Being There - Until Your Dissociative Fugue

I just finished Being There by Jerzy Kosinski and it was a delightful little novel. I admired the pacing: in a matter of pages a simple minded gardener goes from homeless to being present with the president of the United States but it never felt forced or contrived…as if a play on the title of the book. The plot reminds me of a Woody Allen quotation: [paraphrasing] “80% of success is showing up.” And it is also funny and poignant (research backs this up - which is why people pay for likes on youtube and facebook) how Kosinsky draws the main character, Chance, into the being the icon of the fallacy ad populum. Once, popular, nothing he says can be wrong and it is HI-larious.

via GIPHY

But one line hit me hard:

“A man’s past cripples him. His background turns into a swamp and invites criticism.”

Ah, what must be the power of a dissociative fugue and waking up in Nebraska with no past to invite

criticism. I kid, sort of.

Of course, most people know of the movie with Peter Sellers which I now have to put into the queue. And while I figure I will appreciate the movie, I feel confident it will not come near his performance in Murder By Death. His character Sidney Wang tells little jokes like:

“Talk, like television in Honeymoon suite, very unnecessary.”

And one line in the movie goes unfinished so I ask you to provide the punch line:

"Treacherous road like fresh mushroom, must always…"

The Peak of Beauty

Saturday night I had the tv to myself and came across an old 80’s movie I never got around to…so I watched Clue, mainly because it looked a little like one of my favorite movies Murder ByDeath.

First things first, Clue is no Murder By Death. Clue is closer to murder by movie. Twas not for me.

But…the very, very voluptuous maid in Clue was played by actress Colleen Camp. I remembered her from the second Police Academy movie as the very firearm-informed love interest of Tackleberry.  The scene where she brings Tackleberry home to meet her family is uproarious. Uproarious I say.

Camp is breathtakingly beautiful in Clue and it got me to thinking about a person’s peak of beauty. We talk about an athlete’s peak and the peak of our mental abilities, so how about a peak of beauty?

But no you say, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, beauty is subjective, so finding a peak is futile.

Ah but let’s take a quick peak at a couple of pics.

Collen Camp in 1985’s Clue.

 

Now to give you an idea of how beautiful Camp is in 1985, take a look at her next to two other actresses from the movie:

Collen Camp at event of Knock Knock, 2015.

Now before you start crying about ageism and sexism and body shaming, let’s take a look at Marlon Brando.

Now most reasonable, sane people will undoubtedly say that the younger of the two people are the more beautiful of the two people.

Why?

Asking why here gets us into some really worm filled cans containing subjects such as evolution, proximate vs. ultimate causation, procreation fitness, and more.

But aren't these cans we should open? Can't we talk about beauty without fear of repercussion?

Don't we appreciate beauty because it is rare and doesn't rare run on a time continuum (if it were rare forever it wouldn't be rare!) and if it does, can't we then talk about a peak of beauty?  

Isn't this scene a thing of beauty?