Newsprint Time Machine

 An abandoned Los Angeles Times vending machine in Covina, California, October 2011 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

         For the many working years after I moved to Los Angeles in 1991, I subscribed to the daily Los Angeles Times.  Sometimes when I didn't get around to reading the paper, I would save the paper to read later.  As things would happen I often didn't read that paper and put it in an ever accumulating stack of newspapers, now and then tossing aside sections that didn't interest me--sports, classifieds, fashion or whatever they were--and keeping sections that seemed like they would be interesting to read sometime later.

         Over the course of many years I acquired several stacks of news papers--some at work and some at home.   After the California branch of the company where I worked shut down for good and I was left jobless, I toted those work stacks home and put them in my garage.  Since I was no longer working outside of the house, I was able to dwindle my newspaper stacks at a faster pace.  In order to save money, in 2012 I cut back my L.A. Times subscription from seven days to weekends only. Besides, there wasn't that much in the paper that interested me anymore.  And the paper was highly biased and annoying for me to read.   Soon I switched to Sunday only, mostly because of the ad and coupon sections and the crossword puzzle, but then I let that go.  Now I no longer get any papers.  But I still have some news paper stacks in my home office closet.

          Some of the papers remaining in those stacks are from 2012 to 2013.  Then like anomalies in the geological strata, there might be small layers of papers from 2002 or sometimes even older.  These days instead of reading a daily paper I'll read the papers stored in my closet.  Sometimes I feel like an archaeologist making discoveries about the past as I read old news stories.  The odd thing though is that some of those old stories seem like the same things that are in the news now or stories that seemed to foreshadow later events then still to come.

          It's like a story I was reading last week in a paper from 2012.  The section I was reading had an article about German Christmas markets where they sounded so fun and festive..  As I was reading though, I was thinking about the terrorism that came in 2016.  That story from 2012 stood out more for me now in the aftermath of the 2016 attack than it probably would have if I had read it back then.

          Lately I've been reading about movies that I hadn't realized had ever been released. Some I've added to my Netflix queue while most seem to be now mostly forgotten come and gone releases in the past.  Reading about films in retrospect makes me realize how much movie garbage actually does get released.  When I was reading contemporaneously to film releases, this ephemeral nature of pop culture wasn't always as evident.  How quickly we forget that next big thing after it has come and gone.

         Reading in the past might seem a bit absurd to many.  Consider that I'm no longer reading for the news of the day, but just to get a feel for the past.  Sometimes I wish those stacks contained newspapers from 20, 40, or even 100 years ago.  Old newspapers provide a window into events of days gone by.  The stories are history written from the perspective of those who were witnessing it.  Rather than the standoffish perspective analysis of history books written years later and based on research and author's interpretation, the old news stories are seen through the eyes and minds of those people back then as they perceived what was happening.

         If I could I'd much rather take an actual physical time travel trip back to old times to witness that world for myself.  Even if that world was something I had lived through, I'd like to go back with my mind of the future to see if what I remembered was really how it was.  Or to see if what I've heard from those older than I was really like how they described it all.

        Old movies and television shows provide some of that perspective.  But then that is part of the illusion of the past.  An image on the screen can never capture the actual immersion into that place in the past and having that experience of immersion is only a fantasy of my mind.  For now at least.  And probably forever.  Unless time travel ever does become a reality.

       For now I have a newsprint time machine in my closet.  The machine is dwindling as papers are read and deposited into my recycling bin.  No point in keeping them.  If I kept everything I'd eventually run out of room. I'd live in a past made of paper and newsprint.  It all needs to go.  And once I've rid myself of that time machine, I can read more of the books on my shelves, watch more of the movies I want to see, sort through old photos as I place them in albums...so much of the past with so little of the present to accommodate it all.

        What will the future do with all of the past anyway?

         Do you still read the newspaper?   What do you have a tendency to accumulate?   Will newspapers have much validity for future generations? 

Related articles

• A Different Take on Organizing Books
• Time Travel Has Never Been Easier!

Hot Chili for a Chilly Day

                        

           Recently I was reading a story in the Los Angeles Times about this thing called a "chili brick".  The chili brick of which they were speaking comes from the Dolores Canning Company in Los Angeles. 

           I was familiar with the Dolores pickled pork rinds and pigs feet, having seen them in the supermaket  and tempted to buy them.  However, it's one of those things I could never quite convince myself to take home with me. Years ago, back in Tennessee, I recall having tried pig's feet and liking them, but I just never got in a habit of keeping a jar of little feet in my refrigerator.  I figure if I had a jar of pickled pork rinds or pig's feet, the first few bites might be an interesting novelty, but the entire jar would never get eaten and have to be eventually thrown away.

         This chili brick was something which I'd never heard of, but it sounded intriguing.  My initial search began at a Ralph's supermarket near my home, but I did not see any chili bricks there.  Thanks to the internet I located the Dolores website to find out where I could find a chili brick.   I must have missed seeing chili bricks in Ralph's because they were listed as a source, but I wasn't going to take any chances.  I went to the Superior Market up the street from my home in Pico Rivera, since they cater mainly to the Hispanic market and I was certain that they would carry the complete line of Dolores products.

         My hunch was correct.  In a freezer case I found the 20 ounce sealed plastic tubs of chili bricks. They are apparently shipped to the stores frozen, but the company recommends that they be displayed in the regular meat counter which may have been where they were displayed at Ralphs.  A 20 oz chili brick at Superior Market was $3.29.  The brick consists of a flavorfully seasoned mixture of finely ground beef and beef hearts.  To prepare you just put the thawed brick in a saucepan and add water or beef broth and heat and stir until the brick is melted.  The pure meat mixture would be ideal for chili dogs or to add to any recipe calling for an all-meat chili mixture.

         Chili bricks were originated in the 1800s by the chuckwagon cooks on cattledrives.  They were made from dried beef and seasonings and formed into bricks for easy storage.  The dehydrated bricks would be mixed with water for an easy on the trail meal for hungry cowboys at the end of a long day driving cattle.  Dolores is one of the few remaining companies to market chili bricks.  They are primarily only available in Southern California but can be ordered online through the Dolores website. 

         I was very pleased with my first Dolores Chili Brick experience.  This was some of the best chili I've made and I have made some pretty darn good chili in the past.  More importantly though, my wife absolutely loved it.  If it pleases her palate then I think I've done pretty well.  By the way, I might mention lest any one think there is any bias here.  My chili experiment was inspired by the article I read in the paper and I was not compensated by the Dolores Company in any way.  However, if they want to send me some of those pickled pigs feet or pork rinds I'd be willing to try them and tell you readers what I think.

         So anyway, without any  further ado, here is my chili recipe:

      Arlee's Realee Tastee Chilee

                              (about 10 bowlfuls)
1  Dolores Chili Brick

1 can beef broth
1 14 1/2 oz can diced tomatoes in sauce
1 15 1/2 oz can kidney beans
1 15 1/2 oz can chili beans in zesty sauce
1  29 1/2 oz can of hominy
1   4 oz can green chiles, diced
1 or 2 chopped brown onions
1/2 cup of left over coffee from breakfast
1 tbsp  McCormick Tex Mex Chili Beef Seasoning
3 tbsp   Brown sugar
3 tbsp  granulated sugar
2 tbsp  honey
1/2 cup marsala

        As you are melting down the chili brick in a sauce pan, add in the can of heated up beef broth.   After you've let the chili and broth mix simmer a bit, put it in the crock pot and add in the rest of the ingredients and cook on high for a couple of hours and then turn down to low and you can cook it all day and get it whenever you feel like eating it. If cooking all day and leaving it, you can just start off on low and leave it there.    Refrigerate any leftovers and it'll taste even better the next day.

      Add whatever fixings you like.  It's mighty good just plain with some crackers or cornbread, but I also like to add some chopped onions and shredded cheddar cheese.

       If you want to make it even meatier, throw in some ground beef, smoked sausage, cooked stew beef, or anything else.  Why you can even add cubed smoked ham or spam and that's pretty tasty.  The point is you can add whatever else you want or adjust it in any way you like.  The sugar and honey make for a sweeter chili, but if you want it hot and spicy go crazy adding whatever kinds of peppers you like.  I like it hot, but my wife doesn't do well with real spicy and I figure I can always add some Tabasco when I fix my bowl.  I made some corn muffins to go with my batch of chili.

         This is so easy because you just have to toss it all together and let it cook in the crock pot and forget about it.  I can't resist stirring it periodically and giving it a taste test, but you could put it on in the morning, go to work, and when you come home dinner is waiting.

          An ice cold beverage and some good hot chili.  There you go cowboys and cowgirls-- eat your vittles.

Stop The Presses?

Are Newspapers dying?


         Please say it ain't so.  I have loved newspapers since childhood.  I remember back in the late 50's and early 60's when as school children we would have to clip out an article on certain days to present before the class for current events.  I would scour the depths of the paper to find some bizarre ariticle that I was sure no one else would be presenting.  I would read the daily funnies and work the crossword puzzles.  The newspaper provided me hours of entertainment, enjoyment, and education.

          Back when I was in high school and college, one might have thought I was in danger of becoming one of those packrat whackos that you read about who have a house filled with stacks of newspapers. Indeed, I had two stacks:  the papers that I still needed to read (I read nearly everything in the paper and would often get behind) and the papers I needed to take to the recycling center (I was into recycling before it was fashionable, I saved newspapers because you could  get money for the used newsprint).  Reading newspapers was one of my favorite forms of recreation.

         Clipping news articles was also a hobby of sorts.  I would look for unusual articles for story ideas, clip them, and save them.  I still have a file drawer reserved for these articles and even now sometimes add new articles to the file.  The newspaper was such a wonderful source for current information, as well as interesting features.  The newspaper was written for us--the people.

         What happened?  I think newspapers lost sight of the original intended mission.  They are supposed to be feeding the populace --expressing the "vox populi".  Of course the papers often espoused certain agendas, but they were something in which the masses were interested and could get behind.  And there has always been some media manipulation and scandulous behavior, but that was part of the game too. It was all broadscale and bigger than life when it came to some of the front page and editorials and that was part of the fun.  Now the agendas have often become narrower and less savory to most readers.

         Why read the paper for news when all of the news can be found instantly on TV, radio, and the internet?  For that matter, the internet has it all -- recipes, movie reviews, commentary, sports, and anything else that we used to go to the newspaper to get.  Even coupons-- you can't find as many coupons in the paper as you used to and now they come via email or are found on internet sites.  Or classifieds-- why advertise in the paper when you've got resources like Craigslist or the mailout adzines like the PennySaver. 

         The newspaper stopped serving me years ago.  I now only get the L.A Times week-end editons delivered (they throw in Thursday at no charge) and that's only for the crosswords, Sunday coupon sections, and entertainment section.  I have the extra bonus of some occasionally interesting articles, but I would never miss them if I didn't have them.  The Times does not speak to me.  In fact it condemns much of what I believe and does not address most of my interests.  Instead the Times promotes agendas which I am against and lifestyles that are not mine.  Even the restaurant and travel reviews --it might occasionally be interesting to read about places where the meals are $100 a person or rooms are $500 a night, but those are not the types of places that fit my budget.  Please--speak to me.  Are those people you are speaking to really reading your boring rag?

      In my opinion, newspapers as we have known them in the past are dead.  They will keep getting smaller and smaller until the big ones are essentially gone or somehow migrated to the internet as they are doing now. In the future I think we will see more localized community papers, more special interest papers, and smaller agenda driven papers.  All of these are out there now and have been for years.  But now they will be all there is.  The days of the newspaper with a huge circulation are going to be over in the near future.

       What do you think?  Am I right or wrong on this?  Where do you get most of your news and information now?  Will you miss the newspaper?  What do you like about newspapers and what do you dislike?   Do you have a good local paper that you enjoy?    Does anyone reading this now work for a newpaper, and if so what is your view?

Bad Movies-- Not Like In Bad, But Not Very Good

          When I'm talking about bad movies in this article, I'm not necessarily referring to rated X, or evil, or morally offensive, although it could also be any or all of those.  I'm talking about that genre of movie that is sometimes referred to as "so bad that it's good".  These "bad movies" are the ones that become standards by which we measure how bad a movie can be.

          One of my favorite good movies of all time is ED WOOD with Johnny Depp and Martin Landau, who won an Oscar in this film for his portrayal of Bela Lugosi.  This film is a bio-pic based on the life of bad filmmaker Ed Wood, who has been often referred to as the worst filmmaker of all time. The film ED WOOD is one of the best films about optimism ever made. If you have not seen this film, I would highly recommend it for the acting and story. The film certainly paints a far brighter picture of the character of the real life Ed Wood, but in essence I think Tim Burton, the director, accurately captured the spirit of the early years of this bad film director.

         Ed Wood the director made a lot of bad movies.  As far as I know he never made a good movie,  but his movies were so bad that he has earned a place in cinema history.  The most well-known film that Wood made is certainly the science fiction absurdity PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE.  I recall seeing this as a child back in the late 50s and being quite frightened. The movie impressed me so at the time that it stayed with me for many years, but I never saw it again until the 90's. Watching the film as an adult I realized how absurd  and unrealistic were the acting, dialogue, and special effects. This is why the film has achieved cult status.  If you've never seen this movie and you like campy, 50s sci-fi, then you might get a kick out of PLAN 9.  This is not my recommendation, I'm just saying some of you might get a kick out of it.

            What has made me think about Ed Wood is a film that I saw recently called THE ROOM.  I had read an article in the Los Angeles Times about this film and became curious. The Times story told about how this film had achieved cult status and was playing to sell-out midnight movie audiences. The article went on to compare the status of the film to ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW , a schlocky rock musical from the mid 70s. Most people are now familiar with ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW but if you're not the film has been playing to midnight movie audiences for over 30 years now. It is not so much of a movie that you would go to see as it is an event that you dress in costume for and you participate along with the film when you are in the audience. If you watch it at home you're not going to have the same experience as you would when seeing it with an audience.  You really have to attend a showing to get the full effect, but if you're like me it shows past your bedtime.  If you have never been to a showing of ROCKY HORROR , and can stay up that late and enjoy utter wackiness then you might like to check it out.

             Now comparing THE ROOM, which was first released in 2003, to ROCKY HORROR I do not understand.  Maybe it's a new generation thing.  The schlock-rock musical is a fun fest where you can dance, sing, and act along with intentionally hokey dialogue.  THE ROOM was originally intended to be serious. After it was released some critics were calling it the worst movie ever made.  Wikipedia states that at it's premiere "people in the theater began laughing at the film within the first ten minutes, and by the end, some of the crowd were "rolling around" and "crying with laughter"." 

           Tommy Wiseau was the star of the film and also wrote the screenplay, produced,  and directed it as well.  He states that everything he did in the film was done intentionally, however his attempts certainly did not come out as he planned.  He was attempting to make a Tennessee Williams style drama filmed ala David Lynch.  Unintentionally he ended up with an absurd film with which a certain segment of movie audience became endeared.  So after having read the Times article I felt compelled to see this movie for myself, especially being a big David Lynch fan.  I won't say it's the worst movie I have ever seen by a long shot, but it's pretty bad.  The dialogue and acting are pretty laughable and the story is rather peculiar to say the least. I guess I'm glad I watched it to satisfy my curiosity about what I'd read. I would not recommend it to anyone unless they were a fan of bad movie-making.

           I'm not sure what it is about camp, schlock, and bad movies, but some people just love them.  And I guess it's especially more fun when you're in a crowd and everybody's laughing and having fun with it.  I don't know how Tommy Wiseau really feels about the reception to his film, but I guess he's thankful that he's making money with it and apparently has been pretty good-natured about the whole thing.

          If you've seen THE ROOM what did you think of it?  Do you like to see bad movies?  What particularly bad movies have you seen and what made them so bad?  How do you think you would feel if you created a work that you deemed very serious and instead it was received with such ridicule that it gained notoriety?  If you have to pick one, what's more important to you: the status of your work or the money you make from it?

          One final note--at the beginning of November I stated that I was hoping to gain 100 followers by the end of the month.  At last count I had 57.  After a little over two months of blogging, I guess that's really not too bad.  I'm not displeased with the count at all and I am quite thankful for all those who have signed on to follow this blog.  And if you don't follow yet then how's about you clicking on that little ole follower button there on the right?