it is too soon to tell whether the events of September and its aftermath signify the beginning or end of a coherent unit of world history, though i can imagine a particular bias that would title this chapter "America's New War" or somesuch media-branded claptrap.

If you don't believe in bias in history texts, just take a look at the controversy over new history textbooks designed for 13-15 year-olds in Japan. These books explain that Japan's occupation of Korea was an unopposed annexation necessary for Japan's security, dismiss the Rape of Nanjing as "nothing like a holocaust", and consider occupation during WWII as merely preparation for independence from colonial masters in Europe, conveniently omitting any references to sex slaves known as "comfort women". Though the central government stood firm, many regional school authorities rejected the new textbooks. Happy ending?

Though certainly a human tragedy on a scale that defies description, very little has actually changed in our daily lives since September 11. in fact, we've been entreated, hassled, harangued, cajoled, threatened and begged to get "back to normal". it seems as though getting back to normal is a national obsession and this should come as no surprise. that's what conservatives (the reigning political elite) do, "conserve" the status quo.

considering this, it was exceptionally disconcerting and yet rather obvious to hear President Bush discussing Martin Luther King on the official remembrance of his birth. george focused on the reverend's ministry, instead of that which we actually celebrate him for: his refusal to accept things as they were, his challenge to the status quo, his perserverance despite popular opposition and monumental odds, his payment of the ultimate price. and yet, those same values that we admire in dr. king today, just might bring the label "unamerican" in these new troubled times. seems clear why mr. pres stuck to the religious angle. besides, it's not like this is a Crusade or anything, right?

SO NOW, it's offical. On February 8, 2002, we're back to normal. how do i know? because warner bros. tells me so. on this date, Warner Bros. releases Collateral Damage, starring action hero Arnold Schwarzenegger. Originally scheduled for release on October 5, 2001, its debut was postponed "out of respect for the victims and their families", referring of course to 9/11. i know it was wishful thinking to believe that this "respect" extended to the rest of us, those who had been "collaterally damaged" and that this tripe would never see the light of day, but i never learn.

the "political" action thriller features arnold as an LA firefighter who becomes an international vigilante after government attempts to bring those responsible for a terrorist attack claiming his family's lives to justice ends empty-handed. (the fact that this movie was scheduled as the opening night feature at the Chicago International Film Festival is deeply wrong. aren't film festivals meant to showcase the new, the challenging, the marginal, the quirky, the next gen not stock hollywood shoot-em-ups designed to make a "killing" at home AND abroad?)

who knew that it would take less than six months to cauterize our national wounds, allowing international terrorism to again become fodder for our fictional fantasies? i was up early enough last sunday to catch the sunday gasbags and beyond wondering when Meet the Press became Stroke the Cabinet, i was incredulous to find tim russert ask the following question of donald rumsfeld: can we have closure without capturing osama bin laden? shouldn't that question have been can we have closure even after capturing bin laden? well, i guess collateral damage answers both. closure requires one man taking on them damn foreigners and blowing them to kingdom come once and for all. duh!