Creating a warm bubble of agreement
It seems that Republicans in government are very fragile nowadays. So fragile that teenage girls who disagree with them must be arrested by state police, lest they shatter the delicate bubble of Republican groupthink with inconvenient reality-based thinking.
Wednesday, May 31, 2006
Look, up in the sky!
Cool miltech stuff: carbon-fiber wings that may allow paratroopers to glide up to 200 miles. But that's not all: "[S]tudies have begun on a powered version which will use small turbo-jets....
Another source supplies a picture.
Of course, Leonardo da Vinci may have done it first.
Cool miltech stuff: carbon-fiber wings that may allow paratroopers to glide up to 200 miles. But that's not all: "[S]tudies have begun on a powered version which will use small turbo-jets....
Another source supplies a picture.
Of course, Leonardo da Vinci may have done it first.
Tuesday, May 30, 2006
Back from Toronto and Stratford
Things done:
* Saw Stratford Festival production of Coriolanus, one of Shakespeare's later tragedies, with fabulous Fiend and two friends, "Noth" and a fellow for whom I do not yet have a convenient online handle. (NOTE: the "extended synopsis" link contains spoilers.)
The Toronto Star reviewer praises the lead actor's performance. I concur, but it also seemed that the play was effective and powerful because it avoided much of the discursive banter and meandering subplots that bog down other, lesser Shakespearian plays. Every scene, maybe even every line, contributed directly to the plot. It's a lean and direct play, a bitter and cynical look at the rise and fall of a superbly capable soldier who's just too proud for his own good. Too proud to play politics, too proud to pander to the plebian mob, and thus easy prey for those more skillful in that art.
I found myself reflecting that this is exactly how many political thinkers of Shakespeare's time viewed democracy: as violent, unpredictable mob rule, subject to the machinations of designing demagogues who promote themselves by manipulating the opinions of the ignorant herd and, in the process, deliberately driving out any capable potential leaders who might threaten their position. That is, after all, what frequently did happen in democratic Athens, where successful generals and rulers were exiled from the city with rather monotonous regularity. When the founders of the US were hammering out the terms under which their new nation would govern itself, the same thoughts haunted the mind of Alexander Hamilton and others. ("Your people, sir, is a great BEAST....")
* Saw The Da Vinci Code. A busy and baffling movie. As with the book, I found it rather implausible that an elderly man dying of a bullet in the gut would be able to run all over the Louvre, composing clever anagrams to scrawl on different paintings, hiding artifacts here and there, writing intricately-coded messages on the floor, and then arranging himself in an artful pose before expiring. Entertaining otherwise. Ian McKellan nearly steals the show from stolid Tom Hanks and subdued Audrey Tatou with his irascible but debonair portrayal of Sir Leigh Teabing. Dang it, when I'm his age, I hope I have wavy hair and twinkling eyes like that.
The movie is visually good-looking, with lots of mysteriously dark settings and baffling imagery. The use of computer-generated animations to portray Robert Langdon's thought-processes was a good idea, but relying on it as a crutch so that the movie doesn't have to really let the viewer see certain critical objects and locations in their entirity is excessive.
I note that various Christian groups and individuals are protesting against the movie, although so far as I know no Catholic or other Christian clergyman has issued the kind of public calls for riot and murder that characterized the Danish Cartoon brouhaha of a few months ago.
* Watched BBC miniseries of Dorothy L. Sayer's Strong Poison, in which the aristocratic amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey meets and is romantically smitten with an accused murderess, Harriet Vane. The actor playing Lord Peter was perhaps a bit older than I expected, but seemed otherwise well suited to the role. Bunter seemed a bit young but quite capable. Harriet Vane didn't have much to do in this episode, since she spent most of the time either locked in a prison cell or stoically enduring the accusations of the court. Fiend assures me that strong-willed Harriet plays a much more active role in other episodes.
* Accidentally discovered miniscule-but-lovely Cloud Garden Park in downtown Toronto.
* Debated merits of SmartCar.
* Bought a boring-but-servicable Generic Dark Suit to replace the one that was in the back of the Pontiac when it was stolen.
Things not (yet) done:
* Canoe/paddleboat race along the river in Stratford. Future fellow Stratford-goers may expect to be challenged to such a contest.
* Exploring Toronto's Music Garden.
And that was my Memorial Day weekend. Anyone else care to describe theirs?
Things done:
* Saw Stratford Festival production of Coriolanus, one of Shakespeare's later tragedies, with fabulous Fiend and two friends, "Noth" and a fellow for whom I do not yet have a convenient online handle. (NOTE: the "extended synopsis" link contains spoilers.)
The Toronto Star reviewer praises the lead actor's performance. I concur, but it also seemed that the play was effective and powerful because it avoided much of the discursive banter and meandering subplots that bog down other, lesser Shakespearian plays. Every scene, maybe even every line, contributed directly to the plot. It's a lean and direct play, a bitter and cynical look at the rise and fall of a superbly capable soldier who's just too proud for his own good. Too proud to play politics, too proud to pander to the plebian mob, and thus easy prey for those more skillful in that art.
I found myself reflecting that this is exactly how many political thinkers of Shakespeare's time viewed democracy: as violent, unpredictable mob rule, subject to the machinations of designing demagogues who promote themselves by manipulating the opinions of the ignorant herd and, in the process, deliberately driving out any capable potential leaders who might threaten their position. That is, after all, what frequently did happen in democratic Athens, where successful generals and rulers were exiled from the city with rather monotonous regularity. When the founders of the US were hammering out the terms under which their new nation would govern itself, the same thoughts haunted the mind of Alexander Hamilton and others. ("Your people, sir, is a great BEAST....")
* Saw The Da Vinci Code. A busy and baffling movie. As with the book, I found it rather implausible that an elderly man dying of a bullet in the gut would be able to run all over the Louvre, composing clever anagrams to scrawl on different paintings, hiding artifacts here and there, writing intricately-coded messages on the floor, and then arranging himself in an artful pose before expiring. Entertaining otherwise. Ian McKellan nearly steals the show from stolid Tom Hanks and subdued Audrey Tatou with his irascible but debonair portrayal of Sir Leigh Teabing. Dang it, when I'm his age, I hope I have wavy hair and twinkling eyes like that.
The movie is visually good-looking, with lots of mysteriously dark settings and baffling imagery. The use of computer-generated animations to portray Robert Langdon's thought-processes was a good idea, but relying on it as a crutch so that the movie doesn't have to really let the viewer see certain critical objects and locations in their entirity is excessive.
I note that various Christian groups and individuals are protesting against the movie, although so far as I know no Catholic or other Christian clergyman has issued the kind of public calls for riot and murder that characterized the Danish Cartoon brouhaha of a few months ago.
* Watched BBC miniseries of Dorothy L. Sayer's Strong Poison, in which the aristocratic amateur sleuth Lord Peter Wimsey meets and is romantically smitten with an accused murderess, Harriet Vane. The actor playing Lord Peter was perhaps a bit older than I expected, but seemed otherwise well suited to the role. Bunter seemed a bit young but quite capable. Harriet Vane didn't have much to do in this episode, since she spent most of the time either locked in a prison cell or stoically enduring the accusations of the court. Fiend assures me that strong-willed Harriet plays a much more active role in other episodes.
* Accidentally discovered miniscule-but-lovely Cloud Garden Park in downtown Toronto.
* Debated merits of SmartCar.
* Bought a boring-but-servicable Generic Dark Suit to replace the one that was in the back of the Pontiac when it was stolen.
Things not (yet) done:
* Canoe/paddleboat race along the river in Stratford. Future fellow Stratford-goers may expect to be challenged to such a contest.
* Exploring Toronto's Music Garden.
And that was my Memorial Day weekend. Anyone else care to describe theirs?
Update on HR 5319
The text of Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick's effort to ban most interactive web services from schools and libraries can be found here. (From Politechbot by way of Bytes in Brief.) It's also now available through Thomas (search for bill number HR 5319).
I commented on this bill earlier in May.
The text of Rep. Michael Fitzpatrick's effort to ban most interactive web services from schools and libraries can be found here. (From Politechbot by way of Bytes in Brief.) It's also now available through Thomas (search for bill number HR 5319).
I commented on this bill earlier in May.
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
Recent reads:
The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood
A startling and engrossing vision of dystopia. I won't bother to recap the basic premise ofthe book since, like me, most people reading this blog have probably become aware of that premise through exposure to the book, the movie, or the discussions that it has inspired since its publication in 1986.
The book's still worth reading, even for someone who already knows that premise. It's a tour de force of writing in which Atwood never seems to hit a single wrong note in her first-person portrayal of a woman trapped in a living hell. Even the "villainous" characters who are responsible for her enslavement are believable and, at times, sympathetic in their own twisted way. (If anyone thinks that such a society cannot exist, or that women would automatically rise in righteous rebellion against it, he or she would do well to read up on revolutionary Iran, Afghanistan under the Taliban, 19th-century Utah, or the present-day Short Creek community of polygamists.)
Part of the reason Atwood's story is so effective is because the reader's viewpoint and knowledge are so strictly limited that we feel as closed-in and claustrophobic as the protagonist. The reader is trapped inside the perceptions and thoughts of the"handmaid" of the title, both literally and metaphorically blinkered and unable to see anything outside the hellishly confined world to which she's restricted. We're even denied knowledge of her real name, just as that name is denied to her by the society in which she lives.
In Nancy Pearl's scheme of things, this is a setting-driven novel. My interest in the book was driven by intense curiosity about the world that Atwood created: how it worked, how it came to exist, how people managed to live in it. Although the protagonist "Offred" and the other characters she describes are indeed compelling, the impact of the novel depends almost entirely on the setting as it is gradually, haltingly, revealed, and to a lesser degree on her own backstory as it is gradually and reluctantly revealed in a series of flashbacks, dreams, and uncomfortable reminiscences. It's implied that she's been tortured into submission -- "broken" -- after being torn away from her husband and child. We know, because she describes it, that she's been put through a "training program" that most people would consider brainwashing. And throughout the novel we have a ringside seat inside her head as her memories of a better time, and her desire to escape her current life, vie with the vile things she has to do and the submissive facade she has to maintain in order to survive.
All this makes for powerful drama, but I found myself reading on not because I was particularly interested in "Offred"'s current or future emotional state, or whether she became pregnant or not, or even what her eventual fate might be, but because, in a horrified way, I wanted to know more about the world in which she lived. How did it come to be? And how did people manage to live in it? And what might eventually become of it?
A measure of this can be seen in the fact that the reader is never actually told what eventually happens to "Offred". The story she tells simply trails off into silence after a critical moment, after which we're given a kind of framing device in the form of an academic presentation about the provenance and background of the "soi-disant manuscript" that we've been reading. We don't find out much more about "Offred" than she's already told us, and we certainly don't find out what happened to her after the events she describes. What we do get is some context, a few more details about the "Gileadite regime" in which she lived, all of it couched in a stream of condescending, trivializing academic jokes that seem downright ghoulish after what we've just read. It's tempting to think that Atwood is just poking fun at the affectations of academia, but it's also possible that she has bigger game in mind. I'll leave that as a question for discussion should anyone feel so inclined.
Edit, 5/25: corrected publication date of Handmaid's Tale. Thanks to S. and Fiend.
The Handmaid's Tale, by Margaret Atwood
A startling and engrossing vision of dystopia. I won't bother to recap the basic premise ofthe book since, like me, most people reading this blog have probably become aware of that premise through exposure to the book, the movie, or the discussions that it has inspired since its publication in 1986.
The book's still worth reading, even for someone who already knows that premise. It's a tour de force of writing in which Atwood never seems to hit a single wrong note in her first-person portrayal of a woman trapped in a living hell. Even the "villainous" characters who are responsible for her enslavement are believable and, at times, sympathetic in their own twisted way. (If anyone thinks that such a society cannot exist, or that women would automatically rise in righteous rebellion against it, he or she would do well to read up on revolutionary Iran, Afghanistan under the Taliban, 19th-century Utah, or the present-day Short Creek community of polygamists.)
Part of the reason Atwood's story is so effective is because the reader's viewpoint and knowledge are so strictly limited that we feel as closed-in and claustrophobic as the protagonist. The reader is trapped inside the perceptions and thoughts of the"handmaid" of the title, both literally and metaphorically blinkered and unable to see anything outside the hellishly confined world to which she's restricted. We're even denied knowledge of her real name, just as that name is denied to her by the society in which she lives.
In Nancy Pearl's scheme of things, this is a setting-driven novel. My interest in the book was driven by intense curiosity about the world that Atwood created: how it worked, how it came to exist, how people managed to live in it. Although the protagonist "Offred" and the other characters she describes are indeed compelling, the impact of the novel depends almost entirely on the setting as it is gradually, haltingly, revealed, and to a lesser degree on her own backstory as it is gradually and reluctantly revealed in a series of flashbacks, dreams, and uncomfortable reminiscences. It's implied that she's been tortured into submission -- "broken" -- after being torn away from her husband and child. We know, because she describes it, that she's been put through a "training program" that most people would consider brainwashing. And throughout the novel we have a ringside seat inside her head as her memories of a better time, and her desire to escape her current life, vie with the vile things she has to do and the submissive facade she has to maintain in order to survive.
All this makes for powerful drama, but I found myself reading on not because I was particularly interested in "Offred"'s current or future emotional state, or whether she became pregnant or not, or even what her eventual fate might be, but because, in a horrified way, I wanted to know more about the world in which she lived. How did it come to be? And how did people manage to live in it? And what might eventually become of it?
A measure of this can be seen in the fact that the reader is never actually told what eventually happens to "Offred". The story she tells simply trails off into silence after a critical moment, after which we're given a kind of framing device in the form of an academic presentation about the provenance and background of the "soi-disant manuscript" that we've been reading. We don't find out much more about "Offred" than she's already told us, and we certainly don't find out what happened to her after the events she describes. What we do get is some context, a few more details about the "Gileadite regime" in which she lived, all of it couched in a stream of condescending, trivializing academic jokes that seem downright ghoulish after what we've just read. It's tempting to think that Atwood is just poking fun at the affectations of academia, but it's also possible that she has bigger game in mind. I'll leave that as a question for discussion should anyone feel so inclined.
Edit, 5/25: corrected publication date of Handmaid's Tale. Thanks to S. and Fiend.
Recent reads:
A Skeleton in God's Closet, by Paul L. Maier.
Maier's name seemed vaguely familiar to me when I picked this 1994 book out of the library book sale, and the title, along with the bookjacket teaser copy ("A skeleton almost 2,000 years old -- will it shed new light on the life of Jesus or plunge the world into darkness and chaos?") seemed to suggest a religious thriller that I might be able to recommend to people who are still on the waiting list for the Da Vinci Code.
It turns out that Maier's name is probably familiar to me because he edited a collection of the "essential writings" of Josephus Flavius that I recently ordered for the libraries at which I work. He's a professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, and he's also written novels about Biblical characters such as Pontius Pilate, but I haven't read them.
The plot of the novel in hand involves an archaeological dig near Jerusalem, in which the protagonist, a globetrotting history professor and archaeologist, unearths a grave that may hold secrets that will rock the Christian world. Complications ensue, as the Vatican and various governments around the world seek to spin the story or alter it to suit their purposes.
The historical and archeological tale that Maier spins here is intriguing because of his knowledge of archaeological technique and early Christian history. As Nancy Pearl might say, it's a plot-driven novel, in which the reader keeps forging onward to find out what new twist is going to be revealed, not because of the clunky writing or the stereotypical characters. Most readers in the western world are familiar with the fundamentals of the story of the early Christian church and the thought-system that has developed from it, and thus will find some interest in a story about how that history and thought-system would be affected if an archaeological discovery were to cast doubt on its most sacred elements.
It would be interesting to trace the threads of influence linking various books in this mini-genre of religio-historical thrillers. As mentioned above, Maier's protagonist could almost be the prototype for the hero of The Da Vinci Code. There's even a reference or two to Opus Dei, with a suggestion that it might have ill will toward anyone who presents evidence contradicting established Christian doctrine. Maier may have done a bit of borrowing of his own, too, since one plot twist involving an ancient document is very similar to the critical plot twist of James Hall Robert's 1964 religious thriller, The Q Document.
Still, it might be worth recommending to people who enjoyed DVC and are aching for another fix of Biblically-flavored historical mystery. As with DVC, I enjoyed the ride, even as I sometimes winced at clumsy prose or characters who were just too goody-goody to be true.
A Skeleton in God's Closet, by Paul L. Maier.
Maier's name seemed vaguely familiar to me when I picked this 1994 book out of the library book sale, and the title, along with the bookjacket teaser copy ("A skeleton almost 2,000 years old -- will it shed new light on the life of Jesus or plunge the world into darkness and chaos?") seemed to suggest a religious thriller that I might be able to recommend to people who are still on the waiting list for the Da Vinci Code.
It turns out that Maier's name is probably familiar to me because he edited a collection of the "essential writings" of Josephus Flavius that I recently ordered for the libraries at which I work. He's a professor of ancient history at Western Michigan University, and he's also written novels about Biblical characters such as Pontius Pilate, but I haven't read them.
The plot of the novel in hand involves an archaeological dig near Jerusalem, in which the protagonist, a globetrotting history professor and archaeologist, unearths a grave that may hold secrets that will rock the Christian world. Complications ensue, as the Vatican and various governments around the world seek to spin the story or alter it to suit their purposes.
The historical and archeological tale that Maier spins here is intriguing because of his knowledge of archaeological technique and early Christian history. As Nancy Pearl might say, it's a plot-driven novel, in which the reader keeps forging onward to find out what new twist is going to be revealed, not because of the clunky writing or the stereotypical characters. Most readers in the western world are familiar with the fundamentals of the story of the early Christian church and the thought-system that has developed from it, and thus will find some interest in a story about how that history and thought-system would be affected if an archaeological discovery were to cast doubt on its most sacred elements.
It would be interesting to trace the threads of influence linking various books in this mini-genre of religio-historical thrillers. As mentioned above, Maier's protagonist could almost be the prototype for the hero of The Da Vinci Code. There's even a reference or two to Opus Dei, with a suggestion that it might have ill will toward anyone who presents evidence contradicting established Christian doctrine. Maier may have done a bit of borrowing of his own, too, since one plot twist involving an ancient document is very similar to the critical plot twist of James Hall Robert's 1964 religious thriller, The Q Document.
Still, it might be worth recommending to people who enjoyed DVC and are aching for another fix of Biblically-flavored historical mystery. As with DVC, I enjoyed the ride, even as I sometimes winced at clumsy prose or characters who were just too goody-goody to be true.
Sunday, May 21, 2006
Props to PLOS
The Public Library of Science has launched another free, peer-reviewed online journal, PLOS Clinical Trials.
So far neither Suburban Public Library nor Busy Bee College has added links to PLOS to its list of online resources. As it was explained to me, if administrators see that such things are available for free, they won't pay for expensive commercial databases.
The Public Library of Science has launched another free, peer-reviewed online journal, PLOS Clinical Trials.
So far neither Suburban Public Library nor Busy Bee College has added links to PLOS to its list of online resources. As it was explained to me, if administrators see that such things are available for free, they won't pay for expensive commercial databases.
EPA
The Environmental Protection Agency has a series of libraries scattered around the country which make scientific studies and other information about pollution and pollutants available to the general public.
Fortunately, the Bush administration has a solution to this problem.
The Environmental Protection Agency has a series of libraries scattered around the country which make scientific studies and other information about pollution and pollutants available to the general public.
Fortunately, the Bush administration has a solution to this problem.
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Recent reads:
A Houseboat on the Styx, by John Kendrick Bangs and Peter Newell. I've heard this book referred to time and time again on fiction-related listservs. Finally I was able to order a copy for Suburban Public Library, thanks to Kessinger Publishing's extensive catalog of print-on-demand editions of public domain works.
Unfortunately, the book didn't quite live up to its billing. It is witty, and it is clever, and it is somewhat amusing, but there's no plot to speak of. The reader is essentially a witness to the arguments and conversations that Bangs puts into the incorporeal mouths of various deceased souls inhabiting a gentleman's club aboard the titular houseboat. It's clever and amusing at first to hear Samuel Johnson and William Shakespeare in animated disputation with Socrates, et al, but the novelty wears off before one reaches the end of the book.
Rumor has it that Connie Willis alludes to this book in To Say Nothing of the Dog. I expect that tracking down her allusion to it will be more satisfying than the work itself.
A Houseboat on the Styx, by John Kendrick Bangs and Peter Newell. I've heard this book referred to time and time again on fiction-related listservs. Finally I was able to order a copy for Suburban Public Library, thanks to Kessinger Publishing's extensive catalog of print-on-demand editions of public domain works.
Unfortunately, the book didn't quite live up to its billing. It is witty, and it is clever, and it is somewhat amusing, but there's no plot to speak of. The reader is essentially a witness to the arguments and conversations that Bangs puts into the incorporeal mouths of various deceased souls inhabiting a gentleman's club aboard the titular houseboat. It's clever and amusing at first to hear Samuel Johnson and William Shakespeare in animated disputation with Socrates, et al, but the novelty wears off before one reaches the end of the book.
Rumor has it that Connie Willis alludes to this book in To Say Nothing of the Dog. I expect that tracking down her allusion to it will be more satisfying than the work itself.
Graphic novel roundup
A Thousand Ships (Age of Bronze, vol. 1), by Eric Shanower For those of us who never actually got around to reading The Iliad, this volume's a must-read. Shanower portrays the events leading up to the Trojan War in dramatic, fast-moving fashion. I didn't spot any significant departures from mythology as I know it, but for those who want to check up on him, he provides an afterword in which he discusses the sources he used and the problems of chronology and contradiction that he encountered with them.
My Faith in Frankie, by Mike Carey, Sonny Liew, et al. A witty look at the problems of having a personal diety. Frankie's a cute brunette who would really like to have a boyfriend. She also has a personal diety who is, quite literally, a jealous god. Things get complicated when Frankie heads off to college and becomes the target of both a lecherous upperclassman and more sinister forces. The artwork is cartoonish and lighthearted, especially when portraying Frankie's younger years in flashback. There are some adult themes, although no explicit nudity.
Once in a Blue Moon, by Nunzio DeFilippis, Christina Weir, Jennifer Quick, et al. An entertaining, anime-style interpretation of that old fantasy staple, the mysterious/magical book that transports a modern-day teenager into a parallel world of mortal combat between good and evil.
A Thousand Ships (Age of Bronze, vol. 1), by Eric Shanower For those of us who never actually got around to reading The Iliad, this volume's a must-read. Shanower portrays the events leading up to the Trojan War in dramatic, fast-moving fashion. I didn't spot any significant departures from mythology as I know it, but for those who want to check up on him, he provides an afterword in which he discusses the sources he used and the problems of chronology and contradiction that he encountered with them.
My Faith in Frankie, by Mike Carey, Sonny Liew, et al. A witty look at the problems of having a personal diety. Frankie's a cute brunette who would really like to have a boyfriend. She also has a personal diety who is, quite literally, a jealous god. Things get complicated when Frankie heads off to college and becomes the target of both a lecherous upperclassman and more sinister forces. The artwork is cartoonish and lighthearted, especially when portraying Frankie's younger years in flashback. There are some adult themes, although no explicit nudity.
Once in a Blue Moon, by Nunzio DeFilippis, Christina Weir, Jennifer Quick, et al. An entertaining, anime-style interpretation of that old fantasy staple, the mysterious/magical book that transports a modern-day teenager into a parallel world of mortal combat between good and evil.
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Recent viewings
Danger Man (aka Secret Agent), disk 1
There's a man who leads a life of danger
To everyone he meets he stays a stranger
With every move he makes another chance he takes
Odds are he won't live to see tomorrow
Secret agent man, secret agent man
They've given you a number and taken away your name....
Plenty of people have heard Johnny Rivers sing the lyrics above. Not so many have seen the television show for whose US presentation they were written. Fortunately, DVDs and the magic of the Long Tail have made it possible to do so.
And a good thing, too. Danger Man (to use its original British title) is an above-average spy thriller series in which Patrick McGoohan's character, a British secret agent named John Drake, uses intelligence, personal charm and believable spycraft -- rather than explosions, violence and implausible James Bond gadgetry -- to complete the various missions to which he is assigned. And, occasionally, freelance ones of which his bosses disapprove....
It's suggested early on in the episodes I watched that Drake and his political bosses often disagree about ethics and responsibility. McGoohan went on to create a better-known series, The Prisoner, in which a dissatisfied secret agent tries to resign from a spy agency and ends up incarcerated in a surreal Village of brainwashers and brainwash-ees.
Officially, Number Six is not John Drake. But I couldn't help but notice a prominent, framed picture of a penny-farthing bicycle on the office wall of the boss to which Drake reports in one episode.
Hmmm.
Proto-Prisoner or not, it's worth checking out for anyone who enjoys Cold War spy dramas.
Danger Man (aka Secret Agent), disk 1
There's a man who leads a life of danger
To everyone he meets he stays a stranger
With every move he makes another chance he takes
Odds are he won't live to see tomorrow
Secret agent man, secret agent man
They've given you a number and taken away your name....
Plenty of people have heard Johnny Rivers sing the lyrics above. Not so many have seen the television show for whose US presentation they were written. Fortunately, DVDs and the magic of the Long Tail have made it possible to do so.
And a good thing, too. Danger Man (to use its original British title) is an above-average spy thriller series in which Patrick McGoohan's character, a British secret agent named John Drake, uses intelligence, personal charm and believable spycraft -- rather than explosions, violence and implausible James Bond gadgetry -- to complete the various missions to which he is assigned. And, occasionally, freelance ones of which his bosses disapprove....
It's suggested early on in the episodes I watched that Drake and his political bosses often disagree about ethics and responsibility. McGoohan went on to create a better-known series, The Prisoner, in which a dissatisfied secret agent tries to resign from a spy agency and ends up incarcerated in a surreal Village of brainwashers and brainwash-ees.
Officially, Number Six is not John Drake. But I couldn't help but notice a prominent, framed picture of a penny-farthing bicycle on the office wall of the boss to which Drake reports in one episode.
Hmmm.
Proto-Prisoner or not, it's worth checking out for anyone who enjoys Cold War spy dramas.
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
Recent viewings
It Happened One Night. A first-rate romantic comedy, circa 1934. Claudette Colbert is a spoiled-but-lonely heiress on the run from her father, who disapproves of her marriage to a flamboyant New York playboy. On the road, she encounters a cynical newspaper reporter (a young Clark Gable, looking disreputable in trenchcoat, fedora and pencil-thin mustache). Verbal sparks fly in all directions as they spar with each other, other bus passengers, and the occasional detective trying to track down the elusive heiress. Watching the two of them spontaneously improvise ways to distract unwelcome inquisitors, while becoming steadily closer to each other, is a sheer pleasure. Some of Gable's macho posturing wouldn't pass modern-day political muster, but aside from that minor quibble it's a delightful story from beginning to end. Highly recommended.
(Note: this review was written sometime back in January and got misplaced until now.)
It Happened One Night. A first-rate romantic comedy, circa 1934. Claudette Colbert is a spoiled-but-lonely heiress on the run from her father, who disapproves of her marriage to a flamboyant New York playboy. On the road, she encounters a cynical newspaper reporter (a young Clark Gable, looking disreputable in trenchcoat, fedora and pencil-thin mustache). Verbal sparks fly in all directions as they spar with each other, other bus passengers, and the occasional detective trying to track down the elusive heiress. Watching the two of them spontaneously improvise ways to distract unwelcome inquisitors, while becoming steadily closer to each other, is a sheer pleasure. Some of Gable's macho posturing wouldn't pass modern-day political muster, but aside from that minor quibble it's a delightful story from beginning to end. Highly recommended.
(Note: this review was written sometime back in January and got misplaced until now.)
Sunday, May 14, 2006
Republicans vs. the internet (again)
Republican senator Michael G. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania has proudly announced a bill, HR 5319, that would require any library or school that receives any federal funding to censor "social-networking" websites. The latter is, according to various news sources, very broadly defined and would include most weblogging services as well as wikis, instant-messaging services, many e'mail services, and many interactive news-and-commentary sites such as DailyKos, Redstate, etc. In essence, it seeks to block access to the whole generation of interactive, user-centered web applications that are loosely referred to as "Web 2.0".
Unfortunately, Thomas doesn't seem to have the full text of this bill, HR 5319, available yet, and I'm dependent on published news summaries such as BusinessWeek, personal blog-entries, and legislative alerts from groups like the ALA.
Now I'm willing to grant that some social-networking sites may be useless or even counterproductive in a school environment. But local schools are perfectly capable of blocking troublesome websites on their own, without this kind of federal mandate. (What ever happened to the Republican love of local control, small government, and parental responsibility? Evidently, it was whisked away like a cardboard theater prop the moment they took control of the juggernaut that they spent the last twenty years screaming against.)
Furthermore, the mission of public libraries is not nearly as restricted and specialized as that of schools. Even if this bill made sense for schools, it makes no sense at all for libraries, whose computer services exist in order to link the general public with the electronic world, not to wall them off from it. And I can testify that it works. One of the regular users of Suburban Public Library has achived a bit of note lately on DailyKos for her regular commentaries about the recent changes in Medicare. That wouldn't have been possible if this kind of restriction were in place, and both she and those all across the nation who read and benefitted from her commentaries would be the poorer for it.
Even if it affected only users under the age of 18, it would be a disaster. The extremely broad ban contemplated by Rep. Fitzpatrick would in effect wall them off from the ongoing public conversations that they need to be aware of if they want to become knowledgeable adults. And, entertainingly, it might actually outlaw services like www.tutor.com, which provides live online tutoring with qualified teachers through school and library computer connections.
The rationale, of course, is to protect the children from "online predators". The reality? Once again the Republicans are using nuclear weapons to hunt cockroaches, inflicting enormous collateral damage on the vast, law-abiding majority in order to win political points for largely illusory blows against a small minority of abusive users.
Or -- to use an entirely different metaphor -- they're standing, like King Canute, at the low-water mark on the beach, holding up a hand and shouting "stop!" at the waves of the advancing tide. I don't think that interactive web applications will disappear just because Representative Fitzpatrick is afraid of them.
If this misguided bill is passed, it will serve only as one more barrier blocking those who access the internet through public spaces like libraries from being able to participate in the most active and vibrant part of the world's economy of information. And, of course, it'll do absolutely nothing to "protect" any kid who has access to his own, or his parents', computer.
Republican senator Michael G. Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania has proudly announced a bill, HR 5319, that would require any library or school that receives any federal funding to censor "social-networking" websites. The latter is, according to various news sources, very broadly defined and would include most weblogging services as well as wikis, instant-messaging services, many e'mail services, and many interactive news-and-commentary sites such as DailyKos, Redstate, etc. In essence, it seeks to block access to the whole generation of interactive, user-centered web applications that are loosely referred to as "Web 2.0".
Unfortunately, Thomas doesn't seem to have the full text of this bill, HR 5319, available yet, and I'm dependent on published news summaries such as BusinessWeek, personal blog-entries, and legislative alerts from groups like the ALA.
Now I'm willing to grant that some social-networking sites may be useless or even counterproductive in a school environment. But local schools are perfectly capable of blocking troublesome websites on their own, without this kind of federal mandate. (What ever happened to the Republican love of local control, small government, and parental responsibility? Evidently, it was whisked away like a cardboard theater prop the moment they took control of the juggernaut that they spent the last twenty years screaming against.)
Furthermore, the mission of public libraries is not nearly as restricted and specialized as that of schools. Even if this bill made sense for schools, it makes no sense at all for libraries, whose computer services exist in order to link the general public with the electronic world, not to wall them off from it. And I can testify that it works. One of the regular users of Suburban Public Library has achived a bit of note lately on DailyKos for her regular commentaries about the recent changes in Medicare. That wouldn't have been possible if this kind of restriction were in place, and both she and those all across the nation who read and benefitted from her commentaries would be the poorer for it.
Even if it affected only users under the age of 18, it would be a disaster. The extremely broad ban contemplated by Rep. Fitzpatrick would in effect wall them off from the ongoing public conversations that they need to be aware of if they want to become knowledgeable adults. And, entertainingly, it might actually outlaw services like www.tutor.com, which provides live online tutoring with qualified teachers through school and library computer connections.
The rationale, of course, is to protect the children from "online predators". The reality? Once again the Republicans are using nuclear weapons to hunt cockroaches, inflicting enormous collateral damage on the vast, law-abiding majority in order to win political points for largely illusory blows against a small minority of abusive users.
Or -- to use an entirely different metaphor -- they're standing, like King Canute, at the low-water mark on the beach, holding up a hand and shouting "stop!" at the waves of the advancing tide. I don't think that interactive web applications will disappear just because Representative Fitzpatrick is afraid of them.
If this misguided bill is passed, it will serve only as one more barrier blocking those who access the internet through public spaces like libraries from being able to participate in the most active and vibrant part of the world's economy of information. And, of course, it'll do absolutely nothing to "protect" any kid who has access to his own, or his parents', computer.
Saturday, May 13, 2006
Recent viewings:
Lost in La Mancha Documentary chronicle of a film production gone horribly, abortively wrong. Terry Gilliam, the Monty Python alumnus and director of films like Brazil and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, seeks to create a modern film adaptation of Miguel de Cervantes' classic satire of knight-errantry, Don Quixote. Unfortunately, according to LILM, the production of the latter film has won Gilliam a reputation as a spendthrift, which limits his access to funding. Minor obstacles snowball into disasters: scheduling conflicts, ailing actors, torrential flash floods, the Spanish Air Force....
It's hard to tell what the finished Gilliam film, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, would have been like. It would have featured Johnny Depp as a modern-day advertising man somehow transported into the medieval Spain of Cervantes' story, much like the protagonist of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. A couple of scenes discussed in LILM suggest that the Depp character would have been -- at least initially -- sarcastic and dismissive of Quixote's tales of chivalry. Other scenes suggest that the giants and other fantastical elements of Quixotes' tale would have been portrayed as real, or at least experienced as real by characters including Depp's cynical modern protagonist. The French actor selected to play Quixote seems well-suited to the part of the Ingenious Gentleman of La Mancha, but appears in too few completed scenes for the viewer of LILM to draw any further conclusions.
I was struck by the degree to which Gilliam's production effort seemed to be slapdash and disorganized from the beginning. He seems to have started production without any firm scheduling commitments from key actresses, with inadequate scouting of exterior locations, and (incredibly) without confirmed access to any professional-quality indoor sound stage. The various disasters that are visited upon the film crew might not have stopped a better-prepared team. I wonder -- is this kind of seat-of-the-pants flying typical of professional movie production?
I would love to see what Gilliam would make of Don Quixote, but based on this documentary, the failure of the production seems to have been the result of poor organization and preparation, not an Act of God. Let's hope he's better prepared if he ever essays it again.
Lost in La Mancha Documentary chronicle of a film production gone horribly, abortively wrong. Terry Gilliam, the Monty Python alumnus and director of films like Brazil and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen, seeks to create a modern film adaptation of Miguel de Cervantes' classic satire of knight-errantry, Don Quixote. Unfortunately, according to LILM, the production of the latter film has won Gilliam a reputation as a spendthrift, which limits his access to funding. Minor obstacles snowball into disasters: scheduling conflicts, ailing actors, torrential flash floods, the Spanish Air Force....
It's hard to tell what the finished Gilliam film, The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, would have been like. It would have featured Johnny Depp as a modern-day advertising man somehow transported into the medieval Spain of Cervantes' story, much like the protagonist of A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court. A couple of scenes discussed in LILM suggest that the Depp character would have been -- at least initially -- sarcastic and dismissive of Quixote's tales of chivalry. Other scenes suggest that the giants and other fantastical elements of Quixotes' tale would have been portrayed as real, or at least experienced as real by characters including Depp's cynical modern protagonist. The French actor selected to play Quixote seems well-suited to the part of the Ingenious Gentleman of La Mancha, but appears in too few completed scenes for the viewer of LILM to draw any further conclusions.
I was struck by the degree to which Gilliam's production effort seemed to be slapdash and disorganized from the beginning. He seems to have started production without any firm scheduling commitments from key actresses, with inadequate scouting of exterior locations, and (incredibly) without confirmed access to any professional-quality indoor sound stage. The various disasters that are visited upon the film crew might not have stopped a better-prepared team. I wonder -- is this kind of seat-of-the-pants flying typical of professional movie production?
I would love to see what Gilliam would make of Don Quixote, but based on this documentary, the failure of the production seems to have been the result of poor organization and preparation, not an Act of God. Let's hope he's better prepared if he ever essays it again.
Fun Fact:
Charlton Heston was born with the name John Carter. Too bad he never got the chance to play himself.
Charlton Heston was born with the name John Carter. Too bad he never got the chance to play himself.
Recent viewings:
Bowling for Columbine. Michael Moore can be a very effective documentarian, and very effective at satirizing the arrogant cluelessness of our modern-day aristocracy. He can also be pretentious, pompous, hypocritically self-righteous and meanspirited -- a textbook example of the very tendencies he mocks. Unfortunately, that's the side of him that's on display here, especially in the final segment of the film, in which he opportunistically badgers a frail and visibly ill Charlton Heston over the latter's long involvement with the National Rifle Association. It's sort of like watching a smug, fat hyena harass an elderly lion that could have broken him in half with a mere paw-flick in healthier days. Disgraceful.
Other than giving Moore a chance to bully and mock an aging hero with Alzheimer's disease, the film has no real focus or organization. It sort of wanders around aimlessly, presenting minor factoids about guns in American history and pop culture, documentary footage of the Columbine murders, and some of Moore's trademarked self-promoting media grandstanding, until Moore gets his apparently much-desired opportunity to hector a man who spent most of his career campaigning for civil rights and other American freedoms.
Not recommended.
Bowling for Columbine. Michael Moore can be a very effective documentarian, and very effective at satirizing the arrogant cluelessness of our modern-day aristocracy. He can also be pretentious, pompous, hypocritically self-righteous and meanspirited -- a textbook example of the very tendencies he mocks. Unfortunately, that's the side of him that's on display here, especially in the final segment of the film, in which he opportunistically badgers a frail and visibly ill Charlton Heston over the latter's long involvement with the National Rifle Association. It's sort of like watching a smug, fat hyena harass an elderly lion that could have broken him in half with a mere paw-flick in healthier days. Disgraceful.
Other than giving Moore a chance to bully and mock an aging hero with Alzheimer's disease, the film has no real focus or organization. It sort of wanders around aimlessly, presenting minor factoids about guns in American history and pop culture, documentary footage of the Columbine murders, and some of Moore's trademarked self-promoting media grandstanding, until Moore gets his apparently much-desired opportunity to hector a man who spent most of his career campaigning for civil rights and other American freedoms.
Not recommended.
Thursday, May 11, 2006
Big Brother is listening to you
This humble little personal blog doesn't even pretend to be a comprehensive news source. But this story is just too big to ignore.
NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls (USA Today)
This is in direct contravention of the law. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has filed a class-action suit against AT&T's participation in the scheme, which is forbidden by Section 222 of the Communications Act (as described in the article linked above.)
The Bush administration's response has been, basically, a big f*ck-you. "Rule of law? We don't need no schtinkin' rule of law. Shut up because we say so."
Meanwhile, Bush's appointee to head the CIA is none other than the military officer who ran this blatantly illegal scheme to spy on American citizens. Not "terra-ists" or criminals. All American citizens. That includes you, your Aunt Mabel, your friends, your co-workers. It includes everyone whom the ruling political deems a political "threat" or wishes to exert pressure on. It's well documented that this includes Catholic pacifist groups, the Quakers, and just about anyone who isn't in lockstep with the Bushite drive for perpetual war and absolute "unitary executive" power.
"Unitary executive" is a synonym for dictator.
Meanwhile, in little-remarked news, Dick Cheney's cronies at Halliburton have received yet another sweetheart no-bid contract, this time to construct a series of military prisons within the United States. The stated purpose is to deal with "an emergency influx of immigrants, or to support the rapid development of new programs".
Just what "new programs" are contemplated that might require such a chain of concentration camps? And why does the government need to compile a massive database of its citizens' personal communications?
Well, I don't know, not being a "unitary executive". But Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican from South Carolina, offers some helpful suggestions to our torture-authorizing Attorney General:
Meanwhile, the Army mutters something about a "Civilian Inmate Labor Program".
Elections are coming up. Gotta be ready for 'em.
This humble little personal blog doesn't even pretend to be a comprehensive news source. But this story is just too big to ignore.
NSA has massive database of Americans' phone calls (USA Today)
This is in direct contravention of the law. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has filed a class-action suit against AT&T's participation in the scheme, which is forbidden by Section 222 of the Communications Act (as described in the article linked above.)
The Bush administration's response has been, basically, a big f*ck-you. "Rule of law? We don't need no schtinkin' rule of law. Shut up because we say so."
Meanwhile, Bush's appointee to head the CIA is none other than the military officer who ran this blatantly illegal scheme to spy on American citizens. Not "terra-ists" or criminals. All American citizens. That includes you, your Aunt Mabel, your friends, your co-workers. It includes everyone whom the ruling political deems a political "threat" or wishes to exert pressure on. It's well documented that this includes Catholic pacifist groups, the Quakers, and just about anyone who isn't in lockstep with the Bushite drive for perpetual war and absolute "unitary executive" power.
"Unitary executive" is a synonym for dictator.
Meanwhile, in little-remarked news, Dick Cheney's cronies at Halliburton have received yet another sweetheart no-bid contract, this time to construct a series of military prisons within the United States. The stated purpose is to deal with "an emergency influx of immigrants, or to support the rapid development of new programs".
Just what "new programs" are contemplated that might require such a chain of concentration camps? And why does the government need to compile a massive database of its citizens' personal communications?
Well, I don't know, not being a "unitary executive". But Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican from South Carolina, offers some helpful suggestions to our torture-authorizing Attorney General:
“The administration has not only the right, but the duty, in my opinion, to pursue Fifth Column movements,” Graham, R-S.C., told Gonzales during Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Feb. 6.This is the "unitary executive", you may recall, who has asserted that, for the duration of the fraudulent war which he has illegally started and intends to continue perpetually, he has the power to arbitrarily arrest any American citizen and imprison them indefinitely without ever showing any legal cause for doing so.
“I stand by this President’s ability, inherent to being Commander in Chief, to find out about Fifth Column movements, and I don’t think you need a warrant to do that,” Graham added, volunteering to work with the administration to draft guidelines for how best to neutralize this alleged threat.
“Senator,” a smiling Gonzales responded, “the President already said we’d be happy to listen to your ideas.”
Meanwhile, the Army mutters something about a "Civilian Inmate Labor Program".
Elections are coming up. Gotta be ready for 'em.
It's... it's.... it's....
The Amazing Flying President!
He seems to be looking for his approval ratings. Can you help him find them?
The Amazing Flying President!
He seems to be looking for his approval ratings. Can you help him find them?
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
None dare call it....
Florence King, in the May 22 issue of National Review, dares speak the word that other conservatives dare not apply to Iraq.
Florence King, in the May 22 issue of National Review, dares speak the word that other conservatives dare not apply to Iraq.
Iraq "might be approaching" a civil war. It "could be spiraling into" a civil war. "If it were" a civil war. "It could turn into" a civil war. "It may be an undeclared" civil war. On and on it went: "on the brink of" a civil war, a civil war "is imminent.. over the horizon... threatening." There was even a "quasi-civil war", and, influenced no doubt by endless cancer-awareness spots, someone described a "pre-civil war" and predicted that "it could metastasize" into the real thing....
Conspiracy theorists on both sides of the political spectrum are no doubt in ecstasy over this festival of temporizing. Oliver Stone could get two movies out of it: 1) The liberal media want to start a civil war in Iraq while our troops are there so they will be killed in it, 2) A great big fat civil war is already in progress but the conservative media are under orders from the White House to play down the fiasco.
It has nothing to do with conspiracy. It's psychological projection, a head game we play on ourselves when we attribute our own situation to somebody else. WE are afraid of having a civil war, so we convince ourselves that Iraq is NOT having one.
SS France
Yet another example of our endemic cultural amnesia.
It's unfortunate that, even if I were able to afford a trip to Europe or some other overseas destination, I wouldn't have enough time to take the leisurely ocean-liner route. Nor, it seems, any ship on which to sail.
Yet another example of our endemic cultural amnesia.
It's unfortunate that, even if I were able to afford a trip to Europe or some other overseas destination, I wouldn't have enough time to take the leisurely ocean-liner route. Nor, it seems, any ship on which to sail.
Saturday, May 06, 2006
Over the transom
(or, cleaning out that file of stuff I've been meaning to blog about for the last three months)
The next time you think about how much you or your employer is pouring into the gaping, sucking vortex of health insurance, just remember that it's going to a good cause.
Katrina survivors are forced to squabble with their insurance companies over whether the damage to their insured property was caused by floods or winds.
Trent Lott, staunch Republican partisan for "tort reform" to limit individual's ability to sue corporations for misbehavior, has a sudden change of heart.
Walgreens has helpfully sent me -- or, rather, themselves -- a check for $20.00. On the check is the following note, in type about 2 millimeters high.
Mike Shatzkin, speaking to a publishers' association, discusses Publishing and Digital Change : What's Next? Among the topics discussed: the "problem" of college students being able to purchase used copies of textbooks and how publishers can use digital textbooks to "solve" it. Also, how to "solve" the "problem" of a global free trade in books, which limits the publishers' ability to selectively price-gouge North American and European students.
And, lastly, the Historical Society of Michigan is planning their Upper Peninsula History conference for June 23-25 in Escanaba. I probably won't be able to make it. But anyone feels like making the trek, let me know.
(or, cleaning out that file of stuff I've been meaning to blog about for the last three months)
The next time you think about how much you or your employer is pouring into the gaping, sucking vortex of health insurance, just remember that it's going to a good cause.
Katrina survivors are forced to squabble with their insurance companies over whether the damage to their insured property was caused by floods or winds.
Trent Lott, staunch Republican partisan for "tort reform" to limit individual's ability to sue corporations for misbehavior, has a sudden change of heart.
Walgreens has helpfully sent me -- or, rather, themselves -- a check for $20.00. On the check is the following note, in type about 2 millimeters high.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION: Purchase of a new or transferred prescription required (prescriptions cannot be transferred from another Walgreens.) Give check to phamracist at time of prescription purchase. Offer not valid with Medicaid, Medicare, or any other governmental programs or where prohibited by law. Cannot be combined with other offers, limit one check per customer.Oh well. At least it's good for something.
Good toward any purchase except prescriptions, co-pays, liquor, tobacco and dairy as restricted.
Mike Shatzkin, speaking to a publishers' association, discusses Publishing and Digital Change : What's Next? Among the topics discussed: the "problem" of college students being able to purchase used copies of textbooks and how publishers can use digital textbooks to "solve" it. Also, how to "solve" the "problem" of a global free trade in books, which limits the publishers' ability to selectively price-gouge North American and European students.
And, lastly, the Historical Society of Michigan is planning their Upper Peninsula History conference for June 23-25 in Escanaba. I probably won't be able to make it. But anyone feels like making the trek, let me know.
A hero for our times
Rex Libris!
Preview here; Action figures here. (No, not really, but it would be pretty to think so.)
Rex Libris!
Preview here; Action figures here. (No, not really, but it would be pretty to think so.)
Thursday, May 04, 2006
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
A disturbing development
Chicago gangs are reportedly having members join the military for training in urban warfare.
Chicago gangs are reportedly having members join the military for training in urban warfare.
Monday, May 01, 2006
Would you send work to this company?
More noise-n-smoke about the "book packager" involved in the Opal Mehta plagiarism case. Another author asserts that they similarly plagiarized her draft manuscript after "rejecting" it.
More noise-n-smoke about the "book packager" involved in the Opal Mehta plagiarism case. Another author asserts that they similarly plagiarized her draft manuscript after "rejecting" it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)