I would support anything named “Funny or Die.”  It’s a philosophy I wish more would adopt – if you aren’t funny, do you really deserve to live?  I suppose an argument could be made should someone posses other qualities so perhaps I will amend it to “Funny or Silent in My Presence.”  That would look nice on a sampler, n’est pas?

I mention “Funny or Die” specifically to discuss a short featuring Geena Davis repeatedly making her mark with her bow and arrow that makes me sorry I did not adopt archery much earlier.  A well-aimed arrow would be the perfect punctuation to an adamant request:  “I don’t care how evocative you feel that Ivory Soap ad would make by adding it, Mr. Duchamp, stay away from my Caillebotte!” would be nicely reinforced by the sharp “plong” of a steel-tipped arrow plastering the newspaper in his hand to the wall behind him.

I know guns are the common weapon of choice and there is an argument for efficiency, but I will always argue style over efficiency (it’s why Isadora Duncan and I stayed together longer than we should have.)  Ultimately, however, guns are loud, messy and clichéd.  Blades have their appeal; I returned my divorce papers to Albert’s attorneys by securing them to his desk with a Bowie knife.   But I also rendered one of my favorites a eunuch inaccurately recreating an act from the circus we had seen earlier that evening.  My affection for whips and crops has ventured far enough from anything stemming from anger that the mere sight of them clouds my mind.

Archery’s elegance not only fits nicely with my personality but its drama plays beautifully into my need for the theatrical.  I would have bows planted throughout the Chateau and slowly slide the arched wood from its hiding place as an argument began to turn from my favor.  Should someone insult my chef’s cooking, I would spear the entrée in the center and say “There, now the leather has been tenderized.”  A glance in the direction of the bow and quiver hanging within arm’s reach by my bed would serve as my bedmate’s warning that they were, say, gumming up the works.

Ms. Davis began discussing gender equality in media but, like so many things that support a responsible message in media, her words fell on deaf executive ears.  She could have screamed and kicked trashcans when ignored; shaken her fists and backed up her outbursts with no more than further tantrums – but to what end?  Regardless of the validity of her arguments, the public’s desire for spectacle would have focused on her displays rather than her message.  Instead she founded an institute that researches and provides indisputable data to support her claims.  She presents the information cleanly, concisely and with all of the impression as one of her arrows making impact after a 300 feet per second flight.  “Plong”

http://www.seejane.org/

My point is, darlings, it is not only what you say but also how you say it that gets your idea across the strongest.

ndp_sig


 , ,