Two Classical Poems

april 2nd

by Douglas Slayton

the seasons change their song

as they change with each other

it was a theme played on my palm

running lengthwise with your fingers

held tightly

bowed slightly

Classical

by Alexis Faulkner

Good old fashioned essex station and I was sure a 

Ghost hand touched my head

Then I figured out it was my own hand

And the psychology of me splitting into a ghost to 

Feel my own head sent spinning me into the train 

Gutters

Not all of them are easy thoughts

Unfolding the middle east through fireworks

Because here in the west the explosions are 

Miniature

Ghost once again

Bombs are ghosts and spawn ghosts

A fine mist, really

Eastern corner of westerners mind

Good old fashioned essex station reveals its wealth

To me on this Novemberest of days

M train wretched waiter-maker

But thought blessing it sends onto me this day

Champagne for the cheers and vanity thoughts

Have but a ghost waiting for me

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 

Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

Thanksgiving 2015: Haiku

by Chris Alarie

I give thanks for Bart

Simpson & all the other

Simpsons—like Maggie

by Alexis Faulkner

I just discovered

Deliciosity of

Kahlua. Turkey.

by Douglas Slayton

i am thankful

for existential dread and 

endlessness of night

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 
Chris Alarie is Senior Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.
Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

A Sloppy Thanksgiving Contribution for 2015

While Watching the Parade While Sitting in Brooklyn

by Alexis Faulkner

Today in New York City there is a parade

One most grateful day twenty fifteen

Facts being delivered by one French-Canadian-named person about a parade

Balloon hitting a plane

The peril of the twenties

Thinking about the environment was not a big deal to anyone at NBC then

I did make sure to get cranberries without any dolphin parts in them

INSPECTED

“oh god, is that just snoopy’s head?”

Perhaps this parade is a simple terror

Brussel sprouts and bacon and turkey to come

Comes with worry

My first time

Can’t wait to bite into the dark meat

The man with the lisp on the teevee won’t lie to us about the lions

Syrups and chocolate pieces for the pie delight darkly warming

What a wonder a feast a time for just eating

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 

Two Gospel Poems

Waiting in the Bushes
by Douglas Slayton

with resounding call
the voices ring and shake through
colored glass

it is nothing real
nothing concrete

it sits in my chest like a song
that floats about the pews
caught up in hair and hands
out the door

it will never stay
but reach out for it
anyways

Leaving Something Out
by Alexis Faulkner

Hello dreadful throne giver
Stepping down majestically (sarcasm)
Leaving to take over another operation
The Word as gospel
Hello listener (sarcasm again)
Waving hands around, spreading germs across all surfaces
Words flew
Flying words
Anger
My color check in: Red
Holding everyone under rule in a circle
Sure, it's a strong shape, or is that the triangle
I wouldn't have asked you because I wouldn't have been able to patiently listen
To your response, trust answers, not turn back to red
Temperature reading an unsurprising hot
Why now
This is all really vague
This is about work
I remember the white tiles upon first step
I clomped on them and eventually wore white shit on my jeans
Where my knees touched the floor
The snow I'm so excited for it to get cold again
Sing a song
Twirling in the flakes falling from the sky
The white flakes I love them
The sky The sky is bigger in some states
You know big sky country? Wow, what a beautiful thing about an unpopulated area
Back to the patch of ice I slipped over to work I sang the song
The song sang at me the reverb
It was a pattern or resistance and then a pattern of feed back and then back to observing the reverb
The very thing is about church it's so dramatic
The very thing about snow
It's so beautiful

Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 

Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

35 HI film

by Alexis Faulkner

My Important Podcast with Chris Alarie: Episode 14

by Chris Alarie

We have a new guest this week on the internet's least essential podcast (and that's saying something!).





Chris Alarie is Senior Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.
Alexis Faulkner is Unicorn Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 

What Would You Do?

by Chris Alarie

Exterior Park. The SALESMAN, carrying the camera, approaches JEFF—30ish, handsome, and smiling—as he sits by a fountain, listening to music on earbuds

SALESMAN

[from behind the camera]

Excuse me, sir.

The salesman waves to Jeff (his hand appears from behind the camera) to get his attention. Jeff looks up and takes out his earbuds.

JEFF

Pardon?

SALESMAN

What would you do for a Klondike bar?

JEFF

I don't know.

SALESMAN

Would you kill yourself for a Klondike

bar?

JEFF

[chuckles]

Yeah, sure.

SALESMAN

Great!

The salesman hands Jeff a Klondike bar.

JEFF

Thanks.

Cut to:

Jeff is just finishing the Klondike bar.

SALESMAN

It looked like you enjoyed that.

JEFF

Yeah, it was great. Thanks!

SALESMAN

Ok, since we held up our end of the

bargain—

The salesman tries to hand a gun to Jeff. Jeff puts his hands up and refuses to take the gun.

JEFF

Whoa! Wait, what?

SALESMAN

You said you'd kill yourself for a

Klondike bar. So... pay up!

The salesman attempts to force the gun into Jeff's hands again. Jeff again pushes it away.

JEFF

What!? I thought you were kidding!

SALESMAN

I wasn't.

JEFF

Well I don't know what to tell you—

SALESMAN

I had a feeling you would try to back

out. So I took the liberty to send a man

to your house—341 Maple Drive, right?

JEFF

Y-yeah?

SALESMAN

That's what I thought. So, he is sitting

in a van outside your house right now,

watching as your wife, Linda, plays with

your daughter, Wendy. All I have to do is

give him the word and he'll—well, you don't

want to know what he's gonna do.

JEFF

What the fuck!?

SALESMAN

In fact, here's a photo he just texted me.

The salesman shows his phone to Jeff. Jeff, white as a sheet, covers his mouth.

JEFF

Oh my god.

SALESMAN

Yeah. I'm not fucking around here. So...

The salesman attempts to hand the gun to Jeff a third time. His hands shaking with fear, Jeff finally takes the gun.

SALESMAN

That's right.

JEFF

[crying]

I can't believe this!

SALESMAN

In your mouth, motherfucker.

Jeff, still crying, puts the gun in his mouth, and looks toward the salesman/camera in desperation. The salesman cackles deviously.

JEFF

[still crying, words muffled

by the gun in his mouth]

I didn't even want the bar!

SALESMAN

But you ate it, so...

Pull the trigger, you little bitch.

Screen freezes on Jeff with the gun in his mouth. The Klondike bar logo appears onscreen and the salesman joins in with a VOICE as it sings the famous jingle.

VOICE & SALESMAN

[in unison]

What would you do-o-o—

for a Klondike bar?

end

Chris Alarie is Senior Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

Solidarity

<3 France

Two Friday the Thirteenth Poems

November 13, 2015
By Alexis Faulkner 

The scariest thing to happen to me today

On this unlucky Friday

I’ve been possessed

Listening to a classic house mix playlist

Pause, tilt head right, thought mist disperse

Glance up and to the right to an earlier fall-spiced night

This same month, sure

Sitting on the stoop with a visitor

Visitor II came past us, but with their own key

Said, formed the words, as form in him human,

“Don’t worry, I’m just the night mailman.”

Sure, I thought, nothing to see here

Turned the key to the left and pushed the door open

Our apartment, the door

It’s tricky and it’s not like they were new to the task

My eyes didn’t close like Brautigan’s did

Because, in fact, I’m still not in California

My stoop is in a seasonally affected zone

Where people of the post office act on a different code of ethics

A code all their own and full of fright

Good thing he wasn’t delivering on a Friday the 13^th

Perhaps then he would have deposited anthrax in our box

Which love is, to reference another dry moment in time

Hopscotch
by Douglas Slayton 

that black cat kept me warm
in every storm and frozen evening
the windows wouldn't close

salt on my shoulder
won't dispel that hex
i picked up some winter

i can't cross a street or portal
anymore with that luck i carry
i wanted to make this right
but it's all wrong

i can't look them in the eye anymore
every room, every street,
where everyone else stands close
i see them looking
like they can smell it on me



[found the image here]

Alexis Faulkner is Executive Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine. 

Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

FRIDAY THE 13TH

by Alexis Faulkner

Originally, I planned to make a fact sheet for this unholy Friday, but eventually it became evident that the best way to celebrate is with song, so I made a playlist. The bite-sized chunk of info below will give you a tiny historical foundation concerning the significance of this day.

Triskaidekaphobia, as defined by Joey from Friends

Friggatriskaidekaphobia: fear of Friday the 13th

Paraskevidekatriaphobia: fear of Friday the 13th

Theories on the unluckiness of the number 13 concern Christianity, numerology, and norse mythology.

From an article in National Geographic in 2004, founder Donald Dossey of the Stress Management Center and Phobia Institute in Asheville, North Carolina traces "the fear of 13 to a Norse myth about 12 gods having a dinner party at Valhalla, their heaven. In walked the uninvited 13th guest, the mischievous Loki. Once there, Loki arranged for Hoder, the blind god of darkness, to shoot Balder the Beautiful, the god of joy and gladness, with a mistletoe-tipped arrow. 'Balder died and the whole Earth got dark. The whole Earth mourned. It was a bad, unlucky day,' said Dossey. From that moment on, the number 13 has been considered ominous and foreboding. There is also a biblical reference to the unlucky number 13. Judas, the apostle who betrayed Jesus, was the 13th guest to the Last Supper."

ENJOY! 

Alexis Faulkner is Executive Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine

My Important Podcast with Chris Alarie: Episode 13

by Chris Alarie

Hey! It's another episode of the least popular podcast on the internet!




Chris Alarie is Senior Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.
Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

'The Peanuts Movie' Meets Expectations

by Douglas Slayton

Charlie Brown's Peanuts

There are three distinct versions of Peanuts: Charlie Brown’s Peanuts, Snoopy’s Peanuts, and television’s Peanuts. Charlie Brown’s Peanuts is exemplified by Chuck’s continued failure and questioning of his own worth. Snoopy’s Peanuts is the exemplified by the over-merchandised, lovable optimism, and goofy animal antics that dominated the franchise near the end of Schulz’s life. Television’s Peanuts is the one that tries to find a balance between those two. But in the end, this version of Peanuts is usually smiling (as opposed to frowning) toward the audience, with Charlie Brown saying, “Good Grief” as everyone holds him above their heads. The Peanuts Movie wants to be all three, but most resembles television's Peanuts, updated for a new generation.

Snoopy's Peanuts

The basic plot of the film revolves around Charlie Brown becoming smitten with a new kid who is in his class, the famed Little Red Haired Girl, and attempting to get her to notice him. The film is structured in three distinct acts, each representing an opportunity for Charlie Brown to impress the new girl: a talent show, a winter dance, and a ceremony held in his honor. Each act is broken up by a Snoopy flight of fancy about the World War Fighting Ace saving his love FiFi. The way the story is broken up never feels forced or jarring, but, rather, highlights the dissonance that is present in Peanuts in general—which Kevin Wong documented in his well written piece. It is a necessary consequence of the film's need to serve two masters because of the prevalence of Snoopy in popular culture. The most successful thing about the Snoopy sequences is how they make it possible to have excitement in a film about children with giant heads cursing their own existence. It is a necessary element of a high budget, CG animated film from the creators of the Ice Age franchise.

In each act of the main story, Charlie Brown is given an opportunity to impress the Red Haired Girl but is always foiled, be it by chance or as the result of his being a good or honest friend. While this is reminiscent of Charlie Brown's Peanuts bemoaning life's futility, it ultimately fits safely in the structure of television's Peanuts. On television, Charlie Brown is still a loser, falling for Lucy’s tricks or losing his kite, but even his greatest failings only highlight what a good person he is. That is the Charlie Brown depicted in the film, as well. He is the best of us despite or, perhaps, because of his shortcomings.

It is a very good, if a touch inaccurate, film. While I am someone who has a strange, deep seeded love of Charles Schulz’s most nihilism impulses, even the sunnier versions of Peanuts do a lot to move me. I saw myself in the film by the end and wept, enjoying every minute of it. By taking Peanuts out of four panel strips, giving it a third visual dimension, and putting it in motion, it becomes something else. Schulz, even at his most saccharine, was still using children to address the questions adults have about life and its worth. The doom of his world was always at odds with the outwardly adorable appearance, so it was never a surprise that whenever someone other than Schulz has adapted that world for a larger audience, the sunny exterior would win over the darkness at the center.

This film could have been a mess, trying to honor a work over half a century old, trying to hit all of the buttons that people love, and also introducing the Peanuts world to a new generation. Luckily the film was ultimately a success. Even the CGI animation that had been the source of so much anticipatory consternation prior to the film's release is a joy to watch. Though we will never have a big screen adaptation of Charlie Brown's Peanuts, telling us that life has lost all meaning, I will take this version, indebted to television's Peanuts, and enjoy it all the same.

Doug Slayton is Professor Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

Mahalo, Mon Frère

I wrote you- poem

about the beach- the best time

everything we dreamed 

several palm trees sway

waves wash me away to sea

to see yellow fish

Na Pali coast cliffs

to sea- the yellow fishes

once in a lifetime

Hawai'i beach jump

waves in tow your heart, beat beat

splash! coconut joy 

by Alexis Faulkner 

Alexis Faulkner is Executive Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine

Inequality and the Limits of America's Two-Party System

by Chris Alarie

Over the past several months, the American public and, perhaps more importantly, media have been deeply fascinated by the 2016 presidential election, despite the fact that we are a year away from election day and a few months out from even the earliest nominating contests. Some of that is a result of the necessities of the 24 hour news cycle, the horse-race-style¹ coverage of elections that the media favors,² and the particularly odd characters who populate the nominating contests. But another source of interest is the way that the battles for each party's nomination have put a spotlight on intra-party issues, particularly with regards to America's income and wealthy disparities.³ Both the Republican and Democratic parties are in the midst of battles as to how each party should best address the questions surrounding inequality. These intra-party debates illustrate one of the more pressing but under-discussed political problems in America: the way our two-party system is hurting the democratic process and preventing the government from properly addressing the economic concerns of the general public (in this case, the increasing divide between the super-wealthy and the rest of the country—a function of worsening income and wealth inequality as well as a lessening of economic mobility).

America is, for all intents and purposes, the only major democracy that has only two effective political parties. And the two parties are entrenched in such a manner that their respective areas of expected electoral control are, if not predestined, then highly predictable, at least. The Democrats have a distinct advantage in the electoral college, giving them an easier path to control over the electoral branch of the federal government. The Republicans have a stranglehold over much of the governments at the state level which, in turn, gives them a similarly overwhelming control of the House of Representatives. The only segment of the federal government that is currently a remotely open contest between the two parties is the Senate, depending on which seats are contested in each particular election. The manner in which these two parties are entrenched is a key facet of the worsening problems of inequality.

In a recently published Vox article, Lee Drutman explains how America seems to be stuck in a reinforcement feedback loop of income and wealth inequality that is both a product of and engine behind Republican control of the government. It is a well-supported, interesting article and is well worth reading in full, but for my purposes, can be summarized as explaining that the last few decades of largely Republican controlled economic policies have created an extreme level of income inequality that has created a less informed and less politically engaged electorate, which in turn favors Republican electoral goals. Essentially, the Republicans have used their control over the federal government to make the federal government ineffective in addressing inequality, which in turn allows them to campaign against the federal government as a solution for inequality in front of an electorate that, thanks to the aforementioned inequality, is less prepared to evaluate these problems and less likely to engage with the political process, both of which favor the perpetuation of this strategy on the part of the Republicans. While the reasons for this feedback loop are manifold and complex, it is, in part, a function of the limitations of our two-party system.

The Democratic and Republican parties have effective monopolies over, respectively, the liberal and conservative factions of the government, with the middle ground becoming more and more empty. And with these monopolies comes an increased focus on ideological consistency, particularly in the GOP, and a greater need to establish differences between the parties on most issues. The problem is that each party's ideology is unlikely to represent the beliefs of most voters on every single issue. Anything outside of either party's orthodoxy, even an idea that finds bipartisan support among the general electorate, necessarily becomes either a partisan cause—if it fits within one party's ideology—or an unsupported cause—if it doesn't fit within either party's ideology. Income and wealth inequality are problems that follow this first model in that they are a primary concern of a majority of Americans but are only identifiable as problems within the ideology of the Democratic party, essentially rendering a cause that should have broad support as a partisan cause that is subject to all of the problems and ineffectiveness of our polarized system of government.

For statistical evidence that a sizable portion of the populace is concerned about inequality, one could look at polls from the New York Times/CBS and Gallup. But for more anecdotal evidence that the issue is important to voters from both parties, one need look no further than the very different, insurgent populist campaigns of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. Indeed, inequality is the primary issue on which Sanders has centered his campaign and a significant source of his unexpected success and momentum—to the point that likely eventual nominee Hillary Clinton has had to (perhaps unconvincingly) focus on the issue, as well. On the other hand, Trump's success is a bit harder to tie to any one issue. But it is still worth noting that Trump has addressed the issue of inequality more directly than any other Republican candidate, stating that he would like to raise taxes on hedge fund managers⁴ and has no intention of reducing medicaid or social security—which amounts to as much of defection from GOP orthodoxy on the subject of inequality as could be imagined by a leading presidential candidate. The strangeness of Trump's behavior and his attendant popularity has led to a veritable cottage industry of articles in which a journalist speaks to Trump supporters in order to discover the reasons behind their support. While the supporters' responses run the gamut from relating to his racist, nationalistic rhetoric on immigration to his supposedly self-financed campaign's freedom from the influence of special interests to his general blustery demeanor, many Trump supporters point to his comparatively stronger focus on the issue of inequality relative to other Republicans. Indeed, the enthusiasm for Sanders and, to a lesser extent, Trump illustrates the extent to which inequality is an issue of importance to the public across the political spectrum. However, the fact that neither candidate seems likely to eventually win the presidency or even capture his party's nomination demonstrates how the two-party system prevents the government from truly addressing the problem of inequality.

Once the primaries are finished, the general election will pit establishment candidates against each other, with Hillary Clinton almost certainly facing off against either Jeb Bush or, more likely, Marco Rubio. While they have made some brief overtures toward the plight of the middle class, Rubio and Bush are extremely unlikely to be concerned with income and wealth inequality than Trump.⁵ And while Clinton is much more likely to campaign against inequality than her Republican opponents, her history and connections to wealthy Wall Street donors renders her a much less convincing crusader against inequality than Sanders. In a system that had more than two parties, Trump and Sanders⁶ would be able to participate as candidates outside of the Democratic and Republican parties and perhaps stand a chance to campaign to a general electorate with their comparatively great focuses on inequality.⁷ But in a two-party system, we will instead be presented with a choice between a Republican candidate who has no interest in the issue and a Democratic candidate who does not have as much interest as a large portion of the progressive segment of the electorate and perhaps even less than some voters who generally lean more conservative. Inequality becomes a comparatively weakened partisan issue instead of the generally popular cause that polls indicate it to be.

Ultimately, a political system that features more than two viable parties would be more likely to represent the vast and varied concerns of the public as a whole. And perhaps an issue that is concerning to a majority of Americans across the political spectrum such as income inequality would be more likely to be addressed by the government. But the entrenched power of the two parties—fueled in part by the campaign contributions of the wealthy elites who benefit from inequality—makes this an impossibility.⁸ While there are a number of potential means by which outside parties could gain traction, such as ranked choice voting or proportional representation, the likelihood of any being implemented is extremely low. Instead, we are stuck with a two-party system that encourages reinforcing feedback loops and ignores broadly supported issues like inequality.

Chris Alarie is Senior Editor-in-Chief of Uncanny Valley Magazine.

---

1  Beware the Vast Equine Conspiracy.^↩
2 And that the public devours.^↩
3 This focus on the economy is a reflection of how many, perhaps even most, political issues in this country are folded into domestic economic debates.^↩
4 Of course, the tax plan that he ultimately released does not follow through on that promise, illustrating just how significant the influence of orthodox conservative economic policy is.^↩
5 Or any Democrat.^↩
6 It is worth noting that lifelong political independent Sanders only recently joined the Democratic party in order to try to secure its presidential nomination.^↩
7 I should note that Hillary Clinton, like nearly any progressive, is likely more concerned about inequality than Donald Trump.^↩
8 Indeed, campaign finance reform is the elephant in the room on this issue, as it is in regards to much of American politics.^↩