Judge: Prop. 8 backers' names to be revealed
Apparently despite having "God" on their side, and of course the will of every decent "normal" American, many of the people who gave money to the campaign to get California's Proposition 8 passed don't seem to want to have their names revealed to the public. Hmm. I wonder why? Could it be because they've done something shameful and wrong? Nah. That couldn't be it. I mean they have THE ALMIGHTY on their side. Maybe it's because they are a bunch of gutless cowards who don't mind relegating a whole bunch of people to second class citizenship, but don't want them to stop patronizing their business.
All I can say is if I were God, I'd be looking for a better class of worshipper.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
The One About I Don't Think It's Quite That Simple.
I recently came across this article. In defense of Internet pornography.
In the article, the author cites a statistic.
For the sake of argument let's say this is accurate.
The authors contention is that this drop is because of the prevalence and ease of access via the Internet, to various kinds of hard core pornography. Needless to say by his own admission this is a theory that a lot of people disagree with.
But I have a question. What if he's, well not exactly right, but rather shall we say going in the right direction but for the wrong reasons.
What if the drop if there is one, is not because of pornography per se but rather because the Internet has facilitated the dissemination of both information and dialogue about sexuality in all its forms both the good (consensual kink, fetish play etc) and the bad, (rape, unwanted pregnancies and such). Perhaps the pornography is a part of this. So kind of like the way your tires won't get you anywhere by themselves they are still part of the car.
*shrug* I won't say I'm a hundred percent on this but I think it's worth considering.,
In the article, the author cites a statistic.
During the 15-year period ending in 2008, the rate of forcible rape dropped a staggering 30 percent nationwide.
For the sake of argument let's say this is accurate.
The authors contention is that this drop is because of the prevalence and ease of access via the Internet, to various kinds of hard core pornography. Needless to say by his own admission this is a theory that a lot of people disagree with.
But I have a question. What if he's, well not exactly right, but rather shall we say going in the right direction but for the wrong reasons.
What if the drop if there is one, is not because of pornography per se but rather because the Internet has facilitated the dissemination of both information and dialogue about sexuality in all its forms both the good (consensual kink, fetish play etc) and the bad, (rape, unwanted pregnancies and such). Perhaps the pornography is a part of this. So kind of like the way your tires won't get you anywhere by themselves they are still part of the car.
*shrug* I won't say I'm a hundred percent on this but I think it's worth considering.,
Friday, January 30, 2009
The One About They Almost Had It And Then Let It Slip Away.
PELOSI SAYS BIRTH CONTROL WILL HELP ECONOMY
Basically Nancy Pelosi has dared to suggest even obliquely that maybe people without means who are dependent on the government for their income ought to not be having children. Personally I say it's about time someone found their backbone and spoke up. Here's a simple fact, we are not mere animals. And if actions that are acceptable in the wild like forced sex are considered illegal and immoral then why are other actions like having offspring without any consideration of whether you can care for them or not considered the same?
Honestly in a perfect world where it would be applied totally equitably I'd be for forced reversible sterilization. However I'll settle for making birth control means more accessible to those that at least have sense enough to know that if they are on assistance that they should not be having kids.
Tell you the truth? I don't think anyone should be allowed to have a kid until they are assessed on several important factors. Income obviously but other ones as well. This would not only keep the local crackwhore from having an army of squatlets but a lot of celebrities as well. Imagine a world in which we can sleep secure knowing that Paris Hilton will never breed.
But wait there's more. Now it looks like they are going to drop the family planning provisions because the Republicants don't like it. Apparently people not burdening the government and the planet with children they don't have the means to take care of is a little too long term for them.
Honestly I'm more than a lottle troubled. I understand that President Obama is trying to be a builder of bridges and that this early into his administration he has to choose his battles very very carefully. At the same time I hope he has the strength of character to stand firm when the time comes and with the Republicants I can pretty much guarantee that it will come.
Basically Nancy Pelosi has dared to suggest even obliquely that maybe people without means who are dependent on the government for their income ought to not be having children. Personally I say it's about time someone found their backbone and spoke up. Here's a simple fact, we are not mere animals. And if actions that are acceptable in the wild like forced sex are considered illegal and immoral then why are other actions like having offspring without any consideration of whether you can care for them or not considered the same?
Honestly in a perfect world where it would be applied totally equitably I'd be for forced reversible sterilization. However I'll settle for making birth control means more accessible to those that at least have sense enough to know that if they are on assistance that they should not be having kids.
Tell you the truth? I don't think anyone should be allowed to have a kid until they are assessed on several important factors. Income obviously but other ones as well. This would not only keep the local crackwhore from having an army of squatlets but a lot of celebrities as well. Imagine a world in which we can sleep secure knowing that Paris Hilton will never breed.
But wait there's more. Now it looks like they are going to drop the family planning provisions because the Republicants don't like it. Apparently people not burdening the government and the planet with children they don't have the means to take care of is a little too long term for them.
Honestly I'm more than a lottle troubled. I understand that President Obama is trying to be a builder of bridges and that this early into his administration he has to choose his battles very very carefully. At the same time I hope he has the strength of character to stand firm when the time comes and with the Republicants I can pretty much guarantee that it will come.
The One About Some Neat Stuff Going On In The Worlds Of Science.
I am a huge fan of science. Even if I don't always agree with some of the more materialist reductionist arms of scientific orthodoxy, I never the less find the deep exploration of how our universe works to be endlessly fascinating. So I offer some of the more interesting things I've come across lately for the edification and enlightenment of other sci geeks out there.
ONE QUANTUM LEAP
This article talks about some of the latest breakthroughs in sending information seemingly instantaneously over vast distances. Even if this road never leads to matter transportation, just the idea that someday true real time communication between earth and distant planets is exciting.
FDA allows first stem cell test for spinal injury
This is news that excites me no end. The idea that stem cells (either embryonic or non embryonic) may make it possible for once life destroying injuries and conditions to be cured fills me with, well honestly I'm not sure how to describe the feeling except as one of pure awe.
Why some people can't put two and two together
This is an article from New Scientist talking about a condition called dyscalculia which affects roughly the same number of people as dyslexia and makes it extremely challenging for them to do even basic math.
Tests that show machines closing in on human abilities
This article also from New Scientist talks about how artificial intelligence is getting more and more sophisticated or to but it more simply more human like. Personally as someone raised on Star Trek in all its forms I see both the promise and the danger inherent in creating or trying to create self aware machines. But honestly I see more promise than peril. If nothing else such attempts will help us to better understand our own consciousness I believe.
ONE QUANTUM LEAP
This article talks about some of the latest breakthroughs in sending information seemingly instantaneously over vast distances. Even if this road never leads to matter transportation, just the idea that someday true real time communication between earth and distant planets is exciting.
FDA allows first stem cell test for spinal injury
This is news that excites me no end. The idea that stem cells (either embryonic or non embryonic) may make it possible for once life destroying injuries and conditions to be cured fills me with, well honestly I'm not sure how to describe the feeling except as one of pure awe.
Why some people can't put two and two together
This is an article from New Scientist talking about a condition called dyscalculia which affects roughly the same number of people as dyslexia and makes it extremely challenging for them to do even basic math.
Tests that show machines closing in on human abilities
This article also from New Scientist talks about how artificial intelligence is getting more and more sophisticated or to but it more simply more human like. Personally as someone raised on Star Trek in all its forms I see both the promise and the danger inherent in creating or trying to create self aware machines. But honestly I see more promise than peril. If nothing else such attempts will help us to better understand our own consciousness I believe.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
The One About Obama's First Broken Promise.
Okay. Now I'm a realist. And I knew that some, well probably many of the things Obama promised when he was campaigning would go unfulfilled. However I was really hoping that this wouldn't be one of them.
Barack Obama Campaign Promise No. 234:
Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
Unfortunately he did exactly that with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Now I'm very happy that the law passed. But that's not the point.
Honestly it was his promise to actually allow we the common folks to have some kind of input even if it's largely pro forma that really excited me. But I don't think this is unrepairable. It is my hope that the president will get his feet back underneath him on this and choose to keep this promise in the future.
Barack Obama Campaign Promise No. 234:
Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
Unfortunately he did exactly that with the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. Now I'm very happy that the law passed. But that's not the point.
Honestly it was his promise to actually allow we the common folks to have some kind of input even if it's largely pro forma that really excited me. But I don't think this is unrepairable. It is my hope that the president will get his feet back underneath him on this and choose to keep this promise in the future.
The One About My Healthy Skepticism.
Google plans to make PCs history
The article is about a subject that has been in the computing news increasingly in the last five or so yours. The idea is that a computer could have enough power to get on the net and then all programs and data would be stored via the web. It's currently referred to as "cloud computing".
And ya know it sounds like such a neat idea. But I'm a little paranoid. The thing is that many companies still love to talk about finding ways to generate revenue through the internet. And while Google is largely a fairly nifty company they are still a business and sometimes what's good for Google is maybe not so good for those of us who aren't Google. So I look at this and wonder, what is to prevent Google or another much less enlightened company from taking this information and then locking it up until we subscribe to their service?
Mind I'm not talking about an above board subscription service. That's fine and fair. I'm talking about something more along the lines of letting you into Disneyland for free and then locking the door and making you pay to get out.
I'm sure cooler heads will tell me it will never happen, but well, until it doesn't happen I'll have to withhold judgement. (btw whoever said paranoia was rational?)
The article is about a subject that has been in the computing news increasingly in the last five or so yours. The idea is that a computer could have enough power to get on the net and then all programs and data would be stored via the web. It's currently referred to as "cloud computing".
And ya know it sounds like such a neat idea. But I'm a little paranoid. The thing is that many companies still love to talk about finding ways to generate revenue through the internet. And while Google is largely a fairly nifty company they are still a business and sometimes what's good for Google is maybe not so good for those of us who aren't Google. So I look at this and wonder, what is to prevent Google or another much less enlightened company from taking this information and then locking it up until we subscribe to their service?
Mind I'm not talking about an above board subscription service. That's fine and fair. I'm talking about something more along the lines of letting you into Disneyland for free and then locking the door and making you pay to get out.
I'm sure cooler heads will tell me it will never happen, but well, until it doesn't happen I'll have to withhold judgement. (btw whoever said paranoia was rational?)
The One About How Different Parts Of The "Middle East" See Our New President.
I personally think that one of the best things about the Internet is that it allows us to move past our own narrow views based on the culture in which we were raised and try to get a more international perspective on events in our own country. One of the most important points of view to try and understand right now in my opinion are those of people in what is broadly called "The Middle East". One article I found is honestly more laugh inducing than thought provoking.
Titled, To combat Obama, al-Qaeda hurls insults, it talks about how the leaders of various hard line terrorist groups including al-Qaeda are using some rather lame insults against Obama.
The other one however I think offers a very intelligent perspective and deserving of our attention, A Wary Eye: How Obama's first steps are playing in the West Bank. I feel that Diana Buttu offers a balanced perspective, neither endorsing nor condemning Obama. Personally I think we would all do well to remember that we've got a lot of international condemnation but justified and unjustified to deal with and to expect other countries especially non Western ones to embrace Obama the way we have is dangerously naive I feel.
Titled, To combat Obama, al-Qaeda hurls insults, it talks about how the leaders of various hard line terrorist groups including al-Qaeda are using some rather lame insults against Obama.
The other one however I think offers a very intelligent perspective and deserving of our attention, A Wary Eye: How Obama's first steps are playing in the West Bank. I feel that Diana Buttu offers a balanced perspective, neither endorsing nor condemning Obama. Personally I think we would all do well to remember that we've got a lot of international condemnation but justified and unjustified to deal with and to expect other countries especially non Western ones to embrace Obama the way we have is dangerously naive I feel.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The One About A Heartfelt Plea.
600 rescued dogs and 80% are pregnant
Take a moment and read the article. I'll wait.
Okay, all done? Now if you have tears streaming down your face the way I do pretty much every time I come across one of these stories then read on because you are probably exactly the kind of person I am intending my message for. If you don't? Well read on if you want but I won't die of shock if you just don't get my point.
So what is my point? Well I have a request. It's simple in a way but not so simple in another.
Please stop patronizing dog breeders either directly or indirectly. Instead choose your dog either from the local shelter, rescue group, or a pet supply store that is reputable and only offers animals from shelters or rescue groups.
Notice I'm not just asking people to stop patronizing puppy mills. Because honestly I think that while puppy mills are the biggest and most visible problem, the whole dog breeding industry is problematic. These are living beings, they think and they feel. And we have too too many of them. Bad enough that people are so careless about getting their pets fixed (and I know this is a problem too but again it's a well known problem) but honestly I'm at a point where I simply cannot view the breeding of more animals to be an ethical enterprise. Because every time an animal is bred and sold that means an existing animal is likely to end up best case scenario living its life in a no kill shelter and more likely to end up killed. For no reason other than that it wasn't a newly minted member of such and such a breed. Even if you have strong breed preferences there are so many dogs available through breed rescues it's not even funny.
I'm not bashing responsible breeders. I know they are not bad people. But even good people if they are part of a bad system can perpetrate harm, which is what I think is happening.
So please before you get a pet animal, especially a dog or cat please think long and hard and seriously consider adopting an existing animal instead of encouraging a breeder to just go on and add more animals to a group that there aren't enough people for already.
Thank you for your time.
Here's another reason to consider eschewing pure bred dogs.
Stockholm University research shows dogs are getting dumber
Take a moment and read the article. I'll wait.
Okay, all done? Now if you have tears streaming down your face the way I do pretty much every time I come across one of these stories then read on because you are probably exactly the kind of person I am intending my message for. If you don't? Well read on if you want but I won't die of shock if you just don't get my point.
So what is my point? Well I have a request. It's simple in a way but not so simple in another.
Please stop patronizing dog breeders either directly or indirectly. Instead choose your dog either from the local shelter, rescue group, or a pet supply store that is reputable and only offers animals from shelters or rescue groups.
Notice I'm not just asking people to stop patronizing puppy mills. Because honestly I think that while puppy mills are the biggest and most visible problem, the whole dog breeding industry is problematic. These are living beings, they think and they feel. And we have too too many of them. Bad enough that people are so careless about getting their pets fixed (and I know this is a problem too but again it's a well known problem) but honestly I'm at a point where I simply cannot view the breeding of more animals to be an ethical enterprise. Because every time an animal is bred and sold that means an existing animal is likely to end up best case scenario living its life in a no kill shelter and more likely to end up killed. For no reason other than that it wasn't a newly minted member of such and such a breed. Even if you have strong breed preferences there are so many dogs available through breed rescues it's not even funny.
I'm not bashing responsible breeders. I know they are not bad people. But even good people if they are part of a bad system can perpetrate harm, which is what I think is happening.
So please before you get a pet animal, especially a dog or cat please think long and hard and seriously consider adopting an existing animal instead of encouraging a breeder to just go on and add more animals to a group that there aren't enough people for already.
Thank you for your time.
Here's another reason to consider eschewing pure bred dogs.
Stockholm University research shows dogs are getting dumber
The One About An Awesome New Game.
It's called Chronotron. On the surface it looks like a basic platform game. You control a robot who's goal is to get a circuit which allows you to get to the next level. You have to move and jump and navigate various obstacles. But to do so you have to use time travel. You have a time pod and when you step into it it takes you back to the start of the level. But it's not a simple restart (although that option is available) but rather you go back in time. Then the "you" from the past does everything you already did while you are free to do new things. It's not as hard to play as it may sound and the neat thing is it makes you think 4th dimensionally. For example if you have to stand on a switch are you allowing enough time for future you to get both in and out of the trap that the switch disables? I've only played about 4 levels so far and I'm totally hooked. One of the best parts is that you can go back into the past as many times as you need to. The graphics are clean and fun and the level progression so far seems pretty balanced, getting incrementally more challenging so you're neither bored nor over whelmed. If you like puzzle games especially ones with a twist I can't recommend this highly enough.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
The One About Why I Have A Big Fat Problem With The Republicants.
Every time I read a Republican responding to the various aspects of President Obama's stimulus plan, or his over all agenda I tend to start to get fighting mad. Now I'm not a reactionary person by and large and I like to know why I feel and think the way I do. Well today I finally put my finger on it. Every time I hear the Republicans carrying on I'm transported right back to my high school days.
Back when I was in high school I was involved in a fair number of extra curricular activities. Now as anyone familiar with American high school culture knows most of the after school time is taken up with sports. So a lot of non sports groups tend to meet during the school day. At the school I went to it had been standard that groups could meet once a week during a class time, provided that the faculty supervisor had a free period and the teacher you had during that period didn't have a problem with it. Most did, and most didn't. But at one point the administration decided that they were no longer going to allow any meetings to take place except for before school, during lunch and after school. Okay. Well before school wasn't terribly popular so it tended to be after school or during lunch. Most teachers were nice enough to excuse students with meetings a few minutes early to get their lunch and get to the appropriate classroom, and if you were a few minutes late to your next class most were understanding about that too.
Well a few months down the road and it was decided that except for sports and certain groups both morning and after school meetings were out. So lunch it was. Still doable. Then it was announced that teachers were not allowed to excuse students early to go to lunch under any circumstances. So then it became try to get out the door as fast as possible, get your lunch, and get to the room where the meeting was. Then a few more months go by and we move into a new building. Well then it got decreed that students were not allowed to eat any where but in the cafeteria. So now it was run to lunch, stuff food down your gullet and run to the meeting room for a meeting that usually had about five maybe ten minutes left before the next class, which you could not be late to because it was a mandatory un-excused tardy.
Every time we (and by we I'm meaning faculty as well as students) would ask the administration as to what we could and/or should do, they would sort of mumble and shuffle and tell us we'd figure something out.
Well that's pretty much what I feel the Republicans are doing. A lot of what Obama wants to try is pretty bold. Some of it has not been tried before. Do the Republicans have a list of clear counter suggestions? Nope not really. Most of their rhetoric seems to be about saying what they think shouldn't be done and very little of what they think should be done. Except for tax cuts of course. Especially for corporations. Can't forget those tax cuts. Some recent examples of the Republicans Can't Do spirit which has led me to label them Republicants include...
Debunking the Stimulus Myth: Only 3% Allotted for Road, Bridge Spending from the website Newsbusters. Wherein they carry on about Obama using the term infrastructure to mean more than just roads and bridges.
Conservatives ask if bailout is unconstitutional which is pretty much what the headline makes it sound like. Republicans and other conservatives questioning the constitutionality of the bailout now that one of their own is out of office and a member of the hated opposition is in the Whitehouse.
Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers Radio Address in which the Congresswoman makes a lot of nice sounding noises about standing with the American Taxpayer and wanting to work with our new President, but doesn't seem to have anything substantial to offer as a counter to Obama's plans.
What if it doesn't work? While this story does offer some pretty dire predictions, in the second page they also echo my sentiments about Obama doing something being better than doing nothing.
Bottom line this is why Obama got elected. Because people are sick and tired of the Republicants and their "stay the course" mentality. It would be different if the course were not leading over a precipice but it is. And I think that at this point people would rather see something bold attempted even if it's not perfect or even fails than the same nothing done which will most definitely lead to exactly the kind of ruin that some people are predicting from Obama's presidency.
Back when I was in high school I was involved in a fair number of extra curricular activities. Now as anyone familiar with American high school culture knows most of the after school time is taken up with sports. So a lot of non sports groups tend to meet during the school day. At the school I went to it had been standard that groups could meet once a week during a class time, provided that the faculty supervisor had a free period and the teacher you had during that period didn't have a problem with it. Most did, and most didn't. But at one point the administration decided that they were no longer going to allow any meetings to take place except for before school, during lunch and after school. Okay. Well before school wasn't terribly popular so it tended to be after school or during lunch. Most teachers were nice enough to excuse students with meetings a few minutes early to get their lunch and get to the appropriate classroom, and if you were a few minutes late to your next class most were understanding about that too.
Well a few months down the road and it was decided that except for sports and certain groups both morning and after school meetings were out. So lunch it was. Still doable. Then it was announced that teachers were not allowed to excuse students early to go to lunch under any circumstances. So then it became try to get out the door as fast as possible, get your lunch, and get to the room where the meeting was. Then a few more months go by and we move into a new building. Well then it got decreed that students were not allowed to eat any where but in the cafeteria. So now it was run to lunch, stuff food down your gullet and run to the meeting room for a meeting that usually had about five maybe ten minutes left before the next class, which you could not be late to because it was a mandatory un-excused tardy.
Every time we (and by we I'm meaning faculty as well as students) would ask the administration as to what we could and/or should do, they would sort of mumble and shuffle and tell us we'd figure something out.
Well that's pretty much what I feel the Republicans are doing. A lot of what Obama wants to try is pretty bold. Some of it has not been tried before. Do the Republicans have a list of clear counter suggestions? Nope not really. Most of their rhetoric seems to be about saying what they think shouldn't be done and very little of what they think should be done. Except for tax cuts of course. Especially for corporations. Can't forget those tax cuts. Some recent examples of the Republicans Can't Do spirit which has led me to label them Republicants include...
Debunking the Stimulus Myth: Only 3% Allotted for Road, Bridge Spending from the website Newsbusters. Wherein they carry on about Obama using the term infrastructure to mean more than just roads and bridges.
Conservatives ask if bailout is unconstitutional which is pretty much what the headline makes it sound like. Republicans and other conservatives questioning the constitutionality of the bailout now that one of their own is out of office and a member of the hated opposition is in the Whitehouse.
Congresswoman Cathy McMorris Rodgers Radio Address in which the Congresswoman makes a lot of nice sounding noises about standing with the American Taxpayer and wanting to work with our new President, but doesn't seem to have anything substantial to offer as a counter to Obama's plans.
What if it doesn't work? While this story does offer some pretty dire predictions, in the second page they also echo my sentiments about Obama doing something being better than doing nothing.
Bottom line this is why Obama got elected. Because people are sick and tired of the Republicants and their "stay the course" mentality. It would be different if the course were not leading over a precipice but it is. And I think that at this point people would rather see something bold attempted even if it's not perfect or even fails than the same nothing done which will most definitely lead to exactly the kind of ruin that some people are predicting from Obama's presidency.
The One About Is There A Point To Miss America Any More?
This last Saturday the 24th was the '09 Miss America Pageant airing on of all place The Learning Channel. Now a lot of people have had a lot to say about this event. I've no interest in repeating their work. But I've had one major thought occur to me. Is there a point to this any more? I mean I can see back when opportunities for women were much rarer. But these days. Few women want to be viewed as nothing but pretty yet empty packages, and certainly even if we are not a truly egalitarian society yet we are further along than we were in the 20's. So I really can't see any meaningful way that the pageant helps us as a society, or helps to advance women and their issues. I mean sure it helps the winner get some publicity and money but it just seems like something who's time has passed.
Monday, January 26, 2009
The One About Losing Sight Of What's Important.
Thanks to Valerie D'Orazio's blog I've learned of a murderer who has based his persona on that of DC Comics The Joker, specifically the version of the character played by Heath Ledger in the movie Batman: Dark Knight
Occasional Superheroine: The Killer Who Was Obsessed With The Joker
Val offers several excellent links including one to a blog about copycat killers. However Val being Val she can't resist making a swipe at the object of her loathing, while of course not actually making a swipe. That way she can act innocent and confused if anyone dares to disagree with the comment she's not making.
Now I'm not going to take Val to task. I mean this kind of gutless nonsense, thinly veiled rants barely masquerading as humor is her stock in trade and hey I figure we each have to go with our strengths.
I'm not even necessarily saying that a discussion about the moral responsibility of the creators of fiction when people start to act out their "heroes" behavior in the real world is not important or necessary.
What I am saying however is that I feel very strongly that it is important to not lose sight of what is most important. Someone who was sick and unbalanced has done a horrible horrible thing. And while it would be nice if taking away negative role models like The Joker or Hannibal Lecter could guarantee that such things would never happen again, the fact that we also live in a world where a man kills his future ex-wife because she changed her facebook status makes me suspect that it's not gonna happen.
So maybe we should look at what this persons home life was like, and at what symptoms he displayed before the murder and what can be done to encourage people not to simply keep silent if they suspect that someone is unwell enough to commit such an act.
Most importantly I think we need to do our best to deal with the complexity of this issue rather than falling back on over simplification and needless snark.
Or I can just call Val a talentless wench who's probably just jealous that this guys getting more attention than she is.
I'm flexible.
Occasional Superheroine: The Killer Who Was Obsessed With The Joker
Val offers several excellent links including one to a blog about copycat killers. However Val being Val she can't resist making a swipe at the object of her loathing, while of course not actually making a swipe. That way she can act innocent and confused if anyone dares to disagree with the comment she's not making.
I'm not going to debate the social responsibility of elevating a fictional psychopathic killer to folk-hero status, and then giving the marketing & licensing departments free reign to milk it for all its worth. We all know how such discussions play out online, don't we?
Please do not misunderstand me: I realize that the most important thing in the universe is for a fan to enjoy the fandom of their choice unhindered by any other consideration whatsoever. You're absolutely right, it's all completely healthy, there is no need for social responsibility in pop-culture. There should not be any stigma to idolizing a serial murderer, especially if he looks really cool in a vest. And if anybody has the temerity to say otherwise, I'm all for you being abusive and obsessive towards them until they are silenced. It's a good plan. It makes sense to me. I'm on your side. Please don't stab me.
Now I'm not going to take Val to task. I mean this kind of gutless nonsense, thinly veiled rants barely masquerading as humor is her stock in trade and hey I figure we each have to go with our strengths.
I'm not even necessarily saying that a discussion about the moral responsibility of the creators of fiction when people start to act out their "heroes" behavior in the real world is not important or necessary.
What I am saying however is that I feel very strongly that it is important to not lose sight of what is most important. Someone who was sick and unbalanced has done a horrible horrible thing. And while it would be nice if taking away negative role models like The Joker or Hannibal Lecter could guarantee that such things would never happen again, the fact that we also live in a world where a man kills his future ex-wife because she changed her facebook status makes me suspect that it's not gonna happen.
So maybe we should look at what this persons home life was like, and at what symptoms he displayed before the murder and what can be done to encourage people not to simply keep silent if they suspect that someone is unwell enough to commit such an act.
Most importantly I think we need to do our best to deal with the complexity of this issue rather than falling back on over simplification and needless snark.
Or I can just call Val a talentless wench who's probably just jealous that this guys getting more attention than she is.
I'm flexible.
The One About What Do You Mean "We" Kemosabe?
Governors seek sacrifices from public workers
The article is basically about how the governors of various states are asking public workers to take pay cuts, benefits cuts, shorter work weeks etc. And personally I'd like to know if they are willing to put their money where there mouths are and take cuts themselves and also ask the states legislators to do the same. I mean it's only fair don't ya think.
The article is basically about how the governors of various states are asking public workers to take pay cuts, benefits cuts, shorter work weeks etc. And personally I'd like to know if they are willing to put their money where there mouths are and take cuts themselves and also ask the states legislators to do the same. I mean it's only fair don't ya think.
The One About Breaking Animation In America Out Of The Ghetto.
I am a huge fan of animation of all kinds. From the more classic types such as hand drawn animation and stop motion animation to their descendant computer generated animation. However much like comic books, animation has been seen in the United States more along genre lines than as an art form and medium unto itself. A kind of ghetto formed that dictated that anything animated must be safe for and have some appeal to kids. However in recent years there have been many people striving to change that. Some of them have taken the road of encouraging people to look at Animé as an example of the kinds of works that can be created. Others have looked to the past to the works of such artists as Ralph Bakshi. However in modern times there has been no more effective force for moving animation out of the ghetto and into the mainstream than Pixar.
While Pixar started out with kid friendly fare like Toy Story and A Bugs Life, the hallmark of their work were stories that dealt in a mature in intelligent way with universal issues like friendship, courage in the face of overwhelming odds, dealing with feelings of worthlessness and inadequacy and more. Then they slowly moved into even more and more mature themes. Never alienating the kid sector but not pandering to them. This was helped by their bringing director Brad Bird into the Pixar family. Bird, one of the most vocal opponents of the view that animation must be slanted first for children and second for adults made The Incredibles which while having a whiz bang visual style and ageless sense of fun, also dealt with middle age malaise, marital problems and more.
And now we have Wall-E, which very well may be Pixar's most mature and challenging film to date. With an opening in which there is not traditional dialogue, and extended sequences where barely anthropomorphized robots carry the action, and an ending that while happy at the same time sends a clear message that all is not instantly all better for the characters in the film it has been a huge hit with both critics and discriminating film goers, however the reaction from kids seems to have been lukewarm to disinterest.
Now in their art and culture blog Newsweeks Sarah Ball talks to Wall-E's director Andrew Stanton about getting animation out of what he calls "a box" and his personal views on making sequels to his own works.
I found it rather interesting, especially since it gives some insights into the characters which I always enjoy. I highly recommend you check out both the interview and if you haven't Wall-E itself.
While Pixar started out with kid friendly fare like Toy Story and A Bugs Life, the hallmark of their work were stories that dealt in a mature in intelligent way with universal issues like friendship, courage in the face of overwhelming odds, dealing with feelings of worthlessness and inadequacy and more. Then they slowly moved into even more and more mature themes. Never alienating the kid sector but not pandering to them. This was helped by their bringing director Brad Bird into the Pixar family. Bird, one of the most vocal opponents of the view that animation must be slanted first for children and second for adults made The Incredibles which while having a whiz bang visual style and ageless sense of fun, also dealt with middle age malaise, marital problems and more.
And now we have Wall-E, which very well may be Pixar's most mature and challenging film to date. With an opening in which there is not traditional dialogue, and extended sequences where barely anthropomorphized robots carry the action, and an ending that while happy at the same time sends a clear message that all is not instantly all better for the characters in the film it has been a huge hit with both critics and discriminating film goers, however the reaction from kids seems to have been lukewarm to disinterest.
Now in their art and culture blog Newsweeks Sarah Ball talks to Wall-E's director Andrew Stanton about getting animation out of what he calls "a box" and his personal views on making sequels to his own works.
I found it rather interesting, especially since it gives some insights into the characters which I always enjoy. I highly recommend you check out both the interview and if you haven't Wall-E itself.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
The One About It Being Fark Barkin Time.
Needless to say I don't think this could have come too soon. The only bad part is that no doubt as soon as a Republican gets back in the whitehouse he'll undo this.
The One About A Troubling Choice By Our New Commander In Chief.
One of the people I follow through twitter is a blogger known as Ragnell. One of her recent tweets led me to this bit of news. It's from The Guardian and it talks about President Obama authorizing a strike against villages in tribal areas of Pakistan where terrorist are suspected of hiding out.
And honestly I have mixed feeling. While I do trust Obama to be acting based on the intel he as president is given, and not merely attempting some act of machismo to quiet those who would claim that he would be lack the will to use military force, at the same time I honestly don't know if applying that force this quickly especially on a mission that may end up with collateral damage regardless of the sophistication of the systems in use, is a good idea. Especially since much of the world is going to be eager to paint Obama as nothing but a better spoken version of our most recent president.
At this point I'm hoping for more information before deciding exactly what I think, but I know that I wish this had not happened quite so soon even if it turns out to have been an appropriate step to take.
And honestly I have mixed feeling. While I do trust Obama to be acting based on the intel he as president is given, and not merely attempting some act of machismo to quiet those who would claim that he would be lack the will to use military force, at the same time I honestly don't know if applying that force this quickly especially on a mission that may end up with collateral damage regardless of the sophistication of the systems in use, is a good idea. Especially since much of the world is going to be eager to paint Obama as nothing but a better spoken version of our most recent president.
At this point I'm hoping for more information before deciding exactly what I think, but I know that I wish this had not happened quite so soon even if it turns out to have been an appropriate step to take.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
The One About President Obama's Campaign Promises.
My ol' pappy used to have a saying. Bullshit walks but it takes money to buy whiskey. Now I've been pretty upfront about the fact that I rather like our new president. And I really want to believe that he is a person of honor, integrity, and vision. But in the end only time will tell. However I found what I think is a rather nifty online resource that may help make it easier to keep track of what Obama has said and what he's actually ended up doing or not doing.
The truth o meter has 0 different categories, Promise kept, broken, compromises, stalled, in the works, and no action.
Personally I think this is a great idea. This will let people judge the president in a fairer way than simply by how well he speaks or how inspiring he is.
The truth o meter has 0 different categories, Promise kept, broken, compromises, stalled, in the works, and no action.
Personally I think this is a great idea. This will let people judge the president in a fairer way than simply by how well he speaks or how inspiring he is.
The One About Smallville's Legion.
hmm. Well. Uh. Here's the thing. I'm kind of a purist. One of the things that finally bounced me out of Smallville was too much fiddling with classic continuity. Fiddling that to me felt kind of arbritrary. Almost like the writers figured out they had written themselves into a corner so suddenly, there's Lois years earlier, and Jimmy etc.
Now we come to the first Smallville appearance of the Legion of Superheroes. In brief Braniac has possessed someone Clark cares about and the Legion in the persons of Lightning Lad, Cosmic Boy, and Saturn Girl tell him that he has to kill this person to stop Braniac. Clark of course refuses and insists there is another way.
Here's my problem. Two of them really. Number one the Legion is being presented as a pretty established group, and a fairly large one. But instead of having a strict code against killing, their code is to do whatever it takes. Well honestly that comes off a little creepy. Especially to a fan of the Legion. At the same time it feels like Clark has become in Smallville what he often is in the comics. The hero stereotype rather than archetype. No doubts. No flaws. Perfection growing ever more perfect as time goes on. Booooring!
Personally what I would have preferred seeing is a reversal of positions. Have Clark feel so overwhelmed that he starts to think that killing the human host of Braniac is the only way and have the Legionnaires hold that there is another way, that killing is never the answer. And in the end when it's proven that they are right have them explain to Clark that they learned this from the hero he will one day become.
I think it would have made for a more interesting story and kept the Legion from coming off quite so Silence of the Lambs creepy.
Now we come to the first Smallville appearance of the Legion of Superheroes. In brief Braniac has possessed someone Clark cares about and the Legion in the persons of Lightning Lad, Cosmic Boy, and Saturn Girl tell him that he has to kill this person to stop Braniac. Clark of course refuses and insists there is another way.
Here's my problem. Two of them really. Number one the Legion is being presented as a pretty established group, and a fairly large one. But instead of having a strict code against killing, their code is to do whatever it takes. Well honestly that comes off a little creepy. Especially to a fan of the Legion. At the same time it feels like Clark has become in Smallville what he often is in the comics. The hero stereotype rather than archetype. No doubts. No flaws. Perfection growing ever more perfect as time goes on. Booooring!
Personally what I would have preferred seeing is a reversal of positions. Have Clark feel so overwhelmed that he starts to think that killing the human host of Braniac is the only way and have the Legionnaires hold that there is another way, that killing is never the answer. And in the end when it's proven that they are right have them explain to Clark that they learned this from the hero he will one day become.
I think it would have made for a more interesting story and kept the Legion from coming off quite so Silence of the Lambs creepy.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
The One About They Will Never Love You.
So the Oscar nominations are out. And predictably Heath Ledger has been nominated for best supporting actor. Dark Knight however? Nada. No best picture. No best director. Everyone who is surprised at this needs to cash this giant reality check that I am about to hand them. They (the elite, the academy, the snobs) will never ever love super heroes. Nope. To most of them super heroes is this funny little monkey that jigs and shimmies and brings in the ducets. But it is not art. It is not respectable. And it sure as hell isn't winning any goddamn Oscar that it doesn't absolutely have to. Here's an extra check to take to the bank of reality. If Heath Ledger were alive? No way in hell he'd have been nominated. It was a sympathy nod because of the "tragic" circumstances of his death that the academy was afraid not to nominate him. If he actually wins I'll pretty much crap myself.
So that's the state of things. But ya know what? So frickin what. Let's just be thankful that there are people like Chris Nolan who gets Superheroes, and Brian Singer, and others like them. Ultimately who needs their love any way?
So that's the state of things. But ya know what? So frickin what. Let's just be thankful that there are people like Chris Nolan who gets Superheroes, and Brian Singer, and others like them. Ultimately who needs their love any way?
The One About The New White House Website.
I got an email today with a link to The Official White House Website. I decided to go ahead and give it a look and I have to admit to being pleasantly surprised. The site compared to what it looked like when I gave it a look a few years ago seems very up to date. There is an official blog, but more interesting I feel is a section where you can look up all of President Obama's policy plans. One thing the first blog post talks about is the president's plan to put any non emergency legislation up for five days prior to signing or vetoing it to allow citizens to comment.
Look I don't get on a soap box about politics often. And I don't usually get any kind of hopeful over politicians. But honestly I feel like this is a chance to really do some things different. So to anyone who has complained about feeling cut off from the process of government I would encourage you to bookmark whitehouse.gov and follow it. Get involved and keep involved. Maybe if we are able to demonstrate that if given the means we really will make this into a true participatory democracy than maybe the next president will have to keep this tradition, will have to keep us involved. Instead of taking us back to mushroom time.
Look I don't get on a soap box about politics often. And I don't usually get any kind of hopeful over politicians. But honestly I feel like this is a chance to really do some things different. So to anyone who has complained about feeling cut off from the process of government I would encourage you to bookmark whitehouse.gov and follow it. Get involved and keep involved. Maybe if we are able to demonstrate that if given the means we really will make this into a true participatory democracy than maybe the next president will have to keep this tradition, will have to keep us involved. Instead of taking us back to mushroom time.
The One About The Co-Opting Of Communication Tools.
Alright. I've only had an account less than two weeks and already I'm twitter-pated. I think it's really neat and while I've kept the people I'm following low, it's gone from something I figured I'd never use to something I've embraced.
As I've thought of different celebrities that I'd like to follow on twitter I've searched for them. Some of the ones I found included Wil Wheaton, and Joss Whedon. If Neil Patrick Harris has a twitter account I've not found it. But I can tell you who does have one. Barney Stinson.
For anyone who is not into television or sitcoms, NPH plays Barney on the incredibly funny show How I Met Your Mother. One of the characters regular bits is referencing from time to time his blog, which actually exists. And it's cute. It usually ties into the current episode some way. And so I went and looked at his tweets. And well honestly I kind of came away with a bad taste in my mouth.
As best I could tell the tweets are all taken from the book The Bro Code. Which honestly is kind of lame.
But more importantly than that it's lead me to wonder about various communication tools being turned into channels for what amount to ads. I mean on the one hand the good is that twitter is essentially opt-in. I mean I didn't click Barney's follow button so I won't be getting tweets from him. But that's not entirely the point. The point is, is there a point at which it stops? Is there a point at which a communication means gets created that it doesn't become just another tool to sell me something at some point? And in saying this keep in mind that I'm one of those freaks who actually is normally fine with advertising.
And I'm not exactly saying that I don't want people advertising through twitter. But I do have to wonder. Is there a stopping point? Or is this all inevitable?
As I've thought of different celebrities that I'd like to follow on twitter I've searched for them. Some of the ones I found included Wil Wheaton, and Joss Whedon. If Neil Patrick Harris has a twitter account I've not found it. But I can tell you who does have one. Barney Stinson.
For anyone who is not into television or sitcoms, NPH plays Barney on the incredibly funny show How I Met Your Mother. One of the characters regular bits is referencing from time to time his blog, which actually exists. And it's cute. It usually ties into the current episode some way. And so I went and looked at his tweets. And well honestly I kind of came away with a bad taste in my mouth.
As best I could tell the tweets are all taken from the book The Bro Code. Which honestly is kind of lame.
But more importantly than that it's lead me to wonder about various communication tools being turned into channels for what amount to ads. I mean on the one hand the good is that twitter is essentially opt-in. I mean I didn't click Barney's follow button so I won't be getting tweets from him. But that's not entirely the point. The point is, is there a point at which it stops? Is there a point at which a communication means gets created that it doesn't become just another tool to sell me something at some point? And in saying this keep in mind that I'm one of those freaks who actually is normally fine with advertising.
And I'm not exactly saying that I don't want people advertising through twitter. But I do have to wonder. Is there a stopping point? Or is this all inevitable?
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
The One About Wil Wheaton Reviews TNG.
Let's face it, if you were a guy and a Trekker then you probably hated Wesley Crusher. And if you were a geek you probably secretly envied him a little bit as well. On the one hand Wesley was the face of future geekdom. On the other hand sadly it looks like future geekdom still has a massive zit problem and no real social life to speak of. But that wasn't the real reason most of us had a love hate relationship with ol' Wes. The real reason is that he pretty much put a pin in our little fantasies. I mean what serious Trek geek doesn't watch episodes and get their Mary Sue on a little bit? Braver than... Tougher than... Sexier than... But there was Wesley, acting as a stand in for us fans and well pretty much sucking at it. He wasn't cool, or brave, or tough or sexy (note: all comments from NAMBLA members disputing that last statement will be deleted) and as a result instead of getting to project ourselves as Lieutenant Commander Super Cool we got stuck as Wesley. And ya know what? Hating a fictional character is okay. In fact it's perfectly natural and even if not taking too far healthy. Sadly however I think some people went one step too far and may have started to hate on Wil Wheaton.
Honestly I was not one of them. However Wil did pretty much drop off my radar after TNG ended it's run.
Then a couple years ago it seemed like suddenly Wil was everywhere. Not in a serious branded Nike, Coke, Microsoft, Google kind of way. And not in a "I'm a desperate ex-almost celeb" kind of way. But rather it seemed to me that he was just as much a geek as many of us on the 'net and was happy to embracing his geek heritage and share himself, his life, and his thoughts with his fellow members of geek nation.
In recent times I've become a fan. I enjoy his blog, I am following his tweets, but that's not what this article is about. It's about finding out that Wil has done detailed recap/reviews of the first season of TNG. And it's freakin hilarious.
On the one hand Wil is totally cuttingly funny about a lot of the crap inherent in the first season. From questionable production values to just out and out sucky writing and directing.
On the other hand he also clearly has a fondness for that time in his life if not for the episodes themselves. He manages to make fun without ever really seeming cruel. And in all honesty even if he hadn't been on the show, I'd find his reviews funny and insightful.
Some of my favorite bits...
Regarding fan response to Wesley:
Regarding the Troi and Riker reunion:
So go on over and check it out. But I suggest you bring two asses just in case you laugh one off.
Honestly I was not one of them. However Wil did pretty much drop off my radar after TNG ended it's run.
Then a couple years ago it seemed like suddenly Wil was everywhere. Not in a serious branded Nike, Coke, Microsoft, Google kind of way. And not in a "I'm a desperate ex-almost celeb" kind of way. But rather it seemed to me that he was just as much a geek as many of us on the 'net and was happy to embracing his geek heritage and share himself, his life, and his thoughts with his fellow members of geek nation.
In recent times I've become a fan. I enjoy his blog, I am following his tweets, but that's not what this article is about. It's about finding out that Wil has done detailed recap/reviews of the first season of TNG. And it's freakin hilarious.
On the one hand Wil is totally cuttingly funny about a lot of the crap inherent in the first season. From questionable production values to just out and out sucky writing and directing.
On the other hand he also clearly has a fondness for that time in his life if not for the episodes themselves. He manages to make fun without ever really seeming cruel. And in all honesty even if he hadn't been on the show, I'd find his reviews funny and insightful.
Some of my favorite bits...
Regarding fan response to Wesley:
Riker and the Doctor begin to discuss the mystery, when Wesley interrupts them to explicitly point out how mysterious the whole thing is. (It's right around this moment, according to historical data and polling research, that the Kill Wesley movement got its first member, though scholars are unable to agree upon who it was. It has been narrowed down to a single male virgin, approximately age 24, living in his parents' basement in the American Midwest.)
Regarding the Troi and Riker reunion:
Picard then introduces Riker to the ship's counselor. As she walks down toward them, she projects some of her thoughts into Riker's mind, and calls him "Imzadi," which is Betazoid for "Backstory red herring that never really goes anywhere for seven years but finally pays off (sort of) in the last movie when Riker gets Worf's sloppy seconds, but let's not go there because 'ew gross.'"
So go on over and check it out. But I suggest you bring two asses just in case you laugh one off.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
The One About Inclusion.
Okay. So the swearing in is over. And our new President has given his inauguration address. And it's not bad. Really it's not. But I won't lie I felt there was a bit too much of the "God's call" stuff. And honestly there was a point that, I'm trying really hard not to be a little bit offended.
A man credited with a very bright mind, and with access to well educated and experienced speech writers and the best they could come up with is a modern revisit of "and the rest"?
First of all, a great many of us are far from "non-believers". It's just that what we choose to believe in is different from what the groups named in that line believe in. From the more mainstream beliefs like Buddhism, to more individualistic beliefs like neo-paganism. Even atheists while not believing in a god concept still have things that they believe in. Things like human potential, and the importance of taking responsibility for our own destinies rather than waiting for a deus ex machina. Ultimately while I do appreciate the attempt at more inclusive language than those in the past have used I still think they have a lot of work to do. I hope to see a better result next time.
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus — and non-believers.
A man credited with a very bright mind, and with access to well educated and experienced speech writers and the best they could come up with is a modern revisit of "and the rest"?
First of all, a great many of us are far from "non-believers". It's just that what we choose to believe in is different from what the groups named in that line believe in. From the more mainstream beliefs like Buddhism, to more individualistic beliefs like neo-paganism. Even atheists while not believing in a god concept still have things that they believe in. Things like human potential, and the importance of taking responsibility for our own destinies rather than waiting for a deus ex machina. Ultimately while I do appreciate the attempt at more inclusive language than those in the past have used I still think they have a lot of work to do. I hope to see a better result next time.
The One About The Inauguration.
I'll be watching it through the good offices of Hulu.com. I'm really looking forward to it and that's the first inauguration I've ever said that about.
The One About President Obama Praising John McCain
To me this is just another example of what makes President Obama the right choice. I honestly don't recall any of the other recent past presidents being so open in their praise of the candidate they defeated. Also I got to thinking and in all honesty while I don't think he was the right choice, I do believe that McCain's head and heart really were in the right place. In fact if it had not been for his choice of running mate I would not have been nearly as opposed to his being elected.
Monday, January 19, 2009
The One About Black Sci-Fi Icons
In relation to the upcoming month long event in February known as Black History Month Entertainment Weekly offered up this list.
The list in brief is as follows...
MORPHEUS
Laurence Fishburne
The Matrix trilogy (1999-2003)
LT. BOOMER & COL. TIGH
Herb Jefferson Jr. and Terry Carter
Battlestar Galactica (1978-79)
ZOE WASHBURNE
Gina Torres
Firefly (2002), Serenity (2005)
HENRY DEACON
Joe Morton
Eureka (2006-present)
LANDO CALRISSIAN
Billy Dee Williams
Star Wars: Episode V — The Empire Strikes Back (1980), Star Wars: Episode VI — Return of the Jedi (1983)
DILLON
Carl Weathers
Predator (1987)
CHILDS
Keith David
The Thing (1982)
GEORDI LA FORGE
LeVar Burton
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-94)
MARQUIS DE CARABAS
Paterson Joseph
Neverwhere (1996)
UHURA
Nichelle Nichols
Star Trek (1966-69)
MICHAEL DAWSON
Harold Perrineau
Lost (2004-present)
SHEPHERD DERRIAL BOOK
Ron Glass
Firefly (2002), Serenity (2005)
THE OPERATIVE
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Serenity (2005)
BENJAMIN SISKO
Avery Brooks
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993-1999)
MACE WINDU
Samuel L. Jackson
Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones (2002), Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith (2005)
AGENT JAY
Will Smith
Men in Black (1997)
MR. X
Steven Williams
The X-Files (1993-2002)
ANASTASIA DUALLA
Kandyse McClure
Battlestar Galactica (2004-09)
MARTHA JONES
Freema Agyeman
Doctor Who (2005-present)
JERIBA ''JERRY'' SHIGAN
Louis Gossett Jr.
Enemy Mine (1985)
Okay. Not bad choices over all. Certainly some I very much agree with. However I have to admit that there are a few names that I think merit inclusion.
Among them...
Lieutenant (later Lieutenant Commander) Worf
Michael Dorn
Star Trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine
Star Trek has always worked best as one part hopeful blueprint for a better future and one part allegory for our troubled present. So when Michael Dorn came along representing a race once considered nothing better than savage villains it was an interesting choice. But what made it brilliant was viewing Worf's journey as a metaphor for the journey that a lot of people (black, and gay to name just two) go through to integrate into the dominant culture while at the same time retaining their sense of self and authenticity. Seeing Worf go from almost denying his Klingon heritage to proudly embracing it was enthralling and made me glad that he accepted the transfer from the Enterprise to DS9.
Dr. Miles Hawkins
Carl Lumbly
MANTIS
Although MANTIS was short lived and under budgeted it was also to my knowledge the first time that a superhero show had both a person of color and a physically challenged person as the lead. Lumbly was excellent as a cross between Batman and Iron Man and anytime he's shown up in anything it causes me to pay attention. His casting as the voice of The Martian Manhunter in the Justice League cartoon was brilliant.
Jake Sisko
Cirroc Lofton
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Whether you love him or hate him Wesley Crusher was very much in the sci fi stereotype of the boy genius. Whether it worked on Next Generation is up for debate. But it's for certain that it would not have worked for a show like Deep Space Nine that was meant to be much more grounded in emotional reality than either the shows that preceded it or followed it. Enter Jake Sisko. What in modern terms would be called a military brat, Jake quickly went from a nice well meaning young man who made some questionable choices to a bright passionate individual who was trying to honor what his father had taught him while at the same time striving to become his own person. I don't know that I've ever seen the journey that most men go through better presented in any medium. And watching the honest affection and rapport that Lofton and Brooks shared translate to the characters made it doubly enjoyable.
Tuvok
Tim Russ
Star Trek: Voyager
Okay here's the thing. No one. And I mean no one is going to make us forget Leonard Nimoy as Spock. But as brilliant as his portrayal was Nimoy's Spock was still half human. That gave him a bit more latitude in the way he portrayed the character. Fast forward to Voyager wherein Tim Russ (A man with such a passion for Trek that he turned down work until he heard for sure about whether or not he'd gotten the part of Tuvok) not only gives us the first full Vulcan in a regular role on Trek but one who has apparently gone in for the emotion purge ritual known as Kolinahr. Russ' Tuvok is at best terse and prickly, at his worst he is narrow minded, hide bound and frankly a bit of a prick. And always fascinating to watch. Whether it was his odd couple-esque bantering with Neelix or his almost mentor like relationship with his captain Russ took a character who would have been notable at least for his skin color and instead made him notable for the sheer brilliance of his performance.
So there ya go. My picks and my reasons why. If anyone else out there has any ideas I'd love to hear them.
The list in brief is as follows...
MORPHEUS
Laurence Fishburne
The Matrix trilogy (1999-2003)
LT. BOOMER & COL. TIGH
Herb Jefferson Jr. and Terry Carter
Battlestar Galactica (1978-79)
ZOE WASHBURNE
Gina Torres
Firefly (2002), Serenity (2005)
HENRY DEACON
Joe Morton
Eureka (2006-present)
LANDO CALRISSIAN
Billy Dee Williams
Star Wars: Episode V — The Empire Strikes Back (1980), Star Wars: Episode VI — Return of the Jedi (1983)
DILLON
Carl Weathers
Predator (1987)
CHILDS
Keith David
The Thing (1982)
GEORDI LA FORGE
LeVar Burton
Star Trek: The Next Generation (1987-94)
MARQUIS DE CARABAS
Paterson Joseph
Neverwhere (1996)
UHURA
Nichelle Nichols
Star Trek (1966-69)
MICHAEL DAWSON
Harold Perrineau
Lost (2004-present)
SHEPHERD DERRIAL BOOK
Ron Glass
Firefly (2002), Serenity (2005)
THE OPERATIVE
Chiwetel Ejiofor
Serenity (2005)
BENJAMIN SISKO
Avery Brooks
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (1993-1999)
MACE WINDU
Samuel L. Jackson
Star Wars: Episode II — Attack of the Clones (2002), Star Wars: Episode III — Revenge of the Sith (2005)
AGENT JAY
Will Smith
Men in Black (1997)
MR. X
Steven Williams
The X-Files (1993-2002)
ANASTASIA DUALLA
Kandyse McClure
Battlestar Galactica (2004-09)
MARTHA JONES
Freema Agyeman
Doctor Who (2005-present)
JERIBA ''JERRY'' SHIGAN
Louis Gossett Jr.
Enemy Mine (1985)
Okay. Not bad choices over all. Certainly some I very much agree with. However I have to admit that there are a few names that I think merit inclusion.
Among them...
Lieutenant (later Lieutenant Commander) Worf
Michael Dorn
Star Trek: The Next Generation and Deep Space Nine
Star Trek has always worked best as one part hopeful blueprint for a better future and one part allegory for our troubled present. So when Michael Dorn came along representing a race once considered nothing better than savage villains it was an interesting choice. But what made it brilliant was viewing Worf's journey as a metaphor for the journey that a lot of people (black, and gay to name just two) go through to integrate into the dominant culture while at the same time retaining their sense of self and authenticity. Seeing Worf go from almost denying his Klingon heritage to proudly embracing it was enthralling and made me glad that he accepted the transfer from the Enterprise to DS9.
Dr. Miles Hawkins
Carl Lumbly
MANTIS
Although MANTIS was short lived and under budgeted it was also to my knowledge the first time that a superhero show had both a person of color and a physically challenged person as the lead. Lumbly was excellent as a cross between Batman and Iron Man and anytime he's shown up in anything it causes me to pay attention. His casting as the voice of The Martian Manhunter in the Justice League cartoon was brilliant.
Jake Sisko
Cirroc Lofton
Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Whether you love him or hate him Wesley Crusher was very much in the sci fi stereotype of the boy genius. Whether it worked on Next Generation is up for debate. But it's for certain that it would not have worked for a show like Deep Space Nine that was meant to be much more grounded in emotional reality than either the shows that preceded it or followed it. Enter Jake Sisko. What in modern terms would be called a military brat, Jake quickly went from a nice well meaning young man who made some questionable choices to a bright passionate individual who was trying to honor what his father had taught him while at the same time striving to become his own person. I don't know that I've ever seen the journey that most men go through better presented in any medium. And watching the honest affection and rapport that Lofton and Brooks shared translate to the characters made it doubly enjoyable.
Tuvok
Tim Russ
Star Trek: Voyager
Okay here's the thing. No one. And I mean no one is going to make us forget Leonard Nimoy as Spock. But as brilliant as his portrayal was Nimoy's Spock was still half human. That gave him a bit more latitude in the way he portrayed the character. Fast forward to Voyager wherein Tim Russ (A man with such a passion for Trek that he turned down work until he heard for sure about whether or not he'd gotten the part of Tuvok) not only gives us the first full Vulcan in a regular role on Trek but one who has apparently gone in for the emotion purge ritual known as Kolinahr. Russ' Tuvok is at best terse and prickly, at his worst he is narrow minded, hide bound and frankly a bit of a prick. And always fascinating to watch. Whether it was his odd couple-esque bantering with Neelix or his almost mentor like relationship with his captain Russ took a character who would have been notable at least for his skin color and instead made him notable for the sheer brilliance of his performance.
So there ya go. My picks and my reasons why. If anyone else out there has any ideas I'd love to hear them.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The One About Who Is And Who Is Not A Feminist.
Thanks to Ragnell I found this comment over at Occasional Superheroine.
A comment like this really makes me think three things.
First of all I think Valerie is missing the original commenters point. Mainly that she has become fixated on the evils of DC while seeming to give everyone else (Marvel especially) a free ride. And honestly the last time I checked Marvel wasn't exactly a hot bed of feminism and activism. And to use her coffee shop analogy if I haven't had a bad experience, and I don't know anyone but you that has had a bad experience, and it seems that all you want to do is carry on about how awful that one shop is, then maybe yeah I'd reach a point where I'd not want to hear about it anymore.
Second of all, and more importantly this is why I generally don't claim labels for myself. Because then I don't have to deal with people deciding that they have some kind of entitlement to tell me whether or not they consider me to be what I am.
Third of all is feminism, is any cause advanced by such pettiness? I appreciate that when something is very personal to you that it can be hard to step back and try to really listen objectively to what someone has to say, especially when what they are saying is critical. And there's no law that says you have to. But if we all only did just what we have to it would be a pretty sad world.
Najika, if you support DC Comics, then personally, I really can't consider you a feminist. Sorry. It's like "yeah, I read about your bad experiences with them. that stuff about sexism. that's too bad. but can you cool it on them? I want to read about feminism, but I don't want to ruin my comic book reading experience."
It's like if you had a horrible sexist thing happen to you at a certain coffee shop. And I stop by, and read the stuff you say about the coffee shop. Now, I consider myself a serious feminist. Ad I DO want to hear your opinions on sexism. But I tire of hearing about that coffee shop. Because I want to buy a fucking cappuccino there. They make good cappuccino, and I don't want to feel guilty about buying it. Now, you might feel offended that I have heard your story, yet not only have patronized the sexist coffee shop -- but had the temerity to tell YOU that YOU should stop talking about how you were hurt there. Because I want to enjoy my cappuccino.
For you to tell me to stop posting about this stuff and post about "feminism" instead -- it's like you didn't read a damn thing I wrote.
Go enjoy your comic books, and enjoy your "feminist" blogs. Hope you find one that hates Dave Sim -- he's such a good, soft target.
A comment like this really makes me think three things.
First of all I think Valerie is missing the original commenters point. Mainly that she has become fixated on the evils of DC while seeming to give everyone else (Marvel especially) a free ride. And honestly the last time I checked Marvel wasn't exactly a hot bed of feminism and activism. And to use her coffee shop analogy if I haven't had a bad experience, and I don't know anyone but you that has had a bad experience, and it seems that all you want to do is carry on about how awful that one shop is, then maybe yeah I'd reach a point where I'd not want to hear about it anymore.
Second of all, and more importantly this is why I generally don't claim labels for myself. Because then I don't have to deal with people deciding that they have some kind of entitlement to tell me whether or not they consider me to be what I am.
Third of all is feminism, is any cause advanced by such pettiness? I appreciate that when something is very personal to you that it can be hard to step back and try to really listen objectively to what someone has to say, especially when what they are saying is critical. And there's no law that says you have to. But if we all only did just what we have to it would be a pretty sad world.
The One About Comic Book Deaths.
Ya know what? I don't care. I'm just well I'm numb. The last straw honestly was Captain America. It's like something broke in me. Batman's not dead. Seriously. I'm not going to deride those who have chosen to cry out but honestly? These characters die and then get replaced for a time and then come back. So... *shrug* Either the Batman's replacement stories will be good or suck. Either the Batman returns story will be good or sucks. But he's not dead. My interest? That however pretty much is.
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
The One About An Introduction.
Hello everyone.
A while back I started blogging. I had decided to focus on the geekier end of pop culture. So I started a blog called Geek Love. Well Geek Love in time spawned A Finer World. AFW was going to be for more political topics. Recently I went through some personal stuff and had been offline more or less. I was going to retool and relaunch my two blogs and suddenly I decided not to. I'm tired of compartmentalization in my life. So I've decided instead to launch an entirely new blog. It will deal with everything that I deal with. What I love, what I fear what I hate. It won't be a personal blog per se. I have no desire to bore you with the minutia of my life but rather it will be about the things that I see going on in the world and my thoughts and feelings on them. However to establish some ground rules I want to make the following pledges.
1: The One About... might be negative but it will never be low brow. What this means is that if I have something negative to say I will say it but I will never bash or rant just to rant.
2: The One About... will strive to be as honest a representation of my thoughts and feelings as it can be. I will not bandwagon but rather speak my own mind as best I know it.
3: The One About... will strive to be open and accessible to dialogue. I want to get honest feed back from my readers, to be questioned and responded to. Not to merely turn someone off the moment they challenge me. However I expect common courtesy and those who cannot give it will find themselves dealt with swiftly.
4: The Blog About... will attempt to offer something a little different from what is normally available in the blogsphere. But given how many blogs are out there I can't say I'll never fail at that one. *L*
Anyway enough of my opening ramblings. I'll see you soon.
A while back I started blogging. I had decided to focus on the geekier end of pop culture. So I started a blog called Geek Love. Well Geek Love in time spawned A Finer World. AFW was going to be for more political topics. Recently I went through some personal stuff and had been offline more or less. I was going to retool and relaunch my two blogs and suddenly I decided not to. I'm tired of compartmentalization in my life. So I've decided instead to launch an entirely new blog. It will deal with everything that I deal with. What I love, what I fear what I hate. It won't be a personal blog per se. I have no desire to bore you with the minutia of my life but rather it will be about the things that I see going on in the world and my thoughts and feelings on them. However to establish some ground rules I want to make the following pledges.
1: The One About... might be negative but it will never be low brow. What this means is that if I have something negative to say I will say it but I will never bash or rant just to rant.
2: The One About... will strive to be as honest a representation of my thoughts and feelings as it can be. I will not bandwagon but rather speak my own mind as best I know it.
3: The One About... will strive to be open and accessible to dialogue. I want to get honest feed back from my readers, to be questioned and responded to. Not to merely turn someone off the moment they challenge me. However I expect common courtesy and those who cannot give it will find themselves dealt with swiftly.
4: The Blog About... will attempt to offer something a little different from what is normally available in the blogsphere. But given how many blogs are out there I can't say I'll never fail at that one. *L*
Anyway enough of my opening ramblings. I'll see you soon.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)