Unca Harlan's Art Deco Dining Pavilion

Archive - 03/17/2006 to 06/06/2006

Unca Harlan's Art Deco Dining Pavilion

Oh damn,
I meant to take out that part with the "p" word-- that was coarse.
:(
oops,
Cindy

Steve! Hey, Steve! No, No--the Other Steve

STEVE EVIL:

My "patronizing" remark was actually directed at Steve Barber. I should have used an initial to clarify who the hell I was adressing. Sorry 'bout that.

-----------------

STEVE BARBER:

You were quite kind to apologize for the tone of your comment on the Canadian election, and now I feel guilty for being perhaps a tad too defensive. I'd say, "Damn you for being so reasonable," but that wouldn't be polite.

D.

Dorman,
What you say is true. Those who make up lies should be routed out. Of course from where I am perched on the starboard side-- it looks like Michael Moore would be a good place to start the flossing.
I still think Kinky Friedman got it right when he said George W. is a good man trapped in a Republican body. The war started out looking like a necessary thing to get rid of a blood thirsty despot who had used weapons of mass destruction on defenseless children, men and women. I am sickened and ashamed that we stand by and allow something like Darfur to continue.
I don't defend the administration-- just W. I agree he made a mess with those appointments--a swarm of imbeciles. I don't think Clinton did much better with the lick spittle twins Sandy Berger and Madelyn Albright. I believe when closely examined history proves each president ( like each flesh and blood human being on Earth) is a mixed bag. I couldn't abide Clinton when he was in office. I think my antipathy toward him sprang largely from a dislike for his wife's politics and the fact that he was a cheat. Looking back now I can see that I blew the whole matter entirely out of proportion. Clinton had lied so convincingly about not having the affair with Monica that I believed him. I felt sorry for him and thought Monica was the devil in a beret. Later..after the DNA dress; I felt like an idiot for having believed him in the first place. Now with the passage of a few years-- I'm a little older I see things more clearly. Clinton pretty much kicked ass as a president. I applaud what he did in Kosovo and I thought he showed real class when he toured with Bush Sr. The pardons he handed down as he left office could probably still piss me off if I dwelled on it-- but I don't.
:)
No body's perfect; Clinton and his successor are only mortal men. How could they not fuck up? They're people. George W. has acted on some very bad advice in some instances. I still think Iraq needed what we did there. The world needed somebody to cull Sadaam.
Cindy
P.S. I read the U.N. does not want the " West" to send in troops to Darfur to protect the innocents. WTF? The United Nations' tits on a boar hog approach to human slaughter is unconscionable. What a bunch of pussies. Guilt by ommission is guilt nonetheless.


Keith Cramer,
Hey.
:)
On fiddling while Rome burned.
Okay; it looked bad-- I'll give you that, but that's one of those scenarios that you can armchair quarterback all day long. Not too many people in the history of this nation have had a test of that magnitude. Truman could tell you what it feels like-- J.F.K. could... other than that ( in recent times) who else? Would Bush not have been equally criticized if he had run from the room flanked by secret service men? He didn't look cool-- he didn't look like a man of action and he didn't look like the leader of the free world at that moment... but hell, he was in shock-- we all were. If this had been a Hollywood script he would have done something better-- but real life is just that and the cameras were rolling. I don't think you can bust his chops for being human or for taking a moment to gather his thoughts and consider his options.
Cindy

Steve Dooner,
I agree it has nothing to do with patriotism-- mine or anyone else's. My support for this war is actually more of a sad, grim understanding that we can't abandon those we waded in to save until they are secure in their ability to protect themselves.
My permanent jerk of the knee when it comes to Michael Moore stems from his utterly amazing lack of manners and respect. The scene that showed me all I need to know about the man featured an oily Moore worming his way into the home of an elderly man, Charlton Heston. Maybe it's my Southern upbringing-- but at the very least it was inexcusable bad form.
I feel profound gratitude and loyalty toward the honorable service men and women of this country. I feel protective of them as a group and individually-- even though they don't need it. I look at the old men in my town who went to Germany, Switzerland-- France to fight against Hitler and I want to cry. I think about the people they liberated and again I want to cry-- I think about my babies, my brothers, my grandmother, my mom .... and I think about the innocents who were slaughtered. I put myself in their places and I see our soldiers for what they are-- heros. Of course they know what they stand to lose-- but they sign up anyway. I remain in awe. Should those dauntless souls receive deference? Without question and to a greater degree than anyone else I can think of.
You are absolutely correct in your outrage. I feel it too when I consider our men and women were sent in without the very best of everything and lacking in the numbers necessary to complete the job as safely as could be possible. Bad advice was given and those who were responsible for it should be outfitted in the same substandard gear and sent to Fallujah to serve along side those whose lives they have endangered. .
To make our soldiers pay for their own medical treatment, to cut veterans benefits, including veterans disability pay is unconscionable. The deliberate editing of film to warp the statements of a man who has lost both arms in service of our country is egregious. Doubtless there are people he cares about still serving and risking their lives over there. Can you imagine being part of a unit-- being stateside and having someone twist your sentiments to make it look like you were in essence spitting on those whom you left behind? Would you feel like a victim if a propaganda machine had ground up your words and portrayed you as someone who would discount the ongoing war for a cause you would have given your life for?
Anyone who believes as I do understands that we are indeed our brother's keepers.
Cindy

Darryl,
I've missed your voice here abouts. You're right too. If McDonalds had been warned and they did it anyway then they deserved what they got. You're
also right about the fourth paragraph of Steve Dooner's message.
I''m glad to see you, my friend.
:)
Cindy

Dorman,
I don't defend the administration-- just W. He's not a rocket scientist-- but I believe he's a good man.

Steve Barber,
The necessity for the war remains the innocent people who were being butchered under Saddam. The reason we got into the war was Saddam's resolve to restrict the venues required by the U.N. for inspection. Three months, if you recall-- we gave him three months to allow the inspectors to do their jobs. It was ridiculous for the U.N. to put up with Saddam's bullshit. Had Saddam not been a spoiled child he would have opened the palaces the U.N. would have been placated. It didn't work out that way and certainly the U.N. certainly bears some culpability in this mire as well. Had they imposed some stringent sanctions on Iraq back when-- rather than allow Saddam to continue with his reign of terror unchecked perhaps it would not have come to this.
I doubt if the soldier no longer believes in the cause. It IS a righteous war-- just ask the women who no longer wear burquas. Ask the man who had hidden in the walls of his parents home for 30 years becasue he would have been killed if he'd been discovered. Ask those who used to witness the lopping off of heads and hands for minor infractions without trial. The war is righteous. Moore's treatment of the man's statement should result in punishment that deters him from doing it again. It isn't right to present something as truth if it isn't true. Moore re-victimized the soldier.
Moore mischaracterized a disabled veteran-- used him for his own financial and political gain and he should be punished for that.

Cindy


Dorman,
I share your outrage at the diatribe of the shop keeper. His statement about bombing the men women and children of Iraq is bone chilling. I don't think his "answer to a higher father" remark makes George W. a religious fanatic. To me it just sounds like he wanted to rack up a few points with the churchy sect.
I don't think organized religion in itself is a bad thing- but the extremes of organized religion can be diabolically dangerous.
yer pal,
Cindy

And it's 5-6-7-8,
Open up the pearly gates!
Well, there ain't no time to wonder why,
WHOOPEE! We're gonna die!

So once again, Uncle Sam is in a jam way down yonder in Vietraq. How did it happen? Who let it happen?

The answer: Everybody did.

The Democratic party for running two of the most lackluster presidential campaigns in the party’s history (2000 and 2004) and two of the most uninspiring candidates since Mondale and Dukakis (Gore and Kerry). The Republican party, who picked George W (Chimpy McFlightsuit) Bush instead of John McCain, who at least had SOME qualifications for the job, instead of a good PR team, which is all Bush had for the 2000 nomination.

Who else? How about the average voter, who decided not to Change Horses in Midstream, even though the horse was running rampant and threatening to drown the rider.

We all did. I should have become more involved in the campaign, but I was too busy trying to FUCKING STAY ALIVE during the latest bout of unemployment to be bothered. I had every reason to become more involved and certainly had time on my hands, but I couldn’t be bothered, had to find a fucking job. Still looking, by the way.

We had a chance. We had a chance to stop this bullshit in Vietraq back in ’04, but we didn’t. We kept Bush in office, and he’s simply done what he originally set out to do, which was to transform the middle east, to make it more friendly to the good ol’ U S of A. All we need is the same kind of imaginary troops that Hitler had to defend Berlin in the last days of World War Two, and we'll have Iran dancing to our tune in no time.

Yes, we needed to transform the Middle East by BOMBING the love of Uncle Sam into them there ragheads. And make no mistake, many people are using that particular pejorative when referring to anyone living in the Mideast these days.

We will accomplish this laudable goal by using the same strategy, by following the same arrogant ignorance of the region, its people and history that we brought with us into Southeast Asia and the Soviets brought into Afghanistan. Who needs to know anything about the people whose hearts and minds we’re supposed to be winning? After all, in every gook, there’s an American waiting to get out. Yup, that sure worked for us in Southeast Asia, didn’t it? Besides, we're the biggest, meanest sumbitch in the valley, right? We can beat them gooks with one hand behind our backs, right?

Yeah, right. Works every time.

As I understand it, there are two rules of war: 1) Know your enemy. 2) Strike for the heart. In Iraq we have done neither. We just send people there and expect them to lose life and limb because it’s their job. It’s what they signed up for, right?

And we must, we must, we MUST support our troops. With photo ops, with statements filled with empty bravado like, “Mission Accomplished” and “Bring it On”.

But not with Veteran’s benefits. Oh, no not that. That would cost money, which is needed to fund the war in Vietraq. Besides, those lazy-ass wounded veterans would just become the latest Welfare Queens, you know, the people who use their food stamps to buy Cadillacs and such. We must provide a “disincentive” for those who would live off the government teat. Those wounded veterans will just have to make their own way like the rest of us Fungible Assets.

As an example:
This year, the administration increased spending on veterans by $519 million. In 2006, it plans to cut veterans spending by $910 million.
That's a $391 million REDUCTION in veteran's benefits.

Yeah, support our troops. Tell me another joke. I could use the laugh.

RUMSFELD: “Come on, people are fungible. You can have them here or there."

adj. Of goods or commodities; freely exchangeable for or replaceable by another of like nature or kind in the satisfaction of an obligation.

Chuck

"And, much as I despise him--and her--I do not for a moment believe this current bullshit rumor about Dubya and Condoleezza having an affair"

I'd rather start - and I think it's a lot more justifiable, and BELIEVABLE, for that matter - an affair between Dubya n'Cheney. Who'd be d'man n' who'd be d'woman? Helluva challenge, dat 'n.

And WHAT a Video Spy Cam that would make!

We're supposed to honor and respect the bravery and sacrifices of our veterans. That's only decent, but it's really not as simple as that.

For example, what happens when people are brave, or make those sacrifices, for causes that are simply _wrong_, or for rotten and corrupt regimes? The invasion of Vietnam, conducted to prevent the outcome of that country's election? The annexation of Europe under German rule in the late 1930s? The establishment of Greater Serbia? The defense of Saddam Hussein against an effort by foreign armies to depose him?

When the _war_ is wrong, should we really honor the soldiers who participated? Now, keep in mind that I'm not talking about war crimes committed by individual soldiers under stress; it's horrible, yeah, and it'd be great if we could all be saints, but these are inevitable consequences of being in war.

I'm talking about wars, and tactics, created and implemented by commanders and political leaders: the use of cruel weapons like fuel-air bombs, ordering soldiers to rape civilian woman (as in Bosnia), the recruitment of children as in the Sudan? What if the war is conducted with horrific tactics, a disregard for conventions, and even the intention of targeting civilians?

I mean, we found it repugnant when Reagan dropped a wreath over SS graves at Bitburg; what about U.S. soldiers who participated in war crimes in other wars?

Well, most of us are _not_ strict moralists, and it's more than a little cruel to pass such severe judgements on people who were, like most soldiers, young men misled into hell. So, we decide that we're not holding the soldiers responsible for the policy decisions of the leaders we had at the time. We say that we're honoring _their_ bravery and sacrifice. (We're also deciding to not look too closely at them as individuals. I, for one, reserve the right to _not_ honor such vets as William Calley or Oliver North.)

But that does create a real problem. Because while we're making this adjustment, and while we're _saying_ this, we're avoiding looking at an unpleasant fact: the fact that these noble traits were _misused and wasted_ by the likes of (here in the U.S.) MacNamara, Nixon or Rumsfeld.

There's really no other word for it. Obviously, we appreciate it when soldiers work for a _good_ cause, like ridding the world of Hitler and the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. Their sacrifices were for a good cause that, happily, won. But if equally brave people made the same effort for a cause that was nowhere _near_ as noble, And even if we _respect_ this effort, then we _have_ to face the fact that this wonderful bravery and heroism was _wasted_.

And while we can talk about what we do as a _society_ to deal with this legacy, we also have to ask ourselves what this means for us as individuals. I mean, if I look at the thousands of lives ruined for issues that seemed like a good idea at the time-- well, the _last_ thing in the world I want is for my life to be wasted in the same way. Even if the _cause_ is good, I'm not especially trusting of the people in charge.

So if there is some devaluing of military service in our culture, part of that is due to some fairly basic observation of what the sacrifices of soldiers really amount to. Our leaders obviously regard them as means to ends. Our citizenry is content with empty 'honoring' and cheap sentiment that doesn't _begin_ to address the horrors they've faced. And the people to _sent_ them there? We never punish _them_ for the waste.

BARNEY:

As far as I'm concerned, or WANT TO BE concerned . . . THIS is myspace. The reasons you give for wanting to drag me and/or my name into deeper, more treacherous internet swampsites SEEM quite nice and quite logical . . . if I actually GAVE a fuque about making money, which I pretty much don't, and never have. Oh, I know how to massage the market, all right, but doing things for money has NEVER tilted my pinball-machine.

Nonetheless . . .

I will not blow you off, old chum. I will turn you and this whole MySpace thing over to the Fang Who Walks Like a Woman, the OTHER Ellison. You hash it out with mah honey, and what you can con her into/out of and her decision either way, will be just fine with me.

Tomorrow Susan goes to work at the precinct polling station, all day; and I will be starting Day One of my jury duty in Beverly Hills. The Ellisons will be incommunicado due to Good Citizenship for at least the next 24 hours.

All the rest of you . . . try to behave yourselves till we resurface. And, much as I despise him--and her--I do not for a moment believe this current bullshit rumor about Dubya and Condoleezza having an affair. It is as despicable as what the right wing did to Clinton. For the good of your soul, disregard it.

Yr. pal, Harlan

Myspace redux
Since my initial proposal wasn't mocked eight ways to Sunday, let me just say a few more things.

The points made about Myspace being VERY VERY youth oriented and frequently monkey-butt ugly are true. Utterly true.

***IF*** I were given permission to build a Harlan Ellison [trademark] Myspace page There are a few simple rules that would guide me.

1.] I would keep the page as simple as possible in terms of design layout. There are a million bells and whistles you can put on those pages but things get busy real fast. Put in pre-loading audio and mandatory streaming video and shite and then just waiting for the page to load becomes a data processing career. Some of my own friends are the worst offenders. My own page is ugly ***TODAY*** because I tried to do a tiled image last night and realize the result is just wrong. However that's easily fixed.

2.] I think a couple of eye-friendly background colors, a dozen shots of Harlan [approved by Harlan] from various stages in his career, and links to Webderland and a few other on-line sources COMBINED with some front page info on where and how books and CD's may be purchased is all you would need to start. A news page could come later OR reinforce links to whatever is here. A sort of Ellison Field of Dreams/if-you-build-it-they-will-come deal.

3.] I know Myspace catches a lot of flack for the occasional 300 pound, 40 year old guy pretending to be a teenaged Ukranian immigrant who will do singing telegrams for free breast implants - that's the messed up nature of people and the net. Still, I see lots of "Good cause" Myspace pages and Indy band pages and comics professional pages [Fred Hembeck] that are using Myspace in a constructive fashion to supplement various Mom & Pop enterprises, which the H.E.R.C. clearly is. And I see nothing wrong with that.

I don't see Myspace displacing this venue at all. But what I do see NOW are Myspace profiles where you search for Harlan Ellison and he is listed as one of their favorite authors but those people (who clearly love Harlan's work) NEVER pop up in here. Or they only lurk. But I don't think they're getting here at all.

Then they go on to list TROUBLEMAKERS in their books profile because that book actually sort of does what it was intended to do. Find potential young HArlan readers. This site here is [mostly] for the choir. I like the choir just fine but I'd like to see a bigger congregation.

Supplemental Myspace formating note - There are PLENTY of people who love to tweak Myspace pages by assembling Myspace codes. I bet some of the best aspects of that theoretical Ellison page would be built by people who would love to just build a better Ellison page.

So, those are my slightly expanded thoughts today.

- Barney

Support this?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13124487/site/newsweek/

Yeah yeah, not every troop is a crazed maniac. But there's a fairly large number of warped indivduals over there, fighting not for freedom, not for democracy, but for some barbaic lord-knows-what. And those who don't participate, but do know about this tpye of behaviour, are part of the problem by not speaking out soon enough. Why 1.5 years after the fact, do we know just hear about these Caligula-wanna-be's?

I'd support the troops if they self-policed themselves. I'd support the troops if they had the balls to speak out against any of the atrocities of the Iraq war (in an appropriate time frame, not 18 months later). I'd support the troops if they asked Bush what the war is all about.

That was pretty harsh Harlan, but you are right about your comments regarding the Moore lawsuit. The soldier was probably told to sue, probably by some right wing crazy, like David Horowitz, or the like. They have undertaken a lifelong effort to squash the left, especially someone who connects with mainstream America, like the Flint wonder chunk.

I worry about the outcome because of the hallowed nature of how we view the military here. In the view of most Americans, the cup of Christ touches the lips of every serviceperson who enlists to aid our country's imperial jaunts. We view military people the way many view cops--and you know how many of those creeps go to prison or lose lawsuits. Hell, not even the Rodney King footage could convince the Jury that those fat swine were the racist thugs that they were. But, this soldier, with his puppy dog eyes and his sense of mission could sway any jury.

He also says that if he wins, he will donate all of his money to a charity for soldiers. Now tell me how that doesn't play to even the most leftist of juries?

I also fear that Moore will buckle and give the guy settlement cash. Moore is such a sap, with his frayed image, that it would not surprise me. But the message that would send would open the floodgate for lawsuits. I doubt Moore wants to be part of some lawsuit, when his new film is coming out in September. The dumbest thing he ever did was not respond to the guy. I hear Moore has yet to contact the guy. He said that Moore should apologize to him and he will drop the lawsuit. I just hope that the worst will not happen. Imagine the feeding frenzy?

There are hundreds of times that soldiers have been used by the media that could be seen to imply some slant. So, does that mean that the soldier, if so offended, could sue any network that tries to tell a story he may not like? Every politician has a case then, when it comes to the way footage is used by a network to make a slanted case. But, does that give them the right to sue? There has to be strict criteria when it comes to libel lawsuits. As an anarchist, I don't think there should even be libel laws, but that's for another day.

Cindy, you're a peach, but that last scribbling has no gas, whatsoever.

Those Texas papers are dangerous. hehe.

-----------

Well, let's see, the war is illegal, based on international norms of law, so any soldier that kills someone, even under the best intentions is still murdering them. Call that harsh if you will, but under an illegal occupation, the occupier has no rights, only to obey the norms of decency that international treaties give them.

People forget that Fallujah was an outright war crime, much worse that the Haditha murders. All of this on film, by an Italian camera crew. Sure, PBS refused to air the film, but that is its own shame.

I respect the soldiers who are just there, because they are told to, but if they cannot see what they are doing is wrong, then they are about as blind as any patriotic yahoo can be.

-----------

Here's one of the better defenses of Moore's film:

http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:qAccRuN5R7UJ:tbwt.org/index2.php%3Foption%3Dcontent%26do_pdf%3D1%26id%3D255+playthell+benjamin+michael+moore&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4

The Whimper of Whipped Dogs
Cliff Pickover's RealityCarnival had this listed...

(05/24/06) Man lists every popular URL on the Internet
http://popurls.com/

At the top of the listings under 'metafilter.com' was this...

The Whimper of Whipped Dogs
http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/52108

The poster doesn't mention Harlan, though.

On War, Warriors and (hopefully) clarifications.
Mr. Sam Waterman wrote

"I'm not so sure Edward Yashinsky, the Yiddish poet who survived the Holocaust only to die in a Communist prison, was all that grateful."

Probably not. But the point isn't that the Evil Empire was any less evil. It is only a question of who destroyed the Nazi regime, and the fact is they did more than we did. Whether this is a good thing or not is another debate.

Mr. Barber:

I appologize if I sounded insensitive to this man's suffering, or indeed any of your troops. But I had to address the "They did this for you" chorus, and the "shut up" it implies. I am not gratefull that this young man lost his arms to an unjust war. I hope he is looked after and made comfortable as possible (despite the Republicans constantly cutting back veteran's benefits), and I won't condemn him personally for serving. But I can't see his actions as heroic. I think they were tragic. That he honestly believed himself to be doing the right thing makes it all the more tragic. These kids are being fed into a meat grinder, and I wish people would stop saying it was for my benfit.

It is a fallacy that opposing the war is by definition not supporting the troops. I support the troops fully and whole heartedly. Tha's why I want to bring them home before any more of them are killed. I don't see how continuing to feed them into the meat grinder constitutes support. ( I am not suggesting this is what you said. This is the attitude I was attempting to address with my previous statement).

And I still do not think it is desirable to have soldiers who don't think about the consequences of their actions, which someone else said.

This is not Canadian smugness but the God's honest truth as I see it. It is not a Canada vs. America thing. (and now Canadians are comming home in body bags as well, and terrorist cells are being uncovered in my own hometown, so my points are more relevant than ever. I would make the same argument for any unjust war being fought anywhere).

In summation:

Mr. Harrison:

It was not my intent to sound patronizing, but I meant what I said.

and Mr. Samuals:

I have indeed read "All Quiet on the Western Front". We have apparently derived different conclusions from it.


- Steve E.

'Cause I know how much you guys enjoy your quotations. Pick up a copy of The Quote Verifier, by Ralph Keyes.

I just got wind of this through Kilpatrick's column, and apparently Yogi Berra didn't say a lot of things he's supposed to have said, and Edmund Burke apparently didn't tell us "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."

I've got my own opinions about the military, and while I can _intellectually_ agree with the macro-concept of Eric's statement, knowing some of the dudes and dudettes that are in the military I can't bring myself to really agree with it.

RAVENSCROFT

[deadly cool surname, by the way, Tony]

"On the up-side, I opened a long-misplaced box & found a bunch of "stuff I want to read when I can relax" books, including an Alfred Hitchcock omnibus with tales by deFrord, Sesar, Matheson, Sayers, & (!!) Kersh, plus a somewhat floppy "Impact-20" (William Nolan shorts, for you heathens)."

If that Hitchcock anthology is TERROR TIME you are in for a treat with Kersh's "Crooked Bone." One of my favorite stories by any author. My copy of IMPACT-20 is also all beat to shit. I think there is a good reason for this:

" 'Well?' I snapped, lighting a butt. I put it in the side of my mouth and let it live there." (from "The Beautiful Doll Caper") Aah, 1963...i was still poopin' my pants...


peace,somehow,
unheathen all-Rick

Kiss Butt - Then Kick It.
I've been reading this page for a couple months now, and I just can't hide any longer. I'd like to fire off a couple remarks then crawl back under my rock for a little while.

First off, to Mr. Ellison - I love your work. It's great. My best friend placed a copy of "Edgeworks Vol. 2" in my hands a couple years back, and it's been down hill ever since. Thanks for hours and hours of entertainment.

Second, I would like to stick my nose into this discussion about the military.

The one point I have to make on this is that it is not important that you _support_ your troops because you feel that what they are doing is right. The legitimacy of the conflict, its goals, its execution, its management - all that stuff - doesn't factor in one bit when I'm talking about servicemen. Politicians pick the fights and the soldiers fight them. It’s been that way for a long, long, time. If it changes, let me know.

You can be opposed to war and still support your troops. You can protest the war if you like and still be supportive and respectful towards men and women in uniform. It doesn't mean you have to respect the Air Force Captain that stole your wife. The reason I feel you _should_ be respectful and supportive is for this reason alone - it isn't you. If you live in a country that has an all-volunteer military, you're lucky. (That's a _standing_ military, so don't lay on that draft crap.) I believe...and please pardon my woeful ignorance here...many European nations have mandatory service requirements for men at age 18. Lucky you weren't born there.

Wanting your soldiers to come home is one thing, and _how_ they come home is another. I hate to go back to high school here, but Erich Maria Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front" does a pretty good job of dealing with most attitudes about war. I'd love to see everyone holding hands and skipping through fields as much as the next guy, but it just ain't a fact of life...at least not yet. Until that day, though, I'm endlessly thankful there is someone to do the dirty work so I don't have to.

My car is the blue Toyota. Direct your eggs thata way.

-Chuck

Harry Houdini
Potentially interesting, but kinda been done.

I remember a Houdini biography & autobiography that both deal quite clearly with his anti-spiritist crusade -- the autobiog is called "A Magician Among the Spirits" or something such.

Houdini was crushed by his mother's death, & wanted to speak to her spirit. He was shocked, then disgusted, to consult an endless string of fakes whose gimmicks were so shoddy that even a beginning showman would turn up his nose.

After watching these fakes manipulate peoples' lives, driving them to bankruptcy & even suicide, Houdini began a crusade to make spiritism a crime.

To read either man, you'd get the impression that Houdini & Conan Doyle were friends to the end, despite their deep religious differences.

(A funny story is Conan Doyle's role in discovering Piltdown Man.)

As for the "Houdini the spy" stuff, on the same order is "Carter Beats the Devil," which among other stuff involves a thwarted Presidential assassination & the corporate suppression of a new invention: broadcast TV.

The news page hasn't been updated in years
I'd be grateful for a reasonably accurate list of upcoming speaking events by Mr Ellison (or those personages he chooses to endorse) on the off-chance I might be down the road or even find some excuse to shift my schedule.

I'd settle grumpily for a retrospective calendar of Mr Ellison's appearances, writing benchmarks, etc.

I didn't want to wet-blanket the MySpace proposal -- but, see, while I retired the Selectric almost two decades ago, I'm not a bells&whistles sorta guy. If a website has extensive Flash animation, I likely never return. And my marketing-smarts tell me that MySpace isn't so much a "community" as a poorly run cult, with the Deep Lasting Social Meaning of "Magic: The Gathering" cards, Beanie Babies, & Tickle-Me Elmo, as are about 99.99% of the all-holy blogs.

Anyone wants to do it, they ought to go ahead, & I'll cheer their successes without claiming any of the kudos.

The Department of I MUST BE FUCKIN DREAMING (really)!
Okay, I'll admit the only stuff I know about HOUDINI (that will change soon as I get time to read some reputable bios) is a few articles I've read, bits of a history channel documentary, and the movie starring Tony Curtis. But the following description -- copied verbatim out of a catalogue for Atria Books, summing up a forthcomng title, THE SECRET LIFE OF HOUDINI by William Kalush and Larry Sloman -- Blew. Me. Away. Read on:

"Using exclusive access to newly uncovered archives, Kalush and Sloman reveal the clandestine agreements in which the United States and England recruited Houdini to be an active secret agent. In exchange for his cooperation, these governments facilitated his rise to the top of the world stage. The authors give thrilling accounts of his assignments, such as his participation in early aerial surveillance and his use of his own magic magazine to communicate espionage-related information.

After the war, Houdini embarked upon what became his most dangerous mission when he took on the Spiritualist movement. Convinced that Spiritualist mediums were frauds, he became obsessed with exposing them -- organizing his own group of disguised undercover operatives to infiltrate this seamy world. But the Spiritualists were a powerful adversary. An organized network of fanatics, led by Sherlock Holmes creator Arthur Conan Doyle, worked relentlessly to orchestrate a camapaign that would silence Houdini forever.

Grounded in solid research, but as exciting and dramatic as a good thriller, THE SECRET LIFE OF HOUDINI traces the magician's long and circuitous route from struggling vaudevillian to worldwide legend." (c) copyright 2006, SimonandSchuster

THERE are no copyright marks on that text, but just in case, and since it is the parent company, I inserted the copyright above.

OKAY: Does ANYbody know if the above claims -- made in this forthcoming bio -- really DO have any basis in fact? Man, even if they didn't, the guys who came up with this could put together a bangup historical thriller. Anybody? Beuller?

MySpace, and more examples of how people are sheep

Barney wrote: "I think Harlan ought to have a Myspace page. No, really. Not to pull anything away from here but to steer people here - and to the bookselling side of things. The template isn't "perfect" but I think it could be a very Harlan friendly / Harlan "hands free" way to promote some of Harlan's stuff."

I dunno, Barney. MySpace has always seemed to me to be LiveJournal's ADD-afflicted, airplane glue-huffing teenage sibling. The template isn't only less than perfect--it's cluttered, confusing, and downright ass-end-ugly, so much so I think it's purposely designed to be a visual irritant to anyone over the age of twenty. Maybe a Harlan MySpace could yoke in a few new readers, but I doubt it's worth the effort (it's a better promotional tool for actors and musicians, imho). Still, if you wanted to make one, I'd love to be proven wrong--unless it's a complete fuckup (not likely), it can't hurt Harlan's rep, and it certainly could help to get the word out on new projects. (Of course, this kind of brings up an obvious question: instead of branching out to other websites, why not revamp WEBDERLAND ITSELF? The news page hasn't been updated in years, other sections have fallen into disuse, and spambots have utterly run rampant over the whole megillah. As great as this site is, it's not all it could be, and I can't help but think that it could, with a little tweaking, become an exemplar of how to market an author's work.)

TO EVERYONE WHO READ "THE WHIMPER OF WHIPPED DOGS" (AS WELL AS, UM, THE GUY WHO WROTE IT): The Sundance Channel is currently running HUMAN BEHAVIOR EXPERIMENTS, a documentary on the three great psychology projects--the Milgram Experiment, the Stanford Prison Experiment, and the Columbia University bystander study--that have explored how quickly people can disregard their conscience and, under the right conditions, descend into apathy, abusive behavior, and outright sadism. The doc also mentions some real-life analogues to the experiments, including Abu Ghraib, a phone scam involving numerous fast-food restaurants from a few years back*, and, yes, the Kitty Genovese murder. If you can catch it, it's well worth the time.

*I had never even heard of this, but apparently it hit the national news in 2004. Someone pretending to be a cop or a regional boss would call one of these places--restaurants hit included McDonald's, Burger King, Hooters, Ruby Tuesday, Applebee's, Perkins, Taco Bell and others--and order the managers to strip-search employees in a bogus hunt for money, merchandise and drugs. This would go on for hours, and sometimes even involve sexual acts performed against the (mostly young) employees. Horrifying shit, needless to say.

>And for Eric: You need to read a bit more on the subject before making such grand statements.<

Oh, ok. Silly me. I didn't think it was that grand of a statement. Just a personal viewpoint.

You could just say you disagree with me, Steve, because I don't think your patronizing (and mildly insulting) suggestion "to read a bit more on the subject" is going to change my mind. Especially books by Stephen Ambrose...if he's your source for anything, then maybe YOU need to read a bit more.

(Douglas, you're right and I apologize. I was roundly astounded at the results of the last Canadian election, given the history of your country as progressive on so many fronts. I genuinely respect Canada and am sorry it came off the way it did.)

Now, on to the show:

Brian - You make a number of good points, however in response to this: "But if we were to be really cold, and say that these were people who let their lives be thrown away by our leaders... well, we'd be one step away from _laughing_ at their stupidity. But it'd raise a lot of questions, wouldn't it? It'd mean that even without wars, we're pretty worthless to the people who really _matter_ in our society. It'd mean that, even if we were to make some great sacrifice for the Greater Good... it may not be for the real Greater Good, it may not help at _all_, and it may not even be noticed by anyone... least of all our leaders, or the generations that file past the memorials without reading the bodiless names."

No. Uh-uh. There are many, many other reasons society must pay respect to military service. Unfortunately, in America that service has been devalued because of the tone of the debate over wars in general. America has moved militarily away from a protectionist role towards an aggressive role in the world. It started in Korea, moved dramatically into Vietnam and has now settled down in Iraq.

In each of these wars we maintained that we, as a nation, were threatened. We were never attacked by any of these regimes, and yet we felt comfortable attempting to impose our power and will upon these nations to get them to "think like we do".

But -- and this is a big one -- I'm not sure that you fully understand the true relationship between the troops on the ground and the intelligentsia running the show. It often astounds me (and this is not a personal attack, just an observation) how people who have never served in the military assume they know how it works.

Am I defending the civilian government or the senior leaders in the Pentagon? No.

Am I defending those troops who commit horrific acts in the name of their service? No.

I am honoring and appreciating the people who serve in the military at all levels who are decent, hard-working and patriotic citizens who genuinely believe what they're doing is some good in the world. And for others to stand on the sidelines with no full understanding of what it means to serve in the military is more than a little disingenuous and frankly smacks of elitism in and of itself.

Kerry criticized a war AFTER experiencing it. Our buddy Harlan did his service, along with thousands of other critics of military adventurism.

(Disclaimer: No, I never served, which is precisely why I won't condemn the entirety of the armed forces. There are too many honorable, respectable and downright idealistic people serving.)

And for Eric: You need to read a bit more on the subject before making such grand statements. I might suggest you find, in a used bookstore or online, a 1970s-era book which details the actual relationship between our civilian society and the armed forces which protect it. The book is entitled "The Military and American Society" by Stephen Ambrose and *ahem* James A Barber. (I'm rather fond of this second guy.)

The book frames the tension between our culture and the organization chartered with protecting it from the outside. Given the era in which it was written, the book examines many of the currently broiling controversies.

As someone very astutely noted in the Message Boards, you've got to understand and be able to debate the opposing point of view to truly "get" what the debate is really all about.

Yours with a capital "L".

Steve B

"Aristocratic draft-dodgers in 17th-century Spain"
The record indicates that few grandees who pleaded poverty to avoid service were left without substantial maintenance grants and emoluments and that the Crown gladly financed their luxurious military lifestyles.

"And I wouldn't be quite so smug about the politics north of the border. It seems you guys just recently repeated our mistake five years AFTER we gave you every reason to resist the Neocons..."

I found no smugness in Steve Evil's comments. At no point did he suggest that Canadians are above either the conflict in Iraq or the effects of that conflict on soldiers. In fact, Steve E. said that the capture of the alleged terrorists in Toronto will likely be used to argue for continuing the Canadian mission in Afghanistan--hardly an endorsment of the current political climate here.

I do, however, find your comment patronizing, Steve. It is wrong to suppose that the electorate in Canada would necessarily take its cue from what it observes in the US. Conservatism has long and tangled roots here, and while US affairs often have a profound effect on Canadian politics ... well, it ain't all about what happens south of the border.

D.

>Yours in opposing the war and Dubya's ideology, but in full effing support of the men and women in harm's way.<

I don't support this war, or the troops who engage in it. Supporting them implies I approve of what they are doing. I very much do not, and I don't care who ordered them. I was never much a believer in the "taking orders is my job" line anyway. War is a moral choice, made by individuals. To claim otherwise renders individuality moot.

I sympathize with the troops, and would like to see them brought home. But I will never say I "support" them, not in this venture.

Steve Barber writes:

"This soldier made what must be considered a serious and permanent sacrifice doing what he could in the perception that he was defending our nation. I will not and cannot permit his sacrifice, no matter how misguided and horrifying the political purpose which required it may be, to be dismissed so handily. It means a great deal to me that there are those men and women willing to put themselves in harm's way to do what they can to protect America (and many other nations). It's HIS perception of what he was doing there that makes the sacrifice significant, not MY perception of the rightness of the war the president elected to throw our military at."

This is a nice sentiment, but it's one of those things one can nitpick about. But let's see if we can extract some kind of sentiment out of this discussion.

First of all, we live in societies that are not perfect, everybody-participates democracies. Whatever the reasons, we tend to have power concentrated among a relative few. Sometimes the power is granted (elections) or taken (having wealth), but that's the case. So most of the policy decisions of our societies tend to be made by these elites.

And frequently, those policy decisions are going to involve going to war in some way or another. Suddenly, the elites have decided upon a course of action that requires conscripting a lot of citizens to take up weapons and inflict horrific destruction upon another country. It might be _needed_ once in a while. No need to add the bit about "good" or "bad" reasons; no one can ever completely agree on those anyway.

We, as citizens, may be able to protest, or avoid being conscripted. Or, we might agree to be conscripted for whatever reasons-- agreement with the elites, ideas of public service and patriotism, feeling guilty over enjoying the security the elites have offered us in the past.

So, we can have wars for rotten reasons. We can have wars for ostensibly decent reasons, but our elites may exploit the war for personal or economic gain. We can have wars because elites haven't thought of less destructive means to achieve certain ends. We can have wars because elites have crazy, deluded, or hateful reasons for waging them. And we have citizens allowing themselves to be used for warfare for reasons of their own.

So exactly why do we have to _honor_ the ones who serve? We usually don't know _why_ an individual really went off to war. They might've joined for what they think are noble reasons-- and once placed under fire, they snap, and they perform horrific atrocities. They might've joined for the _chance_ to perform horrible atrocites. They might've gone off to war with the best of intentions and desire to Serve... only to find that their ideals have enabled the elites to mislead them.

In other words, honoring soldiers is a nice sentiment... but for it to really mean anything, we'd have to evaluate each and every soldier and decide whether he should be "honored" or not. I'm sure that Lt. William Calley gets a salute or two from deluded maniacs on Veterans' Day who think he got a raw deal.

So why do we honor them _en masse_? First of all, because we feel _bad_ about them. They risked their lives under the orders of their country's leaders and, for better or for worse, our world is a result. In a sense, there's a vague spiritual debt. Second, it's a good way of encouraging more people to be willing soldiers, too: our elites may need our help, and it's best that they didn't let us know how easily human lives are squandered on their follies. Third, it's kind of like a religion: if you raise doubts about honoring soldiers, you're like to have someone beat the crap out of you.

But if we were to be really cold, and say that these were people who let their lives be thrown away by our leaders... well, we'd be one step away from _laughing_ at their stupidity. But it'd raise a lot of questions, wouldn't it? It'd mean that even without wars, we're pretty worthless to the people who really _matter_ in our society. It'd mean that, even if we were to make some great sacrifice for the Greater Good... it may not be for the real Greater Good, it may not help at _all_, and it may not even be noticed by anyone... least of all our leaders, or the generations that file past the memorials without reading the bodiless names.

So _generally_ speaking, societies need to have people they can use on the occasions when wars occur. And it seems only decent that the people whose lives are used in this manner ought to be commemorated or rewarded in some way. Plaques are nice, but health care, VA benefits, special financial and banking considerations are even _more_ important... and those, I think, are _owed_ to veterans by our elites.

But frankly, I'd avoid military service as much as I can. It's not because I'm a moral objector, or even that I'm a "coward." It's because my life is more important to me than it is to _them_. Let them find _other_ soldiers-- Lord knows there's never a shortage of _other_ people willing to do it. I've wasted more than enough of my life making money for employers and other elites. Get someone else. I won't go. I won't give vets any shit about _their_ going; it's their right, and I don't think _my_ respect or honor'd means a lot to them anyway.

What if everyone felt this way? Well, then I'd be a damn fool to feel any other way, wouldn't I?

[BITTER RANCOUR]

Don't worry, even if the terrorists actually are planning a hit on Toronto the Gawdaful, they can't blow up the subway, because it won't be open.

[/BITTER RANCOUR]

(Doctor, dentist, baker, candlestickmaker - I should switch all my essential services to the city I actually live in, never mind the fact that I'm ten minutes from a subway station, and half-an-hour from downtown. Doesn't do me a damn bit of good when those lazy f^#$# at the TTC want to go through the summer on four-day workweeks.)

Steve Evil

" "He lost his arms in service on behalf of all of us."

I didn't ask him to go into harms's way. In fact, I most emphatically asked him to stay home. This is a debt I did not willingly enter into. I most certainly don't feel any safer."

Steve, I cannot in good conscience allow you to go uncontested in this comment. I am a proud Liberal (capital L), who unequivocably opposes "Dubya's War", and was critical of our American president and his actions (and the actions of his Neocon stormtroopers) even during the dark days of September 11th when it was fashionable to label me a "traitor" in many circles.

Still I fly the American flag on all holidays, and I freely employ the Constitutional right to speak out when I believe the government to be wrong.

This soldier made what must be considered a serious and permanent sacrifice doing what he could in the perception that he was defending our nation. I will not and cannot permit his sacrifice, no matter how misguided and horrifying the political purpose which required it may be, to be dismissed so handily. It means a great deal to me that there are those men and women willing to put themselves in harm's way to do what they can to protect America (and many other nations). It's HIS perception of what he was doing there that makes the sacrifice significant, not MY perception of the rightness of the war the president elected to throw our military at.

Don't ever mistake the blood spilt by the individual soldiers as anything less than heroic, if they do it in the mindset of this young man. That's a commitment I fear I could not match, and moreso's the pity that tiny politicians and associated pundits consider his life to be that trivial in the grand scheme of their personal ideological combat.

THAT is the repugnant part of his sacrifice.


And I wouldn't be quite so smug about the politics north of the border. It seems you guys just recently repeated our mistake five years AFTER we gave you every reason to resist the Neocons...

Yours in opposing the war and Dubya's ideology, but in full effing support of the men and women in harm's way.

Steve Barber

Godless Communists of the Evil Empire
I'm not so sure Edward Yashinsky, the Yiddish poet who survived the Holocaust only to die in a Communist prison, was all that grateful.

Rick:

Amonuim nitrate, when mixed with fuel can produce an explosive. With one ton of the stuff, McVeigh destroed the Federal Building in Oklahoma. These guys had three tons. They could have been planning a very large garden, but it would have to be an incredibly big gargen.


That said, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) is notoriously incompetent and has a habit of arresting Muslim men for fun. The media are now taking their word that a bombing was planned, though they won't say where, other than it wasn't in the subway. I don't think they're going to let on either. We're just going to have to take their word that 17 Second Generation Canadians wanted to level the City of Toronto.

Of course this will be used as an excuse to extend the mission in Afghanistan, even though none of the suspects came from Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, I know it's late in the game, but it must be said:

"He lost his arms in service on behalf of all of us."

I didn't ask him to go into harms's way. In fact, I most emphatically asked him to stay home. This is a debt I did not willingly enter into. I most certainly don't feel any safer.

(and before anyone tells this foreigner to butt out, it must be pointed out that the neo cons like to take credit for protecting and saving the entire western world. Besides which I'm sure there are many U.S. activists who feel the same way, sick and tired of having to be gratefull for all this slaughter. I am sure Cindy Sheenan did not appreciate such a gift).

As for the tired WWII refrain:
"If we didn't have boys like this who think about the role and not about the potential consequences, we could not have put an end to Hitler's regime"

It was a different war, at a different time, fought by different people, mostly conscripts. The war might not have happened if Hitler had not such an abundance of boys who didn't think about the consequences of their actions. Let us also not forget that it was the Godless Communists of the Evil Empire who did more than anyone to put an end to Hitler's Regime. Hitler's regime was finished long before Normandy.

It had to be said.

Unphazed, unafraid,

-Steve E.

Myspace page proposal
I have no idea why some of what I wrote got truncated OR why my zip ended up as a header. The rest of my message - which was in the middle - had to do with moderation and content.

I'd be happy to run/moderate it. Or perhaps in tandem with one other so that Myspace friend approval and emergency content edits - which really shouldn't be a problem because of the way Myspace works - could happen quickly.

There are Myspace features to run photos, you could set up Harlan "sound-bites", fiction and non-fiction excerpts could be run in the blogspace, you can "push" events and news to subscribers. Heck, you could even resurrect the old Galaxy on-line video clips, etc.

That's most of what was in the middle of that last post.

Sorry.

- B

18102
*** Susan *** I think Harlan ought to have a Myspace page.

No, really. Not to pull anything away from here but to steer people here - and to the bookselling side of things. The template isn't "perfect" but I think it could be a very Harlan friendly / Harlan "hands free" way to promote some of Harlan's stuff.

Because of the "owner" edit features and ability to say NO to certain kinds of friends and content it really is not as much of an info dumpster as I first imagined it to be.

At first I thought the notion of a Harlan Myspace page was absurd, but after a couple of weeks playing around with it and linking to a few of the "celeb" pages [Mel Brooks, Bill Murray, Johnny Depp] and "causes" pages [End the War, Save Roe v. Wade, etc.] I think it could be a tool used nominally for good. Or, at least not pure evil. It's not a perfect soapbox but looking at Dane Cook's MILLION+ friends, it sure can be a mighty freekin' tall one.

Of course pressure to be in your top 8 will be fierce.

Just a thought.

- Barney

After leaving Cleveland radio Jack said
"My career got started in TV stations in Seattle, Memphis, San Francisco and Boston. At the end, I was director of advertising and promotion for WBZ-TV, the Westinghouse station in Boston. Then I started a PR firm which grew to 50 plus people and my partner and I sold it to a multi national MS&L in 1999. So now I'm semi retired but still teaching as an adjunct at two universities in Boston. I am also an actor with the high points being two documentaries on the Discovery Channel."

In response to Tony Ravenscroft's dream...

The mystery of the Wandering Jew is solved!

He was looking for the chicken salad!

Many years later, when I was sketching in Rome, a grim-looking Englishwoman came up to me and said with some asperity, "I see you are painting MY view."

Spent a restless night, fighting pointlessly amusing dream-images. The apparent high-point was when I was at some dreary little s/f con, chatting aimlessly with fellow heel-coolers, when Harlan Ellison walked up & asked each of us in turn if we knew where the chicken salad is. He spent extra time on me, apparently guessing that I was pulling a fast one on me, & asked the question a few different ways. He finally decided that I was indeed clueless & not under some clever guise, then sighed & walked dejectedly off.

I sincerely hope that this was not some psychic reflection of reality -- I'd hate to think of ANYONE's shade wandering the Earth in search of a nosh.

No, I do not, beyond medium-roast Fair Trade coffee & extra-hoppy India Pale Ale, do drugs, though I'm open to recommendations.

On the up-side, I opened a long-misplaced box & found a bunch of "stuff I want to read when I can relax" books, including an Alfred Hitchcock omnibus with tales by deFrord, Sesar, Matheson, Sayers, & (!!) Kersh, plus a somewhat floppy "Impact-20" (William Nolan shorts, for you heathens). I now have suitable carrots to finish editing the book that was due last week...

good girls come in threes

Unca Harlan:

CHELSEA is the one with the ponce-y name, the one for whom you signed TROUBLEMAKERS Saturday p.m., immediately after Howard sang. The HUGE Ray Bradbury fan.

CHLOE is "ME". And you had her going for all of 3 minutes. That hardly ever happens, as you may have already guessed. Little girl needs to be kept on her toes.

COURTNEY is away at college fulltime.

All three are raving beauties and smart like whipses. Dunno what I did right. But, you're right, I did it.



Thanks bruh.

--------------------------------

Now, I'm reading about the 3 tons(!) of ammonium nitrate seized near Toronto, and since I don't know beans about ammonium nitrate I was about to google the term and came to a screeching halt. Does my name immediately go on some spookfreak intelligence agency's "watch list", just because I am ignorant? Will i find myself, to my surprise, on a DO NOT FLY list? Do we need to worry about this shit in America? I guess so. Thoughts anyone?

ok,
Rick

RICK WYATT:

Do me (all of us) a small favor. Now that "Paleoconservative" has had his/her odious "moment in the sun" on our website, thereby relieving us of the brickbat CENSORSHIP, would you kindly delete this scumbag's wretched mouthings.

Thanks, kiddo.

Harlan

JOHN GREENAWALT:

Agnew I don't (didn't?) know ... but ask him if he remembers MY youth-idol, Doc Lemon.

Yr. pal, Harlan

On Paleoconservative and Other Creatures Beyond the Pale
ANDREW (and Steve, and any interested others): Yeah, he/she/it is more than likely revealing at least a bit of true feelings -- if not 100 percent of such. Week before last, I visited a man who I have always thought of as a nice guy, albeit conservative in his view of the world and our country's politics (yeah, he voted for Bush -- and _still_ defends Dubya and his administration, like so many conservatives who remain blind to the obvious). The guy runs a used bookstore so I visit the guy now and then, drop off boxes of books I'll never be able to read or hang onto, he gives me some cash -- not a heapload -- then sells the books for a profit. Everyone's happy.

Anyway, we got into one of our discussions about politics: After I said Bush & Co. were the vilest most corrupt administration in our lifetimes, he went into his spiel (which he truly believes) that Clinton (Travelgate, Whitewater, etc) and his administration (and Hilary) were dirty, and that Bush & Co. never lied about their reasons for going to war, that Bush never said anything which could pinpoint his being a religious fanatic (he chose to NOT interpret the "I answer to a higher father" remark of Dubya's as an obvious sign of a fundamentalist nutcase)... Then he said something which made me decide to never darken his doorstep again (tough for me cause his wife's cute -- that's a bit of levity): he said (after I argued about the bombing early in the "War" which killed lots of innocents, women and children included) that the people in Iraq deserve to be bombed, and went on -- in a calm voice! -- about how all Muslims were all really against Americans (even the two he'd recently spoken with, who TOLD HIM they didn't believe in the violence the insurgents or Taliban, or others were committing). This nice, congenial man, was abdicating genocide for all the inhabitants of Iraq. The next day, the report about Haditha (sp. may be wrong) hit the internet and papers. And the more I thought about it, the more I couldn't stand the idea of helping -- in any way (such as providing his business with revenue) -- this person and his monstrous views. (Almost as scary is the thought that his wife -- a lovely woman in the physical and emotional senses -- is actually in love with this man -- and that she might believe as he does).

And the whole point of my extra-long ramble is, yeah, there are people walking around out there -- most of them seemingly nice and kind -- with some scary stuff flowing through their noggins. And though I hate to beat a dead horse, and will no doubt call down someone's wrath, I've found that most (not ALL) of these types are either proponents of an organized religion (something quite separate from spirituality), and/or very conservative in their views of society and politics.
--DTS

Andrew,

That comment's a long way off from qualifying for "irony."

Steve

Paleoconservative?
Please tell me that Paleoconservative is being satirical. He/she/it cannot possibly post that and think that his/her/its opinion is going to be taken seriously!?!

More Carlson, Maybe
A bit of George Carlson's non-comics work is apparently on display in another coffee-table book, James Steele's _Queen Mary_. I say "apparently" because Our Host's essay on Carlson mentions that GC illustrated the souvenir booklet for the _Mary_'s maiden voyage, and a large number of illustrations from that booklet or a similar one are reproduced in various places throughout Steele's book. My eye and knowledge of the artist aren't good enough to say it's definitely Carlson, but I'm 75% sure. (I wouldn't be at all surprised if the book's already somewhere in the Ellison household, given that it's page after page of gorgeous Art Deco, so maybe HE knows.)

Cheers!
Don Hilliard

George Carlson sighting
I picked up a coffee-table book titled _Art out of Time_, which showcases interesting, innovative and oddball comics of the past century. The people collected are _really_ obscure: of the thirty or so artists showcased, I recognized only Gene Deitch and-- thanks to our host-- George Carlson, one of whose "Jingle Jangle Tales" is reprinted in full and in color.

It's a really wonderful collection, actually. Some are obvious knockoffs of McCay or Caniff. Others are just... well, unique. There's a strange story about "what happens at 8:30" that borrows a LOT from Will Eisner's _The Spirit_. There's a comic story called _Herbie_, about a massively overweight kid who, by sucking on magic lollipops, gains superpowers and fights the Loch Ness Monster (and I have a very vague memory of having read this comic when I was a small kid). One strip has a superhero called _Stardust_, who's drawn with the _weirdest_ proportions I've seen, and the story reads like Harry Stephen Keeler's mystery novels.

Guy named Dan Nadel put this together. Worth the money.

To Harlan
Do you remember the "Jumping Jack Agnew Show" in Cleveland, Ohio, 1950s. "Jumping Jack" is a friend of mine and a legend in broadcasting.

SHANE, baby:

I just yelled your post over my shoulder. Susan yelled back, "Yes, got it; deposited; tell Shane thank you."

And next time, IIIIIIIIIIII pick the restaurant! Moleeeeeee w/ mango or whatever the fuck that crap that tasted like feet had in it...geezus, save me from Cuisine Minceur, Shellenbarger! Or its sunburnt Southwestern ponce-y relation, avec mango this an' crocodilia that.

Love from us both, Yr. pal, Harlan

RICK KENNEY:

That was one nice letter. Thank you. Say hello to the THREE girls for me. How come three? Because Chloe and Me make two, and you know who makes three.

Thanks again. You're a nice man.

Harlan

Susan: Have you received the UPS receipt and check?
I haven't received a report from my bank showing you've cashed the check as of yet. Just want to be sure everything is okay.

Expect a package in the next week.

Best,
Shane

James Boyer,

Think of this place as the online equivalent to the Ministry of Silly Walks. You SHOULD find a slow, steady leak in your sanity from this time on. Welcome to the pack.

You've good taste. Harlan's an ace at imagery.

This is my first post here, so I absolutely must express my complete gratitude and appreciation I have for Harlan's work. Ellison is by far my favorite author and I can only aspire to be able to expose myself (legally, of course) as completely as he does through his writing. I've tried, I'm not that strong. I love many writers, but Harlan has the unique ability of capturing everthing I love from those writers and blending them into a mind-altering uber-amalgam. I'm sure this has all been said ad nauseum, probably so much so that the sincerity of these comments may appear diminished.
OK, I think I am done (for now) with stroking Harlan's hubris(like an irresistible persian kitty).

Onto topic #2 (referring not at all to the act of moving one's bowels): Mr. Clifford Lawrence Meth.

Like I said, Ellison is my #1 absolutely favorite author of all time. It's probably no surprise that my absolutely second favorite author of all time is Clifford Meth. He is the only one who has been able to have an effect on me in a way that even approaches an Ellison effect. Most of you out there may be familiar with Meth and in fact, it was only through Ellison that I came to be familiar with Meth myself (I absolutely had to have Strange and Stranger Kaddish because of Ellison's contributions and when he did the afterword for Meth's God's 15 Minutes, I anxiously checked the mailbox every day until it arrived).
So, when Meth found me on the oh-so-trendy MySpace.com, I was immediately excited and willing to help with anything he needed. To get his name and writings out to a wider audience, I started a Clifford Meth Group on MySpace. Under the supervision of Meth hisownself (sorry, I had to put that in), we are going to try and use this group as a tool to get Meth into the hands and hearts of many more people, people who may not have the honor of being a devoted Ellison fiend.

If anyone wants to check out the group, join the group, or simply refer anyone to it, the URL is:

http://groups.myspace.com/cliffordmethgroup

And, Clifford's own profile can be found at:

http://www.myspace.com/cliffordmeth

We are also planning on having some cool things (like interviews, contests, etc) once things get rolling a little more.

Harlan, a simple "Thank You" would be light-years away from what you deserve. You are far more than a writer and your impact is greater than anyone could possibly imagine.

Harlan and Susan, the package for my Dad arrived today and he actually called to thank me (he never calls me, especially when I am at work). Thanks to you both for making his day and mine.

Steve, that is an interesting article and I am glad you shared it. The reporter makes some very valid points, especially how comics have gotten much darker of late and have moved away from the heroic ideal.

The recent event in the DC Universe, Infinite Crisis, was reaction to that darkness. Several key characters, including Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman, were going to take a year off to try and rediscover themselves and they ideals they once exemplified.

What is Marvel doing? It seems like they are heightening the shades of grey between heroes and villains in their current mega-event Civil War. However, their story lines, especially in regard to the X-Men have been so confusing lately that I am considering staying away from Marvel titles almost exclusively. The exception being Neil Gaiman's The Eternals, only because it is Neil.

I will start a thread over in the Pop Culture board to continue the state of comics discussion if anyone is interested

I do not question the sacrifice this particular soldier made on behalf of the country, nor can I dismiss those additional sacrifices made by the hundreds of thousands of other warriors who are serving in "Dubya's War". The rank and file of the military does not choose their destination nor the cause they are told to fight for. They are, almost to a person, to be commended for the commitment they make in what they must at least be allowed to perceive as a righteous war, reality and politics notwithstanding.

I do not doubt this soldier feels violated by Mr. Moore. It would be a harsh reality indeed for him to accept that his loss of arms was for a cause he could no longer believe in -- what a harsh blow that would be.

A) Does this "connection" in the film entitle him to tens of millions of dollars in recompense? No.

B) Does this entitle his wife to ten million? No.

C) Will this result in damages or awards? Unlikely.

D) Is there a political purpose behind the action and timing? Possibly.

It's a very sad and regretable situation all around, and much the sadder since clearly there is an agenda of either financial or political gain at the rear of it all.

I agree with Rick, Harlan, Bud and the rest in that there is much more to the story than is currently on parade.
_______________________________________________

On a lighter and much more fun note: The BBC website has a great article about comics and characterizations entitled "Whatever happened to the superheroes of old?"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/5041046.stm

About that McDonalds coffee...
Delurking for a moment to comment on one thing. It is becoming shorthand in discussions of frivolous lawsuits to mention "McDonalds" and "hot coffee" in the same sentence.

While I agree that there are many frivolous lawsuits in our ever more litigous country, this was a lawsuit which had merit.

There are many details, the most salient are below:

1. The 81 year old woman who filed the suit had never sued anyone before.

2. She suffered 3rd degree burns on her legs, thighs and buttocks, requiring skin grafts and a week long hospital stay.

3. For years, McDonalds knew they served their coffee 20 degrees hotter than other restaurants, and they refused to turn down the heat or post warnings about how hot the liquid was (more than 700 complaints about injury settled).

4. The woman said she wouldn't have sued, except the corporation denied her request for compensation for her medical bills.

5. The jury awarded punitive damages of $2.7 million dollars. They calculated the gross sales of TWO DAYS OF COFFEE SALES, and awarded her that.

Frivolous lawsuits abound. This was not one of them.

More details:

http://lawandhelp.com/q298-2.htm

and one from that noted lefty rag the wall street journal

http://www.vanosteen.com/mcdonalds-coffee-lawsuit.htm

Peace

Darryl

P.S. Cindy, you know I love you, but I have to disagree on the issue of this guy's lawsuit. (Insert Steven Dooner's fourth paragraph here, which is what I have said in discussions about this war several dozen times, though less eloquently succinct).

Trials
The main thing you guys are forgetting is that if this gets before a jury, all bets are off. There are two possibilities for this lawsuit:

(1) It gets thrown out by the judge before going to trial for being groundless (pretty likely: regardless of how you feel about the ethicality of Moore's actions, the lawsuit really is on incredibly shaky ground legally).
(2) It goes to trial before a typical jury. A crippled war veteran and patriot lays a sob story and complains about how he was tricked and mistreated.

You can talk all you want about the legal basis of this suit, but juries in civil cases are FAMOUS for handing down sympathy judgements, ESPECIALLY against parties perceived to have deep pockets. This is why hospitals and doctors both shit their pants over malpractice suits even when they are completely blameless. If this makes it to trial Moore better hold on to his ankles.

Cindy wrote:
"Awwww nooooo....Harlan!
He lost his arms in service on behalf of all of us."

Then let's give him a big _round of applause_!

Cindy,

I'm afraid this question has nothing to do with your patriotism or your support for this war. It has to do with montage and fair use of a public quotation that had been broadcast on the NBC Nightly News. You can hate everything Moore says in the movie, but this soldier is asking for $175 million because his image and quote were juxtaposed with those a congressman who was against the war. Moore said nothing about this soldier's views at all. The claim of the suit is that this cinematic juxtaposition "implied" that the soldier was against the war. Well, that's only one inference that could be made among many others, and so the claim is as thin as a claim could be.

The entire suit depends on how one interprets a set of images in montage for what they supposedly imply. If the court were ever to find for the claimant, we might as well start prosecuting thought crimes.

You seem to be focusing on the affective aspect of this story, feeling the soldier was exploited and that his voice was unheard. That may well be true. But it has nothing to do with the free speech that we must allow.

Yet, since you care deeply about our fighting men, does it bother you that this adminsistration sent our soldiers into battle with insufficient numbers and insufficient defenses, that they made our soldiers pay for their own battle armor, that they used battle vehicles for National Guard troops that were also improperly armored, that they put the National Guard into situations that they were not trained for, that they have made our soldiers pay for their own medical treatment and that they cut veterans benefits, including veterans disability pay?

I would be more outraged at this than what a film-maker may or may not have "implied."

Respectfully,

Steve

my opinion rarely matters, but
First, Harlan, Happy belated birthday. 72 is the number for Hafnium in the Periodic Table of Elements. Here are some of its properties: "Most zirconium minerals contain 1 to 3% hafnium. Hafnium is a ductile metal with a brilliant silver lustre. Of all the elements, zirconium and hafnium are two of the most difficult to separate. ... it is used for nuclear reactor control rods." So there's your Scientific Zodiac Reading for 72.

The Debate:
Michael Moore may be disappointing (Bowling for Columbine), or sensationalistic (Fahrenheit 911), but he's a good filmmaker. I enjoyed both movies (mentioned above), and not just because he's the only one firing back at the Republican Chocolate Factory with large-caliber projectiles. He engages viewers and makes them think. People seem to get bogged down in the fine details of both movies so much so that they can't experience the movies. I suppose, if you get nothing else out of Fahrenheit 911, the footage of the Shrub sitting there in a classroom reading a children's story for a photo-op AFTER he learned of the disaster is worth the price of admission. Shit, when my NETWORK goes down I boogie like Bruce Wayne to the pole: Bush sat there like a pussy and waited for someone else to tell him what to do.

Sadness:
Just found out Dr. Rodney William Whitaker died in December. I'm very upset about it. No more Trevanian. I mean, he wasn't B. Traven, but I liked him and his way with words.

Mark, got your e-mail: replying sometime today.

Rob Ewen, Crystal was wondering why her bikini was stretched out after that trip. I'm going to have to write up my memories of Minneapolis and Tempe soon before I forget them. But it was great seeing you again, and if I ever make it back to London I'm going to look you up, if only to return the bikini bottoms.

-Keith

TWISTIN' IN TH E WIND
CINDY: Who Loves ya, Darlin? I'm 100 percernt behind you regarding the punishment you say Mr. Moore's actions merit...as long as that applies to EVERY one of the suckers who "deliberately twist the statements of others to suit their purpose du jour." Which means President George Bush, Vice President Dick (and I DO mean "dick") Cheney, Good ol' "Rummy" and "Condi" and on and on and on throughout that vile, deceitful, self-serving administration that so many unthinking people put in charge of the country -- including their new, "Fox News"-grown mouthpiece who thinks it's clever to play word games with the press corps instead of giving straight answers to the American people -- the folks who elected his boss, and now pay his check. I say hang them all...er, out to dry...and let 'em twist in the wind.

Anybody else notice that the Administration now in charge has out-Nixoned Tricky Dick, out-Reaganed Ronnie Raygun, and, in a lot of ways, out-done the USSR during their final years as a world power?
--DTS (Cindy's lovin' fan in KC and the enemy of ALL Facist-style governments)

Despite my STRONG criticism of Shrub's invasion of Iraq, I'm no fan of FAHRENHEIT 9/11, a muddled and self-contradictory film. Still, I gotta agree with Harlan on this one: Damon will lose, big-time, if he goes to trial, ESPECIALLY if this is true: http://www.reason.com/hitandrun/2006/06/and_usually_the.shtml. Apparently, an armless soldier named Sgt. Peter Damon flanked Ted Kennedy when he made an anti-war speech in '04, which, if it's the same Damon who's suing Moore, kind of negates his claim of misrepresentation.

It'll be interesting to see how this develops.

Ummmm Frankie,
Free speech should be free but the line should be indelibly drawn against anyone who would deliberately twist the statements of others to suit their purpose du jour. What Michael Moore did-- if this is in fact true-- is beneath contempt and should be dragged out from under the stairs and into the noonday sun. The footage should be excised from the film and the soldier should receive not only an apology but a punitive settlement that is sizable enough to give Moore pause the next time he thinks about victimizing a disabled veteran or anyone else. The amount should also be large enough to draw the attention of the media and provide them with impetus to properly publicize Moore's unscrupulous and dishonest deed. If the Enquirer has been held culpable under similar instances then Moore shouldn't skate. He's no different-- tell the truth, don't twist it or skew it to suit your purposes or pony up.

Sorry, kitten-- continue.
;)
Cindy


Awwww nooooo....Harlan!
He lost his arms in service on behalf of all of us. If we didn't have boys like this who think about the role and not about the potential consequences, we could not have put an end to Hitler's regime. This soldier's actions, however brash, were noble and important. In my own humble opinion; I think the soldier would win if he takes the case before a jury. A judge might be something else entirely, but I think a jury could see a patriot whose life was forever diminished because of his loyal and self-less service on behalf of all of us. They'd also see in Moore, a man who discounted the feelings of a disabled veteran for the sake of his own propaganda. It's about truth in advertising and honor in reporting. If Moore needs to trash the truth in order to communicate his message then he should go into the Baptist ministry and leave entertainment to the professionals like Geraldo and Springer.

Still and always,
yer pal,
;)
Cindy

STEVE B:
Okay, given what you've said here, I have to agree with Harlan that the guy has no case. It would have been one thing to cut actual interview footage with him to misrepresent his opinion, but the juxtaposition of this footage (which, if quoted fully, does NOT include his political opinions regarding the war) with another interview doesn't misrepresent much of anything, at least not to any degree he can complain about - let alone sue over.

Having said that, I will freely admit that I cordially despise Moore as a propagandist who would love to be seen as a polemicist.

Mel Gibson's New "Historical" Film
Just saw the trailer for Mel Gibson's new film APOCALPYTO. The film is another of his "historical" epics (BRAVEHEART, The PATRIOT & The PASSION OF THE CHRIST). This one is about the fall of the Mayan culture & will use "real" Mayan dialogue, as he did with Aramaic in The PASSION.

It looks interesting, but my fear is that the Mayans in the film will be portrayed as "evil" or "satanists". I hope Mel will leave his own personal beliefs at home & just make a damn good film. (I will say that it's nice to see a film deal with something other than the standard Europeanism that dominates cinema).

What think ye?

If you're interested, the website address for the film is: www.apocalypto.com

Harlan
Cellphone all Effed up (yes, I get the irony). Cris and I will do our best.

Call you in the morn.

SB

THOUGHTS GUARANTEED TO PISS -OFF HALF OF YOU
STEVE BARBER:

I've now had one professional attempt to PhotoShop that snap. I'm not wild about the result. Care to take Attempt #2 before I go to the next profferer? If so, call me. You've got the number.

Now, to thrust my bare hands into the lava flow.

Having read what there is to consult, on the much-bruited lawsuit against Moore, having seen the film, having watched silently on the sideliness as Ray Bradbury voiced HIS concerns, it is my VERY VERY VERY humble opinion that:

1) Sorry the dude lost his limb(s), but what the hell did he expect as a terrible possibility if he went off to a war? Peanut butter and jelly sandwiches? He accepted the flag-waving and heroic best wishes when he went marching off; now he has to spend the rest of a crippled life bearing the responsibility for his own actions. And 2) He has no case. He will lose if it goes to trial, and Moore shouldn't volunteer one cent to placate him.

His assertions are illiterate, opportunistic, bogus and well, pure horseshit. 3) Let's take him for some hot hot hot coffee at McDonald's, and drop a horsefly from the horseshit in his salad, while we're at it. Or maybe a severed digit.

This is what we--who are cold, cruel, amoral and hardnosed-- call "the long con."

Yr. pal, Harlan

"I don't remember that scene, but if the soldier wins, imagine how this could chill free speech. Anybody who is offended by some footage in a movie could sue, for any reason."

Um, huh?

First off, it's a common misconception that the First Amendment protects all speech from all things. It doesn't. It protects it *from the government*. It says "Congress shall not...", not "Everyone has to...".

And there is a considerable difference between being misrepresented and being offended. To pull out the obligatory Spider-Man quote, with great power comes great responsibility. Someone whose work will, with foreknowledge, be seen by large numbers of people has considerable power with regards to how someone will be perceived and how their reputation will be affected by how they are portrayed. They have the responsibility to correctly portray them. Commentary about such is fine, but misrepresenting someone and their actions is not.

If you're on active duty in a military hospital, it's not your call to give permission to any journalistic body - that's to be granted by the armed forces, of which every soldier is a representative. This would be like the Kennedy family suing Oliver Stone because they didn't like the way the Zaprudar film was used in JFK - even though no one would doubt their emotional distress. (Zaprudar sold the film to Time Life, later Time Warner, and the Stone film was a Warner release. In fact, I visited Kyle Baker on the Warner Studios lot when he was there as a producer: JFK had just been released, and actual still frames of the assassination decorated the Warner commissary!)

The other problem with this suit is that the soldier would have to show that Moore harbored some sort of personal malice toward him, without which there can be neither slander nor libel.

>What makes me skeptical is that it took so long for the soldier to figure out he had been misrepresented and to do something about it.<

Agreed. And the notion that the level of people's umbrage is directly proportionate to how much money might be gleaned from the redress.

As in had Fahrenheit 9/11 flopped, I doubt we'd have heard from this man.

%$#@. THIS excerpt!!!:
In Moore's film Damon is shown lying on a gurney, covered in bandages. He says he feels as if he's "being crushed in a vise," adding, "but [the painkillers] do a lot to help it. And they take a lot of the edge off of it."


The scene prior to Damon's features U.S. Rep. Jim McDermott (news, bio, voting record), a Democrat from Washington state, saying, "You know, [those in the Bush administration] say they're not leaving any veterans behind, but they're leaving all kinds of veterans behind."


In his lawsuit, Damon has argued that the juxtaposition of those two scenes made it sound as if the military and the Bush administration had left him to grapple alone with pain or possibly even a drug addiction when, in reality, he "agrees with and supports the president and the United States' war effort and was not left behind."




(Aside to Ron Lake: You mean Arthur C Clarke???)

From the excerpt below we still have a lot of open questions. I'd have to see the film, but it seems that the lawsuit is derived not from comments altered by Moore, but by the context created in the scene directly before the soldier's footage.

This is going to be very difficult to prove in court, and may (said in full Conspiracy Theorist mode) be part of a preemptive strike to avoid the film being used before the Fall elections.

From Yahoo News, reporter Natalie Finn:

>

http://news.yahoo.com/s/eo/20060601/en_celeb_eo/19163
______________________________________________

Like others I am thrilled with Harlan's announcement of a new DREAM CORRIDOR.
______________________________________________

And finally, my first released shots from the trip to New Orleans:

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1759557

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1759558

http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/view?id=1758385

The first two are of Bourbon Street after 10pm on a Saturday night. If you've ever been there you'll be startled with how empty it is, relatively speaking. The third shot is of an empty restaurant during lunch hour (that wasn't the specific intent of the picture, but we didn't have to ask anyone to move or keep out of the way in order to get it).

It's June 1st kids -- official start of hurricane season.

Thanks and how I was introduced to Harlan Ellison
First post... thank you so much, blah blah blah.

In 76 two of my High School friends came up to me very pissed. Thrusting a book out in front of them one said, "Give it to Ron, HE'LL like it." What did I know it was a book, we had all read Heinlein and Asimov and Bradbury, and That guy who's last name starts with C, but who now escapes me. We were all complete science fiction addicts but nobody had ever mentioned Harlan Ellison. Heck, we were all still virgins then, what did we know of nothin?

That book sat in the trunk of my volkswagen for two years. Eventually I cleaned the car and found Paingod and Other Delusions.

So thanks to the Science Fiction book club and my two friends ignorance, I've been enjoying HE for a long time.

truth or dare


> I feel for the soldier, but freedom comes first. If Moore
> decides to settle out of court, this could be tragic.
> No matter what you think of Moore's tactics this is important
> to understand. Freedom is supposed to be messy.


Not so messy as to allow one person to damage another's reputation by dishonesty, if that is indeed what happened.

Freedom of speech protects one's ability to say what one believes and supports in public, not the opposite. If Moore misrepresented the soldier's position, than that was a little like stealing from him. Evidently you've never been misquoted in the papers and had to live with the consequences.

What makes me skeptical is that it took so long for the soldier to figure out he had been misrepresented and to do something about it.

Of the unpredictable and constantly angry Paracelsus, for example, the stormy petrel who convulsed the staid medical establishment of the sixteenth century by demanding radical reforms in clinical thinking, he wrote: "This first great revolt against the slavish authority of the schools had little immediate effect, largely on account of the personal vagaries of the reformer--but it made men think."

Belated

I've been out, of my mind and other places this past week, so I haven't been reading this place.

Happy Birthday to you, Harlan, Mr. Ellison.
Many happy,
un-nappied,
returns.

FRANK:
No. The specific problem here is NOT that the plaintiff charges he was offended, but that Moore deliberately cut the sequence of the film to indicate that his opinions were other than what they really are.

And yeah, if this is the case, the guy has every right to be offended AND to take action, if only for slander. If I were offended, I could bitch about it, but am not entitled to legal action.

I finally read _Lolita_, and I posted a mini-essay over at my blog: http://rpk.livejournal.com/96098.html
Utterly amazing book.

Re that soldier who's suing Michael Moore. I don't know the particulars, but I have no respect for Michael Moore anymore. I _used_ to: I wrote a good review of his book "Downsize This!" for the _Inquirer_. But _Farenheit 911_ was a severely dishonest film, avoiding real _politics_ to pander to conspiracy fans and radical poseurs.

So Barney's got a Blog. I'm not exactly certain what blogs are supposed to be. They're a neat way for all of us Must-Write-Or-Go-Mad types to broadcast out thoughts, and maybe find an appreciative audience. But it's easy to get drowned out, and depending on the system, they don't lend themselves to extended conversations or even entertaining arguments. (Sometimes, this can interfere with their social function, but that'd take too long to explain.) The "news" blogs tend to be ideological echo chambers, and while there's a clinical interest in seeing how rumors get started, and which "witty" remarks occur to nearly everybody, they're only of use as pointers to substantial material.

Re Alex Krislov's comments on unfinished or incomplete works: Right on.

New horrors!
Hey gang,

Here is today's extraordinarily bad idea. ;-)

http://www.myspace.com/dannelke

http://blog.myspace.com/dannelke

- Barney

Granfaloon, PA.

p.s. - and thank you for the kind words Rob. YOU can be my friend. "Friend" should be heard as spoken by Karloff in The Bride of Frankenstein. ;-)

Middlesex Rob


glad you made it home alive.

da daughters say, Hey!

email me, wouldya?

Rick

Frank -
Gotta disagree with your interpretation. If I'm at an anti-war rally and it's run on the evening news as a pro-war rally then I've got a legit grievance. I haven't seen the film, but if this person is portrayed as anti-war and this is contrary to what was actually occurring then he's got every right to set the record straight and register the objection.

Disclaimer: The above assessment is reached by someone who is very much against "Dubya's War".

SB

(And RATS! Harlan obviously saw through my nefarious intent to Photoshop his image into various historical events a-la "Forrest Gump". You shoulda seen the image of Harlan crossing the Delaware I'd already constructed in my mind...)

Michael Moore is being sued by a soldier who lost both legs in the Iraqi war. He says that Moore used footage of his in Fahrenheit 9/11 that made the soldier look like he was against the war, when he was actually supporing the war. I don't remember that scene, but if the soldier wins, imagine how this could chill free speech. Anybody who is offended by some footage in a movie could sue, for any reason.

I feel for the soldier, but freedom comes first. If Moore decides to settle out of court, this could be tragic.

No matter what you think of Moore's tactics this is important to understand. Freedom is supposed to be messy.

Minicon 41
Hello - it's me, the Sick Rob of the East. Wow.....I decide to catch up with the Webderland after nearly two months away from it, and discover there are all these people concerned for my health. I'm deeply touched. Thank you, from the heart of my bottom!

I realise that Harlan is now 72; I'm now 44; the Nebulas have come and gone; and MiniCon is a dim and distant memory. However, I wanted to drag everyone's thoughts back in time to that amazing weekend in Minneapolis just once more (despite Kristin' s wish to have swapped Minnesota for Arizona!).

I cannot hope to match Mr Dannelke's superlative account of the events at Tempe, so I won't even try. I will, however, just jot down a few comments at random concerning the occurrences and people that have stuck in my brain since Easter.....

First, the Webderlanders:

THE OLD....

FinderDoug (congrats on selling that story, old son!)
Kosmo Cramer & girlfriend (sorry Keith - didn't get to chat with your missus v. much - but I did get to share a lift with her in a swimsuit - it was a tight fit for both of us, but still.....)

...AND THE NEW

Amy & Ben - thanks for the ibuprofen!
Kristin and the Bear
Roger and his mum
Mark (never did get to Hell's Kitchen, more's the pity - Mr Kramer did, and saw
Al Franken in there)
Scott (still can't discuss GALACTICA, I'm afraid...but at least Season 2 of
LOST has now started up over here)
Rick and da daughters

There was also Annie the nurse, who provided me with a killer massage, and librarian supremo Jody Wurl, who gave some of us a guided tour of the delights of downtown Minneapolis. Not forgetting John Pistachio and Tracy - a delightful couple. Thanks to one and all!

I should also like to thank Susan E. for being so contagious , and Harlan E. for introducing me to the delights of:

a) Mallomars (didn't realise these were an endangered species, Harlan, but I can see why - heaven on earth!)

b) White Castle 'sliders' - hmmm........

It was emotional.

regards
Rob

(Don't know when I'll be going stateside again - my next venture will hopefully be to Worldcon in Japan next year.....see you all before too long, hopefully....)

(I also got to meet George Takei in Madison the following week - a very charming man - so an additional bonus on top of everything else).

Belated Birthday Wishes

Happy Birthday, Harlan! Though I may occasionally dissuade you from sucker-punching certain Unnamed Authors, you have my fullest blessing to get in the ring with Life and Art, and pummel those bad bitches till the lymph comes out of their eyes. Long may you rage, man.

Thanks
Harlan and Susan,

Your timing is impeccable. I will be going back to Philly to see my family next week, so it will be great to see his reaction soon after receiving the gift.

Thank you so much,

Mark

Phoenix Without Ashes
I know that hearing about "The Starlost" doesn't prevoke fond memories for Harlan Ellison. I'm curious though, given that interest in his concept seems to still exist to this day, why there have been no additional books or writings. Do the individuals who managed to uterly destroy his concept still have legal ties that bind?

Bill

Mark:

The copy of CITY OF THE EDGE OF FOREVER that you ordered has been mailed to your Dad.

Thank you.

Susan

Happy Birthday Unca Harlan!

Harlan,

I have a recommendation for you. If you plan on getting that photo framed, I recommend UV protective glass. :) I don't have a specific recommendation for a type of paper best fit for maximum preservation, though. Maybe someone else can chime in on that?

Oh, I must also thank you (again) for that reply a while back about the effect of science fiction on society. I think my original reply got lost the milieu... Anyway, that was mighty swell of you to take that time and reply! :)

-Erika.

NEW DREAM CORRIDOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HOT-DIGGETY-DOUBLE DAMN!!!!!!!!!! Only thing better than new Ellison fiction is new Ellison comic splendor. With a Bolland cover. Time to start bugging the fine folks at the local funny book depot as we speak. Speaking o' funny books, any news on the Dr. Fate project that was kicked around pre-big events?

THAT FADED FOTO

Got it. Thanks to each and all. Josh called this morning to add his mother's Photo Shop skills to the possibilities y'all offered. I think I'm good now, so you can go back to discussing the IMPORTANT STUFF.

Oh, incidentally, the final, spectacular issue of

HARLAN ELLISON'S DREAM CORRIDOR

will be published by Dark Horse on November 23rd. I okayed the promo copy to appear in the Diamond catalogue (as brilliantly written by my beloved editor, Diana Schutz) yesterday. The Brian Bolland cover is to die for.

Yr. pal, Harlan

Harlan
When I read your post about being a CFS sufferer I wanted to offer my sympathy. I am one, too, and it's a horrible thing made doubly so by the fact that externally you look so much better than you actually feel. Non-afflicted people just don't get it.

Mine is abating somewhat (except in times of stress) and I hope yours improves or continues do to so.

Together in Farthood
Harlan, I shouldn't need reminding, every year, that your birthday is only a week or so after mine. I blame the onset of dementia. And Happy birthday.

One Final Birthday Note With Pugs
The other day, my wife was letting me know that I couldn't be mean to our two pugs (Nova and Peewee) because it was their birthday. Three years old. Of course, I'm never mean to our two pugs except for when I squirt Peewee with water when he gets a bit rambunctious, but that's a different story altogether.

So, guess what famous Grandmaster that share their birthday with?

Didja get is in one? Yup, I don't recall doing so, but it looks like a few years ago I searched high and low in the Valley of the Sun until I could find the one pug breeder whose champion puppy machine had spit out two pugs on the same day as our illustrious host was celebrating another one of those dozens of birthdays.

Just as I celebrate my birthday with Elvis Presley, Soupy Sales and Larry Storch, my pugs get to celebrate theirs with Harlan.

-TODD

HARLAN:
A belated Hombly Borgeek. I pinch your claw in bonhomme.

Harlan's Restoration Period
HARLAN: Karl Kofoed, an sf illustrator of some reknown (He did the "Galactic Geographic 3003" magazine/coffee table book), is also a professional photo restorer. You can see some of his latter work at http://users.rcn.com/kkofoed/photosamples/photo.html --I've seen some of his restorations in the up-close, and they're quite good (Brian can attest to this).

His telephone number appears on the web page I cited above.

Of things 72
Harlan,
Allow me to add one more to the wishes of a happy day and congratulations on completing another year maintaining the standards of ethics and productivity to which you so relentlessly hold yourself and from which so many of us benefit.
I thought a little about the number 72 and:

Seventy Two
It may interest you
Is Two to the Three
Times Three to the Two

OK, so Martin Gardner I'm not, but I wish the best to you and Susan and enjoyed seeing and talking to you both in Tempe. It's getting late so I will post later on what to do with this plate and other Nebula memories.

ramble on

I had such a flashback today.

I have been reading science fiction in general since I was 13 and I first spotted that wicked-ass cover of van Vogt's WAR OF THE RULL-- you know, the one with the dude poised astride the behemoth with spear raised--as I sat there rifling through a lot of other crap on the book spinner in the 7-11 store. I read the first few pages of that one and I thought, This shore ain't THE PHANTOM FUCKING TOLLBOOTH, no way!

That's the same way I discovered Harlan. But I discovered others too. Strange names called out from strange looking books. And those other voices have been allowed to run rampant before my eyes; a few resonate to this day.

Ray Bradbury, Ted Sturgeon, Kate Wilhelm, Chip Delany; all friends I never met.

Today I picked up an oldie that for some reason I have yet to read. And reading it I remembered one of the strongest, most self-assured voices I know. One of the guys who I came to trust implicitly. One of the WRITERS to whom I entrusted my imagination.

Roger Zelazny never let me down. And today MY NAME IS LEGION forced me to remember how that all worked. Dude walked like an avenging angel through the pages of every book or story that carried his brand. Telling stories with a bullhorn in one hand and the other hand fisted. Hot boots leaving scorch marks on the bindings. Roughshod; like that.

"Would you mind terribly if I dropped by again sometime?" he says at one point in "'Kjwalll'kje'k'koothailll'kje'k."

No, Roger. I don't mind. You just keep on coming back, old champion.

ok,
Rick

Harlan

I think this is something we can do, if you don't have anyone earmarked. Both Cris and I use Photoshop extensively.

I'll call tomorrow.


Steve B

Photoshop Magic
If you can have the photo scanned, Harlan, I can take a crack at restoring it using the software suite I have here. I presume it is sun faded, the red are gone and the whites are amber and the amber's gone brown.

Let me know if you want me to have a look. By way of resume, I once actually extracted a photo of Bern Xanadu and his wife from the shadows of my wedding. THAT was like picking out the alien on the grassy knoll.

On Photo Restoration
"d) What IS that technology; who performs use of same as magic, the way it's done on crime shows on tv; and how do I locate said wizards? Names if you know 'em. Phone numbers if you got 'em. Or, at least, name of technology so I can go look where most efficient."

For a snapshot, the picture is scanned to create a high quality digital image; the image is then manipulated by any one of a number of software packages - Adobe Photoshop, Paint Shop Pro, PhotoImpact - the package used will vary from store to store. Many camera stores, from the chains down to the smaller independents, offer photo restoration services.

I have no typical 'guy' who I've used for such services. My recommendation is that you don't want to deal with a long-distance merchant that will require you to mail them the original photo (some do), because you run a higher risk of losing it the more hands it passes through. To that end, if it was me, I'd start by talking to two stores in Sherman Oaks who offer such services, see if they do their own restoration in-house or if they send it off-site, and gauge your own comfort level based on their responses to your questions:

Hooper Camera - 14622 Ventura Blvd - 818 784-9020
Ritz Camera - 14006 Riverside Drive #86 - 818 986-6050  

I'd also call American Photo Restoration (est. 1977), located in Hollywood - 1680 North Vine Street, Suite 1211, 1-877-263-9563. While their web site says photos should be scanned and e-mailed or posted, because you're local you may have luck with a drop off/pick up, or may simply be more comfortable mailing locally as opposed to cross-country.

Happy hunting!

Why even bother?
Harlan, I can understand your concern at the wording--but there's no point in anyone pointing it out to Priest. Anybody who thinks you're lazy is so eaten up with his own obsessions as to ignore the obvious evidence. You've written, what? 76 books now? 77? Something like that. Priest has written about 15. I don't weigh quality by the pound, but if we must consider how much work a writer's produced, you're not just in the big leagues, but the heavy hitters box.

A long, long time ago, you made a remark about some people thinking Bob Silverberg was supposed to be "a story factory" because he worked so steadily. You mocked the notion. You were right. Prolific as he was at the time (producing "The Man in the Maze," "Son of Man," "Thorns" and heaven knows how many more of his finest works in a very brief span), even he couldn't make _every_ story come out whole. Some stories, some projects, don't come together. That's life. I expect that's part of what the F&SF piece will be about.

Only twits burning with seething green envy sit there whining about what you _haven't_ done. And only willfully cruel people mock the weakness that comes with illness. I ran into a few of those when I was fighting cancer (and, for all intents and purpose, sleeping through nearly two years of my life).

The whole issue is bull. You know that.

Ah, well. Belated birthday wishes, oh Grandmaster. Hey, I never realized how close your birthday was to Miles Davis' until this year. Seems appropriate, that closeness.

Flying Blue Monkey report
a few places offer the service you seek:
http://dejaviewphotos.com/ [sorry, no phone number or address]
http://www.digitalrestoring.com/ [10 Alpha Place, Lincoln Park, NJ 07035]
http://www.a2zphotorestoration.com/ [678-849-4444]
http://www.phototouch.biz/ [530-873-1717]


there are hundreds more out there, none show anything better than any of the others on the surface. I have never used any of them, but they do turn up clean with the BBB.

And belated happy birthday.

Stephen

HARLAN SEEKS ASSISTANCE + 2 OTHER MATTERS

I need anyWebderlander and/or Flying Blue Monkey to steer me to the artisan I need. I'll ask the question simply, in hopes it will stanch the flow of what-ifs, how-comes, and other nth-degree maddening diversionary remarks you clowns back your Peterbilts up to me and dump onto my loading dock.

Here it is: ITEM THE FIRST

a) I have a framed snapshot taken with an everyday camera--not a digital or high-end instrument--and in that photograph I am shaking hands with Carl Barks, the Duck-Man hisownself. 1993, for the curious.

b) The sun has faded it.

c) I know the technology exists to bring back the color and make it crisp and sharp and restore the skin-tone to the two now-vampire-white subjects shaking hands in the shot.

d) What IS that technology; who performs use of same as magic, the way it's done on crime shows on tv; and how do I locate said wizards? Names if you know 'em. Phone numbers if you got 'em. Or, at least, name of technology so I can go look where most efficient.

ITEM THE SECOND

Todd Cassel: I called Gordon Van Gelder at F&SF and gently told him I was unhappy with that phraseology. It wasn't that I was "unable" to finish the story, as much as it was that I'd had the basic idea for years, had never been able to figure out an ending as clever as the beginning, and thought it would be a lark to write a brief essay (which I did) in which I pointed out that an "idea" is not a "story," and that a lot of neat-o ideas never go any further ... and wouldn't it be a lark to toss that great idea out to three disparate writers; and see what THEY could spark with it. So I did, they did, and the "endeavor" will be published in F&SF in a month or so.

But...

For a man who has been mercilessly hounded and defamed for decades because he couldn't "finish" THE LAST DANGEROUS VISIONS -- and isn't it interesting to note that recent studies of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, with which I've suffered for thirty-plus years, now show it IS REAL and probably genetic -- and it struck me in 1973 as I was well into TLDV -- and would someone mention that to Christopher Priest, who has never missed an opportunity to ridicule my "imagined illness" as yet another reason to pillory me for being "unable to complete" TLDV -- for such a man, Gordon's careless phraseology (with no malice intended, I'm certain), "unable to complete," is less than salutary.

ITEM THE T