Van Gogh
November 03, 2010
The Life and Legacy of Simon Wiesenthal
The Passion of Joan of Arc
October 20, 2010
Nobel Peace Prize
It has been a long time since the committee honored someone for a profound commitment to individual liberty.
July 30, 2010
In whose world is this sane?
Meanwhile, those exploding budgets increasingly line the coffers of private firms who provide not only an arsenal of spy gadgets, but some 30 percent of the staff at the intelligence agencies. Assuming that private contracts continue to account for about 70 percent of the intelligence budget, the firms in the secret sector are competing for some $50 billion annually in tax money. (By way of comparison, the global movie industry pulled in a hair under $30 billion in 2009.)
I hope you'll read the article and pass it along.
July 08, 2010
Othello
June 16, 2010
Killing Whales is a Crime
Gulf Oil Spill
April 14, 2010
Lear Seeks Liberation in Madness - A rebuttal
This cannot be the King Lear I’m familiar with. The main quality that gives Lear epic status is his implacable nature and total refusal to give in to adversity. Lear has always taken huge pride in his total control of himself and everyone around him.
Note what Kent says to him in 3/6 after his mind is broken: ’ O pity! Sir, where is the patience now
That you so oft have boasted to retain?’
For Lear, the idea of going mad would be the most atrocious thing imaginable and his greatest battle is against encroaching madness.
Note what he says throughout the play until his mind cracks:
1/5 ’ O, let me not be mad, not mad, sweet heaven! Keep me in temper; I would not be mad!’
2/4 ’ I prithee daughter, do not make me mad…."
‘You heavens, give me that patience, patience I need…'
'O’ fool, I shall go mad.'
3/2 ‘No I will be the pattern of all patience. I will say nothing.’
‘My wits begin to turn.’
3/4 'But I will punish home! No, I will weep no more….'
'Pour on I will endure.’
'O,that way madness lies; let me shun that.'
'No more of that.’ ‘This tempest will not give me leave to ponder on things would hurt me more.’
This is most definitely not a man seeking an outlet in madness . One final thought. The scene at Dover, 3/6, where Lear enters mad is invariably played quietly, as though he were soothed and free of pain. Shakespeare had something very different in mind. Near the end of the scene, when Lear is surrounded by French soldiers he says, in what to me is one of the most powerfully dramatic and horrific lines in all of Shakespeare: 'Let me have surgeons; I am cut to the brains.’
That line is the key to Lear’s mental condition here. Rather than quiet and subdued, throughout the scene Lear is going through the torments of hell. Anything less is a betrayel of the character.
cross-posted to DC Theatre Scene
April 06, 2010
The Eyes of Van Gogh
April 02, 2010
Thank you all
Group: Film Independent
What a wonderful and inspired portrayal of a troubled mind! Posted by Stanley N. Lozowski
Group: Film Independent
Congratulations on the new film. I am a Van Gogh fan so the topic matter is of much interest. I have a screening room in New Mexico and would love to show your film. Posted by Kenneth Segura Knoll
Group: DC Media
Excellent hair and makeup! Captured Von Gogh's self-portrait look. Perhaps you'd consider a voiceover like the one I did for Random House Books?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YdT8S0RT9Qk
Group: DC Media
Looks like an awesome film, Alexander! When will it premiere? Posted by Katherine Hutt
Group: Filmmakers
The trailer looks excellent and from what I see the performances are great. Let us know if we can be of any assistance in the musical score department on any future productions----Good Luck, Brad Hord
Group: Media & Entertainment Professionals
Cool trailer, the man playing Van Gogh looks just like him! Good LUCK!Mike E.T.http://www.miketrapp.com Posted by Michael Trapp
Group: Independent Filmmakers and Screenwriters
Looks very intense and I like its tone when compared to, "Lust for Life". Posted by Brian Duggan
Group: Actors and Casting Directors
Impressive. Nicely done, Alexander! Posted by Lee Armstrong
Group: Actors and Casting Directors
Wow, that was hard to watch. You captured a lifetime in Three minutes, can't wait for the film. Posted by Paul Marshall
Group: Actors and Casting Directors
Looks good. Great job casting! Posted by Tony Folden
March 25, 2010
Assault on the Fourth Amendment
March 12, 2010
Women as Tools of War
March 11, 2010
New trailer for The Eyes of Van Gogh
February 21, 2010
Exploring King Lear
Cross-posted to E-Notes
January 15, 2010
An End to the Myth of the Tortured Soul??
Regarding Theo's support of Vincent, I agree that Vincent would never have been able to achieve what he did without his support. However, Vincent and Theo came to an agreement in 1882 whereby Theo would send Vincent money and in return he would get to keep all of Vincent's work and and do with it what he pleased. Certainly this was not a handout but reasonable recompense. Finally, the title of this article is totally misleading since there is nothing in it that indicates that Van Gogh was not a tortured soul.
January 07, 2010
Getting Away with Torture
January 01, 2010
Robert Barnete Studio
Robert Barnete was most of all a painter of passionate motion, which found its greatest expression in the equestrian arts and within the culture of Spain.
During his mid-career he fell under the enchantment of the Bedouin and the Blue People.
Although born in New York, his work took him from Mexico to Paris to Madrid to Tangiers and finally to London.
November 19, 2009
Van Gogh in Taiwan
November 02, 2009
An artist making art
October 17, 2009
Polanski's Supporters
September 24, 2009
September 22, 2009
Letters of Vincent van Gogh
For more information go here.
September 04, 2009
Gauguin and van Gogh in Arles
In my film The Eyes of van Gogh, Paul Gauguin’s arrival at the Yellow House in Arles is the happiest day in Vincent van Gogh’s life. He will now be able to work with the man who, among living artists, he regards with the highest respect and esteem. He’ll have a friend and companion in art. From this will come his greatest dream: the realization of the School of the South. From this day forth, he believes, everything he’s dreamt of is possible.
To prepare for Gauguin’s arrival, Vincent has been working day and night with little sleep or food. He’s determined to show Gauguin as much good work as possible. All of Vincent’s hyperactivity and nervousness are focused completely on Gauguin. He and what he represents to Vincent are the emotional center of the scene. In his overwhelming excitement and eagerness he cuts off thoughts in mid-sentence and then jumps to a different thought entirely.
September 02, 2009
Aural Hallucinations in the film The Eyes of Van Gogh
June 15, 2009
Character Analysis: Death of a Salesman
It is a sad and frightening truth that Linda, Willy's wife, who is so totally devoted and loyal to him, who is his pillar of strength, who will let no one speak ill of him (no matter how justified it may be), who does everything possible to make his life peaceful and happy, who knows so well how to handle him, who can anticipate almost his every mood and who prides herself on understanding him so well, in actuality knows Willy very little.
She encourages him to stay at a job he is obviously unfit for; she is unaware of his self-esteem crisis and his pie-in-the-sky delusions; she discourages him from starting other pursuits (this because of her ultra-conservative nature); and is completely bewildered by his suicide, despite the clues that are dropped everywhere.
Her fundamental decency, integrity, loyalty and love are remarkable and unquestionable, but it must be realized that she unwittingly feeds Willy’s problem. The love and devotion she gives him, however, are truly a wonder. Tragically, Willy never understands the depth of her commitment.
Fundamentally, Biff is decent, gentle and sensitive. He is extremely stubborn, with a strong independent streak. Right to the very end it is love, not hatred, that drives the relationship between Biff and Willy. Biff hates Willy for betraying his mother, but still loves him deeply for the love and affection Willy lavished on him. He is furious with himself for being unable to remove what he considers this yoke of love, and this exacerbates his antagonism toward Willy.
It is said that Biff’s life is ruined after discovering that Willy is a philanderer. Certainly, it is a tremendous setback, but there are other factors at work here. His innate nature plus his prior experiences and conditioning are of major importance. It is not the discovery of the event itself that causes Biff to give up and leaves him unable to cope with the experience.
Memory and Flashback Scenes in Death of a Salesman
In all of the memory scenes Willy, unlike the other characters, never actually leaves the present, but re-experiences the past. In effect, he revisits the pivotal moments in his life and tries to make sense of them. Subconsciously, however, he already knows what has and what will happen.
Example: In Act ll when he is in the hotel room with the woman and hears the knocking, he knows that if he opens the door it will be disastrous, but is so lost in the memory he cannot comprehend why. The memory scenes are subjective and emotional; a pure visualization of Willy’s feelings and thoughts. Thus, they are fragmented, elliptical and epitomized. He will sometimes remember four or five separate events within one sequence.
The set must be light, minimal and portable. There should be as much free and open space as possible. The confines of the home should be created primarily by the lights, not by actual, permanent walls. We should be able to expand and retract easily and naturally. When his brother Ben enters, for example, we must go from the confines of the kitchen to the open space of Alaska, Africa and the prairies.
Rarely will there be a blackout. Lights will frequently overlap or cross-fade. The action must never stop. Willy’s mind is on a collision course and the lights must reflect this. The set and lights must serve Willy’s mind, which is constantly changing, striving, searching.
There can come a point in a man’s life when it is too late. After this point is reached the truth, and not delusion, becomes the killer. Contrary to most opinion, Willy does achieve self-awareness, and this very awareness is something he is unable to come to terms with. He cannot live with the reality and so hangs on to the delusion and dies with it.
Death of a Salesman is a tragedy of the first order. Consider: a theme of epic importance; the strength, immensity and uncompromising nature of Willy’s struggle; his fatal flaw; his intensity, passion, love, devotion and total single-mindedness; his ultimate destruction; Biff’s ultimate self-awareness. And finally, the fact that true tragedy must have the potential for creating self-awareness in the audience. From this will follow a purging of the soul. Death of a Salesman most definitely creates this self-awareness.
Death of a Salesman: Director’s Notes
This is not the story of a salesman: It is the story of Willy Loman who just happened to be a salesman. This is not the story of Everyman. Willy’s passion, love and drive go way beyond the norm. Perhaps most people will relate to Willy, be moved by him and, most importantly, think, contemplate and learn from his life and his mistakes.
Self-esteem based upon the approval of others is evanescent and leads to self-delusion and self-destruction. This, to me, is the primary theme of Death of a Salesman. All of Willy’s other problems--his lack of self-knowledge, his refusal to follow his natural instincts, his constant self-doubt, confusion and lack of confidence (no sooner does he make a decision then he needs to be reassured that it’s the right one), his stubborn, pigheaded determination to do things his own way, positive that he’s right and yet in the next moment afraid that he’s wrong, begging for another opinion, the very bad influence he is on his sons--all of this stems from the primary theme.
Having achieved his self-esteem through the approval of others, Willy has watched these ‘approvers’ go to their graves and take his self-esteem with them. As the play progresses, it becomes more and more difficult for Willy to lie and delude himself. One after another, all the myths he has created in the past are exposed before his eyes. There is no self-pity, only frustration, bewilderment and epic struggle. The more he struggles the faster his decline. Subconsciously, Willy knows where he went wrong, but consciously is unable to come to terms with it. The constant and horrendous turmoil Willy endures is based upon his subconscious awareness and conscious refutation.
Both Biff and Happy, his sons, are confused, but Biff is desperately searching for answers; Happy is under the delusion that he is searching, but in many ways has found his niche. Like most womanizers, he’s mindless and self-gratifying. In no way is Hap a young Willy as has sometimes been stated. He lacks the love, passion and depth. Hap is puerile where Biff is undisciplined. Biff, being deeper and more sensitive than Happy, suffers more from Willy’s influence.
May 17, 2009
Art historians claim Van Gogh's ear 'cut off by Gauguin'
I understand and appreciate their fascination with this extraordinary individual.
Nonetheless, it must be said that the entire basis of their book rests on a regrettable but enormous misunderstanding of what it was van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo and to Paul Gauguin. That, plus a very selective editing of the same letters and an apparent lack of awareness of certain key facts about Gauguin, led them to a very flawed premise. They then proceeded to shore up their thesis with assertions easily rebutted and with one ludicrous and fabricated incident.
Frankly, I am astonished and appalled by the unthinking reception and attention this book has received from the press.
The authors have concluded that Gauguin, not Vincent himself, is responsible for the mutilation of van Gogh’s ear. They state “We carefully re-examined witness accounts and letters written by both artists and we came to the conclusion that van Gogh was terribly upset over Gauguin’s plan to go back to Paris.” This in itself is no revelation. Anyone who has studied the letters van Gogh wrote to his brother Theo after he mutilated himself, as well as the references to the incident in Gauguin’s memoirs, would know this.
Again quoting the authors: “In the first letter that Vincent van Gogh wrote after the incident, he told Gauguin, ‘I will keep quiet about this and so will you.’ That apparently was the beginning of the ‘pact of silence.’”
The first letter that Vincent wrote after the maiming was to Theo on January 1, 1889, eight days after the event. On the lack of the letter he wrote a note to Gauguin questioned the necessity of having Theo come to Arles. “Look here – was my brother Theo’s journey really necessary, old man?” It pained Vincent terribly to live off of Theo; the last thing he wanted was to burden him with this.
Vincent never wrote “I will keep silent about this and so will you.” There is absolutely no reference to this so called “pact of silent” anywhere in the letter. The only reference to silence, per se, is in a letter to Theo written January 17, 1889 where he mentions that after the incident he had continually asked for Gauguin but he refused to come. He wrote, “How can Gauguin pretend that he was afraid of upsetting me by his present, when he can hardly deny that he knew I kept asking for him continually, and that he was told over and over again that I insisted on seeing him at once. Just to tell him that we should keep it between him and me, without upsetting you. He would not listen.” Meaning that Gauguin did tell Theo what had happened. There was no cover-up. No pact of silence. How could there have been since Vincent makes it clear in this letter that Gauguin refused to see him after the mutilation. Any silence Vincent wanted was in regard to Theo’s learning what he had done to himself – completely in keeping with his character, actions and statements throughout his life, up to and including his suicide, when he pleaded with Dr. Gachet not to let Theo know he shot himself.
Another point: The telegram Gauguin sent to Theo telling him what happened was sent the following morning – after the injury – when Gauguin, seeing a crowd at the Yellow House, discovered what Vincent had done. Obviously, if he had injured Vincent, he wouldn’t have retired to a hotel and let his friend bleed to death, but would have notified Theo immediately.
Kaufmann also cites correspondence between van Gogh and his brother in which the painter hints at what happened that night without directly breaking the “pact of silence’ writing that, “…it is lucky that Gauguin does not have a machine gun or other firearms.” This is very selective editing. What Vincent actually wrote in that letter of January 17, 1889 is, “Fortunately, Gauguin and I and other painters are not yet armed with machine guns and other very destructive elements of war.” He was expressing his disdain for violence disguised as sport.
Finally, again quoting the authors: ‘On the evening of December 23, 1888 van Gogh, seized by an attack of a metabolic disease, became very aggressive when Gauguin said he was leaving him for good. The men had a heated argument near the brothel and Vincent might have attacked his friend. Gauguin, wanting to defend himself and wanting to get rid of ‘the madman’ drew his weapon and made a move towards van Gogh and by that he cut off his left ear.”
Several points: 1. It was not Vincent’s entire ear that was cut off, but rather the lower third of the ear. 2. If in the course of a heated argument Vincent attacked him, Gauguin would have had no need for a sword since he was an expert boxer and would have made short work of a totally inept fighter like Vincent. (While in Brittany in 1893, Gauguin was attacked by a large group of sailors. He more than held his own until he tripped and severely injured his leg.) 3. Gauguin was also an expert swordsman. The swords he fenced with were, of course, foils. For those who don’t know, a foil is a thrusting, not a cutting, weapon and does not have a cutting edge. The idea of Gauguin striking downward with a foil and cutting off a third of Vincent’s lower ear is ludicrous; in fact, damn near impossible. If Gauguin did have a cutting sword (which, of course, he didn’t) and was able to cut of Vincent’s lower ear, rest assured he would have cut off part of his face and shoulder with it.
How sad this whole thing is. As I have written before, there are more myths and misinformation about Vincent van Gogh than any artist who ever lived. What should capture the attention of the world are the facts: The most significant and revelatory things about van Gogh are not that he cut off his earlobe or that he suffered attacks of madness or that he committed suicide, but rather that he lived life to the fullest, realized his artistic potential as much as humanly possible, fought magnificently against the attacks and all forms of adversity - never willingly giving in to them. Most important, he created a superb body of work that will live as long as the human race survives. The theme of his life is his quest to achieve immortality through his work.
May 09, 2009
Vincent van Gogh Myths: Myth #4
The truth: Vincent van Gogh admitted himself to the insane asylum at St. Remy voluntarily because he wanted to be isolated from the outside world; because he considered himself a potential danger to others; and because he wanted to be in a protective environment.
His brother Theo was strongly against his going the St. Remy and wanted Vincent to come to Paris where Theo and Johanna, his wife, could look after him.
May 07, 2009
The Where did Vincent van Gogh shoot himself myth
The myth: Vincent shot himself in the chest.
The truth: No. The reason Vincent van Gogh died slowly and lingered for two days was because he shot himself in the upper abdomen rather than the chest, which had been his intention. The wound he suffered was not necessarily fatal but he no longer had the will to live.
May 06, 2009
The Only One Painting Vincent van Gogh Myth
The myth: Vincent van Gogh sold only one painting.
The truth: It made little difference in his life but van Gogh, in fact, sold two paintings ( and may have sold one or two others as well). On October 3, 1888 his brother, Theo, wrote to the London art dealers, Sulley & Lori. In this letter he said: "We have the honour to inform you that we have sent you the two pictures you have bought and duly paid for; a landscape by Camille Corot,...a self portrait by V. van Gogh." Another picture, therefore, was sold in England nearly fifteen months before Anna Boch bought The Red Vines.
May 05, 2009
Vincent van Gogh and Dr. Peyron Myth 1
The myth: The institution of St. Remy and the man in charge, Dr. Peyron, strongly encouraged Vincent van Gogh to paint and cared for him using advanced modalities in the treatment of psychiatric illness.
The truth: The institution of St. Remy never encouraged Vincent to work; on the contrary, Dr. Peyron opposed the idea from the very beginning and with the greatest reluctance allowed him to paint. I am very glad to hear that they now offer workshops in art therapy, etc. but this was definitely not the case when Vincent was there. The sole treatment was hydrotherapy-hot baths, twice a week. The idea of any kind of work was anathema. There were no books in the asylum, no distractions except bowls and draughts. Vincent found it loathsome that they were given nothing to do. As he said, they were like vegetables, sitting around all day eating, digesting and waiting for their next meal.
If the authorities today claim otherwise they're lying. Vincent's letters prove it. Vincent suffered four attacks at St. Remy. After the final one Dr. Peyron forbid him to paint in spite of his pleading. It was then that he left St.Remy.
David Sweetman's The Love of Many Things - A Life of Vincent Van Gogh corroborates the official version. And what, pray tell, was Sweetman’s source? Probably the institution’s own account. Who do we believe, Vincent and Theo or Sweetman and the institution?
Vincent wrote to Theo at this time: “M. Salles has been to St. Remy – they are not willing to let me point outside the institution.” April1889. Theo, over the strong objections of the administrators, persuaded them to allow Vincent to paint and arranged that he should have two rooms, one to be used as a bedroom and the other as a studio. Both, mere dingy cells with bars like all the other cells. Sweetman's description makes it sound like a resort.Reiterating my earlier point, prior to Vincent, no patient at St. Remy was ever allowed to do any work of any kind. Their whole philosophy was to keep all the patients as quiet and inactive as possible. Vincent again, “Above all I must not waste my time, I am going to set to work again as soon as M. Peyron permits it; if he does not permit it, then I shall be through with this place. … The rather superstitious ideas they have here about painting sometimes depress me more than I can tell you.” January 1890. For them to claim that they pioneered the treatment of psychiatric illness (at least when Vincent was there) is belied directly by Vincent’s own account. Again: “The treatment of patients in the hospital is certainly easy for they do absolutely nothing; they leave them to vegetate in idleness and feed them with stale and slightly spoiled food.” Sept. 1889. “The food is so-so. Naturally it tastes rather moldy, like in a cockroach infested restaurant in Paris.” May 1889. As to the people, Peyron included, who ran the institution, “Perhaps they would like nothing better than for the thing to become chronic, and we should be culpably stupid to give into that. They inquire a great deal too much to my liking about what not only I but also what you earn, and so on.” August 1889.
Vincent’s stay at St. Remy was indeed a nightmare. For them now to try to rewrite history is very typical and very wrong. I made my film The Eyes of Van Gogh to set the record straight, to show what really happened there and also to reveal the truth behind his relationships to his brother, his father and Gauguin. All from his point of view.
April 11, 2009
April 01, 2009
DARFUR: THE PEOPLE THE WORLD HAS FORGOTTEN
March 04, 2009
Bashir: Murderer
February 24, 2009
ART AND HUMAN REALITY
Perfectly said.