?

Log in

No account? Create an account
I meant to say something about this a few weeks ago, but the delay… - jacob's corner [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
jacob

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

[Apr. 21st, 2006|01:35 pm]
jacob
[Current Location |Washington, D.C.]
[music |The Goon Show - The Phantom Head Shaver [of Brighton]]

I meant to say something about this a few weeks ago, but the delay doesn't matter since I'm already hopelessly late to the party. "Weeds" is an amazing show. Like I said, this is hardly an unpopular opinion, and probably doesn't merit acknowledgement. But I guess I was just surprised - not that it was "good," but that I liked it. Before it premiered last year, two things kept me from watching: (1) the idea didn't seem that interesting or novel, and (2) my general distaste for marijuana culture.

As for (1), nothing has changed - the premise won't surprise anyone who saw that public service ad with kids skateboarding down suburban sidewalks on their way to joining their fellow non-urbanites in comprising the pot-smoking majority. That's not really a downfall, though. There's no reason a show needs an outlandish scenario to succeed. So it's obvious, then, that "Weeds" avoids arousing concern (2). I've only seen four or five episodes now, but it seems like the business (and to a lesser extent, the culture) is simply a backdrop for genuinely good plotlines and dialogue.

The new season is starting soon so Showtime is playing all the first-season episodes. If you can, and you get a chance, it'll be worth your time to watch.

Coincidentally, I spent a couple hours the other day trying to wrap my brain around last year's Supreme Court decision in Gonzales v. Raich. I know most people won't have an opportunity to read it, so I'll just say this: it strikes down a California law allowing the use of medical marijuana and it features two of the most tortured and ambivalent opinions ever written. Stevens (for the liberal majority) desperately wants to let these people smoke, but can't bear the thought of limiting federal Commerce Clause powers. Scalia (for the conservative minority) detests all things pot-related, but loathes the idea that this counts as regulation of interstate commerce.

Oddly enough, despite "Weeds" misgiving number (2) above, I realized while watching that of the people I'm happiest to have known so far in life, a very high percentage of them have been at least somewhat involved in said culture. No jam band likers, though.

And now back to the rule against perpetuities and offensive nonmutual collateral estoppel.
linkReply