Школу закрыли полностью: в Роспотребнадзоре рассказали о всплеске гриппа в тульском регионе

Полностью приостановлено обучение в 1 школе региона, частично в 6 классах 3 школ и 3 группах 2 детских садов Тульской области

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

В Тверской области вечерние «покатушки» закончились госпитализацией маленького ребёнка

Дорожно-транспортное случилось в минувшую субботу, 10 марта, около 22

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

The O.J. Simpson Interview: Gripping, Gross or Both?

Whatever explanations Fox has given for the existence of this special, there’s more to it than just, “Hey, look what we found!” What’s the actual story behind the interview? Why are we just seeing it now? And did we really learn anything from it?

Why Was It Shelved?

In 2006, Ms. Regan employed the ghostwriter Pablo Fenjves to turn conversations with Mr. Simpson into “If I Did It.” It initially seemed like the latest coup for ReganBooks, a HarperCollins imprint that was renowned in the late ’90s and early ’00s for publishing hot-take political commentary and salacious celebrity memoirs, in addition to popular literature.

But publicity surrounding the project was mostly terrible. The Goldman and Brown families made public statements against both the book and the interview, raising concerns about the prospect of anyone — Mr. Simpson, HarperCollins, Fox — making money off murder. As the uproar grew, both the print and TV versions of “If I Did It” were scrapped. Additionally, Ms. Regan was fired from her own imprint, for reasons said to be unrelated to the project. (She later sued and won, claiming to have been defamed during her dismissal.)

A version of “If I Did It” did eventually get released in 2007. The Goldmans was granted the rights to the material in order to help satisfy their civil claim against Mr. Simpson. They published the book as “If I Did It: Confessions of the Killer” — putting the word “if” in almost imperceptibly tiny letters on the cover.

Why Is It Airing Now?

According to the executive producer, Terry Wrong, Fox dug up this interview to satisfy the huge demand for more O.J.-related television. The former network executive Preston Beckman — known on Twitter as “the Masked Scheduler” — noted in a blog post that Fox probably intentionally showed it on Sunday night to counterprogram ABC’s premiere of the revived “American Idol.” (“They probably don’t want egg on their face if ‘AI’ returns with an impressive number,” he said.)

In interviews leading up to the broadcast, both Ms. O’Brien and Mr. Wrong stressed that Mr. Simpson didn’t get a dime for this special. He was reportedly paid $800,000 for the book “If I Did It” in 2006, but got no money for the interview then, according to Fox. Fox, on the other hand, definitely stands to benefit — which was one of the complaints levied before the broadcast was scrapped the first time.

Fox, Ms. Regan, Ms. O’Brien and Mr. Darden have all insisted that “The Lost Confession” is a vital document in the era of #MeToo and #TimesUp. The special was framed as a look inside the mind of a domestic abuser, and perhaps a warning to any woman who might be in a relationship with someone who talks the way Mr. Simpson does in the interview. Mr. Wrong also made sure to point out that unlike in 2006, the Brown and Goldman families gave their blessing to show this footage, ostensibly because they believe it makes Mr. Simpson look guilty.

Does O.J. Come Clean?

It certainly seemed that way. Bear in mind that this interview has been edited down from about four hours (according to Ms. Regan, in promos Fox sent to TV critics), and that throughout Mr. Simpson is referring to the “hypothetical” confession in the book “If I Did It.” In the six minutes in which he talks about the murders, he describes being on the scene with a friend named Charlie — whom the panel believes was just a voice inside his head. It’s all very odd.

That said, when Mr. Simpson describes grabbing a knife (“I do remember that part,” he says), and recalls seeing copious amounts of blood, it doesn’t sound all that hypothetical. The interview goes on to cover the aftermath of the crime — including the infamous Bronco chase — and Ms. Regan’s questioning about what was going through Mr. Simpson’s mind at that time keeps steering him toward explaining his feelings of anger, frustration, depression and yes, guilt.

“The Lost Confession” also offers a glimpse into its subject’s character. It’s fascinating to see Mr. Simpson blasting the media, all while frequently reminding Ms. Regan of his past reputation as a successful and popular guy. He seems to cling to every half-truth about his relationship with Ms. Brown that makes him look like he’s the real victim.

Does It Actually Shine a Light on Domestic Violence?

It definitely does. One argument in favor of airing this interview now is that the panel can contextualize Mr. Simpson’s comments in ways that Fox might not have cared to do in 2006. When he confesses to getting “physical” with her on the nights when she called the police, for example, Mr. Simpson is quick to note that “she started it,” prompting Mr. Darden and others to clarify just how violent and threatening he had been, according to the first responders.

In the present day, Ms. Regan justifies her lack of follow-up questions during the original interview by saying that she felt at the time that Mr. Simpson was already hanging himself with every word, and that if she pushed him too hard he would walked out. That’s a debatable point. But it is remarkable over the course of the interview how often Mr. Simpson — unbidden — deflects blame back onto Ms. Brown, insisting that the media and the lawyers didn’t talk enough about her shortcomings during the trial. That’s textbook abuser behavior, persistently implying, “She was asking for it.”

Also while the program doesn’t make too much of it, Ms. O’Brien’s narration subtly lays out a story of privilege, wherein the authorities (and the public) give a battered woman less credence than the rich, famous man who tormented her. This particular aspect of “The Lost Confession” special — exposing the nature of abuse — clearly mattered to the producers. And to Fox’s credit, each commercial break during the telecast began with a PSA for a domestic violence hotline.

Final Verdict: Gripping or Gross?

Oh, it’s definitely both. Early on, especially, the recurring reaction shots of a crying Ms. Shakti Chen border on the exploitative. There’s an extent to which Fox is trying to have it both ways here: cashing in on a valuable piece of tape from its archives, while trying to do some good with it.

But on balance, it’s better to have this interview out in the world, rather than locked away. It’s a piece of broadcasting and cultural history, which supplements all the other O.J. Simpson coverage that filled the airwaves last year. As unpleasant as “The Lost Confession” is — and though it doesn’t offer any definitive closure — it’s still an illuminating part of a story that’s been captivating us for more than two decades now, with no signs of losing its pull.

Continue reading the main story

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

В Ивановской области помолились о заключенных

В воскресенье, 11 марта митрополит Иваново-Вознесенский и Вичугский Иосиф совершил Божественную литургию в Крестовоздвиженском храме в селе Красинское Приволжского района Ивановской области

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

Women, Art and the Houses They Built

In fact, according to Ms. Chicago, she herself coined the term feminist art. “The first time it appears, according to my biographer, Gail Levin, are in my journals in 1971,” said the artist, whose works of note include the installation “The Dinner Party.” “All these women said they didn’t want to be called that. Now I get emails from young women all over the world who say, ‘I’m a feminist artist.’ That’s what I set out to do.”

Photo

Judy Chicago’s “The Dinner Party,” 1974/1979, at the Brooklyn Museum. Credit Suzanne DeChillo/The New York Times

The original Womanhouse was set in a 75-year-old abandoned mansion in Hollywood, Calif., and became a home and a feministic artistic endeavor to 21 female students and three established artists, in addition to the creators. It was the first show created by the Feminist Art Program, an extension of CalArts, founded by Ms. Chicago and Ms. Schapiro.

Photo

Katlego Mashiloane and Nosipho Lavuta, “ext.2, Lakeside, Johannesburg,” from 2007 is on display at Women House. Credit Katlego Mashiloane and Nosipho Lavuta

There were mixed-media environments and performances. Familiar rooms — kitchen, bathroom, bedroom and dining room — were re-examined, and the idea of a woman as a “happy homemaker” was questioned. The exhibit prompted the participants and thousands of viewers to explore feminism through the relationship between art and social change, and the complex, often-misunderstood relationship between a woman, her home and domesticity.

Ms. Chicago, now 78, lives in New Mexico with her husband. Following are excerpts from an interview with the artist, which have been edited and condensed.

What was the Southern California art scene like in the ’70s?

It was unbelievably macho. I went through tremendous struggles to be taken seriously as a woman artist. I really tried to fit in, both in my art-making and in my persona. After about a decade I got tired of it. I didn’t realize what a radical change I was about to make when I went to Fresno, but I knew I was setting out to create two things: a feminist art practice, and a feminist art education so that young women wouldn’t have to do what I had to do.

Photo

Judy Chicago’s “Butterfly Test Plate #2,” 1973-1974. Credit 2018 Judy Chicago/Artists Rights Society (ARS), New York and Salon 94, New York; Photo: Donald Woodman

What was the goal when you got to CalArts?

There was no women’s art scene. The goal was to build one. And I knew there was a lot of hunger among women for images that related to our own experience. I taught women to step up. I trained them in what it meant to be professional artists, and to raise their consciousness, among other things. Once I gave these young women permission to make art out of their own experiences as women, it was like an explosion.

How would you describe yourself?

A troublemaker. I’ve never fit in. In my first decade, I didn’t fit in because of my gender. Then, after I made this radical change in my art, I didn’t fit in because of the kind of art I was making. Part of the problem is the art world can’t fit me into one category. I’ve done different subject matters and different techniques. I have tried to make art that’s accessible to a broad audience, that doesn’t need somebody to stand between me and the audience and explain it, and that’s very out of step with the art world.

What did people take away from Womanhouse?

In those days, women were the primary audience for feminist art. That has dramatically changed. Young men now come by themselves to see my work. There’s a big shift generationally. Back then men came because their mothers, wives, girlfriends or sisters brought them. Many were uncomfortable because they didn’t know how to relate.

Photo

The cover of the exhibition catalog for the original Womanhouse exhibition with Ms. Chicago and Miriam Schapiro. The cover was designed by Sheila de Bretteville. Credit Through the Flower Archive

Over the past 46 years what are the biggest changes?

I’d been told in the ’60s that I couldn’t be both a woman and an artist. I had to excise any hint of gender from my work in order to be taken seriously in the L.A. art scene. That has completely changed. Young women, artists of color, artists of the range of sexual orientation can now be themselves openly in their work. That’s a fabulous change.

What do you hope this new show accomplishes?

I hope it kicks ass, shakes people up, and opens their eyes. That it gives them new experiences and helps them understand more about the range of women’s experiences and their views.

Continue reading the main story

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

За долгие выходные на дорогах Поморья зафиксировано около полутысячи ДТП

Похоже, особо отдыхать в мартовские праздники сотрудникам дорожно-патрульной службы не пришлось

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro

What’s on TV Monday: ‘Jane,’ and Oprah on ‘The Late Late Show’

Photo

Jane Goodall in the new documentary “Jane.” Credit Hugo van Lawick/National Geographic Creative

Brett Morgen’s documentary about the British scientist Jane Goodall is on National Geographic. And Oprah Winfrey appears with the “A Wrinkle in Time” co-stars Mindy Kaling and Reese Witherspoon on “The Late Late Show.”

What’s on TV

JANE (2017) 8 p.m. on National Geographic and Nat Geo Wild. When Jane Goodall journeyed into the forests of East Africa to research chimpanzees, it was the early 1960s, she was 26 and had no scientific degree. But, despite her lack of traditional training, Ms. Goodall’s quiet observations of primate interactions would help significantly deepen human understanding of chimps and our connections to them. Brett Morgen (“Kurt Cobain: Montage of Heck”) directs this documentary, which consists primarily of historical footage of Ms. Goodall taken by the wildlife photographer Hugo van Lawick, Ms. Goodall’s first husband. In his review for The New York Times, Ben Kenigsberg wrote that the film “is such an absorbing account of her experiences at a reserve in what is now Tanzania that you may not pause to think about how its imagery was captured.” It has a score by Philip Glass, and includes a present-day interview with Ms. Goodall. Now in her 80s, she has spent her career pursuing her research and living as an outspoken conservationist. “It is a jolly tough way to live,” she told The Times in 2010, “but it’s worthwhile.”

Photo

From left, Oprah Winfrey, Mindy Kaling and Reese Witherspoon. Credit Dimitrios Kambouris/Getty Images for Hearst

THE LATE LATE SHOW WITH JAMES CORDEN 12:35 a.m. (Tuesday) on CBS. The post-Golden Globes shouts of “Oprah 2020” may have slowed, but it’s hard to imagine that the topic won’t at least be alluded to when Oprah Winfrey appears on “The Late Late Show.” Ms. Winfrey plays the role of Mrs. Which in the Ava DuVernay-directed Disney film adaptation of the children’s novel “A Wrinkle in Time,” which opened over the weekend. Her co-stars Mindy Kaling (whose new sitcom, “Champions,” began last week) and Reese Witherspoon will also appear on the show.

Middle of Nowhere Official Trailer #1 (2012) Sundance Film Festival Movie HD Video by Movieclips Trailers

What’s Streaming

MIDDLE OF NOWHERE (2012) on Netflix and Amazon. If you liked Ava DuVernay’s adaptation of “A Wrinkle in Time” — or for a primer on the director before you see that film — a natural place to start is with her breakthrough movie, about a nurse, Ruby (Emayatzy Corinealdi), whose husband, Derek (Omari Hardwick), has been given a multiyear prison sentence. In her review for The Times, Manohla Dargis called the film “a plaintive, slow-boiling, quietly soul-stirring drama about a woman coming into her own.” Its cast includes David Oyelowo, who plays a bus driver. Ms. DuVernay’s prison documentary “13th” (2016) is also available on Netflix, and her historical drama “Selma” (2014), which stars Mr. Oyelowo as the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., can been watched on Amazon.

THE HAIRY BIKERS’ PUBS THAT BUILT BRITAIN on AcornTV. The cheeky television hosts Si King and Dave Myers dig into the history of English drinking establishments. In this BBC Two series, the pair known as the Hairy Bikers travel England visiting interesting pubs. It’s a bit like “Diners, Drive-Ins and Dives” for cask ale devotees.

Continue reading the main story

Хостинг сайтов Joinder.Pro