Bernie X- The Borges collection is now out in pb for 16.95. Beats the $40 hb tag.
My fave Borges story is *August 25, 1983*. It's one of those dream thingies. It's really fab & gear & harladelic to the max. But the only book that contains it is a big fat recent anthology called *Collected Fictions*.
I'm glad that Ursula LeGuin & Brian Attebery included *Strange Wine* in that Norton anthology. *Strange Wine* is arguably the single greatest story ever written in the history of this particular galaxy-cluster. And I'm not even much of an Ellison fan.
Here's one of my fave pet-peeves: I hate it when writers use the same title for both a single piece and a collection. Because it creates a confusion between the two in regard to which one you're referring to. For example: *Strange Wine* is the title of a story by Ellison. But *Strange Wine* is also the title of a story collection by Ellison. What I'm trying to say to all you entertainers out there is simply this: Fer pete's sake, don't be so goddam lazy. Don't just name the collection after one item that's contained in the collection. Think up a separate title for the collection.
SHANE & ALL REST: re your comments below. Dove is also issuing an Ellison recording entitled, "THE VOICE FROM THE EDGE, VOL 1: I HAVE NO MOUTH AND I MUST SCREAM." It will include that story, plus "A Boy and His Dog," "'Repent Harlequin!'...," "Grail," "Laugh Track," "The Time of the Eye," "Paladin of the Lost Hour," "The Very Last Day of a Good Woman," and "The Lingering Scent of Woodsmoke." It'll include introductory material as well. Comes out around September 16th, I believe. ISBN for ordering is, 0-7871-2266-1. Happy listening. Out here, DTS.
Peter: If you enjoy Orson Scott Card's Alvin Maker books, you might be interested to know that Harlan will be doing a reading of Card's ENDERS GAME that will be released by DOVE AUDIO.
DTS- Thanks for the comments and recommendation. I'll check out Willis' book.
CHARLIE: one more thing! Connie Willis will have a new book of short stories out in November, MIRACLE and OTHER CHRISTMAS STORIES. I've already started reading bits of it -- it's great, as usual (there's a reason she wins all of those writing awards). In fact, it looks like it'll be the second Christmas book (in as many years) that I'll actually buy and recommend for family and friends (the last one, last year, was SANTA STEPS OUT by Charles Devereaux, in which Santa and the tooth fairy have an extended affair -- don't even ask about the Easter bunny or Mrs. Claus and the elves -- it's a great tract about sexuality and myths...pagan and otherwise). Out here, DTS.
CHARLIE: Yes, I've read TO SAY NOTHING OF THE DOG -- it's hilarious! (don't go to it looking for a retread version of DOOMSDAY BOOK, like other readers, and you'll be greatly rewarded). Great time travel adventures, and great fun -- especially with the stuffy English characters. Mrs. Willis also advised (for a "Bloomsbury Review" piece a couple years ago) that she is hard at work on WORKING CAPE RACE, a book about life after death that includes "characters" and situations from that famous 1912 shipwreck which provides the title. As for Simmons, yeah, the story he is writing with Ellison is for the White Wolf reissue of PARTNERS IN WONDER -- I just didn't mention the title cause the publication date might change, depending on when all the stories are finished (in addition to Ellison's full schedule, Simmons just finished a screenplay and another novel, due in April 2000, DARWIN'S BLADE, has begun work on a new book, THE HOUNDS OF WINTER, a sort-of-sequel to SUMMER OF NIGHT, and has yet another in the research stages [that one will feature Charles Dickens as a main character]). Out here, DTS
BARNEY: tried to email you (after copying the address from one of you postings here), but got a message back saying the address was incorrect. Anyway, to condense my message: Got the surprise package in the mail! Many thanks. The "Con" book was especially great (with the L&D Dillon artwork from SHATTERDAY), but the rest of it was pretty cool, too. I owe you. If I'm ever in a position to repay you in kind, I will. Till then, let me know there's anything I can do to help garner any needed information for your forthcoming Ellison bio. Thanks again. Out here, DTS.
SHeriff Buck: regarding HE and Borges -- obviously Ellison has developed his own unique style, but if you are looking for similarities, that is, prose that shows signs of influence, check out MIND FIELDS, "From A to Z in the Chocolate Alphabet" (and, in a future publication, "From A to Z in the Sarsaparilla Alphabet"), "Eidolons," and at least half of the stories in SLIPPAGE. Out here, DTS.
Now for a moment of reflection as I step back into the merciless arms of academia. Tonight is my last night for pleasureable reading without the pressure of "having to do something else." I just found Orson Scott Card's Alvin Maker books, and am quite enjoying them. Of course, I read the first four in about a week's time. I'm going to finish off the last one tonight before I plunge my hand into the waiting vat of liquid nitrogen called education.
---Peter
Charlie - I'd also heard that there was a HE/Bradbury collaboration in the offing for the re-release of "Partners In Wonder".
Alejandro - I'm currently rotating "Ficciones" with a few others, including the annotated complete Sherlock Holmes, so I haven't read enough to converse intelligently. But I've liked both "The Secret Miracle" and "Three Versions of Judas" - two for two so far.
All - For those of you looking for quality stocking stuffers (hey, it's never too early), the Edgeworks 2 trade paperback has been sighted on the shelves.
That thar post is me, not some mechanized clone. I got careless and typed in the 1st half of my email instead of my handle. These things wouldn't happen if I'd just use my real name like a good boy.
alejandro:
My favorite Borges stories (keep in mind, I haven't gotten around to reading any more than the first 15 or so stories in Labyrinths) are "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote" and "The Lottery in Babylon."
I, too, have read HE mention Borges as one of his greatest influences on many occasions, but I must confess I don't see many similarities. Maybe I just haven't read enough Borges; maybe I just don't understand what's meant by "influencing." Obviously HE's not going to simply tread the same ground as JLB, but I fail to see any characteristics whatsoever that the two share (apart from--arguably--genre). That includes style, ideas, topics of interest--they just seem completely different to me. Can anyone shed light? Am I just being ignorant?
There's an interview w/Dan Simmons in latest Bloomsbury Review and he mentions that he's writing a short story with HE to be included, I'm assuming, in Edgeworks Partners in Wonder. So, now the list includes C. Willis, N. Gaiman, M. Moorcock, and D. Simmons. Did I leave anyone out? Speaking of C. Willis, has anyone read To Say Nothing of the Dog? Wondering if worth picking up.
In the hopes of changing the thread a little bit, here's a peice of news that may not have reached your neck of the woods. Jorge Luis Borges was born 100 years today. And even though I have some major catch up to do in regards to his work (I last read Ficciones a decada ago) and considering that Borges has been such a strong influence on Harlan's work, I would like to ask, what are some of your favorite Borges' stories, poems or piece of nonfiction?
Rick: any chance that Harlan may share his thoughts on Borges in this site?
You're right. I have some pet peeves that resist logic. For instance the words "like" and "you know what I'm sayin' " after every few words when someone is talking, make me nuts.
But, as a whole, if I let spelling mistakes mess with my head too much, I'd lose my mind. My husband and son are both dyslexic. I know it's now called "reading disabled", but people never know what I mean by that. It's so severe that my husband is not allowed to touch the checkbook and my son, who is eight, sees "e" as the universal vowel that belongs in every word as many times as possible.
other Chris,
Yes, you're right. I have no idea why I latched onto the one word. I just got a little bit of the bulldog in me, I guess.
Am I sometimes surprised by the lack of basic communication skills people have? Absolutely. I'm shocked at the general knowledge many people don't possess. I saw a game show with 14-16 year old contestants and they were rendered helpless by questions I think any 6th grader should have known.
One example: "If Tommy Lee only served 2/3 of his 6 month sentence,how long will he be in jail?" Not only did the two 15 year olds asked this question not know, they produced these stunned glances and didn't even try as if they thought, "Hell, nobody knows something like that!"
At the same time, I also don't get too upset about spelling mistakes as long as they aren't too egregious.
I'd rather see people writing with lousy spelling than not writing at all.
You are right. I give. I was talking about the usage of the word when refering to a group. However, in the form you are defending, it can be a noun or adverb. But, I can't believe that when I was talking about the sweeping illiteracy in this country, all you could comment on was one word. Do you not see examples of this illiteracy all around you?
In regards to Sherriff Buck's query about the upcoming Sandman project......Sandman: The Dream Hunters is the book in question with art by Yoshitaka Amano. It is a $29.95 HC and is supposed to be similar in format to Stardust. For more information check out the blurb at http://www.holycow.com/dreaming/
Yeah, but "altogether" is a word, plain and simple. It's not slang or a substitue for "all together." It's simply a word in its own right. I've got it in a dictionary that's 20 years old so it's been accepted for at least that long.
My God, what's wrong with me? Why would I debate such matters?
-chris
We all have to have some genetic imperfections to keep us humble. I can't seem to walk across a perfectly clean floor without tripping over the invisible object that seems to hover near my feet at all times.
Also: the use of 'alot' and 'altogether' instead of ' a lot' and 'all together' are simply pet peeves left over from journalism school. We all have things that make us roll our eyes.
HELP!! I'M DOOMED I SAY!
That should be "You're doomed." Not your. I am abjectly sorry. Again, I can only say that this is all my Grandma's fault. Bad genes...
YUP! Your screwed now Barney! ;-)
Yeah, my Dad is very bright too. I'm telling you, it's genetic and I'm doomed. I fight it and fight it. .
Hey, if you want to get peeved about something, why not the destruction of a perfectly good swear word? Have posted a rant yet about the abuse and destruction of the great English swear words? Just really irritates me when I'm on the bus and there's somebody using fuck as if it were an adjective instead of one of the most perfect swear words ever invented - hey, have you ever heard what passes for a swear word in France?!?! These people have a great public transportation system. They eat so much better than your average American that we're practically a different species, but their swear words are totally lame. No power in them. No punch. No good hard explosive "k" sound that you can really get behind when you're good and angry. And some idiot children with no vocabulary and even less imagination are turning our perfect swear words (I count shit in this. Not quite as perfect as fuck, but you can still get a good explosive out of it) into everyday speech. Just irate!
Women can vote? Oh crap.
Actually, "altogether" is a word, at least according to all of my dictionaries.
"Alot" may not be in the dictionary but it has become common usage and I have no problem with it. Language evolves. The dead white guys don't get the final say on what is and what isn't "proper" English.
I have this wild desire to comment on the grammar and spelling issue. As a ex retail manager for many years, I must say that people are definitely paying less attention to spelling and grammar. A sixteen year old employee asked me to proofread a term paper for her. When I told her that there was no such words as "altogether" or "alot" she told me that her teacher had told her to spell them like that. These were not her only errors, but when she showed me the graded version of her paper, no spelling errors were addressed. I just threw up my hands in disgust.
Also, I would like to point out that my father is a brilliant man. However, when he writes a letter it looks as if it was written by a third grader. His spelling is that terrible.
Hiya! Yes, I am back live and direct! I would just like to say thanks to Shane for copying all of this stuff and sending it to me periodically so that I could keep in touch vicariously! Kept me from completely running amok in this here looney bin.
So - a few thoughts that I meant to post last week when we first on line before I was felled by the allergy aggravated cold turned sinus infection from hell -
On the evil that is known as "political correctness" - I have to say that I am about the least politically correct human being on earth (oh ask me some time about the brouhaha last fall when I dared to firmly and rather loudly participate in a bunch of stupid crap celebrating the local bashers, aka Vikings football. Yikes!), but I don't spend that much time on PC, and I don't think that it's the beginning of the end of civilisation. On the contrary, it seems a rather hopeful, if irritating thing - rather like an itchy scab. I like to read history (among other things) and it seems to me that anytime something comes along that shakes things up, there is a penduluum swing to things before they settle down. For instance, women's rights. The suffrage movement built for a long time before we, FINALLY, got the right to vote. Then nothing else big happened, and in some ways, it even looked like we were going back wards. Then the 60's came along and ERA. Didn't pass, we have even gone through a bit of back lash, which seems to be fading a bit. In it's wake, things have changed for women substantially. Same thing with this PC crap. People aren't going to put up with it forever. Eventually, commonsense is going to rear it's head and people are going to find a middle ground. On the plus side however, I think that it's a good thing that people are actually thinking about the fact that different people have different sensibilities. It's not the end of the road, just a step in the right direction. Eventually, people will find a consensus.
As to the evil spelling/grammar issue - I have to say right here that I have a genetic predisposition to wretched spelling and grammar. Trust me on this. My Grandmother has been sending me letters with the exact same spelling and grammar errors as the ones my father sends me ever since I went off to college, nigh on 20 years ago. Until recently, I thought that I had evaded that particular genetic bomb. My Dad and my Grandma both email me now and both have spell check and it doesn't help a bit. I just keep battling this particular gene. Still cranky about that damn sneaky farmer gene....
Happy to be back!
ALL- There is all sorts of juicy news in latest issue of Rabbit Hole #22. Enuf to whet your appetite for weeks on end. Ellison in Estonian-hmmmm.
OK, I get it now. Jim's one of those performance artists. Otherwise, the laughable number of spelling and/or grammatical errors in his last message would just be too ironic for words.
However, I believe sherrif buck has it right. The only way to deal with the trolls is to ignore them.
As for my favorite HE stories, "Jeffty is Five" is, by far, my favorite. I also like "Paladin" and "Prowler." And "Christopher Columbus" and "Mephisto in Onyx" and and and... well, a whole lot.
-chris
One final thought on the matter and then I am off to do something else (Interesting? Meaningful? Possessing purpose? Who knows? It matters to me, and a handful of others.): Harlan Ellison has spent his writing life thus trying with great effort and energy to make writing and the Writer credible and respectable. To do this means taking to task those who apparently don't give a damn about what makes up writing--things like spelling, which worsen with each passing day owing to the ever increasing presence of computers and spellchecks that don't know and don't care about the difference between such words as "to" and "too". For his efforts, troubles, and sacrifices Harlan Ellison has been branded a pain in the ass, Le Enfant Terrible, a Bad Boy of literature, etc. Better to branded such for trying to do a good job than to slog through life making excuses and being narrow-minded pinheads who think, because they have a year or two of college behind them, they know everything. Unfortunately, based on the exchanges here of late, HE's writing life, his efforts, his attempts to make writing and the Writer something meaningful and worthy, have been for nought. If--god forbid--he died tomorrow he would die knowing that he has failed, based much on the remarks here. Man, you people must be proud of yourselves. Until next time. . . .
RE: Sheriff Buck's remark that I assume a HE-like persona. To suggest so is to insult Harlan Ellison. Of course, the fact you need to categorize, stereotype, quantify others in terms of others begs the asking of a question. Which I won't do. Y'all have fun, now. Until next time. . .
Allow a correction: "I must people" should be "I must suffer people. . ." See? I found my mistake and learned from it. Until next time. . .
RE: Chris's remarks: "get a life". Actually, I do have a life. A wonderful life. Unfortunately, with a certain regularity, I must people like you. Until next time. . .
Let's start with Chris: No. I do not have personal issues. No. I do not need--as you say--"professional therapy". Yes. I do have loved ones. That you would feel compelled to use the word "unlucky" in association with this makes me wonder about you. But that is what makes the world go 'round'. Until next time. . .
*** Sherrif Buck *** The real name deal [modified to Rick Wyatt being able to get in touch with the poster or the posters ISP] was something that I lobbied for. I understand peoples reservations about this but what prompted this was sort of over the top. Awhile back somebody anonymously posted a one-liner here under a former regular guests name that the subject of Webderland had suddenly passed away. When I opened the board up to that it was only up about 10 minutes and I just about had a seizure until I realized this was someones sick joke. Having a nom de plume is one thing. Taking pot shots at us from the hills while we stand in someones electronic equivalent of a living room with a big bay window is something else. I think using your real name adds credibility, especially if your going to say something that flys in the face of a common perception, but I understand the average net users hesitation to do so.
Does anyone know anything about the upcoming Neil Gaiman Sandman project? I read that it was to be a short novel with illustrations, much like "Stardust," and that it had a hardcover release date of Oct. However, I read these things in a none-too-reliable periodical. Has one of y'all heard of this book?
Also, kindly excise one "then" from my previous post, lest I have a third asshole ripped for me. And I meant "superior" in its most basic sense, ie. "best," not "haughty."
Oh my god.
It's clear that every time I post here (on anything but the most banal and uninflammatory topics, like blues-rock albums) I somehow transform JH from his generally snide, curmudgeonly, vaguely HE-like persona into a poopy-head of unfathomable magnitude. I didn't mean _anything_ except to point out that you were being a little rude, Jim. I even included a disclaimer of sorts about my intentions!
It's clear that the rest of the board isn't keen on Jim's infuriated responses. Some months ago, he informed me on this board that it was his right, in this age of unprecedented violence and worldwide internet phone "books," to know my real name when I posted. If anyone here did not then then understand my argument to the contrary, hopefully Hess's recent, confrontational posts serve as a poignant illustration. You never know who's reading, fellas.
It's clear, to me, that Finder has taken the superior attitude toward all this. Thanks for setting the example; I will now follow it.
Mr. SA - Fave stories include "Grail", "Paladin of the Lost Hour" and "Go Toward The Light" - but then, I'm sentimental at heart...
DTS - I haven't had the chance yet, but I was e-mailed an article a couple months ago on the Harry Potter series, which clued me in. I simply haven't had the finances to pick up any of the books yet (a few weeks back, I did notice the three in the series were the top three sellers at Amazon.com, even though the third was still pre-order). What I've been able to skim in passing has been an enjoyable read, though, and I'm looking forward an honest read down the road.
Jim,
You should also review this phrase you recently posted:
one must first find and correct faults and mistakes
with themselves and what they do or say.
Please analyze it for errors and post the corrected version.
Or you could consider getting a life.
Either one.
-chris
Jim,
You have some serious personal issues and I urge you to seek professional therapy immediately. I fear you could be a danger to yourself and those who love you (if there are any such unlucky persons.)
And you still can't figure out how to spell "grammar" correctly.
-chris
Jim. You claim that you are not the standard by which to judge other people's writing, but you are so quick to disparage others on the board. That is the high horse from which I ask you to dismount. I think that people on this board do a rather excellent job in spelling and grammar, especially when you consider the almost abysmal state of our teaching institutions and the fact that most people are left to their own devices when they actively attempt to improve their writing abilities. However, what I do not appreciate is someone coming on this board and saying "But given the spelling mistakes found
_here_ since my last post I just sigh and roll my eyes as a form of sadness and dismay over the laziness that pollutes and contaminates the English language today." You don't hold yourself as a benchmark? Fine. But do not presume to make comment unless you are willing to hold yourself up to the same standards that you wish to impose on other people. I take pride in my ability as a writer and I take pride in my attempts to master the written word. I don't take kindly to people who assume an attitude of holy-than-thou, especially under the auspices of "hey I'm just a regular joe." Either you are disgusted by the corruption of the english language and wish to do something about it by writing in clean, grammatically correct prose, or you are just blowing smoke and contributing to what you think of as the problem. A man who doesn't hold himself to his own standards is no sort of man I can respect.
I apologize to everyone for my unseemly outburst. But in an effort to correct my horrible use of grammar, I must say, "I is pissed off."
---Peter (three days and I'm back in the daily academic grind)
Tell you what, folks: Since you people know just every GD thing why don't you just get Harlan Ellison (HE) on the telephone and tell him something like "Hey, old man. Congrats. You have managed to waste your writing life thus far because we, snot-nosed f***s, know better than you when it comes to spelling, grammer, mechanics, etc. And your constant rantings and ravings and the rantings and ravings of those who stand with you on this, demanding that we straighten up and fly right (pun intended) is just breaking wind. So, run along, old man. You're wrong. We're right. Kiss off." I'd love to see you tell Harlan Ellison or Stephen King or Dan Simmons or Ed Bryant or any other writer (which you little turds obviously aren't) worth their salt that you know better than they do. Go on. I would buy a ticket to see you say this to Harlan Ellison. I would buy two tickets to see what Harlan Ellison would do to you after you said this to him. Until next time. . .
*JIM*, yikes! It's so hard to convey good-natured gibing electronically; I tried, I really did. That's why I tacked on the parenthetical (sorry, couldn't resist) at the end. But I guess the tone was lost in the translation to keystrokes. But hey, how were we to know in a serious post containing "sigh and roll my eyes as a form of sadness and dismay over the laziness that
pollutes and contaminates the English language today" that we were supposed to pick up on the intentional Mzspelling of one word? By the way, if anyone's looking for pollution of the English language, search no further than the US Declaration of Independence. I don't think Unalienable was any more a word in 1776 than irregardless is today. -- Billy D.
Peter, with his remarks, goes to reinforce what I have said all along. Incidentally, Mr. Wonderful, _if_ you had been reading along you might have found an interesting fact, which I repeat now: I do _not_ hold myself up as a benchmark or standard. Thereby going to prove your 'high horse' remarks are false. It is because of _your_ high horse horseshit that things are the way they are. _If_ you had any measure of self-respect or pride in your writing you would make a solid effort to check for mistakes before posting. Failing that you would admit to and learn from mistakes that make their way into print. Gawd. What's the damn point with pinheads like this? My god, it must be wonderful to be so GD perfect. As for those of us who are _not_, well, I'm off. Guess this site is just for gods the likes of Peter. Let me know, would you, oh-so perfect one, when the book burning is, huh? Until next time. . .
Uh, how did this argument about the way we write turn personal? Sheesh. Jim, get off your high horse. So wat, weze all gotz som mizerble gramma n speling. There is a vast difference between honest spelling and grammatical errors, and the type of sputum you find floating around the world because people just don't know any better. And as for purposeful mismellings (yeah that was on purpose). Exaggeration will clue people in that a mispelling is on porpoise, otherwise it looks just like a tiepoe.
Everyone else. Uh, let us go back to the days when we either ignored our idiosyncratic diction and grammar shifts, or correct them ourselves. Please?
---Peter
'Mispell' in my previous post, incidentally, is correct for my purposes. It should not have been 'misspelled'. I do that all the time. Just to check to see if A) anyone gives a damn, and b)anyone knows the difference from one to another. Feel free not to comment on it with implicitly snide remarks. Until next time. . .
Yes, I misspell a certain word. I did it on purpose, incidentally. But doing so goes to my point originally: Everyone--generally speaking--here seems so quick to find fault with others, but, by god, _you_ are above making mistakes and if _you_ do make mistakes, well. . . it isn't your fault you don't have a spellcheck or a dictionary. And you were in such a hurry to run off and pass judgement elsewhere on god knows what you didn't have the time to check your remarks. Let me make this as simple as possible: To achieve credibility, respectability, credence, respect, etc. as a writing type with aspirations of being a Writer one must first find and correct faults and mistakes with themselves and what they do or say. Until such time that this occurs one does not have credence, credibility, respectability. I make mistakes. I admit to my mistakes--deliberate or otherwise. I make all efforts to learn from these mistakes. And I think, once more trying to drag this thread back to the topic of this site--Harlan Ellison, that HE teaches well, through his writings and speakings and whatnot, that life is an ongoing learning process. Failure on your part _not_ to learn ongoing is to hand over the world to heaven knows what. Until next time. . .
Okay, I just reread my last post for grammar, spelling and typos. Perhaps it should read, "giving each ITS own planet." And "visiting" should be "visited" near the end. -- Billy D.
*JIM*, I will accept your confession that you are not a benchmark for grammar, since you spelled the word incorrectly in your post (sorry, couldn't resist). *ALL*, regarding the separation of races, we need to take a step back and realize that we've been misled into believing that there are "races" at all, especially the ones we've been told about. It was a white man's categorization to begin with. What defines a "race?" Skin color? Then where's the cutoff point; there are "Negroids" in Africa with lighter skin than I. Facial features? Susceptibility to certain diseases? There's more genetic diversity WITHIN a tribal community than there is between people from two different continents. There used to be a GREAT satire television show called "TV Nation," with Michael Moore. In one installment, they went to a white supremacist church in Idaho, where the prevailing belief is that God will come and separate the races, giving each their own planet. The interviewer, a British chap, asked, "Well, let's say I'm on the white planet, and I find out that the black planet is having more fun. Will I be allowed to emigrate?" That was the same episode where they visiting another church claiming that the Book of Isaiah prophesied that the Second Coming would occur 381 days after the bombing of the World Trade Center. On the alleged day, the interviewer, wearing a bomb shelter helmet, phoned the church from New York City to ask what the delay was. -- Billy D.
For those who don't have a King James handy, the passage I refer
to reads, approximately, "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday,
the same today and forever..."
Okay, been away for a while, here 'tis:
1. Dr. Laura = bonehead.
2. PC is from hunger, and anyone thinking differently *is*
welcome to their own opinion; they are also welcome to go
shit in a hat.
3. On the "cat-strangling" thing, I commend interested parties
to Hebrews 13:8. I understand pet-love; so does Harlan. If
his attitude offends your precious sensabilities, I suggest
you are taking the matter *far* too personally.
4. THE HAUNTING was a travesty of filmmaking. I expected to be
disappointed; I did not expect to be actively offended. Jan
Debont should have his jodpurs and megaphone taken away, and
much as I hate to rain on a fellow Jew, we are nevertheless
advised to correct our brothers where they are wrong: Steve,
bubie> DO NOT call your director and command scene-inserts
just because something cute happened that "inspired" you;
and by the way, ET stank. As for THE (non)HAUNTING, I'm glad
I sneaked in from something else in the Evil Sony Googleplex.
5. Yes, THE SIXTH SENSE is good -- see it.
6. MYSTERY MEN is only terrific, worth even full-price
admission, see it at once. Seldom have I enjoyed myself so
and the ensemble work,... hell, just go.
7. BWP is tremendous, not without flaws. Outstanding psycho-
logical study. A landmark '90s film -- mark my words.
8. Kristian Bland was lookin' for a fight when she walked in --
why is anyone surprised at how things went (and went)(and
went)(and....).
That's all I got for now. I'm charging boldly into chapter 9;
no, not bankruptcy, I'm talking about my novel, SURVIVING
FOOTAGE, which should benefit, deservedly or otherwise, from the
resurrgence of the "horror" (or as I prefer, "macabre fantasy")
field. Rick, the review is on the way, I **SWEAR**...
Cheers,
Doc
Sheriff Buck,
I try to mind my own P's & Q's (I really do), but you misspelled "woolly".
Mr. S.A.: My favorite HE stories are "The Man Who Rowed Christopher Columbus Ashore," "Base," "Ernest and the Machine God," and "The Cheese Stands Alone."
Jim: Were we to give the roaches dominion over the earth, and to ensure that their rule lasted as long as the earth itself was capable of sustaining life, I do not believe they would ever reach the point at which "you guys'" is easily confused with "your guys," or at which punctuation is often placed on the incorrect side of the quotation mark.
Then again, they probably wouldn't develop such wooly mammoth-sized egos that such errors would cause them to lament, sarcastically or otherwise, their species' existence.
P.S. Please, do not take this as anything other than the friendly japing it's intended to be. I feel ridiculous placing what amounts to a disclaimer on a post here, but I don't want to repeat that mean business between us a while back.
Incidentally, you misspelled "grammar."
Well, if a person even _had_ a spellchecker I would allow some tolerance. But given the spelling mistakes found _here_ since my last post I just sigh and roll my eyes as a form of sadness and dismay over the laziness that pollutes and contaminates the English language today. FYI: I do not hold myself up as a benchmark of what is right or wrong when it comes to grammer, mechanics, spelling, etc. I do the best I can do. Which is what I expect of others--do the best you can. But apparently _that_ even is too much to ask. Oh, well. Like Harlan wrote once or twice: Well, we had our shot at it. Give over and let the roaches have their shot. Until next time. . .
ALL: How many of you guys have picked up (and read) the Harry Potter books? My daughter and I just finished the third (HARRY POTTER AND THE PRISONER OF AZKABAN -- got a galley copy for review purposes), and we cant wait until next July for the fourth installment. These books are terrific! J.K. Rowling is the best thing to hit children's literature since Roald Dahl. She deserves the success she stumbled into a couple of years ago (her rags-to-riches story has been written up in "Time," "Newsweek" [twice now], and several major newspapers throughout America). If you guys haven't tried these books (the first two are, HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE and HARRY POTTER AND THE CHAMBER OF SECRETS), run out to you local book store and pick 'em up now (number 3 comes out September 8th). That way you won't be standing in the corner, scratching your head at the next party you attend, because everyone else is talking about "muggles," "quidditch," and "Lord Voldemort," while you're trying to decipher the code. Out here, DTS.
*** Jim *** Re: typo Hell - I've been reading Microsoft press RFC's and White papers lately [essentially, papers written by geeks, for geeks] and I can't believe the typos that get through. These arn't beta editions, these are THE NEW WORD FROM GATES. You'd think they could do more than run it through a spell checker that accepts "fad" when "and" was the word they were looking for. Logical line breaks, hyphenation, and widows? Don't ask.
*** Mr. S.A. *** All time, it would have to be "Jefty Is Five". Stuff in "Mind Fields" is looking stronger every year. But it's a mugs game. It's like picking favorite relatives or children.
*** Joe *** Too vague, man. There are currently 3 editions. The Ziesing, the Houghton-Mifflin, and whoever did the TPB. If your talking fonts, I think different fonts were used for different parts [ie. intro/story/etc.]. That information sometimes appears on the indicia page or in a typesetting/binding page toward the back, but with the prevalence of a lot of off-shore proofreading/computer typography you may be S.O.L.
Ziesing press could tell you. He's on-line and a fairly personable fellow. If it's the HM edition, they won't give you the time of day.
Anybody know which typeface SLIPPAGE was printed in?
Quick Question: What are your guys favorite Ellsion stories? I have to go with "The Deathbird", "A Boy and His Dog", and "Mefisto in Onyx".
RE: Reading/writing scores I won't question. Given what I have seen of late when it comes to the news media and just your average Joe, supposedly a college graduate, I believe the numbers crunched on these test scores. Jeez. . . no wonder Harlan is always cranky on such matters. Here's a shining example of recent days from one of my local rags: "For vereficatio letters to the edtor must include. . ." No jokes here, folks. I present it to you as it appears and has appeared for weeks now in the newspaper. Until next time. . .
Jim, if you feel like wading through the muck and mire of data tables, the National Center for Education Statistics can be found at
http://nces.ed.gov/
Although I haven't found any tables organized by rank, I have found some state and national averages for reading and math proficiencies. California seems to tie for lowest scoring state, and is below the national average when it comes to reading proficiency. Whether or not the difference is a significant one is another matter.
---Peter
Before someone here gets the idea to break out the tar and feathers for Yours Truly, let me lay a basic notion on y'all: I ask this question because I have yet to see _any_ state listed as number one. A 'fact' that makes me wonder if these low ratings in the overall scheme of things is just an attempt to get more money into the public schools. Especially at a time, like in Colorado, when the number of students moving from the public education system to the charter schools, private schools, and home schooling is about 40,000 per year. Until next time. . .
As a product of the California Public Education system, I'd tend to side with Peter. Some CA schools are top notch - those would be the ones in rich neighborhoods with lots of local property taxes to support them. The rest scrape along. And consider that So Cal has a huge population of struggling immigrant or EOSL students, not to mention those schools in the big cities with large crime elements.... (not prejudice against them, but those students have a harder time learning, get lower test scores, etc., which are some of the measures for ranking).
I don't have test scores or numbers, but I remember what it was like. 49th may be low, but I'd be surprised if it's higher than 35th.
Peg
My figures could be old, but I seem to remember a study based on performance and standardized test scores which placed Mississippi , California, and Hawaii in the last three spots in the education rankings. But I could be wrong, or working from old data.
---Peter (who wants George Romero to direct a sequel to Romeo and Juliet)
California is 49th in education? Hey, now. I thought Colorado was. Right behind Arkansas. I would like to know how these numbers get crunched. I suspect sumpin' aint right here. Thoughts, folks? Until next time. . .
Peter - You and Barney are both absolutely right, and I hide my red face in embarassment. A dot of research I should do/Before I sink my cents of two. (Never, never let me post in the wee small hours when I'm short on sleep, bereft of desire, and just plain-old mad at the world in general and my world in particular.)
Actually Finder, I think Barney was right. The Lorax was a conservation statement. I think the sneetches were about how deep down we are all the same. The Butter Battle Book was also about how people are more alike than they care to think and how differences are merely which side of the bread we spread out butter.
In other thoughts however, I think we should totally throw away any issue of what is deemed "appropriate" attire for school children by making them all wear dull grey jumpsuits. Then, in the interest of safety and attendence, we should barcode their foreheads, and attach lojacks to their ankles. That way, we keep people out of the schools who don't belong, and keep the ones who do in their classes. Truant children will be hunted by teams of cybernetically enhanced beagles, whose tracking systems have a direct link up to GPS sattelite systems. First offense, the child is sent back to school. Second, they are beaten by officers and then sent back to school. Third, the dogs get to have their way with them. Fourth, the children are shot and schools get reimbursed for lost attendence money.
To say that most school districts are inherently stupid is an understatement. I'm just surprised more of their idiocies don't get printed. How about in my own home town. The new Superintendent of schools has just cut the fourth grade science classes so as to funnel more money to performing arts. I'm all for performing arts. I was a band geek throughout highschool (actually, my first two years. The second two years I played jazz trombone which had a certain respectability in its school wide anonymity. Hey we did paying gigs.) But, to cut science? To fund an already highly funded and highly successful performing arts program? That's ludicrous. It is only made worse by the fact that the superintendent's goal is not to improve the education of the children, but to increase budget on an annual district wide show called Marching On that has been her baby since she was the assistant superintendent fifteen years ago. She doesn't give a hairy rat's ass about the kids. Only about her two days in the spotlight. If she had her druthers, the continuation school which gives kids a second chance to get their diploma after having been removed from the normal highschool would be slashed and burned, with the students still inside.
And people wonder why California is in 49th place in terms of education. But I rant.
---Peter (starting classes next week. should be fun)
Barney - You're thinking of "The Lorax", one of the good Doctor's best social messages in the form of rhyming couplets. My college actually kept a copy for loan. I hadn't heard about the poll until you mentioned it here - obviously the success of the Blair Witch Project is more newsworthy than road signs that society is falling apart...the bees in my bonnet have been the State of Kansas' recent decision to eliminate evolution as a required scientific teaching and embrace a more creationist stance, and the Mississippi school board that recently barred a student from wearing a Star of David pin because in their wisdom, there was at least one gang that used the six-pointed star in their gang symbol. Mind you, the nearest known gang that uses such a symbol is some seventy miles from the school in question. And while there was discussion about certain types of crosses for the same reason, it was only the star that was restricted. The inevitable lawsuit is already in the works.
You're not alone in your anger, Barney. The inmates are slowly taking over the asylum, one wing at a time, and the whimper of whipped dogs has never been more profoundly evident.
Well, folks. It's official: I'm outta the e-mail business for, oh, say, a few weeks. Finally managed to get a human (if that, indeed, was what it was) to answer the phone over at Compuserve and laid it on him as to what he could do with the e-mail account in my name. Of course, he did the Bill Clinton bit--I'm sorry but screw YOU. So. Until the new domain goes on line The Best Friend-type Person and I are off to do creel counts for the Department of Wildlife and enjoy a life free of technology. (Maybe Harlan IS on to something with this attitude about computers and whatnot.) Incidentally, if you should experience something crashing through the underbrush, it is NOT Bigfoot. Just Muddy Ass and his faithful companion. Until next time. . .
*** Jeff *** Thanks for the extra information on that story. ...Pause...Man, no matter how I look at that, no matter what spin I imagine on the phrasing, or how you define your terms, that puts us back about 100 years from where I hoped we were. That's not just pre Martin Luther King that's pre W.E.B. Dubois. Shit. Now, I'm no saint. I've said some harsh things about my HUD housing neighbors and have had a few other lapses but I think of them as lapses. If that story is the least credible I'm gonna have to start handing out copies of, oh crap, what's the title? The Star Belly Sneetches? That Dr. Seuss book. Didn't anybody but me read Kozol's "Death At An Early Age" and "Savage Inequities". Man, I'm depressed.
Harlan Ellison is one of the narrators of the following:
The Business & Other Stories
by Jay McInerney, Joe Barrett (Narrator), Richard Cox (Narrator), Harlan Ellison
Amazon.Com
List Price: $18.00
Our Price: $14.40
You Save: $3.60 (20%)
Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days.
Audio Cassette (April 1999)
Dove Entertainment Inc; ISBN: 0787118664
Amazon.com Sales Rank: 930,032
Two abridged audio books performed by Harlan Ellison:
MARS and RETURN TO MARS.
Both are available at Amazon.Com and Barnes and Noble, but they are each $2.50 cheaper at B&N. The B&N information follows:
Mars
Ben Bova Performed by Harlan Ellison
Retail Price: $25.00
Our Price: $17.50 You Save: $7.50 (30%)
In-Stock: Ships 2-3 days
Format: Audio
ISBN: 0787118583
Publisher: Dove Audio
Pub. Date: July 1999
Edition Desc: ABBRIDGED
Return to Mars
Ben Bova Performed by Harlan Ellison
Retail Price: $25.00
Our Price: $17.50 You Save: $7.50 (30%)
In-Stock: Ships within 24 hours
Format: Audio
ISBN: 0787118591
Publisher: Dove Audio
Pub. Date: June 1999
Edition Desc: ABRIDGED
Just to put a finer point on it, the complete wording was: "It's OK if the races are basically separate from one another as long as everyone has equal opportunities." Respondents were asked if they strongly or somewhat agreed/disagred.
Barney, the poll asked respondents aged 18 to 29 whether "it's OK if races are basically seperate" from one another. It didn't define the term "basically separate." No doubt the results are dismaying news for race relations, but that's still a pretty vague way to phrase the question.
Story was in Tuesday's Los Angeles Times.
The dead cat thread again, eh? Personally, if your LOOKING for things to offend - CNN did a "story" about a NAACP sponsored poll that determined that in 1999 [ie. 40 some years after Brown vs. Board of Education] 52% of Americans thought that seperation of the races would be OK as long as equal job opportunities [and presumably educational opportunities] were available. Yeah, that wacky Constitution. It's not just a good idea... By the way, I put "story" in quotes because they couldn't bother actually quoting the poll question/s , they just summed up. More time to cover the making of some Geena Davis film. Tickle your sense of outrage?
How about the fact that at least 2000 people are dead and 10's of thousands homeless, because the government of Turkey is to stupid/short-sighted/corrupt/cheap to adopt a building code that acknowledges that their country is built on a fault line.
Ask me tomorrow and I'm sure I'll have more valid things to be pissed off about. Once again, no metaphorical cats were strangled in the creation of these remarks. Sincerely,
Barney Dannelke
[who has nothing against cats, but did assist in "putting down" about 350 in one day for the Washington,D.C. branch of the Humane Society because someone has to do it when about 2,000 come through the door every month and far fewer are adopted. I probably should have taken them all home with me.]
I'm sorry to hear you were upset by the title.
And considering how deeply it seemed to hurt you, I am trying my best to pick my words carefully.
Some people respond well to black humor, others don't. I've seen a lot of death in recent years. The night my mom died, I watched the Monty Python episode which includes a skit about a man who goes to funeral home, carrying his dead mother in a sack. After some discussion, they decide it would be better to eat her than bury her.
I'm sure some folks would have been offended by that joke at that time or, indeed, at any other time. For me, it was just what I needed.
I admit I found the title extremely funny. I hate cats too. That doesn't mean I'd ever dream of hurting one but I can get a real chuckle out of anti-cat jokes. I can also get a real chuckle out of some viciously racist or sexist jokes. It all depends on the context.
I sincerely doubt Harlan is advocating the strangulation of cats.
In other words, it's a joke. It's not your kind of joke and I am truly sorry it hurt you. But, at the same time, I hope you'll be able to put it into a little perspective as time passes and the sting from the death of your beloved pet fades to just a dull pain (it never goes away completely.)
While I personally decry the abuse or loss of any life form (human, animal, or otherwise), I must question the underlying assault on Harlan (I suppose I can call him that as opposed to "Mister"). Awhile back I was asked to give, like, Harlan, a talk. I was annoyed at the intrusion into my life (as if it ain't crazy enough, what with _five_ canines, usually reeking of god knows what, padding through it regular-like), and although I was honored to be asked to speak, I had to wonder about my capabilities to do it. Anyway, long story short, I was asked for a title to my eventual speech. I offered up "Everything Thing I Need To Know (about writing) I Learned In The Whorehouse". Would you believe, when the promotions, such as fliers, were made up, two words were conspcious by their absence: "About Writing". Well, anyway, when I showed up to give my little babble session, a small group with aspirations of being a mob was waiting to curse me for such remarks. All was eventually explained, most in the would-be mob stayed to hear my remarks, and all lived mostly happily ever after. The point here is this: Given what I know of Harlan, there is mostly like a very human, emotion-driven explanation to this title. You would do well to go to the talk if you can and find out before damning him for crimes possibly never committed. On another note, folks, I might be checking out of cyberspace for, oh, say a month. I've been having this running feud with Compuserve, my e-mail provider, and since I am getting ready to launch a domain of my own, well, I might be without a cyberspace net of sort for a day or night. Patience. And remember: The machine is always on and the postal mail still works. Until next time. . .
Lynne,
You have my sympathies on your cat's demise; the loss of any friend of such a long standing is devastating.
Unfortunately your timing here couldn't have been worse - I don't think Rick posted that listing until the last day or two. Harlan is a notorious and unabashed cat hater, so the title doesn't surprise me in the least. I'm only sorry it hit home for you at such an inappropriate time.
Take care, *hug* Peg
I just stopped in here at webderland after a long absence (it's been a tough summer) to find something very disturbing over in the "News - Recent and Upcoming Appearances" section. I'm talking about the title of HE's upcoming talk in LA - "Cat Strangling and Other Amusements". Under normal circumstances I find the whole cat-hatred thing mildly annoying. But having gone through the recent loss of my beloved feline companion of nearly 14 years, who had cancer and at the end had so much fluid in his chest that he was gasping for breath, I'm very upset. The title isn't clever, it isn't amusing, it's just tastless and cruel. It's re-opened the canyon-sized wound in me that really hasn't even begun to heal. And to make things worse, I know that I'm not going to be able to pick up a book by HE now without thinking of it, which means I won't be reading any more HE for a good long time. Thanks, thanks a whole bunch.
Gee, Barney. The bloodletting and bloodshed here in "Mr.Rogers'" neighbor is down (so sayeth the guvmnet). I was hoping ta take muh popcorn and sodee to sumpin' interesting. Okay. Guess it's gots to the teevee tonight. So hope that there Vanna White centerpunchs ol' smiley boy, Pat, into a week past oblivion. Until next time. . .
*** All *** Anybody who would care to be further brought up to speed regarding what Charles Platt would care to be known regarding this situation and a few reactions should go check out the discussion on alt.fan.ellison. The alternative would be to cut and paste it here and that would truly be more trouble than it's worth. Alternately, if there is a traffic accident or fire in your neighborhood, well, I recommend that for entertainment instead. Regards...
Hi all -- Just wondering if any of you saw the delicious news item in August's Locus ("the newspaper of the science fiction field"), recounting the trials and tribulations of one Charles Platt, infamous enemy of Ellison (a story which is documented in R. Cusick's Gauntlet piece housed on this very website). In case you missed it, let me retype it here, verbatim: "Charles Platt was arrested in Jerome AZ for providing alcohol to minors at a party at which one girl claimed to have been given a date-rape drug. He spent one evening in jail, but is now out on bail and staying out of town to avoid villagers with torches and pitchforks. The police seized his car and its contents, including laptop computers. The city and county have separately filed a total of four charges that could result, if he is convicted, in a sentence of over 10 years in prison. Platt's most recent fiction has been under his 'Charlotte Prentiss' pseudonym for Harper/Collins and Penguin/Onyx." .....Whoa, villagers with torches and pitchforks?! That's almost as good as what HE might have dreamed up for him....hee, hee.
Mr. Clinton has won. I have first-hand knowledge of it. But I will visit the site you suggest. Until next time. . .
Tracy, as I understand, HE is making extensive footnotes as well as an index, which is a huge undertaking. Charlie
jim: If the guys at Zero-Knowledge can do what they say they can do then Mr. Clinton's attack on internet privacy has already been out-flanked by technology. If not, I'm glad I live 60 miles
north of Lake Erie.
Anyone who is concerned about internet privacy should check out http://www.zeroknowledge.com/
MOVIES: I took my kids to see "The Iron Gian" today and I absolutely loved it. The reviews I've seen of the movie, while complimentary, don't go far enough. I thought it was a great movie. Maybe I'm just a sucker for a story set in Maine in the '50s (which is a lot like what Maine was like in the '70s) and with a jazz listening, java drinking Beatnik as a hip adult sidekick to the child hero of the story.
No. It was more than that. The STORY got to my soul. That's where any resemblance to ET ends, really. This is a very different alien. This one does not have the power to heal and he doesn't raise the dead. The Iron guy has the power to kill and the dilemma of choice.
I would really like to read Ted Hughes's book and see how close they got. I loved this movie so much, that my brain is drooling for the book (ooh! that's a pretty disgusting image if you think about it.....)
Edgeworks #5 - will it ever be a reality?
Amazon has Edgeworks #6 available for pre-purchase/order, but it's been over a year since I first signed up to receive #5 and still nothing. :(
Well, not completely true, I received this yesterday from Amazon:
------------------------------------------
Greetings from Amazon.com!
We have contacted the publisher by phone concerning the status of our order for "The Glass Teat, the Other Glass Teat (Edgeworks , Vol 5)."
The representative that we spoke with indicated that this book has not been published and there is no projected release date. Release dates tend to fluctuate; if we receive additional information about this, we will let you know.
--------------------------------------------------------
For your reference, here is a summary of order 002-xxxxx-xxxxxxx:
1 of "Edgeworks : Glass Teat & the Other Glass Teat (Edgeworks , Vol 5)"
Harlan Ellison
Item #: 1565049683
Order time availability: Not yet published
Current status: Ordered from supplier
-------------------------------------------------
Does anybody know anything? What is going on? Why is it taking so long for this book to be published?
thanks much,
- t
I seem to recall rumors a while back that HE had expressed interest in writing an X Files ep; of course, it was nothing more detailed or tangible than that. Didn't he write a two-page article about the series for the magazine of that pseudo science fiction cable station?
FEMA. . . oh, dear. Have we wandered into The X-Files territory? Hmm. Here's a question (trying with Herculean effort to bring the convo back to HARLAN ELLISON): How comes unca Harlan ain't neber written for THE X-FILES? Stephen King did it. Chris Carter knows Harlan. Seems like a perfect match. But what do _I_ know? Until next time. . .
Jim - I'm not surprised. I figure personal freedoms have been in jeopardy since Carter signed Exec Order 11490 on 7/20/79 (creating and giving FEMA free reign over everything - including the registration of American citizens - in the event of a national emergency). But how many Americans are going to wade through the thousands upon thousands of pages of public law and executive orders that are issued every year to see if their liberty is in peril?
Sheryl,
I gotta agree with Finder - I think the main flaw in your premise is that you give too much credit to the public en masse as to their ability to be discerning of the news.
Also, slight point of clarification - there are a number of reasons I tend to not watch the news. It's depressing and tends to report many topics on which I can have little or no effect and which, in and of themselves, may make me feel bad but have almost no effect on me. Sensationalism and unreliability are also reasons I tend to not watch. I cannot STAND to see smiling "news"casters speak about the wretched state of Kosovo refugees.
This is not to say I never see, hear, or read about current events. I do check out the local paper online, listen to the radio, etc. I just don't make it a routine. [My hubby is much more current with national and world affairs, and frankly I usually hear as much as I need through him. And I can *trust* him to be a decent filter against sensationalism and general crap. Hey, everyone oughta have one, I just found him first *smile*.].
Oh, and way back I promised to comment on the ever-twisting discussion of struggle vs value, but I see it's kinda died down. Anyone still interested, or shall I in better judgement leave it where it lay?
Peg
Well. . . I was trying to be diplomatic, owing much to the new system imposed by Clinton and his drones with regards to the Internet. Didja know ('cos the "objective" news media has yet to mention it) that Clinton, by way of executive order, wetted in the dark of the night, signed into being a group that can now police the Internet and World Wide Web, and, if they don't like what they read, can track said info back to point of entry--you, your home--and seize, without warrant or legal force, everything in said entity in relation to what was burped on sites like this? So much for freedom of speech. But, hey, he is a liberal and they know best. Right? Until next time. . .
Doesn't look like Nick is showing "Memos From Purgatory" in their Hitchcock marathon - though tomorrow night's prime-time segments are some good viewing, including "Lamb To The Slaughter" (8 pm), for anyone who may need a break from ABC's TGIF line-up.
Sheryl - I don't think you came off like a crazed Oliver Stone conspiracy theorist. Being one myself, I didn't see that kind of slant in your thinking. :)
I think there are several components in addition to the almighty dollar and the holy ratings share:
1) a big part of the equation is that the news media, because it KNOWS that it has the power to shape - or set - public opinion, simply chooses to flex it - and they don't care who gets trampled in the process. They get a crusade in their heads, and rather than present an unbiased report, they choose a side and pursue it with an unholy zeal. The debacle with NBC and the assisted detonation of a pick-up truck to support a story about the vehicle's safety (or lack thereof) springs to mind. Or the time the media expended on trying to figure out who all the Jane Does who had things to say about Clinton in various depositions really were. This is something that goes back to William Randolph Hearst, who used a news publishing empire as a throne for his kingdom, and who liked the news to be on his terms.
2) The media sees a need to compete with entertainment shows for audience. This doesn't so much plague the nightly news programs that air outside of prime-time, but it certainly shapes the news magazines, which rarely delve into newsworthy items, but vie instead for the sensationalistic story. The single worst example of this, I think, was CBS' decision to air Jack Kavorkian's snuff film, which was the factual occurrence of something spec fiction writers have often written of: the televisied demise of another human being. Necessary for a story on the Kavorkian trial? Not even close. But it generated a lot of publicity for CBS.
3) The news media does a little lemming dance with what they cover; they see what the competition is doing, and they'll run competitively against each other to see who stays with the story longest, even if there's nothing new to report for hours. Witness JFK Jr.'s plan crash: ten minutes of news wrapped several hours of analysis, biography, commentary and the ghoulish deathwatches at the Kennedy compound and John's New York apartment. With breaking stories, watch how the networks react, and how their coverage compares time-wise to each other, and you'll see a pattern.
I don't think there's a preconceived agenda on the part of anyone to use the media per se; in many regards, it's manipulated by people every day with a drum to beat - and let's face it, good news rarely sells, nor does it suck in the viewers. But I feel the media itself is the biggest abuser of its power, and it counts on a faith that a majority of the viewers will simply watch without questioning, without raising their hand and protesting. The people who look at the news and see it's so much sound byte and ghostly "unnamed sources" would appear to be in the minority - or NBC wouldn't have Dateline on at least three nights a week. They only cut their own throats if people start searching for alternate methods of getting their information,and let's face it: a very large segment of the population simply accepts and trust, whether out of laziness, ignorance, apathy, or honest belief that the media would never, ever mislead them on something critical.
There are still elements of integrity inside the Fourth Estate. But you'll be hard pressed to find them outside of mid-sized local markets. Idealism has a hard time standing up to the kind of pressure to dance that comes within the news division located in a major metro or inside the Beltway.
ravings of an insomniac, part two(it's 4am)
Sheryl: Eleminating "4" from the list of possible answers to the question, "what is 2 +2?" does not improve your odds of arriving at the correct answer.(not trying to be smartass, just illustrating a point)
I honestly believe that the press have become a gang of cheap whores(thanks jim) for the same reason that anyone else takes up prostitution as an occupation. Money. The underlying reasons would be........more money.
To deny this in faour of a conspiracy theory that suggests the press is cutting it's own throat flies in the face of reason. They are not cutting their own throats. They are selling a product and it is selling very well indeed. It sells so well for one simple reason. It's what we want to buy!(that we refers to the majority of folks out there.............WWFers, Springer fans etc............you know who you are.)
The popular press merely reflects the tastes and morals of society.(god.....that's depressing)
You want the press to have higher ideals and morals than the society that supports it. So do I, but as long as the journalists are conrolled by the bean counters and network exec's we're
going to get bread and circuses.
Remember.........It was Deep Throat in All The President's Men who coined the phrase, "follow the money."
.....now if you'll excuse me I have a date with a stout length of hemp rope and a rickety chair.
Jim: No, dearest, that would be The White House;)
Al: It's precisely because it seems like the obvious answer that I wanted to eliminate greed from the answers--because I don't think that it's the whole story, and by eliminating it to start with, I think there's a better opportunity to explore what may be underlying power issues.
OK, let's see if I can say this without sounding like some crazed Oliver Stone conspiracy theorist--
Consider the premise that at least since the inception of writing, there have been 'reporters.' At some points, they've been historians, sometimes bards, sometimes priests, sometimes spies-- a lot of different titles, but their function has been to inform certain populations of people (some large, some very small) of the state of things around them, and in other places. In the last 300 or so years, a particular kind of these 'reporters' have created a niche for themselves, and have established something we've come to call the popular press, Here in the USA, that popular press arrived with the earliest colonists. It played so active a part in the early evolution of this nation that the dreaded Founding Fathers (don'tcha just love those caps???) gave the press special dispensation to be free from regulation by the government.
However, from my reading of history over the years, that dispensation was based in great part on a belief in the proposition that a 'free press' would have the ability to discern and report to the world at large a more honest, realistic, potentially more truthful version, and in all likelihood wider picture of events in the world than a state-sponsored popular/propoganda press would ever be able to. I think that Chris' point about "All the President's Men" is illustrative of this trust. Clearly, there has been a shift since then; the question is why? Because on its face, it seems to me that they're cutting their own throats.
The news business--I have some reservations about calling it a free press at this point--has been trading on this trust for at least the last 200 years. The belief of most people that the news is objective, (except on opinion pages and talk shows) is what has kept them in business. Inaccurate and clearly biased reporting--again, illustrated by the examples I gave you earlier--strains that credibility every time it occurs. And no matter what retraction, correction, clarification comes down the pipe later, each time that strain occurs, the credibility in that trust is weakened. In a great many instances--Peg, wasn't it you who said you didn't watch the news anymore?--they have simply stopped paying any attention to what the 'reporters' have to say, because they can't trust it. And the audience shrinks, and shrinks and shrinks.
I question whether it's believable that the entire news industry is so short sighted that they can't see that they're engineering their own demise with this behavior.
Not only is it short sighted on the part of the news industry, it appears to me to be potentially dangerous to democracy at its base. Jefferson supported a free press because he believed an educated populace is the best defense against tyranny; but without correct information on public issues, it's impossible to exercise citizenship (in the form of voting, attending public hearings, etc.) And the more of this untrustable 'news' that circulates, whether it be via tv, radio, print, or on the 'Net, the greater the breakdown it perpetrates. I think it's this breakdown that's responsible for most of the apathy on public issues. You can't really care much about something you're uninformed of; you don't care what the outcome is, either. If you don't care what the outcome is, someone else determines your destiny. Who is it that wants to be in control?
It seems clear to me that 'bias' has turned into 'agenda;' whose and why are the points of curiosity to me. It doesn't seem to be the political machine, on either side of the spectrum, because a huge number of people are simply ignoring politics because they know what they're being told by the press is most likely not anywhere near the truth. Who's going to profit from this media engendered apathy and what's the follow up? And how do we find out, since we know that the 'free press' isn't going to tell us?
If I read "1984" too many times in my teaching career, tell me now, please......
Final aside to Kristian: I've seen any number of invitations on this board by people to the group to go check out what they've written and posted elsewhere. Invitation isn't self promotion. (You really should have gone there, it would have been more appropriate.) Self promotion, sir, is when you try to batter other people over the head with an idea--oh, excuse me, An Idea--that has little to recommend it except that you're the one presenting it.
In point of fact, if you were serious about actually discussing, rather than simply discoursing, you would have responded to Otto's terribly pertinent point on the Native American populations. Except it seems that you didn't want to discuss actual genocides, just throw in the closest near-miss for a cheap point.
On the matter of the Fourth Estate: Now is that the big fancy Victorian mansion called a 'brothel' where the sycophants and whores posing as objective (cough-cough) journalists reside? Until next time. . .
***All *** It looks like TV Land is showing the hour long "Alfred Hitchcock Presents" but the TV Land site isn't too helpful. From the episode description it would seem the Friday 2AM - 5AM & 6AM slots feature other unnamed episodes. After that they list air times on Friday for the hour long episodes as 9AM , 10AM , and 1:30PM. However they don't even describe aired episodes that far off. Any episode description would probably mention kid gangs, juvenile delinquency, etc. and might mention Walter Koenig, who, I believe got his 1st shot on that show. If anybody has more information [TV Guide?] post here or drop me a line.
If it weren't for these tornadoes, earthquakes and geneological shooting sprees, Salt Lake here wouldn't be too bad a place to live. The twister tore by about two blocks from our office, changing from "wow, look at these cool clouds" to "ohmygod get away from the windows" in about 15 seconds. LifeFlight helicopters moving to and from downtown in almost a constant stream now. *KEEGAN* Yeah, that's Henley. One of my all-time favorite songs. A biting message and a foot-tapping dance number all in one package. Who could ask for more? -- Billy D.
Mike: Go to tvland.com and click on "tomorrow's schedule" and keep scrolling down. It will show you which Hitchcock episodes they are showing. Unfortunately, they are listed by plot description and episode number not name.
Cable station TVLand is running a Hitchcock Marathon this weekend, but I can't seem to locate whether they will be running the first of the hour-long shows, "Memo From Purgatory". Anyone out there have a copy?
Chris: Right on.
I was scanning the airwaves on the way home from a jazz gig couple weeks ago and heard the song "Dirty Laundry". Who is that? Henley? Anyway, that song is so true and what journalism has become. Makes me wish I could cover the song in my act.
If you want to see the difference between what the fourth estate was and what it is now, you should read "All The Presidents Men" . You will see reporters verifying their facts with a confirming source and not being allowed to report rumours and innuendo as fact.
We have reached the point where the line between "Legitimate Press" and "Yellow Press" is so blurred as to be almost non existent. This is especially true in television journalism where it isn't just about greed, but , also oneupmanship. I guess this is a by- product of greed since ratings make the tv world go round. But, please remember that CNN has even been caught reporting rumours and heresay as fact.
Sheryl: I've been avoiding the serious stuff and just dropping in occasionally for fun and frolic but you hit one of my pet peeves.
Trying to discuss what's gone wrong with the fourth estate without mentioning greed is like trying to determine what motivates vampires without talking about blood lust.
Sensationalism and pandering to peoples prejudices and pre-conceptions boosts ratings and, just like any other sit-com, news shows are ratings driven.
It's a competitive, cut-throat business with far too many players all competing for a shrinking viewership. It has become the job of the news media to sell commercial time for their sponsors or face cancellation.
Hey.........maybe you were right. Maybe greed isn't the motivator. Maybe it's fear.
......sorry about simply stating the obvious, but sometimes the obvious answer is the correct one.
Damn I hate this serious shit........anybody wanna talk about Chuck Barris's crayons?
Hey All - Does anyone have the low-down on the dedication to HE in Andre Norton's The Stars Are Ours? Just a tad curious. Also, Locus reports e-reads has the rights to some of HE's out of print titles. A web site to be up soon: e-reads.com.
Sheryl -
"...that you're more interesting in self-promotion than in joining in."
Hrmm, I have to say I'm a bit confused on this one. In what way have I come close to attempting to "promote" myself? I feel I've actually taken steps to NOT promote myself, such as NOT listing the places I write for. Seems odd to me that I would be interested in self-promotion and not try and promote myself. If you could somehow elaborate on this, I'm sure I'd see your point.
"Does anyone have anything more interesting to discuss in the spirit of honest EXCHANGE of ideas? [Kristian, you're exempt from that invitation, because you're oppressing me with your boring topic;)]"
Not inviting me to your reindeer games won't make me stop "boring" everyone. When I get tired, I'll move on. As it is, though, I enjoy discussing with some of the folks here.
"Hush up for awhile."
Ok, I'll sink to the appropriate kiddie retort. *Make me.* ;)
Honestly, folks - if you don't feel the need to take part in the discussion, or are tired of it, then simply stop talking about it (or never start.) I don't much like talking to myself. However, these silly little "you're boring" or "you're self promoting" or "you are " are just a wee bit more pointless than you think my topic is. Anyway, sleep becons.
Kristian Bland
It's presumptous me again.
You know, when my modem went wonky 3 weeks ago, I thought I'd be missing all KINDS of really interesting stuff. Thanks, Kristian, for dominating the board with your simplistic view of humanity. Oppression as the primary fuel of change? Oh, please. And what, exactly, is this Platonic conceit of "Ideas"? Really, do you think even the TOPIC merits that /I/?? It's seems to me, after reading your whole INTERMINABLE string, that you're more interesting in self-promotion than in joining in. Hush up for awhile.
Does anyone have anything more interesting to discuss in the spirit of honest EXCHANGE of ideas? [Kristian, you're exempt from that invitation, because you're oppressing me with your boring topic;)]
If not, I've got one.
There was a shooting here today, as I'm sure most of you heard on one of the news media; 3 kids, a teenage junior counselor, and an older staff member were shot up very badly by, according to the 'latest' description, a 40-year old bald white guy with an Uzi.
Before ANY real information was available (before they even had the correct descriptions!) all the real-time media people on TV and radio were attributing this to the 'skinhead/Neo-Nazi hate group' people. No evidence, mind you. Just a supposition that this was a 'Hate Crime.'
I find this reactionary behavior in the media appalling. Do any of you recall when the Murrow Building (I think that's how you spell it, help me out if not) was bombed in Oklahoma City? Do you remember the instant blame placed on 'Arab Terrorists?' Poor Richard Jewel in Atlanta?
Now, I have my own theories, but would be curious to hear yours first:
What has gone wrong with the Fourth Estate (besides simple greed, I mean, leave ratings and the $$$$ out of it) that they've abdicated the idea of finding out what might have actually happened before they start working people's nerves over some stereotype?
--------------------
By the way, thanks to those of you who responded on the Kennedy thing. I checked out a couple of the references, and it seemed to clarify some of what was confusing to me, at least on an intellectual level. If it's really about the 'cult of personality' I guess I'm doomed to not get it....
"Long-winded"? Is that what it's called? Time was, for women, anyway, "Vapors" and for men, "The dog barking". The times, they's a'changin'. Until next time. . .
Felicitations, all. Anybody have videotape of HE on Politically Incorrect ? Dates were Jan. 4 and May 26 of 1999. Willing to trade, etc.
Maggie -
"...it hasn't happened to you, therefore it doesn't exist
or isn't justified."
While I can understand your position, you're making a pretty big assumption there. As an essayist who spends most of his writing time in the devoted act of debunking technology and those who embrace it - posting my real name and location with every piece I write is a wee bit "dangerous." Ya see, the audience that usually takes most offense to what I write is also the same audience that has the most ability to cause harm electronically. I've had the phone calls, the threats, the published street address of my home, the calls to my job, postal mail letters and threats, etc. I'm no stranger to it. Fact is, though, it is my belief that if you're gonna stand up and say something - then you need to have the guts to back it up with your name. After all, if you really wanted to be safe you would never have commented at all. Commenting on something and using an alias (without also providing your name) is chickenshit, in my opinion. Now, I completely understand not listing your name for no reason on the internet. That's just plain common sense. But, like I said, if you're going to say something that you know is bound to piss some group off - you need to be prepared to pay the price of your words, or just don't speak at all.
"don't seem to be able to say anything in less
than 1000 words"
I can't argue with that. I do tend to be long winded in my posts.
"As cultural values are derived from individuals, not some vague
amorphous mass, I feel comfortable with that statement"
Ah, but here ya go. *We* were aculturated through individual relationships with long standing members of whatever culture we were a part of. Today, however, for the kids - we don't sit down at the dinner table. They go to McDonald's with their friends, they talk about the latest episode of 90210 and what just happened on "The Real World" on Mtv. They are being aculturated through a diluted and marketed teacher. All the "Big Helps" Nickelodean dreams of, while at the same time marketting their ideals with nice bits of fluffed-up mechandise - doesn't teach our kids distinction. Sure, the kids will see special "ethnic" bits on their favorite trendy program. They'll see a nicely cleaned up, ordered, and "updated" version that can fit in for about twenty-five minutes of an hour long program. (Which, if you count the real meat of the show, the thing ain't an hour long. Commercials.) This is *exactly* the type of thing I don't want to see continue. People need to learn their heritage from someone who lived it. They must learn their distinctness from the oozing ball of puss that is the "popular" culture. Live history - don't buy commercials.
As for the American value of Nature - it's a pretty laughable concept. Sure, we have a nice little national park system, but like so many things in our society, they are separate from the whole. We allocate a certain SMALL percentage of land, and that somehow makes up for the MASSIVE percentage of Earth that we chop up, pollute, and destroy. Now, I eat off styrofoam at times, and my trash can's made of plastic. I'm not a bleeding heart environmentalist, but I'm also not an extreme waster. Could I waste less? Sure. Will I? Probably not. My personal habits aside, the fact remains that we like to put common sense obligations into niche areas to make ourselves feel better. We're all nice to each other on Christmas (except when someone steals our parking space or the last Elmo-Furby on the shelf.) We all like to give a pittance of our salary to some charity. Some of us will help serve food to the homeless at Thanksgiving. I find this revolting. I find this same application of cultural niche areas disgusting.
As for value placed on love, I agree with you. Value does not HAVE to come from struggle. However, I would like to challenge you to list me examples, outside of accidental love, of when this is true. I love my grandparents not because it was hard to love them, but because I was born into their family. Just as the mother of a murderer loves her child, I love my grandparents. If they teach me value of character, I will respect it yet - but I will not value it as much as I would if I had to struggle to maintain it. This, of course, is what makes character valuable - it's difficult to hold on to. It's not the love of your grandfather that gives you the value you place on the character he gave you. It's your ability to preserve and exhibit that character regularly in the face of anything that should oppose or belittle it that does that trick.
Nice comments. I hope to hear from you more soon.
Kristian Bland
Integrated societies do not work. Period. I have read a few comments here on integrating different cultures and allowing them to retain their initial beliefs, but the standard "pattern" seems to be the following when two different cultures encounter each other:
1. The two groups fight. Conflicts occur, deaths.
2. The groups start to acquire new traits from each other. (Crusaders taking back Muslim culture)
3. A period of segregation- seperation. During this the whole of the culture is divorced from the other culture. A few members of each culture become integrated into the other, changing or quietly preserving their own traits in a non-intrusive way.
4. Procedure three continues over a long period of time.
5. Assimilation of the culture, with traits being shared from one culture to the other.
At least, this is what it seems like right now with little sleep and exhaustion lol. For my hypothetical model I used black and white cultures.
You want a frightening movie? I saw Polanski's Repulsion, and it was damn good. I just picked up EDGEWORKS 1, and was delighted to see Ellisons commentary on Repulsion. If you can ignore the motive problem, which im sure you can if you like The Haunting, Blair Witch, and Sixth Sense, then you will love Repulsion.
Adam Webb, as to your comment:
>I was wondering if any of you might know if there's been any >sort of update on when his newest collection, Edgeworks5 will >be released. Again, I hope I'm in the right place.
Well, I dont know about Edgeworks 5, but there is a book called THE ESSENTIAL ELLISON: A 35 YEAR RETROSPECTIVE, and it is very good, if you havent read it yet.
Please bear with me here. I have several points I'd like to make, but I've
only got 15 minutes before I have to dash out of here for my mile walk to my
two hour bus ride and I'm tired! So, here goes, please forgive me for being
scattered. . .
First - Kristian - I'm sorry that you despise anonymity on the internet.
Having been the victim of a large variety of obscene and harassing phone
calls, strange lurkers, and at least one reported to the police death
threat, you'll have to forgive me if I think that your attitude is simply a
matter of privilege - it hasn't happened to you, therefore it doesn't exist
or isn't justified. I don't know any women who haven't had some experience
along the lines that I have reported to you, and I think that any woman
living alone who willing lists her whole name in the phone book or out on
the internet is braver than I am. I have listed it here, but not until I
had a very good feel for the kinds of people who show up here.
Second - I think that you and Syz should seriously consider taking this
conversation off line. It's not that I don't enjoy a good discussion, it's
just that the two of you just don't seem to be able to say anything in less
than 1000 words. You don't need to refute every single word that anybody
says. Breathe my friend, you'll live longer.
And finally, to get to your thesis, I think that the following small quote
sums it up best, feel free to correct me if wrong -
"Value only comes through struggle. To place value on one's culture, real
value mind you, it had to be difficult to not only acquire - but to hold on
to."
While I do agree that struggle can and does add to the value placed on a
thing (if I didn't think so, I wouldn't be investing so much of my life
trying to pry my nearly 22 year old sister out of her room in my parent's
basement), to state that value is only acquired through struggle is to paint
with a very wide brush. In short, your thesis is seriously flawed. If you
truly only value what you have struggled to acquire, then I feel very sorry
for you. As cultural values are derived from individuals, not some vague
amorphous mass, I feel comfortable with that statement. So, I loved my
Grandfather. I didn't have to struggle to love him, I just did, over time.
I have his last name and his drafting tools. Both are precious to me, carry
value to me because of the love that I bear for my Grandfather. The
cultural and moral legacy that he left to me have value to me because I love
him. There's no struggle involved in that. I think that a lot of cultural
traditions have value because of love. Because we loved the people who
taught them to us. Not because somebody tried to deny them to us. If value
and change only come about through oppression, then please explain to me how
it is that the Danes defied the Nazis (sorry, I told you I'm rushed and they
are such a BIG beast in our collective cultural memories) in the matter of
the Jews being forced to wear stars of David? Their European neighbors
share very similar histories and struggles and not a single one of them made
the same stand. The stand was made based on beliefs that had been held
prior to the oppression, irrespective of the oppression. Yes, the
oppression brought their values into the light of day and held them up for
admiration, at least to us now, but they weren't forged by the Nazis, just
illuminated. Also, one last example, the American national parks system.
Please explain how our value for nature was oppressed into being? Perhaps I
am missing serious chunks of history, but there you go. I'm tired and have
to catch the bus.
***Alex*** Quit whining. Suck it up man. Cheers,
Barney Dannelke
[22,000 books and 47,000 comics down and only a few hundred thousand to go...]
Ellison? Who's that then? As for Edgeworks... I think the best answer for that little packet of papers would be "when it's ready." You really cannot ask for much more than that.
As for movies.
Blair was good, and there were some really frightening things, however, I think that the hype that has been pressed behind the movie has ruined it for the jaded among us. If I had seen Blair at Sundance, with absolutely no idea as to what I was getting into, I think it might have been better than it was. As it turned out, I found myself looking at my watch during one of the interim "scary noises at night, let's get out our DAT and video equipment" scenes. I will give it my thumbs up by saying that just before and when they find the house, there is a real sense of terror which I found lacking in previous scenes. Someone wrote that the Blair Witch Project was about reverting into childhood and all of its terrors. The fact that the three documentarians start out acting like children doesn't make for a lot of development. Also the fate of the map was a bit cheesy.
The Sixth Sense, on the other hand, is genuinely scary. I'll respect the wishes of this board and not say anything other than that it was on the whole more satisfying than Blair. But that's just my heart's opinion, which it let me know every time it leapt into my throat while beating at a rabbits pace.
---Peter
Based on the current conversations, I'm not quite sure if I'm in the right place. There's this author that I'm fond of, you may have heard of him: Harlan Ellison. I was wondering if any of you might know if there's been any sort of update on when his newest collection, Edgeworks5 will be released. Again, I hope I'm in the right place.
On movies, I just gotta post a brief note disagreeing with Todd M.
The Blair Witch Project is, hands down, the most frightening movie I have ever seen. I say that without a trace of hyperbole. I was genuinely terrified while watching this movie and haven't been able to stop thinking about it ever since I saw it.
It's a film lovers' film. If you're a casual film-goer, I don't think you'll care for it. It's the sort of film that requires you to surrender yourself completely to the world the film has created.
Anyway, I think it's brilliant and a true masterpiece of horror.
-chris
I'm glad somebody brought The Haunting back up, so I could throw in a couple of pennies . . . I had the misfortune to be entranced with both the book and the orginal movie, and so felt the need to see the remake. You know for sure that a horror movie is bad when it becomes unintentionally funny. My favorite was one of Liam Neeson's speeches, when his accent interfered with a statement and it seemed that he was "studying group fear in the wisteria."
Bland -- (sorry if that's rude, but for the nonce I can't recall your first name, and the last one stuck out because I've just re-watched "Eating Raoul") What would you say about the tragedy of the American Indian? Is this an exception to your rule of solidarity through struggle? It seems, to me at least, that their oppression hasn't brought them much.
A request considering "The Sixth Sense"--the film is supposed to have a HUGE surprise ending; if I may, I'd like to ask that no one here give it away.
This is likely a movie (filmed right here in Philly by an area native) that I'm actually going to see--which in itself is something of a surprise, considering how rarely I hit the theaters (as an illustration, I can only remember seeing two movies in the last year or two--"Life Is Beautiful" and "South Park". Granted, both were excellent movies about freedoms, but ... nevermind.).
So can we not give it away? I was impressed that the Philly Inquirer's reviewer stuck to his guns and DIDN'T give it away, as often reviewers will.
In other news--Harlan and his colleaugues are killing me--I'm all set to move into my new apartment, and am ready to foot the bills for furnishing it all, but people like Harlan, Paul DiFillippo, Dan Simmons, Pat Cadigan, Fred Pohl, and many others are costing me beaucoup buks, simply through the fact that, with the closing of Encore Books and my snapping up great books at rock-bottom prices is going to make me get ANOTHER huge bookcase (I'd already budgeted for two tall seventy-dollar [I hate particleboard and plastic; wood for me, thanks] with eighteen feet of shelf space each) with all the books I'm getting (I'm closing in on six or seven hundred books now.
On the good side, for the first time in my life, I have a surfeit of books I've not read--I figure it'll be a year or so before I have to resort again to rereading and rerereading my stuff ...
Ah, well ... two weeks and I'm an apartment dweller--albeit one drowned in great books ...
ALL: since the subject of movies has come up recently...it may not play well since it isn't a balls-to-the-wall type action/adventure/thriller, but "The Sixth Sense" is a dynamite movie (with at least a handful of jump in your seat, drop your popcorn mmoments) that has the perfect ending (the kind that makes your think back through everything you've seen to figure out if the screenwriter really did do what he did to make that final twist work the way it did). Go see this one ASAP! - Out here, DTS.
Well, I'm back. Dressed out in my new hairshirt (from The Banana Republic, $79.99, plus a tax or two). Me? Bad? Not at all. Yes, I do remember HE's wandering through THE DATING GAME. Guess it could have sumpin' to do with me having copies of THE GLASS TEAT AND THE OTHER GLASS TEAT, as in original paperbacks, signed by Himself, none other than HARLAN ELLISON. As to HE and THE GONG SHOW, well, -if- you had been paying attention you would be able to find out the so-called mystery about this had you followed the instructions I laid on y'all about -my- column, twice-weekly. Geez. Must I smack you up side the head with the unabridged? No wonder college students are such wads nowadays. Until next time. . .
Well...Jim Hess, it was bad of you to leave the Chuck Barris/Harlan Ellison connection a mystery, and then add the "clue" that MTV has something to do with it (readers of THE GLASS TEAT or was it THE OTHER GLASS TEAT will remember Ellison's adventure on THE DATING GAME, a Barris entity, if I remember correctly, which I may well not).
Hey, Keegan, good for you. Much better you grouse on line than at them, and congratulations on having more time for that closer to your heart's desire...hope the finances are holding up.
Finder, in re your note about the repackage of THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE and the mistaken notion of some unfortunates that the book is based on the (utterly atrocious) script, alas this kind of nonsense is not new...more copies of BLADE RUNNER by Phillip K. Dick were probably printed, with DO ANDROIDS DREAM OF ELECTRIC SHEEP in small print and parentheses, than ever saw light under the (original?) title. PSYCHO, by Robert Bloch, is in my two copies of the early '60s edition graced by two bad photographs of Janet Leigh screaming and cowering and Hitchcock's name in larger letters than Bloch's. The more recent edition had the cover graphics from the insulting remake of the movie, which had the temerity to give Bloch credit only in the closing credits, while giving Joseph Stefano a full screen openining credit (the PSYCHO remake, btw, is about as bad as THE HAUNTING remake, and for similar reasons, among them a lack of respect for the written word...something which, with less disrespect intended, afflicts current phenom THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, which has dull stretches in the middle that are no surprise once your suspicions, as you watch, that all the dialog has been improvised are confirmed). PSYCHO and THE HAUNTING OF HILL HOUSE were both published in 1959, making the eventual retro-Stoker, if any, likely to be a tie unless someone wants to annoy a lot of folks. They were both the most famous books of their authors' careers, they were both made into low-budget films directed by two of the best craftsmen (I hesitate to call them fully-realized artists) in the field (your charity in forgiving Robert Wise for STAR TREK: THE MOTION PICTURE would be similar to forgiving Hitchcock for some of his lesser work) which have taken on an iconic status...and now they're both sullied by atrocious color tributes to overweaning directorial egos and the idiots who abet them. Oh, well, enough of that.
Speech codes in universities, of course, are there largely so that the administration can pretend to care about the students, and have some legal arse-coverage. Nothing more. All the nattering about PC, the nature of which "correctness" depends on who's premises we're accepting at any given time (and the phrase itself was first used by lefties being nagged by more annoying lefties), is usually unfocused; this is part of what makes Bill Maher's show so dull so much of the time. (Sorry to be redundant, if so...don't have time right now to do more than skim the discussion that's been unfolding here, but I do commend everyone's attention to the "free speech vs. workplace quality of life" debate (as if the two were genuinely at odds) generated around the recent Califonia case...
Peg -
You're right. Another of my flaws is that I do tend to get a little insulting at times. I don't usually mean it, though - it's just my nature. However, I do know how people react to it and I should take this to heart whenever I feel myself slipping into the Mode. I'll double up my efforts.
Kristian Bland
I don't know if anyone posted this allready(or if anyone cares), but in the latest issue of Wizard:The Comics Magazine there was an interview with Harlan Ellison.
Wow. Go away for only 2 days and look what happens. Goodness gracious me oh my.
Uh, I was originally inspired to write a few comments, but it's late, and after wading through umpteen pages, I just ain't up to it. More tomorrow on values, satanism, society, security, oppression and other assorted topics. Or maybe this weekend. Or next week (not skipping out, just have to get an internal application done by Monday for a possible job in the UK).
Kristian - Let me offer this observation as someone currently uninvolved with the discussion and having read all the posts to date in one big sitting (or is that reading...) - I gotta say some of your comments did come across to me as defensive; and that some ways in which you addressed other posters seemed insulting or maybe just condenscending. While I will grant you may have done so unintendedly, that wouldn't be my personal interpretation of your posts and their (occasional) tone. You certainly have a right to if you choose, but then you shouldn't be surprised by some of the reactions as a result. [just a comment, not an insult]
Peg
Sue -
I'm sorry to hear that you're taking your toys and going home. I wish you could stay and contribute, but if you're not willing to first accept that my views are logical, to myself, then you will never be able to counter them with any real "meat" of your own. Again, sorry to see you go.
Kristian Bland
keegan -
I think you "got" what I was trying to say. However, now that you've "got" it, let's explore it. I agree with you - you cannot endorse freedom of speech and expression while, on the other hand, seek to deny any segment of the population those freedoms. But, at the same time, you can. And you must. It's not quite a paradox, but it comes close. Because we have free speech is the reason we have multiple cultural identities all competing for influence. However, because any one cultural identity can come into "power" at any time - you have the threat, and the actuality, of oppression present as a constant. I'm looking for a better way, as I think we all are. We just have to see the problem before we can create a new solution.
Kristian Bland
Syzygy -
Again, you impress me. This is the type of discussion I was looking for. I must say, that stepping back and looking at my argument when presented with your observations, that you are pretty much on the money. There are, of course, a few minor speculations of yours that I must address - but on the whole, you're absolutely right. I'm looking at things from an analytical standpoint via a cause and effect relationship. More on this in a minute. Let me get the nastiness of commenting on those few points that I must.
The Holocaust
I've admitted that the procedure of genocide is, in fact, oppression. However, I also went on to say that I cannot find a "silver lining" in the act of genocide because of its end result. I see now that that was a bit short-sighted on my part. Without an example of completed genocide to cite, then you're right - all we have is uncompleted genocide which is, in the end, nothing more than extreme oppression.
Quantum Physics
As an avid "student" of QP, I have to say that you're analogy set me to thought. If taken as a whole, or the atom, then mankind follows very predictable patterns. However, when viewed at the individual, or quantum, level - there exists a level of uncertainty that makes it impossible to predict anything. I have a tendancy to generalize my thoughts about everything - including people. It's a flaw in my character, and I have to offer that up. That said, however, since American society must be, by definition, a collective - then my ideas hold ground. However, if I went on an individual basis and spoke with people, much like I'm doing now, I would find very different reactions that I could not anticipate nor predict in any fashion. The act reeks of Chaotic elements, and it should. No complex system can be explained by such general cause and effect events that I have put forth. Generalizations can be made, and relatively safe and certain predications can be made as to the nature of the Beast - but when it comes down to it, there is always the possibility that you'll encounter a Quantum Shift. An individual will arise that will alter the course of events in a manner that you could never have anticipated. I can see this more clearly now, and I applaud you for bringing it to my attention. (Also, a terrific analogy)
Ethics And Morality
This is really the only gripe I have against your post. It's my fault, of course, for not explaining myself fully. In my thoughts, I'm not allowing my personal ethics and morality to come into play. What I am attempting to do is simply illustrate how you cannot have Oil and Water blend into one happy unit. Substitute Oil and Water for opposing ethical beliefs, and I think you'll see why I ever mentioned ethics. I, in no way, wish to belittle or insult - or praise - anyone's personal belief system. I merely wished to point out that a true homogenous society cannot exist if you, at the same time, wish to permit all unique cultural identities that wish to live in it. At least, I don't think we can - yet. I hope this helps you to see my inclusion of ethics as less "absurd" now.
Again, I have to thank you for your insight. Now, though, I have to ask you to take it further. Offer up some possibilities for that "quantum shift". What could happen to change how the system - on the whole - works? What mechanisms can we employ to change the whole of our society to where we can get past oppression of opposing belief systems, yet still have those systems present and influential? To find the answers to these questions is the only reason that I wrote the essay. I believe you are exactly the type of person that can see all the sides that need to be seen in order to come up with the New Idea.
Kristian Bland
[in his best Rodney King voice] Kin't we'ahl git along? Oh, well. Guess I'm shuffling off to more ignorant, er, interesting territory. If y'all wanna to subscribe to my on-line, twice-weekly column, drop me a line. Until next time. . .
Kristian -
"Anyway, of all the remarks to the essay, I have to say that this post was the most unremarkable piece of slight personal attacks that went nowhere to further help illustrate an alternative viewpoint to my own."
Well, that's the problem you have, isn't it? You defined "intelligence" as whatever it takes to agree with you - and make accusations of personal attacks (where there were none - read it again) to gain some fictional moral highground when you can't think of a real response to an obvious truth - no one here CARES to be enlightened by you. That does not make everyone else intolerant - it makes you an object lesson for the everyone reading of just how nasty your theory that Opression is good really is..
I'm with finder on this one - outa here, and on with life..
Life is struggle. It was a struggle for your mother to give birth to you. It was a struggle for you to be born. I can kind of get with Kristian on the point that some people need to lighten up. Remember Lenny Bruce? He couldn't play some campuses today.
That doesn't mean that you have to *create* a problem or tolerate those who do. The problem is that sometimes people think they are contributing to the solution, when in actuality, they're just creating a deeper problem.
The PC speech prohibitions do not foster dialogue, they stifle it. I think it is the beginning of the end for many of the personal freedoms we are guaranteed under the Bill of Rights (at least here in the US of A).
Racist oppresive acts and speech are evil, but we have to support the rights of individuals to act or speak as free humans. Gun-control and decency laws are all well and good, but what if somehow THEY get into power and inflict our laws on US?
Is that close?
Another problem: people are much more willing to exercise their freedom of speech (often without fully exercising their freedom to think first) than they are willing to exercise their right to shut up. I mean, I do have a right to shut up,right?
Shuttin' up.
Kristian,
Please permit me to qualify my initial knee-jerk reaction with a more lucid response to your current argument. All too often I tend to lose myself to a callow 'venting of the spleen' before taking into account the slowly metered tempo of my own limited and ineffectual mind. I assure you, obscurantism is not my preferred mode of expression. However, any time I come in contact with a keyboard, I find myself rushing carelessly forward with breakneck speed. A psychological failing I haven't quite gotten control of yet. Anyway...
In regard to your comments:
The main thrust of your argument, as I understand it---and tell me if I am wrong---is that all societal change is the by-product of struggle. Further, you go on to say that only struggle unites people in a common goal, and that only true value can be placed on things which are obtained through struggle. In my estimation, all of these high-level propositions can certainly be used to describe the simple movement by which society exhibits change. However, these propositions fail to give any real indication as to what motivates individual people toward struggle in the first place. Is the measure of personal value always a proportion generated by the degree to which one struggles? Not always. Do common goals truly only come into being as products of opposition? Sure. But, again, not always. Is man merely a pawn in your observational system? Or is man, at bottom, an indeterminate entity which is too complex to be fitted naturally into the confines of the rigid observational system from which you mark your perspective? And if so, why would the abstract laws of struggle necessarily have validity with regard to societal change? Allow me to elaborate...
It seems to me that you mention things such as 'common goal' and 'value' as one might declare a set of variables in a computer program: as a priori puzzle pieces which serve only to support a gestalt perception of some elaborate game of cause and effect. The conflict inherent in the presentation of your argument is that you are attempting to define the vagaries of discreet human motivation in terms of observed mechanical change, where such vague, systemic constants as "oppression" and "struggle" merely exist as causative entities as subsumed by a much larger theory. You propose a relativistic description of mankind that takes into account only the visible effects of change. My contention, in response to this, is that man, as an entity, is too indeterminate a subject to be fully defined by any abstract system of observation, due mainly to the complexities of human morality, ethics, psychological conditioning, sociological disposition, acculturation, etc. In your argument you observe mankind through an all inclusive lens, in much the same way as classically trained physicists employed the laws of Newtonian Relativity to view the atom. Held to their rigid laws of high-level observation, it wasn't until years later that Quantum Mechanics gained a rightful foothold in the academic establishment-quantum mechanics being those set of scientific laws and observations which proved that the atom, at discreet levels of observation, exhibited movement that, though invisible to general perception, nevertheless effected the general nature of any atomic composition. Man, like the atom, exhibits movements and motivations which are far more complex than the larger, 'Newtonian' concepts of struggle and oppression. Unless you agree to look at man from the 'Quantum' perspective, any contentions made about value and motivation can only be viewed as gross approximations, and therefore lack any real validity.
To say that some kind of tension or oppression is a causative factor for change says very little; it is akin to saying that clouds change shape due to wind current or transverse heat accumulation. Okay. Sure. But why? Why must wind and meteorological effects alter the shape of clouds? Why must weather systems change with respect to the Lorenz model? Does it really matter how clouds change? Do we really care? We don't ask these questions of clouds because they exist as part of a physical system in which only inanimate forces are active. We say that the shape of clouds change in response to the laws of nature, and we