Here’s a recommendation.

It’s worth your while to visit a small exhibition at the Honolulu Museum of Art, located in a gallery just to the left of the main entrance.

Breeze block. It was all around when I was growing up. Still very visible today. You’ll know it when you see it, like in this portion of a photo in the current exhibition.

These photos of buildings across the state will likely leave you with with a new appreciation of this basic element of many homes, as well as public buildings, dating to the 1950s, 60s, and 70s.

And while you’re there, you can check out the other fine galleries featuring art from a variety of time periods and locations. The museum is an under-appreciated gem!

Let Trade Winds Flow
November 7, 2025–March 8, 2026
Gallery 14

Let Trade Winds Flow is a visual exploration of the breeze block, the affordable and engaging architectural element that can be seen throughout Hawai‘i, keeping us cool and adding midcentury-modern character to our built environment.

Used in residential and commercial buildings starting in the post-World War II construction boom, breeze block originated in the Sunbelt regions of North America and by 1955 were being used in Hawai‘i. In the 1960s and 1970s, Hawai‘i was home to at least four breeze block manufacturers—a testament to the building material?s popularity. Today there is one.

Inspired by the work of the nonprofit Docomomo US/Hawaii Chapter, which is dedicated to the conservation of modern architecture, and its 2023 publication Screen Blocks in Hawaii: Letting Trade Winds Flow, HoMA curator Tory Laitila invited six photographers from across Hawai?i—Andy Behrle, James Charisma, David Franzen, Michelle Mishina, James Nakamura, and Kahale Naehu-Ramos—to share their images of breeze block on O‘ahu, Hawai‘i Island, Kaua‘i, Maui, and Moloka‘i. They reveal an architectural identity and may inspire us to see more whimsical patterns embedded in the world around us, appreciating these functional building blocks with spaces that allow the trade winds to flow.

Meda received this email yesterday. It looks very real. I tried to check the link, and it looks legit.

The only fishy thing about it is that we do not have any account with Capital One. Not now. Not ever.

If it is part of a phishing scam, it is very sophisticated, and that makes it very scary.

Any suggestions on whether or how to test it further?

And provides an important public defense.

This Washington Post story may be behind a paywall, but if you have a chance to read it, don’t miss it!

It’s an interview with photographer Christopher Evans, whose photos of Trump’s inner circle have been reverberating through the online world since they were published. His direct defense of the use of photographic realism as a journalistic tool is amazingly refreshing!

The Vanity Fair photographer who disrupted Trumpworld’s polished imageEvery line, spot, blemish and blood vessel was captured by Christopher Anderson’s lens. What was he thinking?

In the Post’s interview, Anderson described his style as a way to “circumnavigate the stage-managed image of politics and cut through the image that the public relations team wants to be presented, and get at something that feels more revealing about the theater of politics.”

CNN put it this way: “As a photojournalist, he’s also not in charge of how his subjects present themselves, who their makeup artists are, or when they might be booking cosmetic procedures. Unlike a commercial photographer who might smooth out every imperfection, his job is to reveal, not conceal.”

From the Post interview.

The images are really arresting. What is your response to people who say that these images are unfair? There’s been a lot of attention about Karoline Leavitt’s lips and [what appear to be] injection sites.

I didn’t put the injection sites on her. People seem to be shocked that I didn’t use Photoshop to retouch out blemishes and her injection marks. I find it shocking that someone would expect me to retouch out those things….

Specifically in the context of Vanity Fair, though, where the prevailing aesthetic is creamy and dreamy, it stands out.

Vanity Fair is a magazine that has its feet in two worlds, right? One is the journalism world, and one is the celebrity entertainment machine. Obviously, celebrity portraits on the cover of Vanity Fair are not really about journalism in the way that you and I think about journalism. But then there’s the other side of Vanity Fair, which is real journalism. I’m surprised that a journalist would even need to ask me the question of “Why didn’t I retouch out the blemishes?” Because if I had, that would be a lie. I would be hiding the truth of what I saw there.

If you have trouble reading the Post’s story, here are other similar interviews that are not behind a paywall.

“Vanity Fair Photographer Defends Shooting Karoline Leavitt’s Lips Up Close After Portrait Appeared to Show Filler Injection Sites,” People, December 17, 2025.

“What these close-up photos of the Trump administration really say,” CNN, December 17, 2025

“Vanity Fair photographer defends close-up pictures of Trump aides in Wiles profile,” The Hill, December 18, 2025.