|
|||||||||
![]() |
|||||||||
| Mayhem 2012 | |||||||||
| HI- | |||||||||
|
Continuing the Stanley Kramer video
collection, I watched The Member of the Wedding, set in 1952, featuring
a twelve year old girl who falls in love with her big brother's wedding and
want to be included in it. This is in black/white, phrased like a play, with
three main characters: the girl, her younger cousin, and the black mammy cook
who takes care of them. It is pretty much all about the girl's unrealistic
dreams and illusions, which she expresses freely, and the mammy's attempts to be
realistic. When the girl does not get to go on the honeymoon she runs away, but
soon discovers that's no answer, and returns to discover that her cousin has
died. But she moves on to other dreams, being, in my view, essentially shallow.
Well enough done, but not my type of thing. Then I watched Guess Who's
Coming to Dinner, the last because it was 107 minutes long and I needed to
find a time slot to watch it, and because my interest in fancy dinners is
slight. I had no idea what it was really about. But the moment it started
playing, I was hooked, and it is my favorite of that collection of movies. It's
a star-studded effort; even I recognize names like Sidney Poitier and Katharine
Hepburn. A black doctor and a white girl meet, talk, and fall abruptly in love.
It's fully believable. They want to marry, but this was when legalized racism
was established in much of America, with interracial marriage forbidden in 16
states. Both sets of pseudo-liberal parents are appalled, but in the course of
the day they come around, with a fine concluding speech by the girl's father,
who decides that love must conquer all. It's a great love story, and a great
stride forward for the liberalization of this country. The producer received
death threats—bigots are ugly any way you see them--but the movie was highly
successful. More power to them both. I never much cared what Stanley Kramer
did, but this one truly impressed me. I did an interview for Jorge
Aguirre, and he sent me a copy of his graphic novel (that is, done in pictures)
Giants Beware!, published by First Second, a division of Roaring Book
Press, a division of Holtzbrink Publishing. This is clearly directed to
children, but I found it fun reading. The pictures are by Rafael Rosado, and
he's some artist; they were clear, well framed, competent, sometimes beautiful,
and often compelling. The story is about Claudette, who looks to be about six
years old, who is determined to go out with her wooden sword and kill the giant
who has terrorized their town. It seems he has raided the region and eaten the
feet of babies. Now the townfolk stay within the walled fortress of the town.
Claudette's own father lost his legs and one arm (first time shown as his
right, but thereafter as his left) and uses a wooden wheelchair. She persuades
her friend the aspiring princess Marie and her little brother Gaston, an
aspiring chef who actually is quite a good pastry maker, and they head out into
the grim forest with their little dog Valiant to slay the giant. When they get
snatched up by a carnivorous tree, Claudette puts out her stinky feet and the
tree spits them out, retching. Did I mention this was fun? The dangers seem
overwhelming, but they find similarly unusual ways to survive them until they
catch up with the giant. Who, it turns out, likes to tickle feet, not eat them;
he has been badly misrepresented in town. All ends well, of course, thanks to
Claudette's ingenuity. I recommend this book to anyone; I got giant enjoyment
from it. There is a quality of imagination here to be admired. I read A Moon Called Sun by
Christopher Cobb. This is intriguingly different science
fiction/fantasy/horror, R-rated for language, wildly ranging, sometimes
hard-hitting, not for maiden aunts; I must simplify considerably to make any
sense of it here. Andrew “Trace” Jackson and his dog Skiff are out fishing in
2010 when they encounter something like a storm and get sucked into it and wind
up in another realm. At one point they meet Hialeah, a lovely young American
Indian girl of 1818. Josette Legard is a
24 year old woman with the French Resistance fighting the Nazis in 1942. She
ducks through a random door, and winds up in another realm, associating with a
lovely but odd alien ruler. It seems that aliens are trolling through Earth's
history to pick out people useful for their purpose, caring nothing for the
welfare or feelings of those people. That makes Josette's Nazi-fighting
experience relevant; the aliens are like Nazis, albeit rather more complicated.
The two main story threads don't directly intersect until the end, as the alien
machinations play out. I was intrigued by the special use of adapted language,
such a “pedal,” which seems to mean a thing of value or feeling; it felt odd at
first but became more comfortable as the novel progressed. The aliens are more
alien than they initially seem, and reality is ever-elusive as friends or
relatives, some of whom were dead before the story began, appear and interact,
conscious of their current states but trying to be helpful. So this is a
strange one, and I am not sure I properly understand it, but it is interesting
and well told, with a considerable range of imagination. Oh, the title? One of
the artifacts of translation, as the aliens try to find a term for their world
that human folk will comprehend, without getting it quite right. My Sony Reader expired just as I
was about to read the foregoing novel. That gave my wife a pretext to shop for
something she had had her eye on, and we got a Polaroid Android Tablet Computer
on sale for a hundred dollars. As I like to put it, I'm an old codger from
another century, and slow to catch on to newfangled dinguses, but I rather like
this one. Its Adobe Reader handled the .pdf manuscript, oriented the page to be
upright regardless of my orientation; sometimes as I let the device tilt the
page would spin around to re-orient. I can show the pages as they are, in
assorted type sizes, or have them reformat and wrap to remain always on the
page. The print is beautiful, easy to read. But I am unable to jump to my place
in the book, or to return directly to the beginning when I complete it. So I
had to page backward through the 373 page manuscript, one page at a time. This
gets old fast. It does hold my place if I keep it in ready mode, but loses it
if I turn it all the way off to save power. It will play songs, and I can read
with musical background; it seems to have a fair roster of popular songs to
start with, and we added more. But it can be a federal case to make it stop
playing, and we have not found out how to make it play our added songs. It
acknowledges their presence, lists them, but won't actually play them, instead
playing only its own songs; it seems to think they are on the Internet. Would
it be too much to ask that you be able to play a listed song by clicking on it?
Or that there be an On/Off switch? If there is a Hell for programmers, it may
have an On/Off switch for the tortures they undergo—that doesn't work. It will
handle WiFi, but as yet I have not caught up with that 21st century
stuff. So it's a novel experience, and I like it despite its frustrations. As I
like to say, computers are like the opposite gender: can't live with them,
can't live without them. The opposite gender is born that way; what excuse do
computer have? Last column I asked whether anyone
could verify a quote I am credited with, "When one person makes an
accusation, check to be sure he himself is not the guilty one. Sometimes it is
those whose case is weak who make the most clamour." I agreed with it but
didn't remember saying it. Well, James A Long identified it for me: it is in my
autobiography Bio of an Ogre, page 174 of the American paperback edition
or page 166 of the hardcover. I did spell it “clamor.” It related to someone
accusing me of something of which he himself turned out to be guilty, breaking
into lines. So a minor mystery is solved. It seems there is more than one way
to use Google, and different ways can produce different results. The candy Skittles was in the news,
in the case of an unwarranted killing, and I was curious, as I was not familiar
with it, so we bought a package. It turns out to be M&M shaped pellets
filled with fruit flavors. Okay, but it does have that bad association for me.. As I mention every so often, I
practice archery, for the exercise, not for accuracy, as my aim seems to be
abysmal. I have a right side bow and a left side bow, both compound. That is,
when you draw the string, the 55 pound draw weight lessens to under 20 pounds
so I can hold my place without straining; then when I loose the arrow, the full
55 pound force is exerted. Yes, some magic exists in Mundania, facilitated by
the leveraged pulleys. Well, one day I did the right side, then went to the
left side, loosed eight arrows, drew the ninth—and the bowstring snapped,
giving me a smart sting on my gloved right hand. That's why I wear goggles, so
as to be sure a such a loose string doesn't take out an eye. The arrow
vanished; I thought I heard it tumbling through the tree foliage, but it never
came down and I have not found it. What to do? I want to exercise evenly, right
and left. The local archery store shut down, so it's not convenient to buy a
new left hand bow. So—I practiced to use the right side bow left handed. That
was a challenge. These things are designed for their purpose, and it is not
easy to circumvent it. The handle section is shaped to the right hand; the left
hand finds it all wrong. The strings are propped to the side to stay clear of
the arm; left handed they are in the way of the arm and I can get a string burn
on my arm. In addition, I have a problem with the arrow-rest; when I draw, the
arrow typically falls off it, and I have to nudge it back into place with a
finger. But my right hand is facing the wrong way, when I use it to hold the
bow instead of draw the string; I don't have a finger where I need it. So when
I drew the arrows were not just falling off the arrowrest, they were flying out
and dropping to the ground. On the left side bow I used a circular arrowrest
that held the arrow so it could not fall off our out; the problem with that was
that it fouled up the release so that a given arrow could strike five feet to
the side of where I aimed it, either side, or plow into the ground or loop over
the top and be lost. Thus the process of securing the arrow for the draw also
messed it up for the target. Then I got a brilliant notion: I'm doing this for
the exercise, not the accuracy, right? I get the same exercise when I draw the
bow regardless where the arrow lands. So I stood there and drew the bow twelve
times. And wow, twice the arrow actually stayed perched on the arrowrest. I
loosed both arrows and scored on the ground before the target. Next session—I
do my archery twice a week—I got smart and tilted the bow to the side as I drew
so that the arrow was more likely to stay in place. Sometimes it still flew out
with such force it landed on the ground beside me, but seven times it stayed in
place, and I loosed it. I never hit the target, but it was progress. The
following session I managed to loose it twelve times; eleven arrows missed the
target, but one hit it and scored half a point. So I had one-half minus eleven,
but it was significant progress. Why it is that an arrow loosed from the same
bow using the same sights that work for the right side can't find the target left
side I don't know, but in time I'm sure I'll get it zeroed in. I like Linux and the LibreOffice
word processor, and am comfortable with them. But every so often they pull a
stunt. I was typing my contribution to the collaboration I'm doing when abruptly
I had a blank screen. My file, and indeed the whole word processor, had
vanished. I went through the process and recovered the files, but I had lost
what I had just been typing. I suppose the programmers find this sort of thing
amusing, but I am not amused. My best guess is that along the way I typoed,
hitting the Control key when I hit the letter Q, invoking the Quit command, and
since I'm typing and not watching the screen, its menu waited until I hit the D
in Quid pro Quo, meaning Discard, and shut down unsaved. I experimented and
discovered that once I hid Control Q it's going to dump my files; hitting the
CANCEL option does not cancel the command, it invokes it. What a crock of spit!
This sort of mishap could readily be avoided, if only I had the option of
turning off the Control and Alt keys when I don't need them, or at least the
Control Q option. They typically offer options galore, but do you think they'll
let me have anything that practical? It is to laugh. I repeat: I am not amused.
Yes, I tried to turn it off, but it turns out not to be a LibreOffice function
so I can't just nix it. It has to be fixed via Fedora, and I am not a
programmer. I am chronically busy—that's a
state of workaholicism—and things that aren't in the forefront tend to get squeezed
out, especially when I'm writing a novel. I subscribe to LIBERAL OPINION WEEK,
which is a 32 page weekly compendium of all the liberal columns. Our local
newspaper, THE TAMPA BAY TIMES, calls itself liberal, and conservatives
regularly lambaste it for its far leftist output. But this is fiction; it's
actually a centrist paper that runs conservative Krauthammer more often than
liberal Krugman, and its staff is as close-minded as you are likely to find
elsewhere. Yes, I speak from experience. So few, very few, of the liberal
columns are run there, and I pick them all up in the weekly collection. But
this is one of the things that gets behind. So I set aside time and went
through 22 back weeks and saved out what I wanted to comment on here. Do I
subscribe to conservative periodicals also, to be fair-minded? I'm glad you
asked. I tried NATIONAL REVIEW years ago. When the first issue arrived I
sampled it at random, and it said that all the charges against Newt Gingrich
were either false or irrelevant. That was of course a bald-faced lie; soon
thereafter Gingrich, a remarkable piece of work even for a Republican, had to
leave Congress because of his misdeeds. (This is oversimplified; the details
are juicy but not essential. I do thank Gingrich for one thing: he clarified
for me the first name of the Grinch who Stole Christmas: Newt, of course.) I
sampled it randomly again, and again, and each time encountered virtually
complete indifference to reality. This came across as a radical right rag, not
a sober presentation of the conservative case. So I dumped it. If a cause has
to lie to make its case, it's not much of a case or cause, and the rightists of
today seem to have little regard for the truth. I repeat what I have said
before: there was a time when conservatism meant fundamental honesty,
cherishing historic values, fiscal responsibility, and caution about untested
ventures. I do appreciate such tenets. Now it seems to mean greed, arrogance,
ignorance, religiosity, hypocrisy, and covert racism. I should think original
conservatives would be disgusted by the evident perversion of their creed. So I
am left with LIBERAL OPINION, which at least has some sensible commentary. More
on that below. A reader asked me what my favorite
quote was. I pondered briefly, and the first one that came to mind was “Beware
of the man whose god is in the skies,” from The Revolutionist's Handbook,
a supplement to the play Man and Superman, by George Bernard Shaw. I
discovered that in high school, when Man & was in our book but skipped
over for assigned reading; I had learned that adults generally disapproved of
the most interesting reading, so I read it, and verified my suspicion: great
stuff. Shaw was one fine smart liberal vegetarian writer; can't think why I
like him so much. But about favorite quotes: Had I pondered longer, I might
have thought of lines from a poem “What the cloud doeth, the Lord knoweth; the
cloud knoweth not. What the artist doeth, the Lord knoweth; knoweth the artist
not?” by the American poet Sidney Lanier. He was a fine southern flutist and
poet, interned in the Civil War, where he got TB and slowly died from it, not
quite living to age 40. I knew his distant collateral relative Sterling Lanier,
a fine fantasy writer, who had a daughter the age of mine. Okay, I have a huge pile of
clippings I will have to boil down to smidgens. I'll start with LIBERAL OPINION
WEEK for last NoRemember and move forward. E J Dionne Jr. “Here is a surefire
way to cut $7.1 trillion from the deficit over the next decade. Do nothing.”
Because when the Bush tax cuts expire, that will do it. It won't undo the
trillions of dollars wasted in the Bush wars, but at least will stop the
hemorrhage. This is one the supposedly balanced-budget supporting Republicans
can't stop by filibustering. With luck, Obama will not again make the mistake
of extending the tax cuts, trying to placate the implacable. He's thrown too
many pearls before those swine already. David Rothkopf gives ten reasons Obamba
will be re-elected, the essence being Barak is a nice guy, the economy is
recovering, and the Republicans come
across as a passel of extremists. Mauer & Cole discuss five myths about
incarceration, such as that crime has fallen because we have thrown more people
into prison. No, Canada's incarceration rate is about one seventh ours, yet it
has less crime. Much of it is drug related; blacks are twelve times as likely
to be sent to prison as whites, yet both use drugs at about the same rate. That
may not be proof of racism, but there's one hell of a smell. Paul Krugman says
that up to 2005 almost two thirds of the rising share of income went to the top
0.1 percent, the richest thousandth of Americans. “Extreme concentration of
income is incompatible with real democracy.” We are coming to resemble a third world
nation in that respect. Gene Lyons suggests that one reason wealthy Republicans
are not comfortable with Social Security is that “...over 75 years Social
Security has provided a measure of dignity, security and freedom to working
Americans that just annoys the hell out of their betters.” Charles Blow asks
whether income inequality is becoming the new global warming, with many
Americans preferring to believe it's not a concern. “If denial is a river, it
runs through doomed societies.” Paul Krugman says that we were supposed to
start regulating mercury 20 years ago, because it is really unhealthy to have
in the environment. Now at last it is happening, expected to deliver huge
health benefits at modest cost. “So, naturally, Republicans are furious.” Nicholas
Kristof says that two Swedes are serving an 11 year sentence in a filthy
Ethiopian prison for committing journalism. That is, they sneaked into the
Ogaden region to investigate reports of human rights abuses. Dictatorships
really don't like having their dirt exposed. Another blogger there called on
the government to allow free speech and end torture; he faces a possible death
sentence. Bill Keller says it would be folly to bomb Iran, as some politicians
urge, as it would unify the people around the mullahs and provoke them to
double their nuclear pursuit. Clarence Page says that a report found that
almost a quarter of all Internet traffic infringes on copyright laws, but a law
to stop it may actually promote censorship. Yes, those are concerns of mine too;
I don't like either theft or censorship and would hate to have to choose
between them. Nicholas Kristof says that now pimps are using the Internet to
sell girls. There's another tricky choice: freedom of speech, or sexual
slavery. E J Dionne Jr. says that the Citizens United decision tore down a
century's worth of law aimed at reducing corruption in our electoral system;
the conservative court majority set out to remake our political system by
strengthening the hand of corporations and the wealthy, entrenching their
approach to governance. That is, they're reproducing their kind. Paul Krugman
asks “But why do regions that rely on the safety net elect politicians who want
to tear it down?” Because they're confused. 44% of Social Security recipients
say they have not used a government program. “But these voters would be both
shocked and angry if politicians actually imposed their small-government
agenda.” Their education may come hard. Robyn Blumner says that the numbers
show that the national deficit is the result of wars and Bush tax cuts, not any
liberal spending spree. Yes, and those who try to blame the whole deficit on
three years of Obama are idiots, liars, or both. Donald Kaul asks “If you
really and truly believe that abortion is the ultimate evil, how can you be
against contraception, the great enemy of abortion?” Well, you can if you want
to keep women barefoot and pregnant for the crime of having sex. I think that's
the hidden agenda. Paul Krugman comments on the Paul Ryan phenomenon. Not Ryan
himself: “He's a garden-variety modern GOP extremist, an Ayn Rand devotee who
believes that the answer to all problems is to cut taxes on the rich and slash
benefits for the poor and middle class.” No, the phenomenon is the cult that
elevates Ryan to an icon of fiscal responsibility. Joe Nocera remarks on the
Chevrolet Volt, a different kind of hybrid car that gets around 40 miles per
charge before the gasoline engine kicks in. An eminently sensible car, if they
can just get the $40,000 price down. It's American designed and made. So the
conservative propaganda machine is trashing it and trying to blame it on
President Obama, who actually is not connected to the Volt. “It is inexplicable
that the right would feel the need to tell lies about the Volt to attack the
president.” No it isn't; the Volt saves fuel, so the gas-guzzler industry is
against it, and conservatives, having no valid case, have to make up lies
instead, such as the cars bursting into flames, as no Volt has ever done. Now that I have caught up the
LIBERALS for now, on to other clippings. Students have invented phone-friendly
lingerie, the JoeyBra, with a pocket for keys, credit cards, cell phone, etc.
Now women can go purse-less and still function. They will not absentmindedly
leave their bras on the counter. It might be fun to date such a woman: if the
phone rings when she has her hands full, she might ask you to answer it for
her, so you'd have to fish for it among the soft hills. Robyn Blumner column in
the newspaper (some liberals do slip through the net) commenting on the book The
Righteous Mind by Jonathan Haidt that explores the differences between
conservatives and liberals. He asks them tricky questions, like what would they
think of a brother and sister who experimented with incest while using birth
control? Of a family that, after their pet dog was run over, ate it for dinner?
I don't have ready answers, so don't know how mine would distinguish me from a
conservative. But I think I would be repelled by both examples. Now the battle between traditional
publishers and Amazon his hit the news. The Justice Department has sued Apple
and publishers about the Agency Model, which establishes that traditional
publishers can set the retail prices of books. This is to prevent Amazon from
setting prices so low that publishers might be run out of business, while
Amazon, with deep pockets, survives. But is this price fixing? The suit may
settle that, legally. I suspect it is more about who fixes the price: the
publisher or Amazon. I have an interest, but am not taking sides, in part
because I have feet in both camps, and in part because I'm just not sure where
the right of the case lies. Maybe the author should set the price of his book,
as is the case with self publishing. Political cartoon: What life is
like for the CEOs of Rush Limbaugh's remaining sponsors. Remember, Rush called
a woman a whore when she argued the case for contraceptives being covered by
health care insurance, and his own wife told him off. Cartoon shows a man
bleary in the morning finding a note on the refrigerator saying “Make your own
breakfast! Hope you enjoyed the sofa.” Lovely story circulated by Monica
Parish on the Internet; she has good taste in relaying things. So I'm agnostic;
I still appreciate a good religious joke. Digested down, it is that a Jewish
businessman sent his son to Israel for a year, and the son returned converted
to Christianity. So the man asked his Jewish friend what to do, but the same
thing had happened to him. So they asked the rabbi, and it had happened to him
as well. What was going on? So the three of them prayed to God, asking what to
do. And God replied FUNNY YOU SHOULD ASK. I, TOO, SENT MY SON TO ISRAEL... You know those virtual worlds on
the Internet? I've never been to one, being on slow dial-up, but I'm sure I
would love them. Well, now it seems crime has discovered them. What do you do
when your virtual home is broken into and smashed up and robbed by a monster? For every US soldier killed on the
battlefield, about 25 commit suicide. That's painful. Items in THE WEEK: The American TV
show Toddlers & Tiaras has paved the way for children's beauty pageants in
England. Even three year olds wear makeup, teased blonde hair and looking like
little sex dolls. To what market are they really appealing? Child porno? Maybe
not related: some women experience sexual pleasure though exercise, sometimes
leading to orgasm. Usually that occurs during an abs workout, but biking,
running, or hiking can also do it. Even weight lifting. They call it
“coregasm.” My guess is that the flexing of the pelvic region is what does it.
It does not seem to work on men. Ah, well. Google is testing self-driving cars;
they are already out there, quietly behaving in traffic. 90% of accidents are
caused by human error, so this could contribute to safety. When there start
being road-rage incidents between self driving cars, we'll know that that
process has arrived. They have discovered that mild electric shock to the brain
can contribute to better performance. The female author of the article tried
it, and became a good marksman, because her mind was clear of extraneous
thoughts. So the key seems to be focus. Remember the P does or does not equal
NP proof I discussed in a prior column? P is the class of easy-to-solve
problems; NP is the class of easy-to-check problems. Are the two categories the
same, or different? Most logicians believe they are different, and that is my
belief. All Ps are in NP, but are all NPs in P? Consider modern secret codes:
designed to be almost impossible to crack, but when you have the key, it is
easy to verify your message. So NP is definitely not P in that instance. But
they feel that it will take a century or more to formally prove it. (They
probably don't read my column.) And one from NEW SCIENTIST: a review
of a book titled Free Will by Sam Harris. Free will is everywhere in
law, politics, relationships, morality and so on; we are constantly making
decisions, for good or ill. Yet it is an illusion. “We either live in a
deterministic universe where the future is set, or an indeterminate one where
thoughts and actions happen at random. Neither is compatible with free will.”
The author concludes that it really does not make much of a difference. I have
a problem with that; as a general rule I don't like either/or extremes, because
in my observation reality is generally a shade of gray. But since I can't
distinguish between true free will and the illusion of free will, I have to
grudgingly agree that it probably does not make much of a difference. Maybe it
is illusion that fills in those shades of gray. I aim for about 3,000 words in
these columns, and as usual I have seriously overshot it with this 5,100 word
effort. I still have a pile of things to do that had to be bumped into next
month; I'll be writing about them then. So let me finish here with a comment
about the flowers of spring: April is a month of flowers here in backwoods
Florida. I'm especially pleased that our star jasmines, that usually display
one or two star-petaled flowers in a season, this time had up to 25 per day
despite getting frozen back by the freezes of Jamboree and FeBlueberry. They
evidently have a can-do attitude. | |||||||||
| PIERS | |||||||||
| Click here to read previous newsletters |
|||||||||
| Home | What's New | Newsletter Internet Publishing | Books | Xanth Awards | Links | Email Us |
|||||||||