Shared posts

08 Feb 01:08

A Ukip-Conservative Pact? What does History say about it?

by noreply@blogger.com (Alun Wyburn-Powell)
Just over a hundred years ago one of the two main British parties of government entered a pact with an emerging smaller party, which shared many of its aims and policies. At the following election both parties made gains and the pact seemed to be a win-win deal.

Could a pact between the Conservatives and Ukip be another match made in political heaven?
A couple of details though – the 1903 Gladstone-MacDonald Pact between the Liberals and the forerunner of the Labour Party was indeed followed by a Liberal landslide victory in 1906 with 400 seats. Labour also won 30 seats. 

The rest is history, of course. By 1922 Labour had overtaken the Liberal Party which dwindled to a low of only 5 seats in 1956. The Party did just survive and (as the Liberal Democrats) clawed its way back to 57 seats at the 2010 election.

Looking at this historical precedent may seem very attractive for Ukip, but David Cameron (who knows his political history) is not likely to be tempted by this precedent.
05 Feb 14:15

Pete Seeger (MP3's)

by Bob Purse

The unusual, obscure and fascinating trips to my reel to reel collection, and the offbeat, unknown and one-of-a-kind records from the archives will wait until another day and another post. 

My hero is gone.

Pete`

Pete Seeger, 1919-2014.

For my money, the best singer ever recorded, and that I've ever heard anywhere. No one comes close. His voice was the purest expression of joy, or sadness, or anger, or righteous indignation, or whatever else was called for. In addition, his singing was a natural extension of his speaking voice, unadorned by any embellishment, misguided training or showboating, and that's exactly the sort of singing we don't have enough of today. HIs voice is pure emotion. His voice is the sound of America. His voice is the sound of life being lived well.

And not only that, Pete was without question in my mind, the most important American musician of the 20th century. I'm not saying that based solely on his songwriting or performances - I wouldn't try to support that statement. What I mean is - looking at any prominent musician of the century, and the totality of what each of them did, in all areas, musical or otherwise, again, no one comes close. He was one of the most important Americans of the century, period. 

I could support those statements, if I had the time and the space - it would take (and has taken) a book. But instead, just a focus on one important moment from history, and then I have a few of my favorites from Pete's works below.

There is also a much more detailed version of this post, with nearly 20 samples from his career, in a post you can find here

Before the music, a trip back in time to one of the pivotal events in Pete's life. While he kept up his professional career from 1955-1962 - Pete made at least five albums with the Weavers, and perhaps three dozen albums for Folkways, including hundreds of tracks recorded during that time, in addition to non-stop touring - he was, for that entire period, facing the wrath of the U.S. Government, including what seemed likely to be a likely prison term, essentially for refusing to reveal his private thoughts.

Indeed, the most significant moment of his life I can revisit is what happened when he appeared before the House Un-American Activities Committee, to answer charges that he was a communist, among other things. 

Pete at HUAC

Many others had cowardly turned over names of friends and former friends to the committee, while even more had reasonably taken the Fifth, which had imperiled if not ended their careers. Pete took a riskier, and flat out ballsier step, one I don't believe anyone else took - he essentially pleaded the First Amendment, telling the panel that, as an American, he had the right to believe whatever he wanted to, and in addition, was entitled to be free from the need to be compelled to reveal those thoughts in such a situation as he was then in. Basically, he told the committee that, under the constitution, his beliefs were none of their business. In 1950's America, those were daring things to say. Read his entire testimony here - it is bracing. 

And for this, facing the charges brought, he could have faced a decade in prison - he was actually found guilty and sentenced, although the ten counts of one year each were to be served concurrently - and was under the threat of this sentence for nearly half a decade. It's a good thing he didn't have to serve this term in prison, but a shame that the case was thrown out on a technicality, as it might have been (had it been decided correctly) a nice precedent to prevent or halt similar Congressional abuses in the future.

But all of that was going on while Pete toured the country, spreading the word that through music can come peace and brotherhood, and, not coincidentally, being the key figure in the flowering of the folk revival of that era in the process.

And now, a quick three song sampling of my favorite Seeger tracks, which, again, is greatly expanded on here

Here's a recording from the Newport Folk Festival. To me, it is among the prime examples of Pete's ability to lead a crowd in group harmony - as he first encourages them to sing, then goes over each part, then, realizing it should be in a higher key, moves his capo before launching into an inspired rendition of "Oh, Mary, Don't You Weep". The spoken opening is a great demonstration of how Pete's singing voice was just an extension of his way of speaking, and the moments here in which he sings a single high note over the harmonizing audience... well, that's something he often did, and it was always an amazing sound, rarely better than it is here.

Pete Seeger - Oh, Mary, Don't You Weep (MP3)

From 1974, here's my second favorite Seeger track, a performance with his great friend Fred Hellerman on the folk standard "Banks of Marble". The track here, with banjo, guitar and piano, goes into a rolling rhythm, as their voices harmonize as in the old days, and they sing a song which is, sadly, yet to lose its meaning - it is as relevant today as when it was written, about 65 years ago. To quote a well known Seeger song: "when will we ever learn?".

Pete Seeger and Fred Hellerman - Banks of Marble (MP3)

And finally, the recording I consider not only Pete Seeger's finest moment, but one of the two or three greatest single tracks ever recorded. This is one of those perfect records that I could listen to multiple times a day without getting tired of it. It's found on an album recorded at the Weavers' reunion concerts at Carnegie Hall in 1963, but aside from some key instrumental backing from other members of the group (the double bass in particular is essential here), this is all Pete's show, or rather, Pete Seeger with an choir-by-audience numbering in the thousands. 

Listen to how simply Pete suggests they sing with him, going into the second chorus, and how, by the end of the song, it's a towering massed vocal singing with him. It helps that Tom Paxton's "Ramblin' Boy" is an incomparable song, but the magic here is what Pete does with it, with his singularly wonderful voice and with the audience.

Pete Seeger with the Weavers - Ramblin' Boy (MP3)

Thanks, Pete, for the myriad ways that you colored our lives, made it a more beautiful, musically vibrant world, help open our eyes to so many things, and worked to make America and the world a better place. 

Pete Seeger with the Weavers - Ramblin' Boy (MP3)

Thanks, Pete, for the myriad ways that you colored our lives, made it a more beautiful, musically vibrant world, help open our eyes to so many things, and worked to make America and the world a better place. 

04 Feb 14:23

Words, Words, Words (Repeat)

by LP

“Stop tormenting me, you ridiculous contraption!”

WHAT IS THE MATTER WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH CANT YOU THINK OF ANYTHING

“You know deuced well that I cannot concentrate on my art with your infernal chattering.”

OH SO ITS MY FAULT IS IT WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH YES THAT MUST BE IT AND NOT AT ALL THAT YOU ARE A BIG HACK

“A hack? What on…look here! I haven’t the time to quarrel with you, you ludicrous tin box. I’m trying to finish ‘Surprised By Joy’, and you’re not helping.”

NOT LIKE I HELPED WITH THE WORLD IS TOO MUCH WITH US EH WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH

“Pish and tosh. You did little more than cosmetics. I would have had it eventually. I didn’t need you, you rattle-trap.”

YOU WOULD HAVE GOTTEN IT EVENTUALLY HA HA DO NOT MAKE ME LAUGH WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH YOU COULDNT EVEN GET PAST THE FIRST LINE

“In fact, in retrospect, I rather fancy my original version better than yours.”

YOU MEAN THE ONE THAT STARTED ‘THE WORLD IS TOO MUCH WITH US LAH DEE DAH’ IS THAT THE ONE YOU MEAN WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH YES THAT WAS JUST GREAT YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE WITH THAT ONE

“Listen, you clattering sky-junk! You are but some base mechanical gadget who claims to be a ro-bot from the future, whatever that is meant to mean, while I am one of England’s greatest poets!”

NOT TO MENTION YOUR GLORIOUS POSITION AS OFFICIAL STAMP DISTRIBUTOR FOR WESTMORLAND YOU MUST BE VERY PROUD WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH

“It allows me to underwrite your precious brass-polish, you devilish toy. I don’t recall you complaining about that. Now, help me think of something that rhymes with ‘power’.”

MAN WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH SERIOUSLY

What?”

HOW MANY WORDS ARE THERE THAT RHYME WITH POWER WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH GOD YOU SUCK I DONT EVEN KNOW WHY I BOTHER

“The sentiment is mutual, you metallic cad! Oh, had I known my life would be laid seige, daily tormented by a nagging ro-bot no bigger than a Bible but containing far more mischief! I would never have left Cumbria!”

HA HA HA WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH HA HA HA

“I fail to see what’s so amusing, creature.”

YOU SAID CUM-BRIA WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH HA HA HA

“What do you find so hilarious about that, pest? It is a respectable clime. I myself hail from Cockermouth.”

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA OH MAN YOURE KILLING ME WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH HA HA HA COCKERMOUTH MAN

“That does it! I have had my fill of you! Silence your shrill chattering, futuristic ro-bot, and torture me no more! I shall brook no more japing from the likes of you!”

THAT IS FINE WITH ME WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH MAYBE I WILL LOOK UP YOUR FRIEND SAMUEL-TAYLOR-COLERIDGE I AM SURE HE WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM ME AGAIN

“Coleridge! That…that betrayer! That mystical bottle-nose! You wouldn’t!”

OH WOULDNT I WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH I BET HED LOVE TO SEE ANOTHER GOOD ONE LIKE THE ONE ABOUT THE ALBATROSS I GAVE HIM THAT TIME

“No! No, I beg of you! I…I don’t know what I would do without you, ro-bot.”

PROBABLY GO BACK TO RHYMING ‘TRANQUILITY’ WITH ‘THAT ONE GIRL WHO WORKS DOWN AT THE MILL AND ME’ I WOULD GUESS WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH

“You’ve won this time, damn you. But my day will come.”

OH IM SURE IT WILL WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH IN THE MEANTIME HOW ABOUT THIS ‘EVEN FOR THE LEAST DIVISION OF AN HOUR’

“Perfect! You have come through again, ro-bot. I scarcely know how to repay you.”

THINK NOTHING OF IT WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH SAY HOW ABOUT TELLING ME A STORY ABOUT THAT TOWN YOU GREW UP IN WHAT WAS IT CALLED AGAIN

“You mean Cockermouth?”

HA HA HA OH MAN WILLIAM-WORDSWORTH WHAT A SUCKER

04 Feb 12:11

The Pupil Premium is hitting the middle classes

by Jonathan Calder
A report in the Daily Telegraph last week said:
The future of England’s grammar schools is under threat because education funding is being diverted towards deprived pupils with poor exam results, the head teacher of the country’s top-performing secondary has warned. ... 
Paul Evans, the head of Colyton grammar in Devon, said tackling underperformance in poor areas was a “laudable aim” but insisted it had “serious unintended consequences” for schools such as his.
I find myself unconcerned by this. Not because I think grammar schools are wicked, but because this is exactly the effect the Pupil Premium was meant to have.

Some have seen the Pupil Premium as rooted in the fact that children from poor families are more likely to have problems and therefore they require more funding.

That is true to an extent, but I have always seen the Pupil Premium having a different genesis. It recognises that there are good schools and bad schools, and that children from poor families tend to be steered towards the bad schools - I blogged about this theory a couple of years ago.

The idea of the Pupil Premium thus becomes to give the good schools an incentive to take more children from poor families. As I suggested back in 2009, the inspiration for this may come from higher education, where universities have always been keen to recruit students from overseas because they pay higher fees.

So the answer for Colyton grammar is to find more bright pupils from poor homes. If they cannot or will not do so, then any moral case for its continued existence as a grammar school is weakened.

The question for the Liberal Democrats then becomes, as I pointed out in that 2009 post, how we are to sell it to middle class voters when their children will not benefit from it or even suffer from it.
04 Feb 12:08

What poverty does to people's thinking

by Jonathan Calder
The American Psychological Association website has a fascinating interview with the Princeton University psychology and public affairs professor Eldar Shafir.

Professor Shafir talks about his research into the degree to which people's minds are less efficient when they feel they lack something - whether it is money, time, calories or even companionship:
One of the classic errors that poor Americans are criticized for is taking "payday loans," those very high-interest loans that at the moment seem like a good solution but two weeks later cause them to owe high interest. So, we decided to run a study with Princeton undergraduates, who nobody would say are unsophisticated. 
Working with Anuj Shah, we had them play a "Family Feud"-like computer game and randomly assigned them to be rich or poor in the amount of time they had to answer questions, giving the rich 50 seconds per round and the poor 15 seconds. Half of the participants were also given the option to borrow time, but every second they borrowed cost two seconds from the entire bucket of time they had available for the game. 
We found that when people were rich with time they were very judicious, needed it less, and only very occasionally took a loan. But when they were time-poor, these sophisticated Princeton students grabbed these available loans to try and do well in the game and ended up making less money than the time-poor students who weren't given the option to borrow. These students made the same mistakes that we observed among poor people. 
What surprises you most about scarcity? 
What's most striking is that these findings make a very strong case for the idea that people who look very bad in conditions of scarcity are just as capable as the rest of us when scarcity does not impose itself on their minds. 
What's interesting about a lot of behavioral research is that we don't have full intuitive access to it. For example, research on the use of cellphones in cars has been striking because we all have the illusion that we can manage calls just fine. But the findings are clear that when you are on a cellphone in the car, even when it's not hand held, your reaction time is comparable to being legally drunk. That's not intuitively available to us because most of us just don't feel it. 
The same thing happens here. People know they're busy and distracted, but the impact and the consequences of that distraction are much more impressive than we realize
04 Feb 12:07

About That Coke Ad

by John Scalzi

Dear every conservative getting his underwear in a twist about that Coca Cola Super Bowl commerical in which not only was the “deeply Christian patriotic anthem” sung in something other than the English that Jesus spoke, but also featured a gay couple being happy with their kid:

Dudes, you’re aware that Katharine Lee Bates, the writer of the song, was almost certainly a lesbian, right? And while undoubtedly Christian, Bates used her faith as a foundation for progressive social activism that would have given the conservatives of her time, and possibly some conservatives now, the shudders and shakes (she also nearly resigned her professorship at Wellesley when the school thought to force its faculty to profess their fealty to the Christian faith).

Bates was a pacifist with the dream of uniting people “from the Pacific to the Atlantic, around the other way… and that will include all the nations and all the people, from sea to shining sea.” Which is to say that it’s an excellent bet that Bates would be delighted to hear her song sung in as many different languages by as many different sorts of people as possible.

And as for the idea that “unity” requires all people to be the same and adhere to the same top-down political and social orthodoxy, there’s this useful quote:

In 1910, when a colleague described “free-flying spinsters” as “fringe on the garment of life”, Bates answered: “I always thought the fringe had the best of it. I don’t think I mind not being woven in.”

In their outrage about “America the Beautiful” being hijacked to represent something it does not, conservatives are perhaps missing the irony that the song has been hijacked at least once before, by them. Perhaps they’re just mad that someone had the temerity to hijack it back. I don’t think it’s entirely out of the realm of possibility that Ms. Bates would be amused by that.


04 Feb 11:53

Tales of My Childhood #8

by evanier

talesofmychildhood

Forgive me. This will be a long one.

My father very much wanted me to go to college. No, strike that: He desperately wanted me to go to college. He spent much of his adult life doing a job he hated and one which offered no chance of ever yielding more than a very modest living. This, he blamed in large part on his education stopping the day he graduated high school. No son of his — and he only had one — was going to be deprived of greater opportunity.

As we neared the day when I would have to start applying in order for college to happen, another reason popped up as to why I had to go to one. There was this war in Vietnam going on and my father literally had nightmares of me being drafted and sent there. He heard about these things called "student deferments" and while he wasn't sure what they did and if they'd keep me out, if there was even a chance…

So I was going to go to college, end of discussion. In truth, there never was any discussion. As it would turn out, I did attend U.C.L.A., found it to be an utter waste of time and quit before I secured any kind of degree — a decision I have never regretted for an instant. I'm sure college is great for many people…probably even most people. But it wasn't right for me and in some other essay here, I'll explain why. This one is about me getting into college in the first place, not out.

If I'd known then what I know now…well, I probably would still have enrolled in college. Because my father just wanted it so much.

I don't know how it works these days but in the sixties, the route into U.C.L.A. went like this. I was attending University High School in West Los Angeles and there were certain "college-qualifying" classes I had to take and I had to get at least a C in each of them. Then one or both of two things had to happen. I had to take the Scholastic Aptitude Test and achieve a certain score on it and/or I had to graduate from Uni with a certain grade point average.

I took the S.A.T. and scored above the designated number so that was that. Getting at least a C on all those college-qualifying courses in high school seemed quite doable…with one possible problem. I had to take and pass two different "lab sciences" — two semesters of each. The choices were Physics, Physiology and Chemistry. In order to sign up for Physics, you had to have notched a certain grade level in Geometry and Algebra but I'd fallen a millionth of a point below that requirement so I was stuck with Physiology and Chemistry. In eleventh grade, I took Physiology and it was no great challenge. In fact, it was actually one of the more interesting and useful things I studied in school. Chemistry, which I took in my final year of high school, was the opposite.

At Uni, there were two Chemistry teachers — Mr. Dennison and Mr. Clayton. Mr. Dennison was a friendly, benevolent fellow and, I was told, a damn good teacher. I wish I could have experienced that first-hand but I got stuck with Mr. Clayton, who was the worst human being on the planet. Years later after he died, the story made the rounds that somewhere in the bowels of Hell, Adolph Hitler and Joseph Stalin found themselves rooming with Mr. Clayton and they both said, "Hey, who let him in here?" I have no doubt this is absolutly true.

At Uni, we had to "run for classes," scurrying from office to office to sign up for what we were going to take and which period. Many a young life was lost as students trampled one another to get into Mr. Dennison's Chemistry class as opposed to Mr. Clayton's. I was not among the better scurriers or tramplers.

Mr. Clayton was a serious, older man. Visually, he reminded me a little of the character actor, John McGiver. In case you don't remember John McGiver, here's a photo of him…

johnmcgiver01

John McGiver

The first day, Mr. McGiver Mr. Clayton announced that he would be teaching the class on a "College Level." By his standards, that meant there had to be little to no chance of any of us passing it. To emphasize this point, he gave every student a failing grade on the first test and most of us a failing grade on the second. For the third, he urged us to read and study Chapter Five in our textbooks. We all committed every word of that chapter to memory…and then the test was all about Chapter Six.

Asked why he had done this, he replied, "Because a good student would have read ahead." And so we all flunked the third test. That was how it went all semester as we all played a game that was rigged against us. I'm sure he thought he was doing us some sort of "tough love" favor but I was sure he wasn't.

I might not have minded this Ruthless Drill Sergeant approach to teaching if I thought I was learning anything but I swear to you: I learned nothing from Mr. Clayton. Not a thing…except on a temporary basis, some memorized (but not understood) facts that I could regurgitate onto a test paper and then forget. We spent much of the first semester learning how to balance Redox Equations. What is a Redox Equation and why on Earth would anyone ever need to balance one? Beats the hell outta me. I never learned what one was though I learned enough about balancing them to squeak through a test or two.

I got out of high school and Mr. Clayton's class in 1969. Since then, I have encountered numerous instances where things I learned in Physiology have proven useful. No one has ever asked me to balance a Redox Equation and I still don't know what the hell they are…or even if anyone still balances them. After all, I spent much of my time in Algebra learning how to use a slide rule. That comes in so handy these days.

I didn't learn anything and I don't think very many of my classmates learned a thing.  Perhaps a few who came into the class with an interest and aptitude for Chemistry did.  I won't say he wasn't good for them.  But at least 95% of us weren't in that class because we cared about it or could ever conceivably use the information he attempted to convey.  We took the class because we had to take it and we had to pass it.  I got through via sheer short-term memorization.  Others did it an easier way: They cheated.  When tests were given, all around me, I could see other students peeking at crib sheets or, when Mr. Clayton wasn't looking, showing each other what they were writing on the test papers.  Also, we were in Fifth Period and Mr. Clayton used the same test forms for his Second Period class.  The students in that class hated him and were willing to share what had been on the tests.  More than once, someone in Second Period swiped an extra copy of the test and let Fifth Period students see it before it was their time.  At lunch on a test day, I'd see little groups of Fifth Period students huddled, going over the form and trying to find the answers in their textbooks.  I wish I could tell you that I never participated in that but, yeah, I did.  A little.

I saw cheating in many of my classes at school.  Mr. Clayton's were the only classes where almost everyone cheated.

Throughout my senior year at Uni Hi, I pretty much neglected all my other classes but Chemistry. The way Mr. Clayton ran things, you pretty much had to. One night, I had a dream…or at least, I think it was a dream. All I remember is Mr. Clayton handing back our mid-terms to us, all marked not "F" but some new, lower grade he'd invented to lower our self-esteem yet another notch…and he'd stapled to each an employment application form for McDonald's. As he passed them out, he explained, "I thought I'd make it easier for you since none of you will ever get into college or amount to anything in this world."

I did not dream about the one female student who was so filled with hatred for that man that she was seriously considering luring him into some sort of affair or sexual flirtation. She was not going to seduce him to get him to give her a passing grade. Her plan was to have someone photograph the two of them together and then she'd report him for statutory rape and then, for the good of all, get him the hell out of the teaching profession. She never did this, much to the disappointment of many.

I had my own, less drastic scheme which I actually did try. I took my copy of Mr. Clayton's mid-term — the one we'd all flunked — and applied about a quart of Liquid Paper to it, eradicating my answers. Then I Xeroxed it at the school library, giving me a blank copy of the test. Some friends and I went to the other Chemistry teacher, Mr. Dennison, and double-dared him into taking it. He got about halfway through before he quit, announcing he was not going to endure the embarrassment of flunking Mr. Clayton's test.

I don't recall why I thought at the time that this would bring down or otherwise impede Mr. Clayton's destructive teaching methods…but it did get all over school that Mr. Clayton's test was too hard even for Mr. Dennison. I felt I scored some sort of small, meaningless victory with that.

Still, I was trapped in what seemed less like a Chemistry class than like some horrid Bataan Death March with test tubes. May I tell you the one thing I did "learn" (sort of) in that class? I understood very little of what Mr. Clayton said in his lectures. In them, he spoke some language that sounded vaguely like one I myself spoke, but I could grasp very little of what he said. And asking for clarifications did no good. It was like asking to be scolded for not studying harder so I could keep up with him.

So my mind often wandered and I often stared at a big chart he had on the wall showing the Periodic Table of Elements. It gave me an idea and in my mind during class, and later on paper at home, I wrote a murder mystery story. In it, someone murdered a Chemistry Professor named Mr. Playton. Note how clever I was to change one letter. When the body is found in the lab, it's surrounded by vials of various chemicals the victim apparently snatched off the shelves in his final moments: Neon, Aluminium, Chlorine, Argon and Potassium. Based on the formula they represented — NeAlClArK — the detective deduces at the end that the murderer has to be Neal Clark.

A year or two later, I sold the story to a small magazine. It earned me $200 and kudos from a friend who was an avid student of murder mysteries. He congratulated me on being the one thousandth writer to think of that gimmick and use it in a story.

Anyway, at the end of the semester, just about everyone in the class was failing, a point Mr. Clayton drove home by reading aloud — with a bit too much glee, I thought — everyone's final grade. Most of them were cheating every which way and they were still failing.  I needed a C for my college credit but I had a D. So did most of us. Mr. Clayton let the gloom sink in for a few minutes…let everyone envision their college admittances flying out the window…

…then he announced that he was going to raise everyone one grade level. An F became a D, a D became a C and the one or two kids in the class who had managed Cs got Bs. Sighs of relief could be heard as far as Kuala Lumpur. Rumors had reached us that he'd done this before for his Beginning Chemistry classes — apparently, he always did it — but it was nice to hear. He did inform us though, and we had no evidence to the contrary, that he never did it for the advanced class.

So when it came time to sign up for my final semester at Uni, I was determined to get into Mr. Dennison's advanced class instead of Mr. Clayton's. I did my darnedest: I cut in line. I elbowed others aside. I cheated and lied and fought and bled and when sign-ups were over, I was not in Mr. Clayton's class.

Unfortunately, I was not in Mr. Dennison's, either. Both had filled to capacity without me. When I told the registrar lady that I needed the Advanced Chemistry class to graduate, she signed me up for another course called Modern Science. I told her Modern Science was not a college-qualifying class and it would not do. She said, "Well, you'll just have to talk to your counselor and get him to transfer you from Modern Science into Advanced Chemistry. I can't do that here."

I went to my counselor — a nice gent named Mr. Wilson — and he shuffled papers, pulled strings and got me moved into an Advanced Chemistry class. Unfortunately, it was the one taught by the future roommate of Hitler and Stalin. There was just too long a waiting list for Mr. Dennison.  I believe it included the names of every single student who'd attended Uni in the last ten years.

Mr. Clayton in the advanced class was even worse than Mr. Clayton in the beginning class. Again, I managed Cs and Ds on his tests through sheer memorization of textbook paragraphs that I did not for a minute comprehend. Alas, there were more Ds than Cs and I was worried I wouldn't pass the class, which was my last obstacle to getting into U.C.L.A.

Mr. Wilson told me not there was no cause for concern. He said, "Clayton's rough but he never stopped a student from getting into college in his life." I said I wasn't sure I wouldn't be the first. I also told him I hadn't heard yet from U.C.L.A. "Fear not," he told me.  "You'll be getting a letter from them any day telling you you've been accepted." Sure enough, any day later, a letter arrived.

I wasn't home when it was delivered but my father was. He took it from the mailbox and ordinarily, he'd have left it on my bed for me to open when I got home.

Then he saw the return address: University of California at Los Angeles, Admissions Office. It was a letter he'd been waiting for since…well, since around the time I was born. And though I'd told him it was coming and what it would say, he just couldn't wait to see it on paper.

I got all sorts of mail and my father had never opened any of it before. He never opened another one after that one. But he couldn't resist opening that one and, as he later described it to me, "My heart stopped. I thought my life was over."

The letter — a form letter, of course — briefly stated that my application and cumulative record had been received and examined and that I was not accepted to U.C.L.A. Very truly yours.

I arrived home about an hour later, unaware I was walking into the worst evening of my life, at least insofar as my relationship with my father was concerned.

I was…well, I must have been sixteen. To that moment, my father had yelled at me about five times. Seven, tops…and never for very long. As often as not, after he yelled at me, he'd apologize for yelling at me.

I'd go over to the homes of friends my age and I'd hear yelling. Lots of yelling. I am not exaggerating when I tell you I would hear them being yelled at, in one afternoon, more than my father yelled at me in my entire life. We almost never argued because he was such a decent, kindly man and also because I was just one of those kids who never did anything wrong.

That night, he yelled at me. All night. He yelled at me so much, screaming about how I'd ruined my life, that I thought he was going to have a heart attack. He'd had one and there were moments that evening I thought I was witnessing its sequel. I'd ruined my life and I'd lied to him with that crap about high-enough S.A.T. scores and guaranteed acceptance.

I yelled back that the letter was a mistake. It had to be a mistake. He yelled back that U.C.L.A. didn't make mistakes.

I reminded him that he worked for the Internal Revenue Service and he was always telling me how the I.R.S. had made mistakes…huge mistakes. If the I.R.S. could make mistakes, why couldn't U.C.L.A.? That wasn't enough. The arguing went on all evening and I remember my mother crying and telling us both, over and over, to calm down. It was just a horrible, horrible night and I'm actually trembling a bit and making more typos than usual as I type this now, a half-century after it occurred.

The next morning, I got up early and left the house before my father departed for work. He usually dropped me off at Uni on his way to his job but that morning, I wasn't about to ride with him. I took the bus to school and waited in the faculty parking lot for Mr. Wilson to arrive. When he pulled in, he saw me standing in his parking space, stuck his head out and said, "I get the feeling you need to talk to me."

I told him, "Yes! And if you won't give me an appointment right away, you might as well run me over."

Soon, we were in his office and he was studying The Letter. "This is obviously a mistake," he said. He picked up the phone, called someone he knew at the U.C.L.A. Admissions Office and straightened the whole thing out in under three minutes. The problem, it turned out, stemmed from when that registrar lady had stuck me in Modern Science and I'd had to transfer to Advanced Chemistry. When the school sent my records over to the university, the transfer had not been noted. U.C.L.A. thought I was taking Modern Science and even if I passed it with an A, that course did not qualify me for their university.

"You'll get another letter in a few days saying you've been accepted," Mr. Wilson said. I told him, "I can't wait a few days to go home. Is there any way you could phone my parents and tell them this?"

He picked up the phone and called my mother. He said, "Mrs. Evanier? This is George Wilson at University High School. I'm your son's guidance counselor. Mrs. Evanier, I have Mark here in my office and we've just straightened out a little mistake. Mark showed me this letter he'd received and I phoned U.C.L.A. and spoke to the Admissions Office there. They made an error. Well, it may be that we here at Uni made the error but whoever made it, the fact is that your son has been accepted into U.C.L.A. There's no question of it and he'll be receiving a letter shortly that confirms that. I'm sorry about the misunderstanding."

Through the earpiece on his phone, I could hear my mother crying and saying, "Thank you, thank you…"

When I left his office, I went to a pay phone and called her. She said, "I just called your father at the office and he was so happy…and so upset that he hadn't believed you. In fact, he's so upset that he can't stay at the office. He said he's on his way home." That afternoon when I got home, my father apologized to me…and apologized and apologized, over and over. In later years, he would occasionally bring it up again just to apologize again.

A few days later, a letter arrived — one he saw first but allowed me to open. It said I was accepted to U.C.L.A. for the fall semester, assuming I successfully graduated University High School and passed all my classes. So it pretty much came down to Mr. Clayton and Advanced Chemistry.

Much to my amazement, I passed that class. I got Fs and Ds and only the occasional C or two on Mr. Clayton's tests and I was sure it would all average out to a D, which was in this case a failing grade. But I got a C. I would start at U.C.L.A. in the Fall.

My last day of classes there, I went around and said goodbye and thanks to a number of teachers, skipping (of course) over Mr. Clayton. I was on my way to my last stop — Mr. Wilson, the counselor who'd helped me so much — when I ran into Mr. Clayton in the hall. He was all smiles and congratulations and he extended his hand. I shook it but something within me bubbled to the surface…something I'd been waiting a year to unleash…

I said, "I can't thank you for all I learned in your class because I didn't learn a damn thing except that I hate Chemistry and will never go near it again. This has been a horrible experience and I know you think you whipped us all into shape and made us better students. But what you did was to convince us that the game was rigged and we just had to do whatever we could to get through your class. A lot of students cheated to pass your tests. I didn't cheat but I did memorize stuff, spit it out onto the tests…and then my brain jettisoned it all because it was of utterly no use to me. I'm not sure what that is but it sure as hell isn't learning."

That's what I said to him.

Well, actually, that's what I wish I'd said to him. I actually started to thank him for all I'd learned because back then, I hadn't worked in television and didn't know how to be rude.  And I guess because I was also worried that he'd call down the forces of Mephistopheles and consign me for all eternity to a fire pit where I'd be flogged by demons as I balanced Redox Equations.

He interrupted my insincere mumbles of gratitude and said, "Well, you can thank George Wilson. He really believes you have a bright future and he came to me to make sure I wouldn't flunk you." So the fix was in. Thank heavens for the fix.

I thanked Mr. Clayton with a smidgen more candor and then I went down and thanked Mr. Wilson…a lot. He said, "Mr. Clayton isn't a bad teacher." I said, "You wouldn't say that if you knew how little, after a whole year of his class and memorizing textbooks, I know about Chemistry." We had a long, interesting discussion about what a waste of everyone's time it was for me to take that course, especially since I'd known well before it that I had no future in anything relating to Chemistry.

Several months later when I was attending U.C.L.A. and starting to wonder if maybe college was a mistake, Mr. Wilson called and asked if I would do him a favor. Of course, I would do him a favor. He wanted me to appear downtown at a meeting of some council at the Los Angeles Board of Education and tell them the same things I'd said to him that day. A week later, I appeared and here — reconstructed from notes I found last year when I cleaned out my mother's house — is almost exactly what I said as my opening statement…

I come before you at the request of Mr. George Wilson here, an excellent counselor who helped me a lot when I attended and graduated from University High School. Mr. Wilson asked that I tell you my own experience with the breadth requirements in the L.A. City School System's curriculum. Let me tell you first that although I am attending U.C.L.A., I have already begun working rather steadily as a freelance professional writer. Let me also tell you that this is a career I decided on around the time I was six. I have never deviated from it. I never wanted to be a fireman or a movie star or the President of the United States. I've always wanted to do what I'm doing now.

The breadth requirements, as you know, forced me to take courses outside my major or interests. The main result of them is that I had to neglect my major and serious interests in favor of subjects I am unable to learn and couldn't possibly have a need for even if I could learn them.

I am dreadful at foreign languages. I took two years of Spanish in Junior High School and two more in High School and the only two complete sentences I can speak in that language are, "Y Fijate, que bien estan las luces" and "Pero el cordero asado esta delicioso." These may come in handy should I ever find myself eating lamb with Mexicans in a room with lovely lighting but otherwise, it was kind of a waste. I passed those classes but I assure you I did not get anything out of them besides those two sentences.

My last year at University High, I had to take Chemistry. Now admittedly, this was because I wanted to go to U.C.L.A. and U.C.L.A. required it but the L.A. City School System also required science classes that might as well have been in Spanish. These were Chemistry classes in which, I swear to you, I learned absolutely nothing. I know how to mix a glass of Nestlé's Quik but that is the extent of my Chemistry.

I got through those classes by memorizing, as opposed to learning, facts with which I could answer questions on tests. And then once those tests were over, my brain — well aware it would never need that information — dumped it all. It's like if you had to learn a column of numbers to parrot back to someone for a test. Since the numbers don't relate to your life in any way but the test, you forget them once the test is over.

What could I have done with all the time I wasted memorizing Spanish I could not absorb and Chemistry I could not use? I could have done real work in classes that were relevant to my chosen career, such as English. I never had the time to read my textbooks for my English classes and I had to bluff my way through those tests. I had to bluff through History too, which was a shame because that might have been useful. But I was too busy memorizing Chemistry data that I do not remember and never understood. I believe I learned less in high school because I had to take Chemistry, not more.

I appreciate that you want to offer a wide range of subjects to students. A student who did have an aptitude for or interest in Chemistry might have profited from that class that was meaningless to me. It also might have been a better class if it had been taught for students who belonged in it. Exposure to Chemistry might even have been valuable to a student who wasn't sure what he or she wanted to do with their lives. Maybe Chemistry would have grabbed them as it failed to grab me.  Given the teacher I had, I doubt it but it's possible.

I hated Chemistry. I hated the subject. I hated the teacher. I hated how much of my time it took up, taking me away from more valuable learning. I hated how it might have even prevented me from gaining admission to U.C.L.A. where, by the way, there is no requirement in my major that I ever go anywhere near a Chemistry Lab. If I had been required to spend the same time learning how to work a yo-yo, I'd have just as much knowledge in my head today, plus I'd be able to work a yo-yo. Something about this arrangement does not seem right to me.

This is the viewpoint that Mr. Wilson asked me to express to you. I will be glad to answer any questions you have as long as they are in English and do not involve Chemistry.

I answered questions for about a half-hour. The Board Members seemed interested and they laughed when I told them, omitting the names, of how Mr. Dennison couldn't pass Mr. Clayton's mid-term. In the end, they all admitted I had a good point and said they'd discuss it further. As far as I know, nothing changed except that I felt better…and felt I'd put whatever lingering anger I had at Mr. Clayton behind me. In fact, I kind of look back on the day I testified to that council as the day I finally got out of high school.  It would have been so much easier without Mr. Clayton.

03 Feb 16:08

What is it about the Lib Dems and Sci Fi?

What is it about the Lib Dems and Sci Fi?
03 Feb 14:11

Most Books Don’t Sell

by Passive Guy

From Hugh Howey:

It doesn’t matter how you publish, most books don’t sell very well. If you query your manuscript, there’s a 99% chance you won’t sell a single copy. If you self-publish, there’s probably an equal chance that you’ll never sell more than 1,000 copies. A great thread on KBoards pointed this out and serves to balance the numerous threads from those authors doing very well. The message is this: Don’t think you’re doing something wrong or that you aren’t successful if your book isn’t keeping up with your neighbor’s.

It’s a great message, one I agree with 100%. My attitude remains this: “You mean I’m ALLOWED to publish my book? Without asking permission? I can just do this? No one is going to stop me?”

. . . .

My dream when I set out on this adventure was simply to have written a book in my lifetime. I feel like I’m getting away with something devious when I hit “publish” and my book shows up on Amazon with all the other “real” books. Someone commented on Facebook today that it was weird to see me enthused about these things. I’ve been on book tours all around the world. I’ve sold millions of books. Shouldn’t it all be blasé by now? It isn’t.

Keeping this mindset — that publication itself is a miracle — ensures that every single sale, review, and email are a treasure. The other way to look at the world is to compare up and be disappointed. A publicist once told me about an author she was touring with in Spain. This author found out that his novel debuted at #2 on the New York Times list. He fell into an inconsolable funk for the rest of the book tour. That’s the other way of looking at the world, seeing what you missed. How many of us would go bonkers to even be on that list? I assume this author had been on the list before. That was no longer a goal, just placing. Now it was to be #1. There is always yet another goal, accomplishment, or reward taunting us over the horizon. Or inspiring us. How we look at the world dictates which.

Link to the rest at Hugh Howey and thanks to Suzan for the tip.

Click to Tweet/Email/Share This Post

02 Feb 15:04

An early document concerning the Brakespeare posted for those interested in the evolution of texts.

by Site Owner
Nebaioth(1)

[(1)-the eldest son of Ismael, in Hebrew and Islamic lore, - Ismael of course being the  only survivor of the whaling ship in Moby Dick.]

Or

The Seventh Wave Boy’s Book Of Whaling For Universes.

BACKGROUND

On Whaling.

Imagine the timelines of all the spiral politic as a tree, its roots the anchors of the web.
The tree is a mangrove. Its roots stand in the flat, drained 'soil' of the primal universe, surrounded by the 'waters' which are neither time nor space. [This 'floor' is sometimes called by Whalers 'the skin wall' - as in the whaling song:-

"A Captain there was who was full of sin,
and his ship grew as heavy as lead,
and he sank that ship in the wall of skin,
where it glows like a fish that is dead". ]

(Of course we may well get to see this ship and its crew of ghosts and walking dead during our narrative...)

In those waters are fish. Around the lower parts of the tree: the early epochs of eternity, they swim: but the roots of the tree seize the fish and draw them in, and their essences are incorporated into its strength. Some say among the roots, not pieced and made into the tree, is a great serpent. Others, more surely, say that certainly the fish are not all. There are larger dwellers beyond the mangrove.

There are whales, that are 'universes' in themselves - bounded bodies of space-time, sleek as porpoises, wild and unchained that escaped in the ceremonies of the Houseworld, that binding that set the first taproot of the tree. And of the school of those whales, there is a King Whale - an Emperor Fish - Leviathan, greatest of the swimming kind. Its exobiodata, its quiditty, is the most prized dream of the whalers.

It is said that it bears on its back, tiny trees, seedlings sprouting from the torn roots of the anchorage. Ghost timelines that can never now be. These too might well have their values. [It is rumoured that timeships believing themselves to be safely within the spiral politic have betimes landed upon the back of Leviathan within one of its pallid and strange branched trees, only to be drowned in the depths of non-space and non-time as Leviathan has dived once more. However a moments thought will suggest that this can hardly be true, since no survivor would exist to begin the rumour.]

The whaling 'ship' "Inclusivity" [formerly, the "Diversity" - renamed by order of the sponsoring House following the twelth committee on progressive description] is
seventy five galaxies long and twelve broad at the beam and tipped with a single specially constructed star, of which more later. While this is still 'minute' compared to some sighted whales, it possesses the capacity to display larger, exuding dark-matter, enhancing its gravity with revisionist geometry. (The geomancers are a core caste of the ship, by their work is it 'wrapped in its skin' the spacetime form that encloses its own seperateness.)

It has the standard armaments of the smaller 'whalers' the sun-cannons, starpoons, and galaxars (galaxies capable of firing as a single controlled quasar-laser, their pulses beginning 50,000 years in the past, and delivered as a phased wavefront in the present
as the light sweeps outwards star by star by star) - a weapon obviously that can only be used by a time active culture, and one which incidently binds a whaling ship to a certain path since like a proverbial samuri's sword: the instruction to use the weapon has in a certain future already been sent back to our past, and hence the weapon 'will' be used at a certain point, and all aboard know it (and it is said that the ships weaponsmasters know the very second of the very hour in which the galaxies will 'finally' flare). Already the power is broiling and burning through the skies of a million worlds even as the ship rests in its transdimensional docks. These weapons are essentially trivial however, and the whalers refer to the sun-cannon particularly, with the dismissive phrase 'pepper-shot'. The ship itself is a weapon, a spear tipped with a Strange Star.

The ship is galaxies wide and long and contains many cultures, but the backbone of the ship is the timeline of a single star and world, unthreaded from space-time. The bridge world, which orbits the 'Strange' and killing star of 'The Point' is the last thousand years of the world. Everything done in the rest of the ship, all the maneouvres and makework, all the threshing of blubber and the gutting of whales (of which more anon) is overseen by the local bridge-world, and thus part of the history of 'The Point'. Thus is defeated the problem of communication, for the Captain knows the history of his ship and thus its every part. Because of its 'removal' from space-time the world itself has no part in the history of the spiral-politic and its native inhabitants are therefore forbidden to ever leave the ship. They are the caste known as 'Jonahs' because their lives are lived forever in the whaling ship, and their religion/culture has it that the ship is - itself - a whale. Whether this is more than metaphorically true or not, it is certainly the case that a whaling ship is an Empire in time as well as space, and the descendants of a threshing world, may well pass their skein of woven exoblubber to their own ancestors on the world from which they migrated to process it further, as it is moved 'back' along the ship, into the 'past'.

[The Houses prefer not to think too hard about the notional paradoxes involved in this. The official view is that a whaling ship is a 'black box' event and that no paradoxes within can leak out to the 'real' universe of the tree and the anchoring of the web. It is suspected that Faction Paradox takes a different view and may have agents among the whalers. The whalers themselves scorn this - in its internal time a whaling ship exists for 3,750,000,000 years bow to stern, from the 'moment' of construction, plus of course the duration of its projected thousand years of voyaging. More than long enough they say to 'winkle out any lubbers, and treeboundmen'. In this perhaps they underestimate the Faction.]


On ‘Hunting-Fish’

The major innovation brought by Scaratt to whaling following his investigations in the region of the Anvil Stars.  Trained ‘hunting’ universes bred from the Leviathan-seeds isolated in the region of the Anvil. This resemble the ‘friendly’ universes sometimes sited by whalers, too small to merit gutting, which often travel along side whaling ships as part of some migratory pattern - or interuniversal non-spacial current.  Scaratt has devised a means to use these entities to ‘herd’ swimmers.  This innovation is, while it has yet to be grasped as such, a blow at the hunter-killer model of whaling and implicitly a move towards a ‘farming’ model.  For this reason it is already ‘felt’ as a breach of taboo among the worlds of the ‘Inclusivity’ even though the geomancers, the fleshers, the ‘poonmen, and the jonahs would be hard pressed to delineate the source of their disquiet.


On the religion of the Jonahs

An important point of conflict in the novel is the world view of the Jonah caste. To them the whole flat plane of ‘the skin’ is but the hull of an even vaster boat, and the thread anchoring history merely its main mast.  Those of the Jonah who have heard of the City Of The Saved in the very pinnacle of history, regard it merely as a distant crows nest. A point simply of vantage.  Their belief is that the purpose of a life is to grow to be the steersman of that ship, the ship that contains all universes and all time, and to sail it to the Great Port where the First Shipwright will marvel at the men who have brought back his handiwork to land, and issue - at last - the true maps of the Heavens wherein it will thereafter sail.  Any action which increases a Jonah’s skill aboard the whaler is seem as producing an equivalent growth in the skills and virtues needed to pilot the True Ship. To be craftworthy is the only virtue.  In many ways the Jonah’s are much like the Pariah-caste of the deeptime engineers: the nechronomancers. It is perhaps unsurprisingly that each regards the other with horror.

For the Jonah’s hold that to be is to be moving, to be sailing onward, whereas the nechronomancers believe all time and space is illusionary and hence there can be no movement. It is one of the Seven Problems, that both approaches have produced incontrovertible results.  It is undoubtedly the case that Scaratt’s primary problem on inheriting(1) the captaincy of the Inclusivity stemmed from his insistance on bringing aboard a nechronomancer among his retinue.  (1)The term inheritance is here used to refer to an assumption of a war-role based on a loom-similarity to an officer unable to undertake the mission. In the case of a Whaling ship, the appearance, ethos, and iconography surrounding the bridge-crew, is a predetermined legend across the million worlds of the ship, and any replacement is undertaken with obsessive care. Scaratt whose birth in any event represented an experimental divergence from war-practice has come to suspect that part of the reason for his breeding was to fit him in due course for the assumption of this captaincy.  He has expanded some considerable effort to discover the reason why the original captain is unable to take the helm.

The former Captain

His face is on the heraldic banners of a million worlds.  In form, how perfect, in attitude how indomitable, in repose how serene. Cultures were engineered to follow him, and then he defected.  What must it feel like to have a God-king turn traitor?  The Jonahs know. What must it feel like to step into the shoes of a defaulting deity? Scaratt is learning.  And as for ‘the Captain‘, a house traitor, a renegade, stripped of his name, known on the Inclusivity, as a hissing and a byword, and an excuse to hawk spit, where is he?  He  is - reputedly - the latest recruit of Faction Paradox.  Captain No-One.  [An in-joke of a kind that I will cut if it is too intrusive Captain ‘Nemo’ is the original Captain ‘No-One’].


Captain No-One’s agenda.

Born as Scaratt was but of the illfated and retrodenied Sixth Wave (in some respect Scaratt’s was created in his image) the Captain was crafted of human tissues loomed with house world bio data technology, and carried in a living womb. With him (and perhaps with the other ’missing’ members of his cohort, although this can not be determined) the psychological aspects of the process left him profoundly disturbed.
By temperament a nihilist, a romantic, and a ‘Byronic’ suicide: the Captain avoided the fate of his wave (whatever it may have been) during his deeptime training to Captain the Diversity (as it then was). He was regarded as possessing the correct ’flamboyance’ to command such a ship-culture, but the planners of ‘the whaling effort’ neglected to take into account the effect of exposure to deeptime reality on such a personality.  The Captain was a morbid and suicidal mind that learned it was threatened by that most awful of dooms - irreversible and unavoidable immortality. At the end of time, he has learned, lies the City Of The Saved, a hideous and ineluctable trap leering at him with a mouth of mumbling years.
At first he considered that he would be ‘safe’ from entombment in the City, if the Diversity were to flounder deep beyond the spiral politic, but making contact with the Faction, he learned via their representative in the City that the human-derived crew of the skin-embedded ship ‘Indomitable’ nevertheless were reborn on Resurrection Day in that great iron prison.  If going beyond the universe itself was not enough to avoid the harrowing engines of eternity, what could he do?  He determined to learn the secrets of Faction Paradox, seeking - not as the Grandfather had to remake himself as a shadow that had never been, but to erase himself utterly - embracing
Nothingness.  In return the Faction asked him to abandon his command: leading to the goal they desire, the provision of the whaling ship ‘Inclusivity‘ (as it now is) to Scaratt‘s Captaincy, one which they believe will achieve great things that the nihilistic Captain No-One would never have conceived.
However:- despite the Faction’s honestly attempting to erase No-One from history - there is a place he remains, and it is in the cultures of his ship, where his presence is a perpetual absence, looming at the back of every endeavour.

No really, what really happened…

The above account is what the Faction claim (a claim based on half truths and intended to portray themselves as still important powerbrokers) it is not entirely true.  Captain No One is not dead, he was that rarest of Homeworld-born a twin.  He did not discover that the Indomitable sank, he killed his own brother - its Captain - and piloted it himself into the skin (feeling some trace sentiment at the breaching of his own vessel, if not at the killing of his kin). Reborn in the City of the Saved, he hunted his brother down there again imprisoning him in an exitless metal-prison, so that decamping by the downtime gate he could step back into his own shoes, and take back his own ship.
However he miscalculated the relative strain of the principles of linearity and even though he had been gone a brief span, he had been declared dead - believed killed on the Indomitable with his mad brother - and his ship had been handed to Scaratt.
Very well, he smuggled himself aboard as a simple ‘poon man. He would take back his ship. The weight of its whole history is shaped to him. He will own it, and he will hunt Leviathan and drive his great ‘poon into its core.
He will command Leviathan and pilot it through the Maw, a flaw in the thread of history itself, bringing it up to the ends of time (it alone has the ‘lifespan’ for that voyage into deep time where even the timeships falter) until he bursts the floor of the City of the Saved and brings its slaves true death.

So much and no less he intends.

But what do the Faction Want From Scaratt?

Cousin Ermintrude and Cousin Discarnadine, are the dissolute and - in another sense - abandoned members of the so-called ‘Seaman’s Missions’ a defunct Paradox Cell founded to investigate the possibilities for paradox implicit in the bounded universe of a Whaler, and the exobiodata it collects.  Discarnadine is sadly addicted to ‘splendour’ the pungent effluxia left after the Houses have taken their refined extracts from the Whalers’ hold-worlds.  The long suffering and contemplative Ermintrude is concerned mainly to prevent Discarnadine passing away from ‘splendid isolation’ the peculiar state of nihilistic lucidity associated with the extract, But Discarnadine has conceived that rarity among the Faction, a heartfelt belief.
He believes that in the roots of the world tree - trapped by the weight of all history, is the great serpant - the King Loa.  He intends that Scaratt should pilot his whaling ship into the Great Deep and bring sacrifice to the King Loa.  [Implicitly the sacrifice is seen throughout the book as something large perhaps the ship, itself, perhaps Scaratt, perhaps the long-suffering and patient Ermintrude who surely can not be as innocent as she appears, but it is Discarnadine’s shadow he intends to offer, letting the King Loa take back the emblem of Paradox, giving up his own mastery.  Emptying himself into the Loa. While he would claim to have no hope of ’gain’ from such an act, it is hard to think that he doesn’t see the role as essentially messianic - bridging the gulf between Faction, and the Spirits in a new and transcendent way.
As will be seen it is Ermintrude - his minder - who is preparing him for this role, to carry the scroll seen sometimes in his shadows hands, of which he is consciously entirely unaware ‘back’ to its origin in the deeps of time.

Scarratt

His character is at best unusual. He has no self-interest: that is he does not find himself interesting, nor is he interested very much in the war, or the tasks the Houses set him.  He is interested in finding out things that the Houses do not realise, or more likely do not recognise in the ways he can.
The cultures of the whaler delight him, as a child with a new game. He intends to see the denizens of the Greater Seas, and aye land Leviathan as Nebaioth the ‘poonmaster demands if need be, and see the very roots of time as the Faction ask, if it please him.  If the Jonah’s do not kill him, of course, and if he can learn the secrets of his vessel before Nebaioth impales him as a False Captain.

The book is among other things his biography.

The Incidents of The Voyage Of The Inclusivity and Their Resolution In The Great Maw.

Chapter-by-chapter breakdown to go here next……

Simon BJ
20th October 2005

02 Feb 15:01

The accretion of legendary, in a War context.

by Site Owner


Even well documented events (cf The Book of the War) can become rapidly misremembered, misconstrued, elaborated, or distorted in the retelling.  One such distortion is at the root of the so-called Prophesy of Seven.

Once the Seven Prophesied Heads have spoken, the story goes the war will end.  The first - it is implied - is the head of the president involved in the Declaration, however this is clearly UNTRUE.

While severed the head was returned with a message in its mouth, it DID NOT SPEAK.

ACCEPT NO OTHER ACCOUNTS.


From "The Book of the Peace"
02 Feb 14:47

Uncle Bernie, Novelty Mart and Frank Zappa in the Comics

by Listener Mindwrecker

Uncle Bernie Fan Club Badge by Drew Dobbs"Hi Folks - Uncle Bernie wants all the children (and grown-ups too) to be happy!  In this latest Novelty Mart catalog you will find fun galore and new excitement for the entire family, year-round entertainment and delights for all the children -- handy useful novelties to fascinate the grown-ups.

You will be thrilled with the magnificent assortment of exciting action toys, novelties, and housewares. You will be delighted with their fine quality and workmanship. You will be absolutely amazed at their rock bottom prices --- sensationally low priced because we're the largest mail order firm of its kind in the country. So just turn these pages for a remarkable PARADE OF VALUES. And feel perfectly safe in ordering any of them. Remember! Every item you choose has Novelty Mart's full unconditional guarantee..."

------ Uncle Bernie ------

Thus goes the pitch from Bernie himself opening up his 1953 catalog, issued from their regular address of 59 East Eighth Street, New York 3, NY. In my last post here at the Beware of the Blog Comic Supplement we briefly examined Uncle Bernie's mail order outfit and its possible tangential relationship to Frank Zappa and the Mothers of Invention which then dovetails into comic book ads in general and some Mothers of Invention Comic Book Ad  by Cal Schenkel -detailother areas of folk Americana / arcana / ephemera that bubble and boil just beneath the surface of wide public consciousness. The comic book publishing business could be sketchy enough, but the folks that advertised in pulp magazines, digests and comics could run the gamut of flim-flammery. All harmless and good fun for the family, usually cheap, but sometimes with price-tags quite high for their day. Old junk that gives you a wistful feeling when you realize it was probably better manufactured junk in its day than one could find now.

Welcome to the comic book sideshow, my friends. Right this way - join me after the jump!

Uncle Bernie 02Since I began speculation in my last article here about a connection between our main subject today, Uncle Bernie, the face associated with Novelty Mart's comic book advertising, and the Uncle Bernie whose bagged plastic toys are featured in a Frank Zappa composition, I acquired a rare and fragile 1953 Novelty Mart catalog. While it only deepens the mystery of who the Uncle 'was' it is a delightful document on its own and we'll be seeing the entire pamphlet here. Also on display are a number of vintage Uncle Bernie ads, as well as a competing 'Uncle' character from the American Specialty Company in Lancaster, PENN, who was lampooned wonderfully in a Mad magazine faux ad in the 1950s.

Let's begin our descent into the depths of Novelty Mart with a gallery of several early 1950s comic book ads from different publishers, one in particular featuring the infamous Portable Wall Shower, a rather racy image for its day.

Another Uncle Bernie ad Uncle Bernie 1953 ad
Ad from House of Mystery -1951 From House of Mystery 15 - 1951
I particularly like the garish 'red background' series of ads, which are somewhat more attractive than others of this type in comic books. I also don't think that their prices are really much lower than their competitors in this area of merchandise. The same comic books often have several outfits hawking very similar products so the hyperbole was an essential ingredient in their full page ads.
Uncle Bernie ad from 1952 And Still More Uncle Bernie ad


Here's a better look at that handy shower device shown in the upper right ad:


Uncle Bernie Ad - Sexy Detail

This certainly would have caught my eye as a young boy. And that is one huge shower-head, it's a doggoned sunflower!   And all of these at $2.98, the magical price.

Here's one last one, with a different color design:
Yet Another Uncle Bernie ad

This is the only ad (above) I have seen where the Little Bandit slot machine ("Pays off in fun!") appears, it is not included in the full 1953 catalog below.  Since this type of 60 year old catalog is rare to begin with, and rarely shown online in their entirety we're giving you the whole thing, all 32 pages of it, as a cool example of its genre, including the order blank, and a self-addressed paid envelope provided to the customer.
As you will see, there are a lot of handy household gadget 'novelties' mixed liberally in with toys, tricks and oddities. After the catalog we'll look at the Zappa / Uncle Bernie 'connection'.

Novelty mart 03 Novelty mart 04
Novelty mart 05
Novelty mart 07 Novelty mart 08
I like Blinky the switchplate, above right - he sounds creepy, with his opening and closing eyes!
Novelty mart 09 Novelty mart 10

Note the revision to the Portable Wall Shower art - here in the catalog we find her in all her dripping glory, but (further up above) the color comic book ad version has had more 'water lines' drawn in to obscure her butt, and a paste-up over her lovely behind as well, partly for space, but I imagine also partly for modesty!
Novelty mart 11 Novelty mart 12
Novelty mart 13The Tele-Chek is brilliant!
Novelty mart 14 Novelty mart 15
Several fun items in this spread; I like the Barrel of Fun text: "It's scientifically made, it's crazy {.} It appears simple but it actually ain't so.", the Fall Guy, a "3 and a half inch boxed carved figurine", and the U-Build-It hot rod and plane look enjoyable, I love the clear hood/fuselage with primary-colored working parts.
Novelty mart 16 Novelty mart 17
Novelty mart 18 Novelty mart 19
Novelty mart 20 Novelty mart 21
Novelty mart 22
Novelty mart 23
Novelty mart 24
Nice ad copy in this catalog. I've certainly seen a lot worse!
I would have really dug the lineman and truck toy as a child.
Novelty mart 25 Novelty mart 27
Another good page - several intriguing items on display, and "No water enters the child's mouth."
Novelty mart 26
I'll bet that poor line drawing of the mask doesn't begin to do it justice. Perhaps someone reading this will know of a photo of the actual "With Imitation Bump" mask and forward it our way. For that matter, any photos of these actual products are welcome, I can't afford to collect them, but love to look at 'em.
Novelty mart 28 Novelty mart 29
Novelty mart 30
Novelty mart 31
Novelty mart 32

Novelty mart 33
Novelty mart 34 Novelty mart 35
"Bomb-a-Ship / Here's a big hit!  Release the bomb from the plane. If you hit the target, battleship explodes into 8 parts. Of course you can put it together again easily for more play and the explosion's perfectly harmless..."
Novelty mart 36 Novelty mart 37
"Bend Me Monkey" (above, right)    ...Well, say no more.
Novelty mart 38

Sock the Moon
Brand new idea indeed! This is one of my favorite items in the catalog. What a sadistic little bastard this is. How long will it take before the child is running to Mama in tears after trying out this mother? Not very long, I'll wager. Points to the child-hater that invented this delightful toy.
Novelty mart 39 Novelty mart 40
Novelty mart 41
Novelty mart 43 Novelty mart 44
Novelty mart 45 Novelty mart 46
Novelty mart 47 Novelty mart 48
Novelty mart 49 Novelty mart 50
Novelty mart 51 Novelty mart 52
Novelty mart 51 a
Now this one is just charming. Lovely, goofy text and an upside-down art paste-up.

That is some crazy gravity-defying putty!
Novelty mart 53 Novelty mart 54
Although not quite as sexy as the Portable Wall Shower, the Sit-Down Shower is rather spicy.

Positioning it right across from Door Peek only makes it worse.
Killer Kane is a nice concept as a product and I love the name! Perfect for a comic book ad.
Novelty mart 55 Novelty mart 57
Novelty mart 58

Absolutely Free - Mothers of Invention 1967 art by FZAs yet it is uncertain whether our Uncle Bernie depicted so far is the model for Frank Zappa's version, as written by him some 15 years later, but I like to think it's possible that Zappa, as a comic book appreciator, might have remembered the various 'Uncle' characters used in comic book ad pitches when he wanted a nice four-syllable name for an evil toy pusher. 
As far as I've seen, the Uncle Bernie comic book ads ended long before the 1967 album, Absolutely Free, containing the Uncle Bernie's Farm piece.

Below we see pages from the libretto for the album, and I had to include Zappa's introductory text for the people who had to special-order the document.

Absolutely Free Libretto cover
Absolutely Free Libretto - Message from Zappa
Absolutely Free Libretto pg 9

Among the examples on the short list of really memorable or creepy comic book ads from my youth in the 1960s is our next exhibit, a lovely and twisted full-pager from a cover-dated April 1968 Marvel comic book. I recall being intrigued and confused by this one well before I even knew exactly who the band was. Similar to my reactions to very early examples of Robert Crumb art before he really hit nationally. There was just something there...
The art is by the brilliant designer Cal Schenkel, with the ad copy by Zappa.
Mothers ad Apr 1968 scan by Drew Dobbs from his collection - art by Cal Schenkel - text by FZ

Next we have "Uncle" Harry Bard, as he appeared in an issue of Mystery in Space comics in 1951, fronting for the American Specialty Co.
Following Uncle Harry is his sinister counterpart, Uncle Louie, from an hilarious MAD magazine comic book ad parody from the 1950s. I don't know the exact issue that this tasty ad appeared in, as my copy is from a 1970s summertime MAD Super-Special comic book insert reprint. The Uncle Louie page is more of a riff on the subscription-sales rackets for kids like American Seeds, the various greeting card outfits, and worst of all, those poor kids trying to peddle Cloverine Brand Salve to snag prizes and cash. Just the same, I felt it appropriate to include him here with Uncle Bernie, as they all give a wink and a nudge to each other.
Uncle Harry ad from Mystery in Space - 1951 Mystery in Space (1951) uncle harry detail - by Drew Dobbs
Uncle Louie ad from MAD magazine - scan by Drew Dobbs

And a closer look at Uncle Louie pal... perhaps a MAD scholar knows who did the painting of Louie.
Uncle Louie - detail


Another detail from the MAD magazine parody of Uncle Harry


Do ya cry Uncle yet? Well..I do.  If this encourages anyone to give that terrific Mothers album Absolutely Free a listen, all the better. Those old 1950s Harvey Kurtzman-edited MADs are always worth another look, too. Uncle Bernie 01

Until we meet again in two weeks, strap on your Willie Wolf Glasses to show the high level of 'couth that you possess from lifelong comic book mind rot. And,  as I said earlier, I highly encourage anyone with stories about Novelty Mart or Uncle Bernie to write to me here via this blog, as the world of carny/novelty/magic fans out there would greatly appreciate it!

Novelty mart 59

 NEW UPDATES TO THIS ORIGINAL POST:

 Here (below) is a Novelty Mart ad from 1950 with NO Uncle Bernie in evidence!

Otherwise, much like the 1951 ads.

  Novelty Mart ad from 1950

 And below, to further deepen the mystery of 'Uncle Bernie', we have a small ad from a 1948 comic book for the 'Bernard Fine Co., Inc.',  doing business from 501 Sixth Avenue, Dept. TCC in New York. It uses the same artwork that we've seen in the Novelty Mart ads, and can it be completely coincidental that it is named after a 'Bernard Fine'? That seems to stretch it a bit for me. I suspect that Bernard Fine IS our 'Uncle Bernie', and that this outfit later became Novelty Mart, at their new address, by 1950.

 Only more time and research will tell.

  Possible novelty mart ad 1948

 

01 Feb 19:08

Nick Clegg is wrong to support the stripping of foreign-born terror suspects' citizenship

by Jonathan Calder
From the Guardian:
Nick Clegg has signed up to a plan drawn up by Theresa May to strip foreign-born terror suspects of British citizenship – a move that would render them stateless – if they are judged to present a threat to national security. 
In a last-ditch bid to reduce a damaging Tory rebellion in the Commons on Thursday, the home secretary rushed out the plan, which was branded by Liberty as "irresponsible and unjust".
Liberty is right, of course. And why is Nick going out of his way to aid David Cameron's doomed attempt to placate the fruitcakes and headbangers on his backbenches?

Caron Lindsay has been given the Liberal Democrat spin on this:
I have been doing a bit of digging this morning and found someone from deep within the Westminster Bubble to give me an idea of why the Liberal Democrats would agree to something as drastic as potentially making someone stateless. 
Well, actually, the Home Secretary already can do just that in two instances already. The first is if citizenship is acquired (including if you were born here) by fraudulent means or facts were concealed and the second is if the person is not conducive to the public good. It came about because of Al Jeddah who could have taken up Iraqi nationality after being deprived of his UK citizenship. 
The amendment today is described as a tweak to that to enable the Home Secretary to leave someone stateless, a power that they actually had up until 2003. It would be very unusual for that to happen, I’m told, because this will not apply to people who were born here, only to people who have acquired UK citizenship. They have the alternative of resuming their former citizenship so that they would not be made stateless. 
Although this amendment has been tabled at the last minute, there has been significant consultation within the Liberal Democrat parliamentary party, I’m told. They’ve looked at it very carefully and are satisfied that there are significant safeguards as this would only ever be done at the end of a legal process and would be open to judicial review. It would also only apply to a very small number of people. It also already applies to people who have dual nationality.
But she comes to the right conclusion:
or me it seems to cede too much ground to those who would scapegoat immigrants and it worries me to be associated with it.
01 Feb 19:08

What is wrong with Ed Balls may not be what you think

by Jonathan Calder
We are frequently told that if Labour came to power and Ed Balls became chancellor he would borrow and spend too much and bankrupt the country.

Nonsense.

The truth is that the chancellor, whoever he or she was, would have very little room for manoeuvre.

So the correct charge is against Ed Balls in not that he would be profligate but that he is promising policies he knows he would not be able to deliver.

Occasionally the truth seeps out from Labour.

Back in March 2010, at the start of the general election campaign, Alistair Darling admitted that
Labour's planned cuts in public spending will be "deeper and tougher" than Margaret Thatcher's in the 1980s, as the country's leading experts on tax and spending warned that Britain faces "two parliaments of pain" to repair the black hole in the state's finances.
And in October last year the Guardian told us this:
Labour will be tougher than the Tories when it comes to slashing the benefits bill, Rachel Reeves, the new shadow work and pensions secretary, has insisted in her first interview since winning promotion in Ed Miliband's frontbench reshuffle.
But for the most part it is easier for Labour to pretend that the constrains that have hobbled the Coalition would not apply to them. That way, they keep their activists and supporters in the press happy.
01 Feb 19:07

Gender bias on Have I Got News For You – updated

by Nick

I was reminded about this by a Twitter conversation this morning, and realised that I hadn’t updated my spreadsheet about the gender of guests on Have I Got News For You since the last series ended. That the last series was pretty underwhelming may have had something to do with it, but if you’re the sort of person who wants to see a lot of statistics about how many men and women have been on the show in its 46(!) seasons, then you can find it by clicking here.

The main points (I hesitate to use ‘highlights’) are:

  • We still have to look back to 1997 for the last time all the guests on a show were women.
  • There have now been 181 times during the show’s history where all the guests (and hence, everyone on screen) was a man.
  • The last series managed to have 30% of women hosts and guests, which meant there was a very slight upturn in the overall percentages of both – 23.27% (guests) and 23.72% (hosts).
  • And it’s very depressing to compile these figures and see that there’s been basically no change since 1990.
  • 01 Feb 19:00

    Pop Between Realities, Home in Time for Tea 32.5: Star Cops

    by noreply@blogger.com (Philip Sandifer)
    Iain Coleman offered me a guest post on Star Cops ever so slightly too late to make it in for the holiday run of them I did, so I held it for later. Since running one this week massages my schedule such that all the Children of Earth entries fall into the same writing week, here it is.

    It is 6 July 1987. The Pet Shop Boys are at number one with “It’s a Sin”, having knocked The Firm’s “Star Trekkin’” off the top spot a week earlier. The European Community has passed the Single European Act, a key step towards the European Union as we know it today, and a court in Lyon has sentenced the city’s former Gestapo leader Klaus Barbie to life imprisonment for crimes against humanity. And at 8:30 pm on BBC 2, the first episode of Star Cops is broadcast.

    Star Cops was created by Chris Boucher, who wrote five of the nine broadcast episodes. By this time, Boucher was an old hand at TV SF, having written three well-received Doctor Who serials before moving to Blake’s 7, where he was script editor on all four seasons as well as writing that show’s best episodes. After killing off Blake and his crew he had moved on to script editing established BBC police dramas Juliet Bravo and Bergerac.

    As a cop show set in outer space, Star Cops combined both major strands of Boucher’s career. With its blending of genres, it was intended to appeal to a cross-over audience. Unfortunately, it never achieved high ratings and met with limited critical acclaim. Its initial nine-episode run was never repeated, and there was no second series.

    To understand what went wrong, we have to understand spaceflight in the 1980s, and the toxic influence of Cold War military thinking upon the US space programme.

    Space has been militarised for as long as there has been space travel. The early successes of space flight were as much public demonstrations of intercontinental ballistic missile capability as they were forays into extraterrestrial exploration. The R-7 Semyorka rocket that launched Sputnik 1 and kicked off the Space Age was the world’s first ICBM, and by putting a beeping ball into space the Soviet Union was demonstrating that it could put a hydrogen bomb over Manhattan. More advanced missiles were similarly pressed into service to launch larger spacecraft, manned and unmanned, over the following decade.

    And not all these payloads were as innocent as Sputnik. Low Earth orbit became the ultimate observation post for military reconnaissance, with spy satellites capturing the movements of military forces on the Earth below, and eventually the US would launch a constellation of signalling spacecraft to allow its troops to pinpoint their positions anywhere on the globe. (You have a deliberately degraded civilian version on your phone.)

    But in the 1980s this militarisation became suddenly threatening, with the Reagan administration’s Strategic Defense Initiative. Immediately nicknamed “Star Wars”, this merrily gung-ho idea was to station armed spacecraft in orbit that would be able to destroy Soviet ICBMs in flight, whether with interceptor missiles or with powerful X-ray lasers, the latter being advocated by Dr Strangelove himself, Edward Teller.

    It was technically unfeasible, but it caught the imagination - on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Reagan sold it to his people as a high-tech shield from communist aggression, while the Kremlin feared that the Americans would be emboldened to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike without fear of retaliation. The increase in Cold War tension was palpable. Never has bullshit come so close to destroying humanity.

    It was in this environment that Star Cops was created. Set in the near future of 2027, when space flight is routine and people live and work in Earth orbit, on the Moon and further afield, it follows the adventures of a small and not terribly respected police force as they solve the crimes these space colonists commit. As lead character Nathan Spring (David Calder) is fond of saying, “Where there’s living, there’s policemen”.

    The setting is a familiar one. The long-standing plan of the space colonisation enthusiasts, going all the way back to Wernher von Braun’s landmark series of articles in Collier’s Weekly, was to establish a permanently manned space station in low Earth orbit, serviced by a reusable spacecraft capable of frequent, cheap, reliable flights. This would be the staging post for routine travel to permanent bases on the Moon, and these in turn would provide the shipyards and launchpads for human exploration of the Solar System.

    This plan was forcibly set aside by President Kennedy, who wanted to beat the Soviets to the Moon for Cold War propaganda purposes and couldn’t give a toss about dreams of space colonisation.  After the Moon landings had petered out to public apathy, the colonisers returned to plan A, lobbying furiously for their space station / reusable launcher combo. But it was the seventies, money was getting tighter, and the budget just wouldn’t stretch to the full package. NASA could have a space station or a launch vehicle, but not both.

    In the greatest strategic error in the history of spaceflight, they chose the space shuttle.

    Like most mistakes, there seemed to be good reasons for it at the time. In this case, the main attraction was that the Air Force was willing to contribute a crucial chunk of funding to the project. But the price was that the shuttle would have to fulfil certain military capabilities - and the design complications this introduced were to prove the shuttle’s undoing.

    The Air Force had some bizarre fantasies about manned spacecraft at war against the Soviet menace, and the shuttle had to be built to fit that vision. Even the shuttle’s iconic delta-wing shape is down to military demands. A civilian spacecraft can manage perfectly well without wings, but the Air Force insisted on the winged glider design so that the shuttle would have enough cross-range manoeuverability to take off and land at Vandenburg Air Force Base within a single orbit, so as to carry out fast reconnaissance missions in wartime or snatch Soviet spacecraft out of the sky.

    All this meant the shuttle was ludicrously over-specified for its actual peacetime missions. This didn’t just make it more expensive to build: it made it more complex, more costly to maintain, and more prone to go wrong. It never came close to managing enough flights to amortise its design and construction costs, and the extent of the repairs and reconstruction needed after each flight meant that it was a reusable vehicle in name only.

    The shuttle never achieved the dream of cheap, routine access to space, but the image had to be maintained even if it meant turning a blind eye to risks. In PR terms, it worked. The shuttle became the harbinger of human conquest of the High Frontier. Every launch carried the implicit promise that human space exploration hadn’t ended with Apollo, that Moon bases and space industry were, if not imminent, at least on the way. A generation was growing up with the space shuttle as its symbol of its future in space.

    Then, on 28 January 1986, 73 seconds after launch, the space shuttle Challenger blew up. In June of that year, the Rogers Commission report on the disaster exposed the crippled, corrupted reality of America’s manned space programme for all the world to see.

    The rise and fall of Star Cops coincides with the rise and fall of the Space Shuttle. The Shuttle programme began its first test flights in 1981, when Boucher began pitching Star Cops as a radio series, and the first episode was eventually commissioned for TV in the aftermath of the Challenger disaster. The political conditions of the space shuttle program run deep in the structure of the show.

    In case after case, the Star Cops reveal not only the contradictions between the transcendent idealism of the High Frontier true believers and the reality of human imperfection, but also the contradictions between visions of peaceful space exploration and the realities of the military-political-corporate complex. Such cynicism is commonplace in TV cop drama, but unusual in popular TV SF - indeed, only Boucher’s prior work on Blake’s 7 really goes this far. But Blake’s 7 hid its political awareness under camp and tinsel, while Star Cops has the realistic setting that allows Boucher to put his message front and centre. Crucially, this near future is still divided along national lines, so Boucher can attack militaristic Americans directly instead of metaphorically.

    The nationality factor proves to be a two-edged sword, tempting writers into portraying characters as national stereotypes instead of individuals. In Boucher’s hands this works well enough: when he writes a cigar-chomping gung-ho trigger-happy American, it is specifically as an attack on the Reaganite attitudes that were so terrifying at the time, and he has already established a sympathetic and heroic American character as one of the main cast. Other writers were less thoughtful, and the character of Anna Shoun in particular, introduced by writer John Collee at the producer’s behest, ticks every box of Oriental stereotypes, much to Boucher’s disdain.

    The problem with Boucher’s attack on militarism is that Star Cops is too close to its target to avoid becoming a casualty. The show was conceived in a world that saw space stations and Moon bases as the coming future, and however much it might have exposed the naivety of the civilian space movement and the sinister motives of its military backers, it still depended on that popular expectation to justify itself as mass TV entertainment.

    By the time it hit the screens, however, the future had changed. The Challenger disaster had put space flight back in the headlines for all the wrong reasons, and the world of Star Cops had lost its plausibility,and hence its potency. When a show’s selling point is the realism of its future setting, how can it survive when the audience loses faith in that future?

    The first sign of loss of faith came from BBC senior management. Star Cops was given an awkward slot on BBC2 and never achieved high enough ratings to justify a second series. It is impossible to say whether a better timeslot would have made the show a hit, or whether it was doomed in any case and Jonathan Powell was right to cut his losses. However, the latter may be closer to the truth, and not just because the zeitgeist had moved on. Even if that O-ring had held tight in Challenger’s solid rocket booster, Star Cops would still have been a troubled production.

    Boucher was at odds with producer Evgeny Gridneff from the start, and later expressed his regret that he hadn’t had the confidence to produce the show himself. One of his frequent complaints is that he had written his scripts to take careful account of the nitty-gritty of TV production at the time, such as the contrast between video and film shooting, and Gridneff had completely ignored all of this.

    In one particularly egregious example, Boucher wrote Nathan Spring and his girlfriend having meals at a restaurant with private booths whose walls featured computer projections of beautiful scenery. So, two actors sitting in front of a blue screen - cheap as chips. In the final production, the restaurant is a conventional set with lots of furniture, extras and so on, with the main characters sitting at a table in the middle of it all. So far, so needlessly expensive, but the real absurdity comes when the meal is interrupted by a news announcement. In Boucher’s conception, that would just mean switching the blue screen background to a TV news clip. However, the production isn’t able to do this with its restaurant set, so instead a waiter has to wheel a portable TV up to Spring’s table on a trolley in order to show him a newsflash. It’s risible, and one cannot watch the writer’s DVD commentary on that episode without having Boucher’s plaintive cries of “I wanted a booth...” echoing in ones mind long afterwards.

    Thanks to this and many other production misfires, Star Cops never achieved escape velocity, despite some clever writing, an outstanding central performance by David Calder, and a bitingly cynical final episode that holds out considerable promise for a second series that never came.

    When looking for the cause of a disaster like this, the question is how deep do you go? A rigid O-ring did for Challenger and its crew, but the more fundamental failure was in NASA management and political priorities. Even that, though, is a consequence of the misconceived decision to go ahead with the shuttle project at all. The ultimate question about the shuttle programme is not “what if the O-ring had held?” or “what if NASA management had been more open?”, it is “what if NASA had done something entirely different instead?”

    So - what if, after Blake’s 7, when he was first pitching Star Cops, Chris Boucher had done something entirely different?

    What if he had moved on to Doctor Who instead?

    That’s just idle speculation, of course. There’s no reason to think that Boucher would have been offered the opportunity, or that he would necessarily have taken it. Doctor Who was largely a training ground for novices at this time, and it would be only natural for the BBC to deploy an experienced script editor like Boucher on higher profile productions such as Juliet Bravo and Bergerac, and to chuck the likes of Eric Saward and Andrew Cartmel at Doctor Who to sink or swim as their talents and luck allowed. But it’s a tempting idea nonetheless, if only because the timing would have been just about right for Boucher to take the place of Eric Saward, whose increasingly dysfunctional tenure as script editor eventually collapsed in Doctor Who’s darkest hour.

    By contrast, the hypothetical JNT-Boucher years could have been very effective. In particular, Boucher’s keen appreciation of production realities and writing to make the most of limited resources would have been a good fit for JNT’s cunning accounting. The quality of the scripts would doubtless have been improved, and there would certainly be a strong political, anti-military, anti-corporate flavour to the stories. More world-weary than the youthful idealism of the Cartmel years, but no less passionate.

    Instead, Doctor Who itself fell victim to the pervading culture of militarism, its whimsical intellectual hero edged out of his own story in favour of a parade of interstellar mercenaries and space marines. Fortunately, in this case the blow was not fatal and a determined rearguard action allowed the show to survive, albeit underground for a time, and eventually to emerge victorious.


    No such luck for Star Cops. Too close to the military-spaceflight complex it was attacking, it became collateral damage in the collapse of its target. An obscure victim, rarely mentioned in the casualty lists, but mourned nonetheless by the few who knew and loved it.

    01 Feb 18:13

    Protocol

    Changing the names would be easier, but if you're not comfortable lying, try only making friends with people named Alice, Bob, Carol, etc.
    01 Feb 17:47

    evenmoviesaboutitareverylongandarguablytoolong

    archive - contact - sexy exciting merchandise - cute - search - about
    ← previous January 27th, 2014 next

    January 27th, 2014:

    The Midas Flesh #2 is now out! And if you go to your local comic book shoppe they'll likely have it as well as #1, because since #1 sold out we did another printing (with a Jess Fink cover!). This issue has covers by John Keogh and Aaron Diaz.

    The story is about King Midas getting his wish and everything he touches turns to gold, but since he's touching the planet the entire planet turns to gold and then he drowns since the air touching his lungs turns to gold. Thousands of years later, a team of RAD DUDES (including a dinosaur) visit the gold planet in search of a doomsday weapon they hope can help them defeat the evil Federation: King Midas's body, the one thing in the universe that carries this transmutation effect.

    You can read the first few pages of the comic here, and if you want to make sure someone else liked it first before you commit, you can read a review of the issue here!

    Thanks for liking my comics everyone!

    One year ago today: cooking is easy, invention is hard

    – Ryan

    01 Feb 17:46

    "write what you know" = "write what you remember" = "write what you still think about years later and don't understand why"

    archive - contact - sexy exciting merchandise - cute - search - about
    dinosaur comics returns monday!

    ← previous January 30th, 2014 next

    January 30th, 2014: The other day I mentioned how I wasn't sure we could trust David Malki. Now I'm not sure if we can trust... ME??

    One year ago today: aw man does this mean we missed a comic on where babies come from?? aw geez, NOT AGAIN

    – Ryan

    01 Feb 17:35

    Jacqueline Nantumbwe must stay!

    by stavvers

    Jacqueline Nantumbwe is a lesbian woman from Uganda, where being queer is a criminal offence. In Uganda, politicians and religious leaders actively campaigned for the death penalty for homosexuality, and there is currently a life sentence for existing while gay. While in Uganda, Jacqueline and her girlfriend at the time, Rose, were caught, and as punishment, Jacqueline was imprisoned, tortured and raped to “correct” her. Her girlfriend was not heard from again.

    Jacqueline is seeking asylum in the UK, and has faced horrific treatment from the Home Office over the last year. In order to have asylum granted, Jacqueline must “prove” that she and her partner are in a lesbian relationship. On 26th January, the Home Office transferred Jacqueline to Yarl’s Wood, the detention centre famous for abusing its inmates. She may face deportation.

    The Home Office has a track record of appalling treatment of queer women from Uganda. Last month, Prossie N, a seriously ill lesbian from Uganda was deported back to a life of rape and persecution.

    Jacqueline Nantumbwe needs our help. We need to apply pressure to protect her from the horrors she faces if deported. Jacqueline Nantumbwe must stay. Here are some things you can do.

    • Sign the petition to the Home Office.
    • Write to Jacqueline’s MP, Gerald Kaufman, asking for his support. You can find a model letter here. You may also send that letter to your own MP asking them to make a statement of support.
    • Get in touch with Jacqueline and tell her you support her. You can find out more here.
    • Finally, and most importantly, share her story. Talk about Jacqueline Nantumbwe. Make as much noise as you can.

    The Home Office get away with such gross violations because they can get away with it without much public knowledge. Show them that this isn’t the case.


    01 Feb 12:53

    Can history point us to the 2015 election result?

    by noreply@blogger.com (Alun Wyburn-Powell)


    The number of seats won by each party at elections since 1945, from top to bottom looks like this:

    Labour

    1997    Blair                418
    2001    Blair                413
    1945    Attlee              393
    1966    Wilson            364
    2005    Blair                355
    1974O Wilson            319
    1964    Wilson            317
    1950    Attlee              315
    1974F  Wilson            301
    1951    Attlee              295
    1970    Wilson            288
    1955    Attlee              277
    1992    Kinnock          271
    1979    Callaghan        269
    1959    Gaitskell          258
    2010    Brown             258
    1987    Kinnock          229
    1983    Foot                209

    Conservative

    1983    Thatcher          397
    1987    Thatcher          376
    1959    Macmillan        365
    1979    Thatcher          339
    1955    Eden                345
    1992    Major               336
    1970    Heath               330
    1951    Churchill          321
    2010    Cameron          306
    1964    Home              304
    1950    Churchill          298
    1974F  Heath               297
    1974O Heath               277
    1966    Heath               253
    1945    Churchill          210
    2005    Howard           198
    2001    Hague              166
    1997    Major               165

    Liberal/Lib Dem/SDP

    2005    Kennedy          62
    2010    Clegg               57
    2001    Kennedy          52
    1997    Ashdown         46
    1983    Steel               23 including SDP
    1987    Steel               22 including SDP
    1992    Ashdown         20
    1974F  Thorpe            14
    1974O Thorpe            13
    1966    Grimond          12
    1945    Sinclair            12
    1979    Steel                11
    1950    Davies             9
    1964    Grimond           9
    1970    Thorpe              6
    1951    Davies               6
    1955    Davies               6
    1959    Grimond            6

    Here is an experimental way of using history to predict the next election result. Taking everything into account, how far up or down the scale of past election performances do you think each of the parties is positioned?

    Clearly, none of the parties seems to be anywhere near the top or bottom of their range. A result somewhere in the middle looks most likely for each of them. But, would you consider that Ed Miliband is better or worse placed than Wilson in 1970? Maybe slightly better, but not better than Wilson in 1964? If so, this would suggest on past performance that the Labour Party is likely to win between 288 and 317 seats.

    Is David Cameron looking as though he is outperforming Home in 1964, but not Major in 1992? This would suggest a range of seats between 304 and 336 for the Conservatives.

    What about Nick Clegg? A result somewhere between Ashdown’s 1992 result and Ashdown’s 1997 performance looks likely, so somewhere between 20 and 46 seats.

    It may be hard to find an exact parallel, but fairly clear upper and lower expectations seem to emerge. Will history lead us to the eventual result? History seems to be pointing to a hung parliament as the most likely outcome.
    01 Feb 12:40

    Talking RAW with Alan Moore

    by noreply@blogger.com (John Higgs)
    Yesterday me and @DaisyEris Campbell drove up to Northampton to visit Alan Moore, the Greatest Living Englishman, to talk about Robert Anton Wilson. We filmed the interview and we'll show it in Liverpool on Feb 23rd. If you can't make that, then Daisy will also use the footage as part the indiegogo campaign to crowdfund the Cosmic Trigger play, which kicks off on April 23rd.

    There was a lot of press recently about Alan's decision to withdraw from interviews and public appearances, so the fact that he was good enough to do this for us yesterday is an indication of how important RAW is to him. Alan has only rarely been asked about Wilson in interviews, and what he has to say is well worth hearing.

    Mighty Alan Moore, Northampton Jan 30th 2014
    If that wasn't enough, we also met Steve Moore, whose eternal novel Somnium will finally appear in paperback later this year, and Alistair Fruish, whose novel Kiss My ASBO will please all who hanker after a bit of dark urban psychedelia. Alistair, it turns out, rides a rowbike, which is a bike that is propelled by rowing rather than cycling. As a result I found myself standing in a Northampton terraced street watching him row past, while Alan Moore told me that the trick was to wave as he passed as this made him automatically take his hand of the handles and fall off. Should my mind ever be wiped, I suspect that will be one of the last memories to go.

    Ken Campbell's Illuminatus! play famously included the voice of Sir John Geilgud as FUCKUP, the artificially intelligent supercomputer which predicts Armageddon by use of the I Ching. As Daisy's Cosmic Trigger play includes scenes from the staging of Illuminatus!, she had the problem of finding someone significant enough to step into Geilgud's shoes. Ultimately it comes down to a choice between Alan Moore and Richard Dawkins and, lets be honest, Alan has the better voice. And also, a sense of humour. So his lines have been recorded, and those planning on coming to see the play will now hear Alan Moore as the voice of FUCKUP.

    For more news on all of this get yourself to Liverpool on Feb 23rd, where there will be talks, performances, music, and me discussing the origins of my KLF book in a talk entitled 'I Blame Liverpool'. See you there, yes?




    01 Feb 12:31

    Why you don’t listen to music

    by mike

    There’s a good reason why you might not enjoy listening to music as much as you used to: It’s gotten too loud.

    All music has “dynamic range,” variations in volume between the loud parts and the soft parts. People sing and play at different volumes. Individual notes have an initial attack and then a gradual decay as they fade to silence. But most of the music you hear today–and by “most” I mean “everything except classical music” has been treated to have little or no dynamic range. It’s been “slammed” and “loudness maximized.”

    Audio engineers manage this with something called “compression.” A compressor is a hardware or software device that sets a limit on how loud a piece of audio can go. It sets a top range, and when the audio signal exceeds that point, it turns it down. Imagine you are listening to a piece of music, and a really loud part is coming up, and you turn the volume knob down just as that part arrives. It’s like that, only automated. How does this make things louder?

    It lets you set an overall high level, and squishes everything that was over that level down. So let’s imagine a piece of music. “Ten” is the maximum volume of the loudest parts. The singer is screaming: it’s really loud. And three is the level of the quietest parts. If you increase the volume level so that the quietest parts, formerly 3, are now at 10, and the compressor is squishing the loudest parts so they stay at ten, the result is a recording that comes to your ear at ten and only ten. The hushed and quiet passages are just as loud as the crescendo. Imagine that a whisper and a scream are the same volume. That’s modern music.

    Here’s an excellent illustration on video 

    Why would anyone want such a recording? Well for one thing human beings hear “louder” as better. If you play two identical pieces of music, and turn one up only very slightly, people will inevitably hear the louder one as better. Salesmen still use this trick to sell audio–turn the more expensive unit up, and it will sound “better” to everyone. For the last twenty tears, music has been getting more and more compressed, more and more uniformly loud.

    And here’s a visual explanation, from Wikipedia’s excellent entry on “the loudness wars.” It’s pretty clear, showing the ZZ top song Sharp Dressed Man as it was issued, and than as it was “remastered” for reissue as a digital file. Watch the animated gif. The first version has little spikes in the waveform, but with each remaster it turns more and more into a solid block of sledgehammer volume

     

    The reason you might prefer vinyl records is that you simply can’t do this kind of thing with a record. A record turns sounds into grooves in vinyl. As the sounds get louder the grooves swing wider. If the grooves are too wide, too loud, either the needle will jump out of the groove or you won’t be able to fit all the music on the record. So there are physical limits on how loud a record can get. Susan Schmidt Horning describes the process here.

    Vinyl records have more “dynamic range,” more variation between the soft parts and the loud parts. Which in turn is closer to how we experience sound in the natural world. If you compare an old vinyl record to a digital remaster, you’ll hear the difference right away. The rule of thumb on a modern recording is that you can’t have more than about 2 db of dynamic range.

    Digital music doesn’t have to be loudness maximized, and in fact lots of recording engineers want to find a way to stop the tendency. You can celebrate “Dynamic Range Day” and find an index of the dynamic range of thousands of albums.

    If you find yourself preferring vinyl, dynamic range is probably why. It’s worth speculating why we create for ourselves a musical landscape crushed and hyped into a impossible level of consistency.

    if you’re interested in the subject, you might take a look at a new publication we are experimenting with, American History Now. Our inaugural issue is on vinyl and vinyl records. Anyone can contribute.

    01 Feb 12:29

    More on the relationship between Stonewall and the trans communities

    by Zoe O'Connell

    The departure of Ben Summerskill from Stonewall has renewed the age-old discussion about the relationship Stonewall has with trans folk. This is partially because the acting Chief Executive, Ruth Hunt, is known to be more trans-friendly but also due to an article written by Sarah Brown for Pink News. I’ve seen a few responses to this from the gay community, some of which are in the comments to the Pink News post – such as one person saying including the T in Stonewall would be “like having a blind man in a deaf support group“. The letter that Sarah published from a “Mr. W” is a good summary of the issues as seen from a gay cis (i.e. non-trans) male standpoint, so I’ll use that as a framework.

    Firstly, who are Stonewall in this context? They are not the same organisation as Stonewall Housing or Stonewall Scotland, both of whom are trans-inclusive. The reason for the common name is that several organisations have named themselves after the Stonewall riots of 1969. Most narratives have the riots being started as a result of police harassment of trans women and cross-dressers, so the fact Stonewall use that name but don’t include trans issues generates friction from the outset.

    It really should not be surprising then that there was the 2008 protest outside the Stonewall awards when noted transphobe Julie Bindel was up for an award: She was being nominated for an award in the name of riots started due to oppression of trans folk.

    What Stonewall do campaign for is same-sex relationships, i.e. mostly focused on gay and lesbian issues, although bisexual folk such as myself do get a look-in as long as we’re in a same-sex relationship.

    So, on to the letter Sarah published:

    As far as I am aware from speaking to some of my trans friends, most believe that they are the sex that they wish to be transitioned to and they want usually to date people of the opposite sex. Its rare a man changes to woman and then dates a woman and the same goes for women wishing to do the same. Most trans people do not believe that they are gay and therefor I fail to see what the gay scene can offer them.

    Research suggests that less than half of trans folk are heterosexual post-transition – some people are simply asexual, but there are as many people that identify as bisexual or homosexual post-transition as straight. It’s a common enough misconception though, because trans folk needed to fit a certain erroneous narrative in days gone by in order to access medical care but those dark days are now mostly behind us.

    Regardless, there has always been a huge crossover. Many straight trans women started out as effeminate gay men or as cross-dressers, and many trans men started off within the lesbian scene. People’s identities may change, but they will still retain links with activist groups they used to be or continue to be members of. And homophobia, biphobia and transphobia all have common roots: “We don’t like people who transgress gender norms.”

    There are some people who may never have identified with the LGB community in any way – either because they are straight and transitioned young before sexuality was an issue, or went from being heterosexual pre-transition to being heterosexual post-transition. But this is rare.

    It is about time some one with your influence created an established advice line for trans people run by trans people, so that the right information can be given and when problems need to be talked over there is an adviser who will understand more closely what experiences the person have been through.

    Stonewall and other gay charities raise most of the money through the gay, lesbian and bi volunteers collecting money and in this austere time it does not go far, they need that money for its intended purpose i.e to counsel and advise people in same sex relationships and safer sex.

    …and this is really the big issue. Stonewall and the Lesbian and Gay Foundation soak up the lion’s share of funding aimed at the LGBT+ community, and until recently the lion’s share of lobbying time. Despite Stonewall being quite clear they don’t cover trans issues, people feel by consulting with or funding Stonewall in particular that they’ve “ticked the boxes” for the LGBT community and move on to other things. Even the Court of Appeal make this mistake: a judgement published just today on the “gay cure” bus adverts refers to “Stonewall, an organisation that works for equality and justice for lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender individuals.

    This leaves trans helplines, of which there have been a few, with little funding and even less access to publicity. This isn’t Stonewall’s fault, it’s a genuine misunderstanding on their part, but more needs to be done to ensure bisexual and trans campaigners and support groups get publicity.

    As an aside, I’ll note the trans community isn’t immune from criticism in this regard. As I understand it, trans lobbyists pointed out to the Civil Service that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 would have a negative impact on intersex individuals but the Civil Service failed to actually talk to anyone suitable because it wasn’t pushed hard enough. When dealing with slow, bureaucratic organisations there is a tricky balance to be struck between being too passive and saying simply “we don’t do this” and inappropriate “white knighting”, i.e. speaking on behalf of people you shouldn’t.

    Historically, Stonewall have managed to end up heavily on whichever side of that balance is worst for the trans community at that moment in time, but I am hopeful that will change.

    31 Jan 17:08

    How I Knew I’d Made It

    by John Scalzi

    In conversation not too long ago, someone asked me when I felt I had “made it.” It’s a fair question; for a writer, there are a lot of milestones that could be the points at which one feels one has made it. Selling that first book is an obvious one (selling the second book, a less obvious but no less relevant one), as is the first time you are nominated for an award, or win one, or hit a bestseller list, or get a starred review in the trades. Getting a movie or TV option is a big one. Seeing someone you don’t know reading a book of yours out in the world. Any of these are perfectly good moments to stop and say, hey, I guess I’ve made it.

    My moment isn’t any one of those. My moment came a couple of years ago, when I was driving out of town and noticed my gas tank was almost empty. So I stopped at the gas station, slid my credit card into the pump, filled up my gas tank, replaced the nozzle, got back into my car and drove away. And then realized a couple of miles down the road that at no point did I look to see how much the gas cost per gallon, or how much the whole tank of gas cost me. I didn’t look because I didn’t have to. No matter how much it cost, I knew I had it. I knew I could afford it.

    That was my moment.

    Some of you, I suspect, are looking a bit puzzled at this. So it’s here that I need to give you a bit of context.

    When I wrote “Being Poor” back in 2005, the very first thing I wrote in the piece was “Being poor is knowing exactly how much everything costs.” The reason I wrote that is because when you are poor, you have to know how much everything costs, because you know exactly how little you have to spend, and how much you need to get through your day. You have to strategize how to apply your money.

    Like so: You have $10 for the whole day. Gas costs $3.12 a gallon. You have a quarter tank of gas to go somewhere 25 miles away and then get back. Do you need to put in more gas? How much do you have to put in to do what you have to do? Is the gas going to be cheaper ten miles down the road? Will you have enough left over when you’ve put gas in your tank to buy the other things you have to get today? Can they wait? If they can’t wait, how much will you need for them? Will what you have left give you enough for gas? And so on.

    I’ve seen people here in town come into the gas station and ask for very specific amounts of gas. I don’t have to ask why they’re asking the cashier for exactly three dollars and twenty five cents worth of gas, or whatever amount they ask for. I know why. It’s exactly the amount they can afford that day, and, hopefully, exactly the amount they need. They’ve thought it out. They’ve made the numbers work as well as they can. I know it because I’ve seen it done it my own life, growing up; the calculus of what you can afford today, what will have to wait for tomorrow and what things can be put off until the absolute last minute.

    If you grow up with that sort of resource calculus as part of your daily existence, you almost never get free of it; you’re always checking tallies in your head. And to be sure, in a very real sense this is not a bad thing at all — not knowing what you’re spending on things is a very fine way for anyone to quickly and suddenly go broke. You should be keeping track of your income and outgoes. It’s a basic and laudable life skill.

    But I would argue that with folks who do it (or have done it) from a place of poverty, there’s a difference in both degree and kind. Like your grandmother who lived through the Great Depression and never threw out a piece of string because “you never knew when it will come in handy” and therefore had a ratty ball of string no one wanted to touch, much less use, there’s something pathological about poverty accounting — a need to know the precise cost of things and the worry that at the end of the day, no matter what you do, there’s just not going to be enough. You keep track of costs not because it’s a smart thing to do. You keep track of costs because you’re waiting for the other shoe to drop.

    I have that sensibility in my head. And again, on one hand, it’s not all bad: we save a lot of the money we have come in, and I have what I think is a realistic sense of what we can afford and what we can’t — and as a full-time writer, whose income is (heh) variable, it’s good to have more than a little ingrained awareness of one’s financial circumstances.

    On the other hand, sometimes I wake up in the middle of the night, and for no good reason plan out a strategy for an imminent income apocalypse. What if everything you’ve ever written stops selling? What if you can’t sell the next book? What if Krissy loses her job? What if you can’t get back into marketing and consulting? What then what then WHAT THEN? And then I spend three hours imagining how we downsize to survive on nothing until I finally fall back asleep from mental exhaustion. When I wake up in the morning I’m fine, because rationally I know that I’m doing all right, and my writing career is unlikely to go up in a sudden, inexplicable flash. But the WHAT THEN? voice stays in the background, because it remembers what it was like to have to think about those contingency plans in one’s day-to-day life.

    And this is why, a couple miles down the road from the gas station, the sudden realization that I didn’t worry about the price of gas, that I had just gassed up and went, hit me like an electric shock. I had literally never done that before. It wasn’t about the not knowing the exact cost of the gas; I could find that out just by looking at my credit card statement. It was that it finally had gotten into my brain that I could afford things. That I didn’t have to do the mental calculation of the cost of the gas from a place of anxiety. That I had the confidence that I could afford what I just spent — not the confidence intellectually, which I had, but confidence in the part of my brain that wakes me up at 3am in a panic about everything going to hell. For that part of my brain, miraculously, everything checked out.

    That’s when I knew I had made it.

    The irony is that since then, I can’t not look at the cost of the gas I’m pumping into my car, if only because I remember driving away that one time, not looking. The difference is now, when I look at the amount, it’s not because my brain is having a tiny, muted but still real bit of panic about the cost. It’s because I just need to know how much I spend, like any person should.

    It’s a small difference, and unnoticeable from the outside. But on the inside, it means that a lot has changed. It means I made it. I am grateful I have done so.


    29 Jan 17:49

    Freaks, Geeks, and Postmodernist Critiques

    by LP

    First day at the new school or should I say it in capitals, the New School is what they call it. Plenty of other Irishmen here in New York but does it feel like home? Ballocks it does. Only one place will ever be home and it weren’t Paris and it ain’t New York either but Mum says to make some new friends and to try and fit in. Fit in hell I say and Da says where did ye learn language like that not from the Brothers says he. I don’t say I learned worse language than hell from the brothers, hell they talked about Hell all the time but the worst of it I learned straight from you dear old Da I don’t say. Anyway Dublin is home but it’s all the way across the sea and I’d better get used to the idea. Easier gotten used to than this pail I have been given in which to carry me lunch. I haven’t any conception who this Roy Rogers feller is but I tell you this: the bloody thing is made of metal.

    ***

    Sure and it is my curse that a bully boy would find me my first day at the New School. It is my lack of faith that has brought this Protestant behemoth down on my head. His name is Eddie Kinslow and he’s a hulking beast about fifteen stone and Monday when I was at communing with the spirit of my belly he burst into the W.C. and give me what is referred to in the schoolyard argot as a ‘swirlie’. He tried to hold a conversation with me while me head was in the jakes, I swear to you, dear diary.

    “You’ve got a girl’s name! Don’t you, Joyce? What’s it like to have a girl’s name, Joyce?”

    “Joyce is only me surname, Eddie.”

    “You better call me sir, you little punk.”

    “No, I mean me second name. Me Christian name is James.”

    “James? That’s a pansy name. You’re a pansy, James.”

    “Most people call me Jimmy. You can call me that if it’ll get me head out of this crapper.”

    “Shut up, Joyce.”

    ***

    The English teacher is named Missus Gomez. She’s not Irish. She’s not even English bedad. I think she’s from Guatemala or somesuch. I turned in my first essay and she give me an ‘F’. She said it was incomprehensible. I told her it was experimental and she says I’m too young to be experimenting. She was unreceptive to my explanation that I was attempting to encapsulate all the things of this world in the form of a thraitment of your man Shakespeare’s poetry. Mrs. Gomez suggested that I take a page from Cicely Millard’s book anent future assignments. Cicely Millard is a sure bet for valedictorian and did her last report on themes of alienation in the verse of someone named Jewel.

    Well at least this Gomez is Catholic.

    ***

    Today Eddie Kinslow was shoving me into a locker after gymnasium class and one of his mates on the swim club wandered past. This worthy made a bit of crack about Nora Barnacle (who is my lab partner in Chem class and with whom I have fallen irretrievably in love) and I became rather agitated, or as much so as a lad can be when stuffed halfway into a steel coffin. So this swimming lad and Kinslow start into a kind of taunting chant: “Joyce loves Nora! Joyce loves Nora!” I answered, well as it happens yes I do. Kinslow answers me this wise: “If you love her so much, why don’t you marry her?” Well I’d rather like to do just that, I reply. Asks Kinslow: “You think you’re pretty smart, don’t you, Joyce?” I says I don’t like to blow me own whistle but I think I’m as bright as the next lad, aye.

    I don’t really remember much after that only I woke up atop a flagpole in a less than comfortable attitude.

    29 Jan 01:02

    My Open Letter to Stonewall on the Departure of Ben Summerskill as CEO

    Originally published at Sarah Brown's Blog. You can comment here or there.

    This is a piece I wrote for Pink News, but I’m also publishing it here:

    The relationship between Stonewall and the trans community has never been straightforward, to say the least.

    Stonewall in England is, and has been, ostensibly an LGB group, campaigning for those involved in same sex relationships, and has taken the position that they are allied with trans campaign groups, but do not involve themselves in trans issues directly.

    On paper you can draw nice neat lines separating “gender identity stuff” and “sexuality stuff”, and have everything work out. Sadly, reality is messier and doesn’t much care for attempts to confine things to neat boxes.

    Perhaps this was most obviously seen in 2008, when what was reckoned at the time to be the UK’s largest public protest by transgender people and our allies took place; outside the swanky Stonewall Awards ceremony in London. Trans people were hurt and outraged that journalist Julie Bindel, who many trans people saw as openly transphobic, was nominated as a champion of diversity. I was there, waving a banner and shouting, and the crowd was angry over what it saw as Stonewall promoting its own interests by hurting our vulnerable community.

    A similar problem arose more recently, over the same sex marriage bill. It’s fair to say Stonewall were caught napping a bit when, in autumn 2010, the Liberal Democrats announced our commitment to delivering marriage equality. As momentum built, Stonewall joined enthusiastically and published a draft “same sex marriage bill”. It was, as I recall, less than two pages long and didn’t mention trans people once.

    Trans people were treated terribly unjustly by marriage law for a long time, and if ever there was an opportunity to right wrongs, it was with this bill. Since the 70s, our marriages were in legal limbo until 2004, when the then government, finally forced to act by the European Court of Human Rights, grudgingly agreed to recognise our true genders (and thus allow us to be protected at work from sex discrimination and a whole host of other stuff), but at a cost; the government wanted to take our existing marriages away, to erase them from history.

    When the actual act came forth, not only did the government not want to right historical wrongs; they also wanted to make a new one, the Spousal Veto. If you wanted your employment non-discrimination rights, and other stuff that came with recognition, you (literally) need a letter from your husband, wife or civil partner saying they consent. If they don’t (and it doesn’t matter if they’re estranged and hate you, or in a coma after an accident and unable to consent), the only way you can end your legal non-personhood is to divorce them.

    About a dozen-or-so trans lobbyists, of which I was one, met with civil servants, lobbied parliamentarians, and offered amendments and compromises to try and get our confiscated marriages back, to remove or at least time-limit the veto. Despite parliamentarians like Julian Huppert and Liz Barker passionately taking up our cause in the Commons and Lords respectively, the civil service and government didn’t budge.

    The Marriage (same sex couples) Act passed into law with a spousal veto, and with no restitution of the marriages confiscated.

    Things could have been so different if our little group of people who didn’t really know what we were doing had a big organisation like Stonewall behind us. In Scotland, after work by the excellent Scottish Transgender Alliance and the Equality Network, and where Stonewall does support trans people, the Scottish Parliament voted unanimously to remove the spousal veto. In England and Wales, we’re stuck with it. At a time when trans people really, really needed the help of a professional LGBT lobbying organisation, Stonewall decided it was nothing to do with them and looked away.

    Every time I talked to formed CEO Ben Summerskill about this, he said it went back to the 2004 Gender Recognition Act, when trans groups wanted to do things by ourselves. I can’t help wounding if there were personality politics involved at the time, if bridges were burned. Perhaps that’s why we’re left in the cold. Times change, a new generation of trans activists is around today and we feel like we’re being constrained by deals, and perhaps arguments, that happened behind closed doors ten years ago by people who haven’t been able to move on.

    My plea to Stonewall, and to interim CEO Ruth Hunt, is to use this opportunity to sweep away old understandings and misunderstandings, and to see if we can’t build something more inclusive, where trans people can turn to the largest LGBT rights organisation in the country (because that’s what everybody else sees them as, regardless of whether they see themselves that way), ask for help, and get it.

    We don’t promise to be uncritical, and not say anything when you get it wrong, but wouldn’t it be great if Stonewall at least tried to be on the same side as trans people, rather than leaving us to fight the same battles, against the same people who hate us for the same reasons, alone?

    Editor’s note: This piece originally created the impression that Stonewall Scotland was responsible for the removal of the spousal veto and discounted the hard work of the Equality Network and the Scottish Transgender Alliance. This was a drafting mistake on my part, and I offer my unreserved apologies to both.

    28 Jan 19:18

    The King of Hearts Didn't Make Tarts

    revonrut asked why we call it the United KINGdom when we have a queen.

    We do it because the words 'king' and 'queen' had very different meanings and still have different values. 'King' comes from the Anglo-Saxon cyninge which originally meant supreme (elected) military leader with an implied sacral element. Her or His Britannic Majesty is still the titular head of the armed forces, to whom military personnel swear allegiance and Defender of the Faith. 'Queen' comes from Old English cwean (and/or Scots Gaelic wheen?) both of which meant litle more than 'wife'.

    Eventually using the word 'queen' only for the wife of a King is pretty typical of English, where two words which were synonymous in their root languages are subsequently endowed with different meanings and values, and are consequently useful to unpick for their implications about culture, politics and gender. An obvious one is the way we use Anglo-Saxon words for animals, and Norman French ones for meat: cow/beef, sheep/mutton. I have read - in an A level English Language textbook no less - that this was a reflection of the superior culinary standards the Normans introduced. That's both a simplification and a cliche. The people shovelling the animals's shit in the barn were more likely to be the invaded, and the people scoffing the meat in the hall were more likely to be the invaders. The two mingled of course, but the fact that French became the language of the fine dining and Old English the language of the farmyard is reflected in the language we speak now.

    The problematic nature of having a Queen as King, when the words are still laden with different values and implications, is why the term 'Prince Consort' was invented for Victoria's Albert. It ws too risky to call him a King, even a King Consort. It was one of the reasons why ELizabeth I never risked diluting her precarious authority and status by taking one of the many husbands who was mooted for her. HRH The Duchess of Cambridge - Princess Kate - will, in due course, will be called Queen, despite being a commoner, if Young Baldy Big Ears becomes King. It's already been publically stated that the calm, competent and well-adjusted Duchess of Cornwall will never bear that title if Old Baldy Big Ears becomes King. She's never sought the title of Queen (of Hearts or anything else), and there is a depressing assumption that residual public sentimentality about the dead, kitten-faced, neurotic, cripple-hugger would make it very difficult for her to do so.

    It would be better - well, less problematic - to suggest calling Lizzy Two 'King', rather than calling it a 'Queendom' while she's Head of State. Which she is, as the elected PM still has to go through the ceremony of asking her permission to form a government, and she opens Parliament each Autumn. It is not an entirely ceremonial role, and could, in extreme circumstances, be a much more interesting one.

    Ther cultural assumptions around gendered titles for royalty can be seen in any pound shop, with the amount of pink, sparkly tat retailed at and for little 'princesses'. Even the least politically aware father is unlikely to call his son his 'little prince', and there aren't blue, sparkly outfits for boys in the shops. 'Prince' still retains a veneer of power. 'Princess' is either a term of endearment (harmlessly affectionate or problematically patronising, according to one's poloitical outlook) or actively pejorative, as in 'Jewess Princess'.
    28 Jan 15:11

    Pete Seeger, R.I.P.

    by evanier

    peteseeger01

    Not long after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, my parents took me out to the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium to hear an evening of folk singers. The main event was Pete Seeger and what I recall is that he sang for a very long time and we all loved him. There were speeches, by him and others, about not letting the murder of J.F.K. kill our hopes and idealism…but the songs were much more eloquent. It was a very exciting evening.

    Flash forward to the evening before the first inauguration of Barack Obama. There on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, Seeger and Bruce Springsteen overwhelmed the audience — there and all over the world — with a passionate rendition of "This Land is Your Land." And I had to think…

    Seeger spent his life singing and preaching about making America a better place. Often, he was denounced as a commie or worse for his messages, few of which seem all that radical today. What would he have thought that evening back at the Santa Monica Civic if someone had said to him, "You'll live long enough to sing that last song on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial as America inaugurates a black man as President of the United States"?

    He just died at the age of 94. He saw an awful lot of his dreams come true.

    27 Jan 23:18

    You Were Expecting Someone Else 27 (The Eyeless)

    by noreply@blogger.com (Philip Sandifer)
    It is not as though there are not writers from the Wilderness Years who carried on writing tie-in material for the new series. Several have, from both the Virgin and BBC Books eras. And, of course, there are the handful of Wilderness Years contributors who have contributed the odd television story or two like Mark Gatiss, Paul Cornell, and Russell T Davies. Nevertheless, to anyone who’s been with the series for the long haul so to speak, the return of Lance Parkin seems significant. Parkin was a middle-to-late comer to the Virgin line, but ended up writing one of the novels that dealt most heavily with the Virgin line’s Gallifreyan mythology, and also ended up wrapping up the line with their one Eighth Doctor novel. And then for BBC Books he wrote a bevy of major books, including the single biggest piece of “let’s play with Gallifreyan mythology” ever, The Infinity Doctors, and, once again, the final book of the line, The Gallifrey Chronicles

    It’s not that Parkin is the defining author of the Wilderness Years or anything so much as that he’s one who is deeply associated not just with them, but with playing with their implications. His novels repeatedly play games with continuity and mythology, and, more broadly, with the importance and centrality of the tie-in media, carefully laying out the rules for his “it’s all true, and that’s the game” vision of what Doctor Who allows. He is not the defining writer of the Wilderness Years so much as the writer most defined by them and their possibilities - the one whose work is most bound up in the Wilderness Years.

    Interestingly, he’s also the piece of the Wilderness Years that bled into the new series. As we observed at the time, the final novel of the Eighth Doctor Adventures, The Gallifrey Chronicles, came out around the same time as Boom Town aired, which is to say, well after the new series had established itself as a massive cultural object. Lance Parkin’s end to the Wilderness Years, in other words, is not actually a part of them, but a postscript - a letter from a point where the future was ensured, even if that is not quite the point from which it was written.

    On a more basic level, of course, Parkin’s books tend to be games of structure. In several of them, he adopts a seemingly impossible premise just to demonstrate how it can be accomplished - a sort of Doctor Who novel as Mort Weisinger-era Superman comic, only with fewer malevolent toads. His books are ruthlessly high concept, though with the focus often as much on exploring the nature of the concept as on delivering it as such. This, at least, provides something of a contrast with the New Series Adventures, which are carefully and consciously positioned as secondary to the new series itself. The New Series Adventures are not there to rock the fundamental premises of Doctor Who. That’s not to say that they are unambitious, but they are expressly and by design not where major issues about the nature of the series get worked out.

    Of course, in its own way this is just another structural challenge for Parkin, and his lengthy discussion of the book in the first volume of Time Unincorporated suggests that in many ways he approached it that way. And, of course, he added other interesting constraints for himself. The Eyeless features no companion, and, unlike the other novels from around the same time, does not even introduce a temporary companion. The Doctor is in almost every scene of the book, and is alone for a great number of them. The supporting cast is largely free both of straightforward allies and straightforward enemies. The result is a book that focuses on the Doctor as a character in a way a lot of books, and indeed a lot of episodes don’t.

    Central to this is the portrayal of Tennant’s Doctor as an at times dangerous figure. The fact that the Doctor destroyed the Daleks and Time Lords both, and that ultimate weapons of the sort he’s trying to shut down are things that are no longer foreign to him matters tremendously to the novel. This is, of course, ultimately an invention of the Wilderness Years. The Virgin era was obsessed with the ways in which the Seventh Doctor was a figure of menace, and this served, in a key way, as the backdrop for the new series Doctor, who was shown very early on to be a character who was capable of doing terrible things. Not because he did them, but because we knew he had done them. The fact that Tennant’s Doctor was clearly capable of crossing the line has always been a part of him, from the chilling “no second chances, I’m that kind of a man” to his killing of the Racnoss. And Parkin’s book hinges on exactly that fact, positively reveling in the uncertainty implied by the Doctor being on his own.

    And, of course, the prospect that the Doctor could do a thing so horrible as destroy Gallifrey was created by the Eighth Doctor books, and was the major focus of Parkin’s finale to the series. A finale, notably, that Parkin actually quotes in The Eyeless, having the Doctor briefly flash back to the destruction of Gallifrey. The flashback reads, “There was a flash as bright as the sun for the merest moment, annihilation so profound it stretched deep into the past and far into the future. Then Gallifrey was gone.” This is, word for word, taken from The Gallifrey Chronicles, specifically a flashback within it that ended Chapter Five.

    That destruction of Gallifrey, of course, is the one the Doctor enacted to save Gallifrey from Faction Paradox in The Ancestor Cell, a novel that manages the impressive feat of being dubiously canonical for both Doctor Who and Faction Paradox. But this raises an interesting question in its own right. It is, after all, not the destruction of Gallifrey that one would expect the Doctor to be flashing back to, given that he’s destroyed the planet again more recently. There are, of course, explanations available - Richard Dominic Flowers and Alex Wilcock’s “A Fractal History of the Origins of the Time War” makes this sort of thing trivial to square away by saying that the vast and terrible time war in the Eighth Doctor Adventures and the Last Great Time War of the new series are in fact echoes of the same event. 

    Indeed, that’s probably the simplest explanation. Though far from the only usable one. All of the antagonists of this story, from the creatures that built the vast and awful superweapon to the precise nature of the Eyeless, whose status as cultural scavengers who absorb the thoughts and experiences of others makes them a sort of conceptual cousin to Faction Paradox’s idea of the Remote, are of mysterious origins - the Doctor has pointedly not heard of the Eyeless, in fact. Any number of explanations that range from hardcore continuity porn to a sort of Swedish continuity art film are, of course available for this. 

    But even if we don’t actually try to link The Eyeless in with the Wilderness Years continuity and conclude that the superweapon is a Feratu invention ferried in from one of the bottle universes and then pursued by the Eyeless, who are the Remote of that universe, and screw it, who even cares, there’s a thematic link underneath this that is worth highlighting. The Eyeless is clearly positioned amidst the conceptual rubble of the Wilderness Years. Which is fitting in a period in which the program is quietly haunted by them and the fear that the Davies era was simply an aberration - an extended blip in the wilderness. 


    Instead we have The Eyeless, a book which shows that the concepts of the Wilderness Years fit perfectly smoothly into the new series. In time, of course, this will probably become self-evident. Someone will eventually pen an officially licensed novel in which Benny and the War Doctor team up to fight Zagreus, or some other suitably and madly dumb idea. Doctor Who is an accretive process, and nothing is ever lost from it. But while the observation that there are clear links from the Wilderness Years to the new series is one we’ve made over and over again on this blog, it’s still comforting to see it demonstrated - to see a book that seems to exist in a slightly hazy space between the two, but that remains comfortable in either one. Certainly it’s nice to see that the Wilderness Years have the potential to be something other than a source of anxiety for the series, but can instead just be an era whose tone can be captured as well as any other. Of course Lance Parkin is the one who ended up demonstrating that. Who else possibly could have, really.